Cargando…
Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure
Assessment of researchers is necessary for decisions of hiring, promotion, and tenure. A burgeoning number of scientific leaders believe the current system of faculty incentives and rewards is misaligned with the needs of society and disconnected from the evidence about the causes of the reproducibi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5892914/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29596415 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089 |
_version_ | 1783313231277719552 |
---|---|
author | Moher, David Naudet, Florian Cristea, Ioana A. Miedema, Frank Ioannidis, John P. A. Goodman, Steven N. |
author_facet | Moher, David Naudet, Florian Cristea, Ioana A. Miedema, Frank Ioannidis, John P. A. Goodman, Steven N. |
author_sort | Moher, David |
collection | PubMed |
description | Assessment of researchers is necessary for decisions of hiring, promotion, and tenure. A burgeoning number of scientific leaders believe the current system of faculty incentives and rewards is misaligned with the needs of society and disconnected from the evidence about the causes of the reproducibility crisis and suboptimal quality of the scientific publication record. To address this issue, particularly for the clinical and life sciences, we convened a 22-member expert panel workshop in Washington, DC, in January 2017. Twenty-two academic leaders, funders, and scientists participated in the meeting. As background for the meeting, we completed a selective literature review of 22 key documents critiquing the current incentive system. From each document, we extracted how the authors perceived the problems of assessing science and scientists, the unintended consequences of maintaining the status quo for assessing scientists, and details of their proposed solutions. The resulting table was used as a seed for participant discussion. This resulted in six principles for assessing scientists and associated research and policy implications. We hope the content of this paper will serve as a basis for establishing best practices and redesigning the current approaches to assessing scientists by the many players involved in that process. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5892914 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58929142018-04-20 Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure Moher, David Naudet, Florian Cristea, Ioana A. Miedema, Frank Ioannidis, John P. A. Goodman, Steven N. PLoS Biol Perspective Assessment of researchers is necessary for decisions of hiring, promotion, and tenure. A burgeoning number of scientific leaders believe the current system of faculty incentives and rewards is misaligned with the needs of society and disconnected from the evidence about the causes of the reproducibility crisis and suboptimal quality of the scientific publication record. To address this issue, particularly for the clinical and life sciences, we convened a 22-member expert panel workshop in Washington, DC, in January 2017. Twenty-two academic leaders, funders, and scientists participated in the meeting. As background for the meeting, we completed a selective literature review of 22 key documents critiquing the current incentive system. From each document, we extracted how the authors perceived the problems of assessing science and scientists, the unintended consequences of maintaining the status quo for assessing scientists, and details of their proposed solutions. The resulting table was used as a seed for participant discussion. This resulted in six principles for assessing scientists and associated research and policy implications. We hope the content of this paper will serve as a basis for establishing best practices and redesigning the current approaches to assessing scientists by the many players involved in that process. Public Library of Science 2018-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5892914/ /pubmed/29596415 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089 Text en © 2018 Moher et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Perspective Moher, David Naudet, Florian Cristea, Ioana A. Miedema, Frank Ioannidis, John P. A. Goodman, Steven N. Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
title | Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
title_full | Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
title_fullStr | Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
title_short | Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
title_sort | assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure |
topic | Perspective |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5892914/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29596415 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT moherdavid assessingscientistsforhiringpromotionandtenure AT naudetflorian assessingscientistsforhiringpromotionandtenure AT cristeaioanaa assessingscientistsforhiringpromotionandtenure AT miedemafrank assessingscientistsforhiringpromotionandtenure AT ioannidisjohnpa assessingscientistsforhiringpromotionandtenure AT goodmanstevenn assessingscientistsforhiringpromotionandtenure |