CoARA Action plan: reforming the evaluation of research and researchers

As a signatory of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment and a member of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (since 2022), Ghent University commits to incorporate the following principles in the evaluation of research:

  1. Recognise the diversity of contributions to, and careers in, research in accordance with the needs and nature of the research
  2. Base research assessment primarily on qualitative evaluation for which peer review is central, supported by responsible use of quantitative indicators
  3. Abandon inappropriate uses in research assessment of journal- and publication-based metrics, in particular inappropriate uses of Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and h-index
  4. Avoid the use of rankings of research organisations in research assessment

Additionally, Ghent University is dedicated to:

  1. Commit resources to reforming research assessment as is needed to achieve the organisational changes committed to
  2. Review and develop research assessment criteria, tools and processes
  3. Raise awareness of research assessment reform and provide transparent communication, guidance, and training on assessment criteria and processes as well as their use
  4. Exchange practices and experiences to enable mutual learning with other organisation
  5. Communicate progress made on adherence to the principles and implementation of the commitments outlined in the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment
  6. Evaluate practices, criteria and tools based on solid evidence and the state-of-the-art in research on research, and make data openly available for evidence gathering and research

These commitments are in line with Ghent University’s vision on responsible research assessment. To further align the evaluation of research at Ghent University with the principles set out in the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, Ghent University is developing a series of concrete actions that have been included in an Action Plan:

  1. All call and evaluation documents are tailored to (a) the specific content and objectives of the call/evaluation, (b) Ghent University's vision on the responsible use of quantitative indicators, and (c) Ghent University's vision on research evaluation.
  2. Guidelines for evaluators are customized for each call/evaluation, taking into account (a) the specific content and objectives of the call/evaluation, (b) Ghent University's vision on the responsible use of quantitative indicators, and (c) Ghent University's vision on research evaluation.
  3. The existing guidelines for the use of quantitative indicators are updated and transformed into guidelines for responsible use, which are then widely communicated.
  4. In collaboration with the researchers and research managers involved, a future evaluation framework is being developed for the evaluation of the university’s Interdisciplinary Research Consortia aimed at realizing societal impact (IDC).
  5. Best practices for evaluating research groups, departments, and faculties are gathered and made available to groups that (on a voluntary basis) want to evaluate their own research activities.
  6. Ghent University's communication channels (especially the website) are used to transparently inform the research community about (a) Ghent University's research evaluation policy and (b) the implementation of this policy.
  7. The needs for training, information provision, etc., related to research evaluation are identified and analyzed.
  8. Depending on the results from action 7, a pilot (training or information session) will be organized.
  9. Ghent University is an active member of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA). No initiatives for knowledge building and sharing will be launched outside of CoARA.
  10. Internal reports on the progress of the Action Plan are submitted to the university management.
  11. Ghent University’s data on the evaluation of research(ers) are made accessible (as far as possible) to (external) researchers. Ghent University does not initiate research-on-research, except when researchers or research groups take the initiative themselves.