Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Selected Aspects of Assessment/Improvement of Academic Research Quality, Also of Industrial Management

Research Papers Faculty of Materials Science and Technology Slovak University of Technology
Volume 24 (2016): Issue 37 (June 2016)
By:
Open Access
|Jun 2016

References

  1. 1. ASCB (2012): San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, Putting science into the assessment of research, The American Society for Cell Biology, [on-line], <http://www.ascb.org/dora-old/files/SFDeclarationFINAL.pdf>, April 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. 2. BOAZ, A., ASHBY, D. 2003. Fit for purpose? Assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice. [working paper No.11] ESRC series of the UK centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice. University of London.
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. 3. CIM (2015): Leaders in Management, Canadian Institute of Management, [on-line], <http://www.cim-winnipeg.ca/index.cfm>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. 4. ELLIOTT, A. 2012. Twenty years inspecting English schools – Ofsted 1992–2012. RISE Review, November, pp. 1-4, No. 283726.
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. 5. ESF (2000): Good scientific practice in research and scholarship, European Science Foundation Policy Briefing, Vol. 10, December, pp. 1-16, ISRN: ESF-SPB-00-10-FR+ENG.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. 6. EUROSTAT (2015): Glossary: Basic research, Eurostat, [on-line], <http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Glossary:Basic_research>, June 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. 7. FOGARTY, D. J., BLAKE, J. 2002. Utilising Recent Advancements in Techniques for the Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data to Improve the Data Quality Management of Current Academic Research. Quality & Quantity, 36(3), pp. 277-28. ISSN: 1573-7845.
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. 8. FURLONG, J., OANCEA, A. 2008. Assessing Quality in Applied and Practice-based Educational Research. In: Report No. ERSC RES-618-25-6001. Oxford University Department of Educational Studies.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. 9. GOLDSTEIN, H. 1998. How can we evaluate educational research? London: Institute of Education, [on-line], <http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/cmm/migrated/documents/tooley-darby-critique.pdf>, June 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. 10. HARGREAVES, D. H. 1996. Teaching as a research-based profession: possibilities and prospects. The Teaching Training Agency – Annual Lecture, EPPI-Centre, [on-line], <http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Portals/0/PDF%20reviews%20and%20summaries/TTA%20Hargreaves%20lecture.pdf>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. 11. IT.JUSTICE.GOV.SK 2012. Koncepcia pre podporu start-upov a rozvoj start-upového ekosystému v SR, It.Justice.Gov.Sk, [on-line], <https://lt.justice.gov.sk/Attachment/Vlastn%C3%BD%20materi%C3%A1l_docx.pdf?instEID=-1&attEID=76576&docEID=417728&matEID=8085&langEID=1&tStamp=20150323092825917>, April 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. 12. JAFFE, A. B. 1989. Real Effects of Academic Research. The American Economic Review, 82(1), pp. 957-970, ISSN: 0002-8282.
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. 13. JALALIAN, M., MAHBOOBI, H. 2014. Hijacked Journals and Predatory Publishers: Is There a Need to Re-Think How to Assess the Quality of Academic Research?, Walailak Journal, 11(5), pp. 389-394, ISSN: 1686-3933.
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. 14. JIMA (2014): Introduction of JIMA, Japan Industrial Management Association, [on-line], <http://www.jimanet.jp/english/about-jima/intro>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. 15. KENNA, R., BERCHE, B. 2011a. Normalization of peer-evaluation measures of group research quality across academic disciplines. Research evaluation, 20(2), pp. 107-116. ISSN: 0958-2029.
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. 16. KENNA, R., BERCHE, B. 2011b. Managing research quality: critical mass and optimal academic research group size. IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, 20 (2), pp. 195-207. ISSN: 0958-2029.
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. 17. KOLATA, G. 2013. Scientific articles accepted (Personal Checks, Too). The New York Times, [on-line], <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. 18. LILLARD, L., SMITH, J. P., WELCH, F. 1986. What do we really know about wages? The importance of non-reporting and census information. Journal of Political Economy,94, (31), pp. 489-506. ISSN: 0022-3808.
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. 19. LIN, P.H., CHEN, J.R., YANG, CH.H. 2014. Academic research resources and academic quality: A cross-country analysis. Scientometrics, 101(1), pp. 109-123, ISSN: 0138-9130.
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. 20. LINDSAY, R., BREEN, R., JENKINS, A. 2002. Academic Research and Teaching Quality: the views of undergraduate and postgraduate students. Studies in Higher Education, 27(3), pp. 309-327. ISSN: 0307-5079.
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. 21. MTF. 2013. Priemyselné manažérstvo, MTF, [on-line], <http://www.mtf.stuba.sk/sk/studentov/akreditovane-studijne-programy/akreditovane-studijne-programy-ing./priemyselne-manazerstvo.html?page_id=8718>, April 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. 22. PORTALVS. 2015. Študijný program: priemyselné manažérstvo, PortalVS, [on-line], <http://www.portalvs.sk/sk/studijny-program/priemyselne-manazerstvo0>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. 23. RAE. 2008. The Research Assessment Exercise 2008, RAE, [on-line], <http://www.rae.ac.uk/>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. 24. RYAN, G. W. 2005. What are Standards of Rigor for Qualitative Research? In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC, May 19–20.
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. 25. SILICONVALLEYCF. 2014. Silicon Valley Index. SILICONVALLEYCF, [on-line], <http://www.siliconvalleycf.org/sites/default/files/publications/2014-silicon-valley-index.pdf>, May 2015.
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. 26. SPENCER, L., RITCHIE, J., LEWIS, J., DILLON, L. 2003. Quality of Qualitative Evaluation: A framework for assessing research evidence. London: National centre for social research, Government Chief Social Research Office. ISBN: 07715-04465-8.
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. 27. VICENÍK, J. 1988. Spory o charakter metodológie vied. Žilina: Nakladateľstvo Pravda, ISBN (SOC): 075-025-88.
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. 28. ZINKHAN, G., M. 2004. Accessing Academic Research Through an E-Database: Issues of Journal Quality and Knowledge Use. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(4), pp. 369-370, ISSN: 0092-0703.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/rput-2016-0005 | Journal eISSN: 1338-0532
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 39 - 50
Published on: Jun 30, 2016
Published by: Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
Academic research,
Assessment/evaluation and improvement of research,
traditional and innovative approach,
value-added,
competitiveness,
innovation,
efficiency
Related subjects:
Engineering,
Introductions and overviews,
Engineering, other

© 2016 Marek Jemala, published by Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 24 (2016): Issue 37 (June 2016)Next article