{"id":106160,"date":"2019-11-19T17:14:40","date_gmt":"2019-11-19T16:14:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=106160"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:24:34","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:24:34","slug":"education-and-impact-will-count-for-more-in-the-future","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2019\/11\/19\/education-and-impact-will-count-for-more-in-the-future\/","title":{"rendered":"Education and impact will count for more in the future"},"content":{"rendered":"

Those aiming for a career in science won\u2019t need to focus so narrowly on research in the future.\u00a0 Being able to give good lessons and the relevance of research are also important, say knowledge institutions and providers of academic funding.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Nederland, Rotterdam, 13-09-2016\nErasmus MC interieur, collegezaal bij onderwijscentrum, leeg \nFoto: \u00a9Ronald van den Heerik<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>

Scientists can be good at many different things, but currently only one area counts when it comes to funding applications and PhD programmes: research performance. In fact, spending too much time on teaching and education can actually stand in the way of an academic career.<\/p>\n

One year ago, knowledge institutions and providers of academic funding decided<\/a> that it was time to rethink this method of recognizing and evaluating performance. But the big question, of course, is how? After consultations with scientists, trade unions and other stakeholders, they have published a number of proposals.<\/p>\n

Ticking the right boxes <\/h2>

The dominance of research performance is \u2018really beginning to grate\u2019, say<\/a> universities, university medical centres, the KNAW science association and funding providers the Dutch Research Council (NWO) and ZonMw in a joint statement. We must put an end to check-box culture (including numbers of publications, citations and the like) because this encourages a high workload and disrupts the balance between scientific fields.<\/p>\n

Other areas of talent also need to be included in the evaluation process. This includes teaching and education, research impact, leadership and (for medics) patient care. \u2018It\u2019s unrealistic, and also unnecessary, for every scientist to excel in each one of the core domains,\u2019 the organizations state<\/a> in their position paper.<\/p>\n

Researchers can work on their profile in one or more of these specializations. Over the course of their career, they could still choose to change course. Education and research remain the two most crucial elements. \u2018In all cases, scientists should have sufficient competences in these two areas.\u2019<\/p>\n

Across disciplinary boundaries <\/h2>

Ideally, everyone will be able to contribute to the team, department or consortium of researchers, based on his or her own expertise. Because the aim of \u2018team science\u2019 should be to promote cooperation between different disciplines. \u2018That doesn\u2019t mean that there is no place for monodisciplinary studies and careers. On the contrary, a strong disciplinary basis is a prerequisite for any meaningful exchange across disciplinary boundaries.\u2019<\/p>\n

When providers of academic funding are evaluating research proposals, there will be a greater focus on quality, content, creativity and the contribution to wider society. According to these organizations, open science<\/a> is inextricably linked to the recognition and appreciation of what is new.<\/p>\n

Cultural change <\/h2>

Big plans, but how do you put them into practice? Next year, the VSNU will launch a national recognition and evaluation framework. In 2021, this will be incorporated into the collective labour agreement and the function house. A \u2018revised university job ranking system\u2019 should be in place by then. The knowledge institutions also wish to focus more attention on recognizing different forms of value through new committees, programmes and courses.<\/p>\n

Providers of academic funding will, for their part, work on a \u2018palette of funding instruments that include clearly distinctive criteria to serve a more diverse group of researchers.\u2019 They will initiate a dialogue with scientists regarding how to define \u2018talent\u2019 and \u2018good research\u2019. The committees that assess grant applications will receive training and instructions to speed up the \u2018desired change of culture\u2019. They will also focus more on rewarding team science.<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

De redactie<\/h2>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t