• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.129-142
• /
• 2009

This study aims to evaluate research performance of Library and Information Science faculty in Korea. By doing so, this study explores the possibility of enhancing research quality in the field of Library and Information Science. According to a survey to the faculty members, 41 respondents published a total of 49 monographs and 239 journal articles during the five year period from 2003 to 2007. The result shows variations in individual scholars publications. Suggestions were made for the improvement of research performance in terms of quality and quantity.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.119-140
• /
• 2011

Effective assessment of faculty research performance should involve considerations of both quality and quantity of faculty research. This study analyzed methods for evaluating faculty research output by comparing the rankings of Library and Information Science(LIS) faculty by publication counts, citation counts, and research performance assessment guidelines employed by Korean universities. The study results indicated that faculty rankings based on publication counts to be significantly different from those based on citation counts. Additionally, faculty rankings measured by university guidelines showed bigger correlations with rankings based on publication counts than rankings by citation counts, while differences in universities guidelines did not significantly affect the faculty rankings. The study findings suggest the need for bibliometric indicators that reflect the quality as well as the quantity of research output.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.309-333
• /
• 2022

A survey was conducted to analyze the perceptions related to research performance evaluation from 2,618 professors. The survey is to find out the perception about two parts. One is a survey of professors' perceptions about the faculty performance evaluation, which is currently being conducted at each university. The other is that we analyzed the perception of the introduction of qualitative performance evaluation indicators, an alternative to the quantitative performance evaluation. As a result, we confirmed followings. Quantitative research performance evaluation is carried out in most universities. Research performance evaluation is not appropriate for a department or research field. And an extension of the evaluation period is required. Quantitative evaluation have a negative impact on the academic community. Quantitative evaluation needs to be improved. As regard to the introduction of the qualitative evaluation, we confirmed that professors perceived that qualitative evaluation is necessary to evaluate research performance, and they also have negative opinions about introduction of qualitative evaluation.

• 대학교육
• /
• s.82
• /
• pp.66-74
• /
• 1996

연구.교육.사회활동이라는 삼분법적 교수업적 평가제는 특정 분야의 천재성이 인정되지 않는 평범한 대학상과 상식적인 교수상만 만들어낸다. -무의미한 논문, 저술의 양산에 질린 우리가 예.체능계 교수들의 업적평가를 일반계의 틀에 맞춘다는 것 자체가 뒤떨어진 발상이다. 예술가는 예술작품으로 평가받아야 한다. 그러기 위하여 창작평가위원회가 따로 설치되어야 한다.

• 대학교육
• /
• s.82
• /
• pp.117-119
• /
• 1996

최근 각 대학에서는 교수의 연구 활동을 전달 관리하는 연구처 등을 신설하고, 교수의 연구 업적을 승진.승급 및 포상에 직접 반영하는 등 교수의 업적평가가 크게 강조되고 있습니다. 이러한 시기에 서울대 조동일 교수(국문학)가 발표한 '공개구직'은 교수사회에 파문을 일으키며 우리나라 대학의 연구 여건을 다시 돌아보게 하는 계기가 되었습니다. 본지에서는 대학사회의 다양한 의견 개진과 토론의 장을 마련하였습니다. 먼저, 아래에 지난 4월 8일자 "교수신문"에 실린 조동일 교수의 공개구직서를 전재한 후, 이에 대한 장일조.서경호.이상섭.임재해 교수의 논평이 이어지고, 마지막으로 조동일 교수가 네 분의 논평을 읽은 소감을 실었습니다.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.7-26
• /
• 2017

There has been growing interest in the methods for measuring the credits of individual authors in multi-authored research papers in response to the increase of research collaboration. Having a good understanding for academic norms of individual discipline is essential to measure author credit effectively. However, many Korean universities do not consider different norms for determining the order of authors across disciplines. Rather, they tend to use a standardized method to assess the credits of authors in multi-authored papers. Therefore, this study presented some problems of applying a standardized method to measure author credits in multi-authored papers in economics. The findings of this study confirmed the frequent use of alphabetical author order in economics papers; however, many university guidelines for research evaluation do not take account the alphabetical authorship in measuring the credits of authors. The authors suggest the needs for (1) establishment of a clear definition for primary authors, (2) flexibility in assessment methods for author credit, and (3) empirical research on author credit.

• Journal of Information Management
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.211-233
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study is to develop key elements of evaluating research achievements in humanities and social sciences at universities in Korea. Literature reviews and analysis of policies for faculty evaluation in domestic universities were carried to define concepts and types of research achievements. Questionnaire surveys and case studies were performed to find measures, criteria and requirements of research achievements assessment in 26 domestic universities and several foreign universities. As a result, basic principles and key elements of evaluation in research achievements that reflected quantity and quality of research were proposed. The result of this study will stimulate research activities and promote the national research competitiveness with ensuring internal stabilities in universities.

• Journal of Engineering Education Research
• /
• v.12 no.4
• /
• pp.93-101
• /
• 2009

Many engineering professors are forced to execute ABEEK activities. Engineering professors are evaluated by their educational, research and service activities, but are mainly by their research papers published in professional journals. The gap between the duties and the evaluation criteria exists among engineering professors. This paper deals with the possible ways of including the ABEEK activities in the engineering professor evaluation system. Among the five ways suggested for a simple survey, tenured professors prefer to reduce the lecture time but junior professors prefer to reduce the research burden for the benefit from executing ABEEK activities. Based on logical reasoning and the preference among the surveyed professors, ABEEK related activities may be included in the educational part for the professor evaluation system before the ABEEK system is matured. However, ABEEK related activities have to be converted to the duties of engineering professors in the long run as in the US universities.

• 대학교육
• /
• s.86
• /
• pp.65-73
• /
• 1997

교육, 연구, 봉사를 '더하기' 식으로 규정하는 것은 교육, 연구, 봉사를 서로 다른 시.공간에서 이루어지는 별개의 활동으로 규정함으로써 교수들로 하여금 대학 바깥의 직접적인 요구에 부응하도록 종용하는 결과를 초래하게 된다. 이것은 바로 오늘날 시행되고 있는 교수업적평가가 안고 있는 치명적인 문제점이다. 반면에 교육, 연구, 봉사를 '곱하기' 식으로 규정하는 것은 교육, 연구, 봉사를 유구한 대학의 전통 속에서 교수가 마땅히 해왔고 또 해야만 하는 한 가지 동일한 활동의 서로 다른 세 가지 측면으로 파악하는 것이며, 이것은 교수들로 하여금 대학 안의 요구에 충실히 전념하는 데에 격려와 지원이 되는 정신적 지주를 제공해 준다.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.14 no.8
• /
• pp.3656-3664
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study is to help each university for valid performance evaluation and quality control of the Industry-University Cooperation Concentration Professor(IUCCP) through the development of the performance evaluation model of industry-university cooperation concentration professor. To achieve this purpose, researchers were collected and analysis data about the management regulations of IUCCP of 57 university include 51 LINC selected by Ministry of Education and Science-Technology in 2012. Through this process, define the concept of IUCCP and clear a qualification criterion, types and role the each types of IUCCP, and developed the model on performance evaluation of industry-university cooperation concentration professor constructed 4 dimensions consists with evaluation area, evaluation element, evaluation indices, and scoring unit.