Brunel University London

Our objectives

1. See examples of qualitative and mixed methodological approaches in the

field of research evaluation and policy;

2. Discuss their role (if any and if appropriate) for current research questions

facing the field;

3. Discuss and move towards standards of good practice (and of excellence)

for these methods in research practice, and

4. Move towards establishing a professional researcher network for the

promotion of qualitative and mixed methodological techniques in the

research evaluation and policy field.

1. Discussion of the next steps in achieving #4 will be discussed tomorrow afternoon.

2

Brunel University London 3

Conclusions from STI ENID 2015 (Lugano)

1. The basis of research evaluation has been to compare, to audit, and to

distribute funds.

2. Past techniques used to achieve this goal (bibliometrics etc.) are now being

used to explain and describe research activity.

1. Alone, these techniques are no longer sufficient.

3. An evaluation, by nature, has a purpose, so this questions the idea that

qualitative techniques are applicable to the field.

4. Concentration of quantitative techniques in the field is tribal. So the move to

qualitative techniques requires a culture change.

5. In the field – the researchers are researchers. Does this inherently bring

biases to the application of qualitative research?

1. We are investigating objects through the lens of our own experiences as

researchers and therefore no longer objective.