Lessons from the history and philosophy of science for research assessment systems

Add to your list(s) Download to your calendar using vCal

• Donald Gillies (UCL)
• Thursday 18 November 2010, 16:30-18:00
• Seminar Room 2, Department of History and Philosophy of Science.

If you have a question about this talk, please contact Nicky Reeves.

The thesis of this paper is that material from the history and philosophy of science is highly relevant to the question of the efficacy of research assessment systems such as the RAE or REF . Systems of this kind are based on peer review or metrics. However, the study of historical examples such as Frege, Semmelweis and Copernicus shows that both peer review and metrics have important defects and can lead to the rejection of innovative research. This phenomenon is explained using ideas of Kuhn and Lakatos. The conclusion drawn is that systems such as the RAE or REF are likely to make research output worse rather than better, and an alternative approach to research organisation is suggested.

This talk is part of the Departmental Seminars in History and Philosophy of Science series.

This talk is included in these lists:

• All Talks (aka the CURE list)
• Cambridge talks
• Department of History and Philosophy of Science
• Departmental Seminars in History and Philosophy of Science
• Featured lists
• History and Philosophy of Science long list
• Philosophy Events
• Seminar Room 2, Department of History and Philosophy of Science
• Trust & Technology Initiative - interesting events
• hc446
• jer64's list

Note that ex-directory lists are not shown.