Evaluation policies for research and graduate education in the Netherlands: lessons on self-evaluation and institutional autonomy

Trevisol, Joviles Vitório; Brasil, André

doi:10.1590/S1413-24782023280108

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Educação

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Article • Rev. Bras. Educ. 28 • 2023 • https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782023280108 copy

Evaluation policies for research and graduate education in the Netherlands: lessons on self-evaluation and institutional autonomy

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

This paper presents the results of a study on the evaluation of research and graduate education in the Netherlands. The policies implemented in the country over the last four decades have consolidated a sui generis and stable evaluation system, contributing to strengthening the country's scientific leadership on the international scene. The Dutch experience has inspired several countries, and its lessons could also be relevant for the Brazilian reality. In this context, this study aimed to analyse the main characteristics of the Dutch system, understand the role of self-evaluation within that system and present a self-evaluation experience conducted by a noteworthy research centre from Leiden University. From the lessons learned, we conclude by presenting some subsidies for improving the evaluation of graduate education conducted in Brazil.

KEYWORDS
evaluation policies; self-evaluation; institutional autonomy; the Netherlands

Protocols	Objectives
SEP 2003–2009	“The evaluation system aims to achieve three objectives regarding research quality and management: (i) to enhance the quality of research through an evaluation process conducted according to international standards of quality and relevance; (ii) to improve research management and leadership; (iii) to be accountable to research organizations, funding agencies, government, and society at large” (VSNU, NWO, KNAW, and 2003VERENIGING VAN UNIVERSITEITEN – VSNU; KONINKLIJKE NEDERLANDSE AKADEMIE VAN WETENSCHAPPEN — KNAW; NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR WETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK — NWO. Standard Evaluation Protocol (2003-2009). [Report]. The Hague, 2003. Disponível em: https://bit.ly/3rbJtzR. Acesso em: 16 dez. 2021. https://bit.ly/3rbJtzR... , p. 5).
SEP 2009–2015	“The SEP 2009–2015 aims to achieve two objectives regarding research evaluation (including doctoral training) and management: (i) improve the quality of research through peer review evaluation, including academic and social relevance of research, research policies, and management; (ii) be accountable to research organizations, funding agencies, government, and society at large” (VSNU, NWO, and KNAW, 2009VERENIGING VAN UNIVERSITEITEN – VSNU; KONINKLIJKE NEDERLANDSE AKADEMIE VAN WETENSCHAPPEN — KNAW; NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR WETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK — NWO. Standard Evaluation Protocol (2009-2015). The Hague, 2009. Disponível em: https://bit.ly/3t0B02X. Acesso em: 27 dez. 2021. https://bit.ly/3t0B02X... , p. 4).
SEP 2015–2021	“The main objective of the evaluation is to reveal and confirm the quality and relevance of research to society and improve it when necessary” (VSNU, NWO, and KNAW, 2016VERENIGING VAN UNIVERSITEITEN – VSNU; KONINKLIJKE NEDERLANDSE AKADEMIE VAN WETENSCHAPPEN — KNAW; NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR WETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK — NWO. Standard Evaluation Protocol (2015-2021). [Rep. Amended version]. The Hague, 2016. Disponível em: https://bit.ly/45TIpzr. Acesso em: 16 jan. 2022. https://bit.ly/45TIpzr... , p. 5).
SEP 2021–2027	“The main objective of the SEP is to evaluate the research unit based on its own objectives and strategies and to maintain and improve the quality and societal relevance of the research, as well as facilitate ongoing dialogues on quality, societal relevance, and feasibility within the context of research quality assurance” (VSNU, NWO, and KNAW, 2020VERENIGING VAN UNIVERSITEITEN – VSNU; KONINKLIJKE NEDERLANDSE AKADEMIE VAN WETENSCHAPPEN — KNAW; NEDERLANDSE ORGANISATIE VOOR WETENSCHAPPELIJK ONDERZOEK — NWO. Strategy Evaluation Protocol (2021-2027). The Hague, 2020. Disponível em: https://bit.ly/3wAFbzi. Acesso em: 16 jan. 2022. https://bit.ly/3wAFbzi... , p. 6).

Protocols	Criteria	Main aspects
SEP 2003–2009	Quality	- International recognition and innovative potential
	Productivity	- Scientific production
	Relevance	- Scientific and socioeconomic impact
	Vitality and viability	- Flexibility, management and leadership
SEP 2009–2015	Quality	– Quality and scientific relevance – Leadership – Academic reputation – Human and financial resources – PhD development
	Productivity	Productivity strategy – Productivity
	Relevance	Societal relevance
	Vitality and viability	Strategy – SWOT analysis – Robustness and stability
SEP 2015–2021	Research quality	– Scientific quality and relevance – Results: publications, products, infrastructure, and other contributions to science – PhD development policy – Scientific integrity – Diversity
	Relevance to society	– Scientific, economic, social, or cultural impact – Quality, scale, and relevance of contributions to specific groups (economic, social, cultural sectors); advice for the elaboration of public policies, reports, and other documents; contributions to the public debate, etc.
	Viability	– Strategy – Governance – Skills and leadership in the management of the research unit
SEP 2021–2027	Research quality	– Quality and contributions to scientific development (international, national, or regional) – Reputation and leadership – Open science – PhD development policy – Academic culture – Scientific integrity – Human resources policy: diversity and talent management
	Relevance to society	- Impact and public participation of the unit in areas related to the economy, social development, culture, education, and others that may be relevant
	Viability	– Viability and relevance of the objectives (the extent to which they remain scientifically and socially relevant) – Adequacy of management and resources to achieve objectives – Viability of the unit in relation to the foreseen objectives – Leadership

		Quality domains
		Research quality	Relevance to society
Evaluation dimensions	Scientific production	Academic scientific production	Scientific/technical/technological production
	Production impact	Academic impact measures	Impact measures on society
	Evidence of recognition	Evidence of academic recognition	Evidence of recognition by society

ANPEd - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Educação Rua Visconde de Santa Isabel, 20 - Conjunto 206-208 Vila Isabel - 20560-120, Rio de Janeiro RJ - Brasil, Tel.: (21) 2576 1447, (21) 2265 5521, Fax: (21) 3879 5511 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: rbe@anped.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Conflicts of interest: The authors declare they don't have any commercial or associative interest that represents conflict of interests in relation to the manuscript.