International Evaluation of Research and Doctoral Training at the University of Helsinki 2005–2010
University of Helsinki – Excellence for Society – Helsinki Model of Research Evaluation
Saari Seppo, Moilanen Antti (Eds.)
The participants were Researcher Communities – a new concept to be used for evaluation and to plan future research which crosses faculty and departmental borders and proves the collaboration of researchers. The Researcher Communities chose one of the options of participation categories describing their special status or the character of their research: • Outstanding • Close to outstanding • Exceptional • Innovative opening • Societal impact The University of Helsinki has carried out previous research assessments in the years 1998 and 2005. The planning of the present evaluation started in 2010. The data in the evaluation material covered the years 2005–2010. One exceptional feature in the evaluation was the two types of bibliometric analyses available to the Panels. The Helsinki University Library prepared tailored bibliometric figures for the entire University and for the Researcher Communities in Social Sciences, Humanities and Computer Sciences. The publication rankings of the Norwegian and Australian models were applied in the evaluation as well. The library analyses proved its innovativeness in the publication analyses. The University of Leiden provided traditional bibliometric analyses for the University and for the Researcher Communities. The TUHAT Research Information System provided an excellent opportunity to test the publication metadata stored in the database of the University. The 50 international Panellists represented the five main fields of sciences. The Panels scored the four main evaluation questions and category fitness using the scale 1–5. The mean of the scores for most of the evaluation objects was four or close to that number. The performance of most RCs can be considered outstanding or high quality. The performance of the entire University is outstanding or high quality when compared to the international field-normalised indicators. The evaluation results with its recommendations offer tools for the strategic planning of the University.