Cavalieri, Marina and Mangano, Alfia (2009): La valutazione della didattica e della ricerca medica: esperienze a confronto.
Download (1MB) | Preview
In medical faculties, teaching and research are carried out together with patient health care. A large body of literature has empirically studied the effects of these joint academic activities, especially in terms of higher hospital costs and better quality of care. An appropriate definition and evaluation of the outputs provided by these institutions and their interactions is crucial to design an efficient and equitable financing scheme. This paper aims at analyzing different methodological approaches which can be used to evaluate medical teaching and research. Some evaluation experiences of both Italian and international institutions are described and critically apprised. The comparative analysis reveals that none of the systems is immune to criticism. Hence, the importance of adopting multiple evaluation methods involving subjective and objective measures as well as qualitative and quantitative approaches.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||La valutazione della didattica e della ricerca medica: esperienze a confronto|
|English Title:||Evaluation of medical teaching and research: a comparative analysis|
|Keywords:||Evaluation; teaching; research; medical faculties; university|
|Subjects:||H - Public Economics > H4 - Publicly Provided Goods > H40 - General
I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I10 - General
|Depositing User:||Marina Cavalieri|
|Date Deposited:||24. Jul 2009 05:54|
|Last Modified:||17. Feb 2014 14:17|
Amin, M. e M. Mabe (2000), “Impact factors: use and abuse”, Perspectives in Publishing, 1: 1-6.
Bordons, M., M.T. Fernandez e I. Gómez (2002), “Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance in a peripherical country”, Scientometrics, 53: 195-206.
Bourke P. (1997) , Evaluating University Research: The British Research Assessment Exercise and Australian Practice, Commissioned Report No.5, National Board of Employment, Education and Training, Canberra.
Braga D. (2000), La valutazione della ricerca in Europa, Intervento al Convegno “La valutazione delle ricerca” organizzato dalla SISSCO e l’Università di Bologna.
Campbell D. (2002), Conceptual framework for the evaluation of university research in Europe, Center for International Science and Technology Policy (CISTP), The George Washington University, draft paper relativo al Panel “Evaluating university research, joint ventures and technology transfer”, 9 novembre 2002, Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Washington, D.C.
CNVSU “Modalità di ripartizione degli incentivi alla ricerca”, Doc 13/01, luglio 2001.
Cole, S. (1989), “Citations and the evaluation of individual scientists”, Trends in Biochemical Science, 14: 9-13.
CRUI (1999), Metodo di valutazione della ricerca svolta presso strutture scientifiche universitarie nell'ambito del macro-settore scientifico-disciplinare prevalente, Roma.
Frank, M. (2003), “Impact factors: arbiter of excellence?”, Journal of Medical Library Association, 91: 4-6.
Garfield, E. (1972), “Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation”, Science, 178: 47-79.
Garfield, E. e I.H. Sher (1963), “New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing”, American Documentation 14: 195-201.
Geuna, A. e B.R. Martin (2003), “University research evaluation and funding: an international comparison”, Minerva, 41:277-304.
Gisvold, S.E. (1999), “Citation analysis and journal impact factors: is the tail wagging the dog?”, Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 43: 971-973.
Hecht, F, B.K. Hecht e A.A. Sandberg (1998), “The journal ‘impact factor’: A misnamed, misleading, misused measure”, Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics, 104: 77-81.
Modica L. (2002), Prefazione a: La valutazione della ricerca in Italia. Repertorio delle fonti Web, Roma CRUI. Osservatorio per la valutazione del sistema universitario (1999), Proposta per un programma di valutazione della produzione scientifica nelle università:programma VPS, DOC 3/99, Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica, Roma.
Pritchard, A. (1969), “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics”, Journal of Documentation 25(4):348-349.
RAE 2001, www.rae.ac.uk.
RAE 2008, www.rae.ac.uk.
Schnitzer, K. e K. Foad (1995), “Formelgebundene Finanzzuweisung des Staates an die Hochschulen: Erfahrungen aus dem europäischen Ausland”, HIS-Kurzinformationen A 11/1995, Hannover.
Seglen, P.O. (1997), “Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research”, British Medical Journal, 314: 498-502.
Tavenas, F. (2003), “Quality assurance: a reference system for indicators and evaluation procedures”, European University Association.
Tomlinson, S. (2000), “The research assessment exercise and medical research”, British Medical Journal, 320: 636-9.
Van Leeuwen T.N., H.F. Moed, R.J.W. Tijssen, M.S. Visser e A.F.J. Van Raan (2000), “First evidence of serious language-bias in the use of citation analysis for the evaluation of national science systems”, Research Evaluation, 8: 155-156.
Williams, G. (1998), “Misleading, unscientific, and unjust: the United Kingdom’s research assessment exercise”, British Medical Journal, 316: 1079-1082.