12/10/2015
Global Law Press suscribe la Declaración de San Francisco sobre la calidad
de la investigación, de 2012
I. LA DECLARACIÓN SOBRE LA EVALUACIÓN CIENTÍFICA, REALIZADA EN SAN FRANCISCO, EN 2012, HACE FRENTE A LOS INDICADORES BIBLIOMÉTRICOS DE CARÁCTER FORMAL PARA EVALUAR LA INVESTIGACIÓN POR SU CONTENIDO Y CALIDAD.
GLOBAL LAW PRESS SE SUMA A LA DECLARACIÓN
Global Law Press, y su consejo editorial, en cuanto organización de investigadores de Derecho Administrativo, han suscrito la Declaración de San Francisco sobre evaluación de la investigación, realizada en 2012, y conocida, por sus siglas en inglés, como DORA (Declaration On Research Assessment), y cuyo objeto primordial reside en poner en cuestión el “factor impacto” (mediciones formales, bibliométricas), para concentrarse exclusivamente en la calidad científica, en su contenido. Relevantes organizaciones y académicos a nivel individual ya han suscrito la referida Declaración.
Puede verse:
Página oficial: http://www.ascb.org/dora/ y la Declaración:http://www.ascb.org/dora/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SFDeclarationFINAL.pdf
Wikipedia:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Declaration_on_Research_Assessment
Para una breve introducción:
http://crln.acrl.org/content/75/4/191.full:
“Academic institutions increasingly rely on bibliometric measures to assess the quality of their faculty’s research output. Tenure and promotion deliberations, as well as funding decisions, often invoke the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), the h-index, citation counts, as well as a growing array of newly developed performance metrics. Similarly, funding agencies use available bibliometric measures to identify grant-worthy research proposals and ongoing projects. While the proponents of metrics insist they impartially capture the quality of research, their opponents point out that these parameters are not reliable tools for evaluating scholarly output.
In the past few years, the ongoing debate on metrics-driven research assessment has gained momentum. In particular, the JIF—the most influential metric by far—has come under fire in the scientific community. Perhaps the most vocal and cross-disciplinary critique was formulated during the December 2012 meeting of the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The critique and manifesto have become known as DORA: San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment.1 The DORA declaration calls for placing less emphasis on publication metrics and becoming more inclusive of non-article outputs.
The 82 original organization signatories for DORA included ASCB and other scientific societies from around the world. Editorial boards of well-known journals, prestigious research institutes and foundations, and providers of new metrics (Altmetric LLP and Impactstory, both promoting the use of altmetrics) lent their support, as well. As of late January 2014, DORA has more than 400 supporters among organizations, and more than 10,000 individuals signed the declaration.2 Since DORA was issued, its critique and recommendations have been discussed in scientific journals3 and blogs,4 and on academic portals such as The Chronicle of Higher Education.5 The debates around research assessment have even been brought to the general public’s attention in The Guardian6 and, most recently, The Atlantic.7”
II. NUEVAS PUBLICACIONES EN GLOBAL LAW PRESS:
En las próximas semanas verán la luz de obras, una en la colección de bolsillo (“Cuadernos Universitarios de Derecho Administrativo”), de Jaime Rodríguez-Arana, sobre “Derecho Administrativo y derechos sociales fundamentales”, y otra, colectiva, en la colección albero, titulada “Hacia el Derecho AdministrativoGlobal: fundamentos, principios y ámbito de aplicación”, de Benedict Kingsbury y Richard B. Stewart.
The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), initiated by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) together with a group of editors and publishers of scholarly journals, recognizes the need to improve the ways in which the outputs of scientific research are evaluated. The group m…
