DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Improvements of Research Performance Evaluation for Enhancing the Soundness of Academic Activities

학술 활동 건전성 제고를 위한 연구업적평가 개선에 관한 연구

  • 노영희 (건국대학교 문헌정보학과 ) ;
  • 강지혜 (동덕여자대학교 문헌정보학과 ) ;
  • 김용환 (청주대학교 문헌정보학과 ) ;
  • 양정모 (한국연구재단 ) ;
  • 이종욱 (경북대학교 문헌정보학과 )
  • Received : 2022.11.15
  • Accepted : 2022.12.21
  • Published : 2022.12.30

Abstract

This study aims to propose the ways to improve the research performance evaluation to support the establishment of a sound research culture. For the study, we analyzed the cases of domestic and foreign research performance evaluation, and a survey and an interview were conducted for faculty and research performance evaluation officials, respectively. In the study, the direction of establishing the principle of research performance evaluation, the method of categorizing the type of research performance, the method and procedure of research performance evaluation, and necessary documents were proposed. First, eight principles were suggested to be considered in evaluating research achievements to ensure the validity, reliability, and transparency of the evaluation while supplementing the limitations of quantitative evaluation. Second, the main types of research achievements were categorized into journal articles, books, and presentations at academic conferences. Third, as a research achievement evaluation method, a hybrid evaluation using quantitative and qualitative and multiple measurement indicators was proposed. Fourth, a total of 11 steps (required 7 steps) were presented as a procedure for research achievement evaluation. Fifth, publications, evaluation documents, and committee chair's reports were proposed as major documents for research achievement evaluation. The research achievement evaluation improvement plan presented in this study should be flexibly applied in consideration of the characteristics of the academic and research fields and universities.

본 연구는 올바른 연구문화 정착지원을 위한 대학의 연구업적평가 개선방안을 도출하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 국내외 연구업적평가와 관련한 사례를 조사·분석하고, 대학 교원과 연구업적평가 관계자를 대상으로 각각 설문조사와 면담조사를 실시하였다. 이를 통해 연구업적평가 원칙 수립 방향, 연구업적물 유형의 범주화 방안, 연구업적평가 방식과 절차, 필요 서류 등을 제안하였다. 구체적으로 첫째, 정량평가의 한계점을 보완하면서 평가의 타당성과 신뢰성, 투명성을 확보하기 위해 연구업적평가 시 고려해야 하는 8가지 원칙을 제시하였다. 둘째, 연구업적물의 주요 유형을 학술논문, 저서, 학술대회 발표로 범주화하였다. 셋째, 연구업적평가 방식으로는 정량 및 정성, 복수의 계량지표를 활용하는 하이브리드 평가를 제안하였다. 넷째, 연구업적평가의 절차로 총 11단계(필수 7단계)를 제시하였다. 다섯째, 연구업적 평가를 위한 주요 서류로 출판물, 평가서, 위원장 보고서 등을 제안하였다. 본 연구에서 제시된 연구업적평가 개선방안은 학문 및 연구 분야와 대학의 특성을 고려하여 유연하게 적용되어야 할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Choi, Eunjoo, Yang, Kiduk, & Lee, Hyekyung (2016). Quality Factor: A new bibliometric measure for assessing the quality of faculty research performance. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 47(2), 287-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.16981/kliss.47.201606.287
  2. Choi, Junryeol, Jang, Jisang, Park, Jeongsoo, & Ban, Sangjin (2010). A Study on Improvement Plans for the Personnel Management System of National Universities. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology.
  3. Choi, Ki-Seok (2004). A Case Study on the Research Performance Evaluation System for Professors at A University. Master's thesis, Department of Business Administration, Graduate School of Business, Dongguk University.
  4. Hwang, Il-kyu, Kim, Kyungsook, Kwon, O young, Ahn, Taewon, & Park, Young-tae (2011). A study on the faculty evaluation model with considering the characteristics of education-based colleges. The Journal of Vocational Education Research, 20(4), 23-49.
  5. Jung, Eui-jin & Roh, Yoo-jung (2019. 06. 11). [Exclusive] Expansion of Qualitative Evaluation for Promotion and Promotion of Professors at Universities Such as Yonsei University and Hanyang University. Korean Economy. Available: https://www.hankyung.com/society/article/201906117427i
  6. Kim, Doo Beom (1996). The analytic approach for faculty performances evaluation. Journal of the Korean Society of Women's Culture, 3, 13-29.
  7. Kim, Shinbok, Lee, Jaegi, & Jin, Jaegu (1999). Implementation plan for professor contract system and annual salary system. Researcher Public Hearing materials on Professor Appointment and Remuneration System.
  8. Kim, Wang Jun, Yun, Hongju, & Rah, Min-joo (2012). A comparative analysis of faculty evaluation systems of national universities in Korea. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 29(1), 143-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.24211/tjkte.2012.29.1.143
  9. Kim, Yong Hwan, Kang, Ji Hei, Lee, Jongwook, & Noh, Younghee (2022). A study on faculty perception of research performance evaluation. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 56(4), 309-333.
  10. Korea Council for University Education (1995). A study on system development for the performance evaluation of university professors. Higher Education, 77, 104-114.
  11. Lee Jang-ik (2006). An analysis of faculty evaluation system in Korean two-year colleges. The Journal of Vocational Education Research, 25(1), 159-176.
  12. Lee, Hyekyung & Yang, Kiduk (2015). Comparative analysis of Korean universities' co-author credit allocation standards on journal publications. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 46(4), 191-205. http://dx.doi.org/10.16981/kliss.46.4.201512.191
  13. Lee, Hyobin & Cho, Youngdon (2021). A study on the research ethics awareness level of university faculty. NRF ISSUE REPORT, 13.
  14. Lee, Jongwook & Yang, Kiduk (2011). A bibliometric analysis of faculty research performance assessment methods. Journal of Korea Society for Information Management, 28(4), 119-140. http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2011.28.4.119
  15. Lee, Suk-Yeol, Byun, Ki-yong, Park, Changun, Lee, Bo-kyung, Han, Shin il, & Kim, Kyu Tae (2012). Controversial issues on action plans in introduction of performance-based annual professor salary system of national universities. The Politics of Education, 19(1), 79-104.
  16. Park, Namgi (2007). Analysis of professor achievement evaluation by university and development of professor achievement evaluation model. Higher Education, 148, 126-131.
  17. Yook, Keun-Hyo (2010). Causal relationship among variables of faculty performance evaluation - an empirical analysis -. Journal of Finance and Accounting Information, 10(4), 1-18.
  18. Balon, R. (2022). What is a review article and what are its purpose, attributes, and goal(s). Psychotheraphy and Psychosomatics, 91, 152-155. https://doi.org/10.1159/000522385
  19. Nundy, S., Kakar, A., & Bhutta, Z. A. (2022). How to write an editorial?. In Nundy, Samiran, Kakar, Atul and Bhutta, Zulfiqar eds. How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries?. Singapore: Springer, 263-266
  20. Tierney, E., O'Rourke, C., Fenton, J. E. (2015). What is the role of 'the letter to the editor'?. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 272(9), 2089-2093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-014-3289-7