• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Unsustainable Growth Hyper-Competition and Worth in Life Science Research: Narrowing Evaluative Repertoires in Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scientists’ Work and Lives
【2h】

Unsustainable Growth Hyper-Competition and Worth in Life Science Research: Narrowing Evaluative Repertoires in Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scientists’ Work and Lives

机译：生命科学研究中的不可持续增长过度竞争和价值：缩小博士和博士后科学家的工作和生活的评估方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

There is a crisis of valuation practices in the current academic life sciences, triggered by unsustainable growth and “hyper-competition.” Quantitative metrics in evaluating researchers are seen as replacing deeper considerations of the quality and novelty of work, as well as substantive care for the societal implications of research. Junior researchers are frequently mentioned as those most strongly affected by these dynamics. However, their own perceptions of these issues are much less frequently considered. This paper aims at contributing to a better understanding of the interplay between how research is valued and how young researchers learn to live, work and produce knowledge within academia. We thus analyze how PhD students and postdocs in the Austrian life sciences ascribe worth to people, objects and practices as they talk about their own present and future lives in research. We draw on literature from the field of valuation studies and its interest in how actors refer to different forms of valuation to account for their actions. We explore how young researchers are socialized into different valuation practices in different stages of their growing into science. Introducing the concept of “regimes of valuation” we show that PhD students relate to a wider evaluative repertoire while postdocs base their decisions on one dominant regime of valuing research. In conclusion, we discuss the implications of these findings for the epistemic and social development of the life sciences, and for other scientific fields.
机译：由于不可持续的增长和“过度竞争”，当前的学术生命科学存在评估实践的危机。评估研究人员的量化指标被视为取代了对工作质量和新颖性的更深层次的考虑，以及对研究社会意义的实质性关怀。经常提及初级研究人员，因为他们受这些动态影响最大。但是，很少考虑他们自己对这些问题的看法。本文旨在帮助人们更好地理解研究如何被重视以及年轻研究者如何在学术界学习生活，工作和产生知识之间的相互作用。因此，我们分析了奥地利生命科学领域的博士生和博士后如何将人们，对象和实践的价值归因于他们谈论自己现在和未来的研究生活。我们借鉴了估值研究领域的文献及其对行为者如何引用不同形式的估值来说明其行为的兴趣。我们探讨了年轻的研究人员在成长为科学的不同阶段如何被社会化为不同的估值方法。引入“评估制度”的概念，我们表明博士生与更广泛的评估库相关，而博士后则基于一种主导的评估研究体系来做出决定。总之，我们讨论了这些发现对生命科学的认知和社会发展以及其他科学领域的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号