Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement
Evaluation was considered a permanent practice in and on universities since the 1990s, and -of course- it was prior practice at other levels, such as thesis defense processes, or the acceptance of articles for scientific journals, mechanisms that acquired greater formalization since then. With Covid...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Núcleo de Estudios e Investigaciones en Educación Superior del MERCOSUR
2022
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/integracionyconocimiento/article/view/36534 |
| Aporte de: |
| id |
I10-R376-article-36534 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| institution |
Universidad Nacional de Córdoba |
| institution_str |
I-10 |
| repository_str |
R-376 |
| container_title_str |
Integración y Conocimiento |
| language |
Español |
| format |
Artículo revista |
| topic |
evaluation arbitrariness thesis postgraduate social sciences evaluación arbitrariedad tesis posgrado ciencias sociales evaluacão arbitrariedade teses pós-graduaço ciências sociais |
| spellingShingle |
evaluation arbitrariness thesis postgraduate social sciences evaluación arbitrariedad tesis posgrado ciencias sociales evaluacão arbitrariedade teses pós-graduaço ciências sociais Follari, Roberto Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| topic_facet |
evaluation arbitrariness thesis postgraduate social sciences evaluación arbitrariedad tesis posgrado ciencias sociales evaluacão arbitrariedade teses pós-graduaço ciências sociais |
| author |
Follari, Roberto |
| author_facet |
Follari, Roberto |
| author_sort |
Follari, Roberto |
| title |
Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| title_short |
Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| title_full |
Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| title_fullStr |
Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| title_sort |
evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement |
| description |
Evaluation was considered a permanent practice in and on universities since the 1990s, and -of course- it was prior practice at other levels, such as thesis defense processes, or the acceptance of articles for scientific journals, mechanisms that acquired greater formalization since then. With Covid-19, the "slowdown" promotes the possibility of reflection on such institutional practices. The old question about "who evaluates the evaluator" returns, because surprisingly evaluators enjoy enormous impunity in their decisions: nobody evaluates their activities, which allows all kinds of relatively open arbitrariness, in addition to the involuntary errors that always exist. Personal revenges, settling accounts between rival academic tribes, differences in theoretical position and even professional jealousies are discharged against the authors of scientific articles, and even more so against thesis students who often receive the attacks that are dedicated to their directors, because in the Thesis cases the names of the academics involved are public. It is time to propose statistical sampling modalities that systematically select some evaluations, and examine what has been done by the evaluators, with proportional penalties in cases where obvious distortions in the actions are discovered. It is surprising that to date these mechanisms for cross-checking the activity of academics have not been stipulated. |
| publisher |
Núcleo de Estudios e Investigaciones en Educación Superior del MERCOSUR |
| publishDate |
2022 |
| url |
https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/integracionyconocimiento/article/view/36534 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT follariroberto evaluatingevaluatorsaneglectedrequirement AT follariroberto evaluaralosevaluadoresexigenciaocluida AT follariroberto avaliacaodosavaliadoresumrequisitoocluido |
| first_indexed |
2024-09-03T23:05:51Z |
| last_indexed |
2024-09-03T23:05:51Z |
| _version_ |
1809218012749758464 |
| spelling |
I10-R376-article-365342024-02-26T01:11:50Z Evaluating evaluators: a neglected requirement Evaluar a los evaluadores: exigencia ocluida Avaliação dos avaliadores: um requisito ocluído Follari, Roberto evaluation arbitrariness thesis postgraduate social sciences evaluación arbitrariedad tesis posgrado ciencias sociales evaluacão arbitrariedade teses pós-graduaço ciências sociais Evaluation was considered a permanent practice in and on universities since the 1990s, and -of course- it was prior practice at other levels, such as thesis defense processes, or the acceptance of articles for scientific journals, mechanisms that acquired greater formalization since then. With Covid-19, the "slowdown" promotes the possibility of reflection on such institutional practices. The old question about "who evaluates the evaluator" returns, because surprisingly evaluators enjoy enormous impunity in their decisions: nobody evaluates their activities, which allows all kinds of relatively open arbitrariness, in addition to the involuntary errors that always exist. Personal revenges, settling accounts between rival academic tribes, differences in theoretical position and even professional jealousies are discharged against the authors of scientific articles, and even more so against thesis students who often receive the attacks that are dedicated to their directors, because in the Thesis cases the names of the academics involved are public. It is time to propose statistical sampling modalities that systematically select some evaluations, and examine what has been done by the evaluators, with proportional penalties in cases where obvious distortions in the actions are discovered. It is surprising that to date these mechanisms for cross-checking the activity of academics have not been stipulated. La evaluación se consideró una práctica permanente en y sobre las universidades desde los años noventa, y -por supuesto- era práctica previa en otros niveles, como los procesos de defensa de tesis, o la aceptación de artículos para revistas científicas, mecanismos que adquirieron mayor formalización desde entonces. Con la Covid-19, la "desaceleración" promueve la posibilidad de reflexión sobre tales prácticas institucionales. Retorna la vieja pregunta sobre "quién evalúa al evaluador" pues sorprendentemente los evaluadores gozan de enorme impunidad en sus decisiones: nadie evalúa sus actividades lo cual permite toda clase de arbitrariedades relativamente abiertas, además de los errores involuntarios que siempre existen. Venganzas personales, ajustes de cuentas entre tribus académicas rivales, diferencias de posición teórica y hasta envidias profesionales son descargadas contra los autores de artículos científicos, y más aún contra tesistas que a menudo reciben los ataques que son dedicados a sus directores e incluso hay casos en los que son públicos los nombres de los académicos involucrados. Es hora de proponer modalidades de muestreo estadístico que seleccionen sistemáticamente algunas evaluaciones y examinen lo hecho por los evaluadores, con sanciones proporcionales en los casos en que se descubran distorsiones evidentes en lo actuado. Es sorprendente que a la fecha no se hayan estipulado estos mecanismos de control cruzado de la actividad de los académicos. A avaliação era considerada uma prática permanente nas universidades desde a década de 1990 e, claro, era uma prática anterior em outros níveis, como processos de defesa de teses ou aceitação de artigos em periódicos científicos, mecanismos que adquiriram maior formalização desde então. Com a Covid-19, a “desaceleração” promove a possibilidade de reflexão sobre tais práticas institucionais. A velha pergunta sobre "quem avalia o avaliador" volta, porque surpreendentemente os avaliadores gozam de enorme impunidade em suas decisões: ninguém avalia suas atividades, o que permite todo tipo de arbitrariedade relativamente aberta, além dos erros involuntários que sempre existem. Vinganças pessoais, acerto de contas entre tribos acadêmicas rivais, diferenças de posição teórica e até inveja profissional são descarregadas contra os autores de artigos científicos, e ainda mais contra alunos de teses que muitas vezes recebem os ataques que são dedicados a seus diretores, enquanto nos casos de tese os nomes dos acadêmicos envolvidos são públicos. É hora de propor modalidades de amostragem estatística que selecionem sistematicamente algumas avaliações e examinem o que tem sido feito pelos avaliadores, com penalidades proporcionais nos casos em que sejam constatadas distorções evidentes nas ações. É surpreendente que até o momento esses mecanismos de verificação cruzada da atividade dos acadêmicos não tenham sido estipulados. Núcleo de Estudios e Investigaciones en Educación Superior del MERCOSUR 2022-01-31 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion application/pdf https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/integracionyconocimiento/article/view/36534 10.61203/2347-0658.v11.n1.36534 Integración y Conocimiento; Vol. 11 No. 1 (2022): Integración y Conocimiento; 153-162 Integración y Conocimiento; Vol. 11 Núm. 1 (2022): Integración y Conocimiento; 153-162 Integración y Conocimiento; v. 11 n. 1 (2022): Integración y Conocimiento; 153-162 2347-0658 10.61203/2347-0658.v11.n1 spa https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/integracionyconocimiento/article/view/36534/36956 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 |