The world of academic research is constantly evolving, and with it, the methods of evaluating scholarly output. In recent years, there has been a growing debate about the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. This debate has been further fueled by the creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA), a collaborative effort between leading experts in the field. With the aim of finding a responsible way to use both peer review and bibliometrics in research assessment, CoARA has become a major player in shaping the future of research evaluation.
The Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment is made up of a diverse group of individuals, including Luciana Balboa, Elizabeth Gadd, Eva Mendez, Janne Pölönen, Karen Stroobants, Erzsebet Toth Cithra, and the CoARA Steering Board. These experts bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to the table, making CoARA a formidable force in the field of research assessment. Their collective efforts have sparked a much-needed conversation about the role of peer review and bibliometrics in evaluating scholarly work.
On one side of the debate, there are those who argue that peer review is the gold standard for evaluating research. This traditional method involves experts in the field reviewing and providing feedback on a manuscript before it is published. Proponents of peer review believe that it ensures the quality and integrity of research, as it is evaluated by those who are well-versed in the subject matter. However, peer review has its limitations, including potential biases and the time and resources required to conduct a thorough review.
On the other hand, there are those who advocate for the use of evaluative metrics, such as citation counts and journal impact factors, as a more objective way of assessing research. These metrics are based on quantitative data and are easily accessible, making them a convenient tool for evaluating large volumes of research. However, they have been criticized for oversimplifying the complex nature of research and potentially promoting a “publish or perish” culture.
The CoARA Steering Board and its members recognize the value and limitations of both peer review and bibliometrics. They understand that each method has its strengths and weaknesses and that a one-size-fits-all approach to research assessment is not feasible. That is why CoARA is committed to finding ways in which these two methods can be used together responsibly.
One of CoARA’s key objectives is to promote responsible and transparent use of evaluative metrics in research assessment. This includes addressing issues such as data quality, transparency, and the potential for manipulation. CoARA also advocates for the development of new, more comprehensive metrics that take into account the diverse forms of scholarly output, such as data sets, software, and other non-traditional outputs.
In addition, CoARA is working towards promoting a more holistic approach to research evaluation, which includes the use of qualitative measures. This involves considering factors such as the societal impact of research, collaboration and interdisciplinary work, and the researcher’s career stage. By broadening the scope of evaluation, CoARA hopes to provide a more accurate and fair representation of the value and impact of research.
The creation of CoARA has sparked a much-needed conversation about research assessment and the role of peer review and bibliometrics in this process. It has brought together experts from various backgrounds to work towards a common goal of finding a responsible and balanced approach to research evaluation. This collaborative effort has the potential to shape the future of research assessment and ultimately benefit the academic community as a whole.
In conclusion, the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) is a vital player in the ongoing debate about the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. By promoting responsible and transparent use of bibliometrics, advocating for a more holistic approach to evaluation, and fostering collaboration and dialogue among experts, CoARA is paving the way for a more comprehensive and fair evaluation of research. The future of research assessment looks promising, thanks to the efforts of CoARA and its dedicated members.
