On the Chronopolitics of Academic CVs in Peer Review

Kaltenbrunner, Wolfgang; Rijcke, Sarah de; Müller, Ruth; Burner-Fritsch, Isabel

doi:10.1108/978-1-78973-911-420211021

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In their analysis of referee reports (produced to legitimize hiring decisions in Swedish academia), Hammarfelt et al (2020) show how the evaluators construct the 'career trajectories' by retrieving disparate pieces of information from the candidates' CVs and transforming them in comparable entities. Thus, the use of CVs in the assessment process entails a trajectorial interpretation (Kaltenbrunner et al 2021;Kaltenbrunner & de Rijcke 2019), where evaluators have to contextualise the elements presented in the lists, relying on their own experience and epistemic culture, and make meaningful comparisons between candidates.…”

Section: From Hamann and Kaltenbrunner's Work We Learn That The Narra...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The term narrative CV refers to a particular type of CVs whose expected distinctive feature is to tell a story i.e., to give an account of connected events. But we have seen that the traditional list format CV, to which it is often opposed, can also have a narrative function and convey a story (Boudès et al 2009), with elements presented in the lists being contextualised and transformed into narratives by evaluators (Hamann and Kaltenbrunner, 2022;Hammarfelt et al 2020;Kaltenbrunner et al 2021;Kaltenbrunner & de Rijcke 2019). They stated that throughout the evolution of CVs, the narrative agency shifts from the candidates to the evaluators; we suggest that asking candidates to provide a narrative CV is a way to shift the narrative agency back to them and thus to put them in control of their scientific personae.…”

Section: Enlarge the Spectrum Of Contributions And Foster Diversity A...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Promoting narrative CVs to improve research evaluation? A review of opinion pieces and experiments

Bordignon

Chaignon

Egret

2023

Research Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the academic community has become increasingly concerned about the drifts of research evaluation, mostly researchers’ evaluation, because of the overreliance on metrics, many expert groups have made recommendations to improve the way researchers should be evaluated. In this study, we focus on the recommendation to use narrative curriculum vitae (CVs). We review 28 opinion pieces and 7 experiments to better understand what a narrative CV can refer to, and to explore whether the narrative function that is specific to this kind of CV is proving effective in response to the concerns raised by evaluation practices. A close reading of these documents reveals the conceptual basis of the narrative CV and the problems it is intended to solve; we propose five commonly reported features of the narrative CV: avoid lists, contextualize achievements, fight metrics, enlarge the spectrum of contributions taken into consideration and foster diversity and inclusion. But the promoters of the narrative CV pay little to investigate how the narrative feature itself can lead to any benefits. However, the feedback collected from both applicants and evaluators is quite positive. Regardless of whether it is justified or not, the enthusiasm aroused by the implementation of this new type of CV undeniably has the advantage of opening up the debate, raising awareness and calling to question the bad practices and biases that exist in the researchers’ assessment processes. The narrative nature of the CV is, in the end, just a pretext for raising interest and working towards the adoption of good practices.

show abstract

Section: From Hamann and Kaltenbrunner's Work We Learn That The Narra...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Enlarge the Spectrum Of Contributions And Foster Diversity A...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting narrative CVs to improve research evaluation? A review of opinion pieces and experiments

Bordignon

Chaignon

Egret

2023

Research Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 For applicants "junior" is defined as <2 preceding SNSF project applications and "senior" as ≥ 3 preceding SNSF project applications. 2 For reviewers "junior" is defined as reviewed <4 times for the SNSF and "senior" as reviewed ≥4times for the SNSF.…”

Section: Differences In Ratings In Terms Of Respondent Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The academic Curriculum Vitae (CV) plays a decisive role at many pivotal points in a researcher's career, including funding and hiring decisions and the awarding of academic prizes [1][2][3]. Researchers have a right to fair and transparent CV evaluation and research performing and funding organisations need to ensure that they support the right people for the right reasons.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SciCV, the Swiss National Science Foundation’s new CV format

Strinzel

Kaltenbrunner

Weijden

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) tested a new CV format called SciCV to encourage fair, DORA-compliant assessment of grant applicants. It was developed in close collaboration with the academic evaluation community and international experts, introduced through detailed change management and finally tested in its utility by an independent research team of the Center for Science and Technology Studies Leiden (CWTS). Methods: We present the development of the SciCV pilot and its evaluation by the CWTS research group. The analysis comprised both quantitative and qualitative methods, with (i) surveys and semi-structured interviews with applicants and reviewers, (ii) text analysis of the narrative elements of SciCV, and (iii) participant observation in ten evaluation panel meetings. Results: Narrative elements and the inclusion of the academic age were rated as most useful new CV elements, while the inclusion of two metrics, the h-index and the relative citation ratio, were received more critically. The omission of a full publication list had similar numbers of supporters and opponents among applicants and reviewers. Less experienced and junior applicants and reviewers rated the new format generally more positively than more senior applicants and reviewers. The text analysis of narrative elements yielded no significant gender specific differences. The participant observation revealed that the new elements in SciCV broadened the information base used in the evaluation of applicants but did not fundamentally alter traditional, publication-centred evaluation practices. Conclusion: SciCV was a relevant and successful initiative for the SNSF, which showed that the implementation of a new, well-structured CV format is not only feasible but also something that many stakeholders welcome.The extensive experience and results obtained during the change process formed the basis for the development of SciCV 2.0 at the SNSF. It also offers a basis and guidance for other funding organisations planning similar initiatives.

show abstract

No time for improvement? The chronopolitics of quality assurance

Vettori

2023

Quality in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the Chronopolitics of Academic CVs in Peer Review

Cited by 4 publications

References 25 publications

Promoting narrative CVs to improve research evaluation? A review of opinion pieces and experiments

Promoting narrative CVs to improve research evaluation? A review of opinion pieces and experiments

SciCV, the Swiss National Science Foundation’s new CV format

No time for improvement? The chronopolitics of quality assurance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About