On impact factors and university rankings: from birth to boycott

K. Stergiou, S. Lessenich
{"title":"On impact factors and university rankings: from birth to boycott","authors":"K. Stergiou, S. Lessenich","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this essay we explore parallels in the birth, evolution and final ‘banning’ of journal impact factors (IFs) and university rankings (URs). IFs and what has become popularized as global URs (GURs) were born in 1975 and 2003, respectively, and the obsession with both ‘tools’ has gone global. They have become important instruments for a diverse range of academic and higher education issues (IFs: e.g. for hiring and promoting faculty, giving and denying faculty tenure, distributing research funding, or administering institutional evaluations; URs: e.g. for reforming university/ department curricula, faculty recruitment, promotion and wages, funding, student admissions and tuition fees). As a result, both IFs and GURs are being heavily advertised — IFs in publishers’ webpages and GURs in the media as soon as they are released. However, both IFs and GURs have been heavily criticized by the scientific community in recent years. As a result, IFs (which, while originally intended to evaluate journals, were later misapplied in the evaluation of scientific performance) were recently ‘banned’ by different academic stakeholders for use in ‘evaluations’ of individual scientists, individual articles, hiring/promotion and funding proposals. Similarly, URs and GURs have also led to many boycotts throughout the world, probably the most recent being the boycott of the German ‘Centrum fuer Hochschulentwicklung’ (CHE) rankings by German sociologists. Maybe (and hopefully), the recent banning of IFs and URs/GURs are the first steps in a process of academic self-reflection leading to the insight that higher education must urgently take control of its own metrics.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"13 1","pages":"101-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

In this essay we explore parallels in the birth, evolution and final ‘banning’ of journal impact factors (IFs) and university rankings (URs). IFs and what has become popularized as global URs (GURs) were born in 1975 and 2003, respectively, and the obsession with both ‘tools’ has gone global. They have become important instruments for a diverse range of academic and higher education issues (IFs: e.g. for hiring and promoting faculty, giving and denying faculty tenure, distributing research funding, or administering institutional evaluations; URs: e.g. for reforming university/ department curricula, faculty recruitment, promotion and wages, funding, student admissions and tuition fees). As a result, both IFs and GURs are being heavily advertised — IFs in publishers’ webpages and GURs in the media as soon as they are released. However, both IFs and GURs have been heavily criticized by the scientific community in recent years. As a result, IFs (which, while originally intended to evaluate journals, were later misapplied in the evaluation of scientific performance) were recently ‘banned’ by different academic stakeholders for use in ‘evaluations’ of individual scientists, individual articles, hiring/promotion and funding proposals. Similarly, URs and GURs have also led to many boycotts throughout the world, probably the most recent being the boycott of the German ‘Centrum fuer Hochschulentwicklung’ (CHE) rankings by German sociologists. Maybe (and hopefully), the recent banning of IFs and URs/GURs are the first steps in a process of academic self-reflection leading to the insight that higher education must urgently take control of its own metrics.
影响因素与大学排名:从出生到抵制
在本文中,我们探讨了期刊影响因子(if)和大学排名(ur)的诞生、演变和最终“禁止”的相似之处。IFs和现在流行起来的全球ur (GURs)分别诞生于1975年和2003年,对这两种“工具”的痴迷已经走向全球。它们已成为各种学术和高等教育问题的重要工具:例如,聘用和提升教师,给予和拒绝教师终身职位,分配研究经费或管理机构评估;URs:例如改革大学/院系课程、教师招聘、晋升和工资、资助、学生入学和学费)。结果,IFs和gur都被大量宣传——IFs在出版商的网页上,而gur一发布就在媒体上。然而,近年来,IFs和GURs都受到了科学界的严厉批评。结果,IFs(最初是用来评估期刊的,后来被误用在科学表现的评估中)最近被不同的学术利益相关者“禁止”用于对个别科学家、个别文章、招聘/晋升和资助提案的“评估”。同样,ur和gur也导致了世界各地的许多抵制,最近的一次可能是德国社会学家对德国“Centrum fuer Hochschulentwicklung”(CHE)排名的抵制。也许(并且希望),最近对if和ur / gur的禁止是学术自我反思过程的第一步,导致人们认识到高等教育必须紧急控制自己的指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: •provides a global stage for presenting, discussing and developing issues concerning ethics in science, environmental politics, and ecological and economic ethics •publishes accepted manuscripts rapidly •guarantees immediate world-wide visibility •is edited and produced by an experienced team
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信