| |
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 7 | |
| 3. |  | REAL, D.; FRANCO, J.; CROSSA, J.; IBAÑEZ, V. Estudio de caso: metodología empleada por INIA para la evaluación de leguminosas forrajeras para mejoramientos de campo en la región basáltica del Uruguay. ln: CERETTA, S.; ALTIER, N.; ABADIE, T., (Coord). Interacción genotipo x ambiente: avances y aplicaciones para el desarrollo de la genética vegetal. Coloquio. Las Brujas, Canelones (Uruguay): INIA, 2001. p. 12-13| Biblioteca(s): INIA Las Brujas. |
|    |
| 5. | | Vivar, H.E.; Gilchrist S., L.; Hayes, P.M.; Crossa, J. Mejoramiento en cebada por resistencia a la roña de la espiga causada por Fusarium sp ln: Congreso de cebada maltera, 2., 1996, Carillanca, Temuco, Chile Beratto M., E., ed. Trabajos presentados. Temuco: FAO/INIA Carillanca, 1999. p. 141-154| Biblioteca(s): INIA La Estanzuela. |
| |
| 6. | | EEUWIJK, F.A. VAN; CROSSA, J.; VARGAS, M.; RIBAUT, J. M. Variants of factorial regression for analyzing QTL by environment interaction. ln: CERETTA, S.; ALTIER, N.; ABADIE, T., (Coord). Interacción genotipo x ambiente: avances y aplicaciones para el desarrollo de la genética vegetal. Coloquio. Las Brujas, Canelones (Uruguay): INIA, 2001. p. 8| Biblioteca(s): INIA Las Brujas. |
| |
| 7. | | REAL, D.; SANDRAL, G.A.; REBUFFO, M.; HUGHES, S.J.; KELMAN, W.M.; MIERES, J.M.; DODS, K.; CROSSA, J. Breeding of an early flowering and drought tolerant Lotus corniculatus L. variety for the high rainfall zone of southern Australia. Crop and Pasture Science, v. 63, n. 9, p. 848-857, 2012. Article history: Submitted: 23 April 2012/ Accepted: 20 July 2012/ Published: 10 December 2012.| Biblioteca(s): INIA La Estanzuela. |
|  |
| Registros recuperados : 7 | |
|
|
|
 | Acceso al texto completo restringido a Biblioteca INIA Las Brujas. Por información adicional contacte bibliolb@inia.org.uy. |
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha actual : |
07/03/2022 |
|
Actualizado : |
30/11/2022 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Circulación / Nivel : |
Internacional - -- |
|
Autor : |
VASEN, F.; SIERRA, M. |
|
Afiliación : |
FEDERICO VASEN, Universidad de Buenos Aires-CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina; MIGUEL OSCAR SIERRA PEREIRO, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
"The Hardest Task"-peer review and the evaluation of technological activities. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2022 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Minerva, 2022, Volume 60, Issue 3, pages 375-395. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-022-09461-0 |
|
ISSN : |
0026-4695 (print); 1573-1871 (electronic) |
|
DOI : |
10.1007/s11024-022-09461-0 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article history: Accepted 24 January 2022; Published 07 March 2022; To be published September 2022. -- Corresponding author: Federico Vasen, fvasen@uba.ar ---
This work was supported by Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria and Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica [grant PICT2018-2794]. |
|
Contenido : |
ABSTRACT.- Technology development and innovation are fundamentally different from scientific research. However, in many circumstances, they are evaluated jointly and by the same processes. In these cases, peer review -the most usual procedure for evaluating research - is also applied to the evaluation of technological products and innovation activities. This can lead to unfair results and end up discouraging the involvement of researchers in these fields. This paper analyzes the evaluation processes in Uruguay's National System of Researchers. In this system, all members' activities, both scientific and technological, are evaluated by peer committees. Based on documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews, the difficulties faced by evaluators in assessing technology products are explored. The article highlights the persistence of a linear conception of the link between science and technology and describes the obstacles to assimilate the particularities of technological activities. Refereed publications are presented as the only uncontested product. Other types of output are reviewed with suspicion. This study emphasizes the need for specific mechanisms to evaluate technological production within academic careers.
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022 |
|
Palabras claves : |
Latin America; National system of researchers; Peer review; Research evaluation; Technological outputs; Uruguay. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
A50 Investigación agraria |
|
Marc : |
LEADER 02398naa a2200241 a 4500
001 1062792
005 2022-11-30
008 2022 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a0026-4695 (print); 1573-1871 (electronic)
024 7 $a10.1007/s11024-022-09461-0$2DOI
100 1 $aVASEN, F.
245 $a"The Hardest Task"-peer review and the evaluation of technological activities.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2022
500 $aArticle history: Accepted 24 January 2022; Published 07 March 2022; To be published September 2022. -- Corresponding author: Federico Vasen, fvasen@uba.ar --- This work was supported by Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria and Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica [grant PICT2018-2794].
520 $aABSTRACT.- Technology development and innovation are fundamentally different from scientific research. However, in many circumstances, they are evaluated jointly and by the same processes. In these cases, peer review -the most usual procedure for evaluating research - is also applied to the evaluation of technological products and innovation activities. This can lead to unfair results and end up discouraging the involvement of researchers in these fields. This paper analyzes the evaluation processes in Uruguay's National System of Researchers. In this system, all members' activities, both scientific and technological, are evaluated by peer committees. Based on documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews, the difficulties faced by evaluators in assessing technology products are explored. The article highlights the persistence of a linear conception of the link between science and technology and describes the obstacles to assimilate the particularities of technological activities. Refereed publications are presented as the only uncontested product. Other types of output are reviewed with suspicion. This study emphasizes the need for specific mechanisms to evaluate technological production within academic careers. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022
653 $aLatin America
653 $aNational system of researchers
653 $aPeer review
653 $aResearch evaluation
653 $aTechnological outputs
653 $aUruguay
700 1 $aSIERRA, M.
773 $tMinerva, 2022, Volume 60, Issue 3, pages 375-395. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-022-09461-0
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
| Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|
