FCT

R&D Institutions

Resultado da avaliação 2007 na área de Ciências e Politicas da Educação

Unidade de I&D

Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas - CIIE Porto [EDU-Norte-Porto-167] visitada em 09/01/2008

Classificação: Good

Reapreciação

Na sequência da publicação em Dezembro de 2008 da classificação que lhe foi atribuída pela FCT sob recomendação do painel de avaliação, esta unidade apresentou reclamação e solicitou à FCT uma nova avaliação. Embora não estivessem reunidas as condições necessárias, expressas no ponto 4 do art. 9º do Regulamento do Financiamento Plurianual, a FCT decidiu promover nova avaliação por um painel distinto, uma vez que das 15 unidades da área científica de Ciências e Políticas da Educação para além desta unidade outras 11 apresentaram igualmente reclamação e solicitaram nova avaliação. A classificação acima, que já foi superiormente homologada, é a que resultou desta nova avaliação, em que das 12 unidades envolvidas 2 viram a sua classificação subir de Muito Bom para Excelente, 1 viu a sua classificação subir de Bom para Muito Bom, e 2 viram a sua classificação subir de Regular para Bom.

Os comentários do painel original e os respectivos comentários da unidade são apresentados a seguir a esta secção relativa à reapreciação.

Comentários do Painel de reapreciação

This is a large well established group with good evidence of research activity and very considerable strengths in research training.

The Review Panel agreed with most of the comments made by the original Evaluation Panel as well as the overall grading of ‘Good’. We did not have access to the scores given to individual groups but we disagreed with the language used in relation to Group 1528 which stated that publications were ‘very good’ and training performance ‘excellent’. Such language might imply that the group was judged to be grade 5 ‘excellent’. Although this group was indeed strong, our judgment was that it was Grade 4 ‘very good’ rather than ‘excellent’.

Comentários do painel de avaliação
Sobre a unidade
This Unit consists of 8 research groups. Taking into account, the number of research groups, the number of researchers in each of the groups (average 7,125 researchers per group) and the fact that all groups will continue functioning in the period 2008/2010, this Unit is the largest in the country. However, the size of the research groups varies between 4 (2 members and 2 collaborating researchers for group 167-1562) and 13 researchers for group 167-1561.
The main weakness of almost all the research groups is their publication record in peer-reviewed international research journals, which varies between poor (for research groups 167-1561 and 167-1559) and reasonable (for research groups 167-1560, 167-1565, 167-1564, 167-1562 and 167-1563). Only the group 167-1528 has good productivity regarding publications in peer-reviewed international research journals. However, this group should try to open new areas of research, since their performance still reflects late Prof. Stoer's work.
According to the criteria of relevance and feasibility of their research projects as well as the training of new researchers the groups have a good performance (even very good in certain cases). The only exception is group 167-1565, in which training of new researchers is a concern.
Finally it should be stressed that for the overall rating of the Unit the panel took into account not only the average of the individual research groups but also the fact that 5 of its research groups have an average evaluation that fell below the threshold ie. groups 167-1560, 167-1565, 167-1562, 167-1559 and 167-1563
Final assessment of Unit: This Unit is a borderline case. The rate ‘Good’ is given conditionally; it depends upon an improvement in the performance of its research groups concerning publications in peer-reviewed international research journals (not only in Portuguese language). Additionally, taking into account areas of research and ratings of the research groups the panel suggests the following merging of groups:
a. groups 167-1560 and 167-1564 into one group.
b. groups 167-1562 and 167-1563 into one group.
c. groups 167-1559 and 167-1528 into one group.
The panel recommends that:
1. Peer-reviewed international research journals (not only in Portuguese language) should be the focus for publications.
This policy is essential for several reasons:
a. it will permit the research groups to establish firm links and collaborations with the international scientific community, and thus, they will get the necessary feedback regarding the quality of their research,
b. it will give the research groups the stimulus to re-orient, at least part of their research efforts towards the currently pressing research agenda as perceived internationally,
c. it will give the motivation to young researchers to produce robust papers contributing to both their training and the development of scientific productivity.
2. International networking activities should be re-organized so as to include the co-operation in joint publications and lead to the broadening of the thematic range of the relevant research topics.
3. Research projects should disseminate their finding via peer-reviewed international research journals (not only in Portuguese language). We recommend FCT to include international publications as one of the criteria for funding.
4. Research groups should be restructured by merging. Specifically, taking into account their areas of research and their ratings the panel suggests the following merging of groups:
a. groups 167-1560 and 167-1564 into one group.
b. groups 167-1562 and 167-1563 into one group.
c. groups 167-1559 and 167-1528 into one group.
Sobre os grupos de investigação
Citizenship, Gender and Childhood in the Education [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1560]
This is a strong group in the area of new researchers training. This strength however is mitigated by their international publication record. The training of young researchers into publish, for the international scientific community, is (and should be) integral part of their training. In terms of relevance and feasibility of their plans and projects the performance of the group is good.
Education, History and Museology [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1565]
The research area of this group is original and potentially very useful because in principle could bridge formal and non-formal education. However, their overall performance is weak, especially in terms of international publications and training. The capacity of this group to transform plans into projects and the relevance of their output is just good. However, given that their research topics are very suitable for producing relevant results, the prospects for improvement are not high.
Expressions, Spaces and Times of Creativity [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1564]
The thematic focus of this group is very interesting, especially in view of the current trends in the international scene. This is reflected by their international collaborations. However, this strength is not materialized in a strong publication records. It is recommended to re-orient part of their energy towards establishing links with the international scientific community via publications. Such links will improve the quality of training of new researchers which for the time being is their second relatively strong point.
Intercultural Education and Paulo Freire Studies [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1562]
The thematic focus of this research group is both interesting and useful despite the fact that their theoretical premises are humane but narrow. It is surprising that they do not manage to exploit the interest of the international community in the work of Freire having a mediocre publication record. Their strength lies in the area of training of new researchers in quantitative terms. Relevance and feasibility of their research projects are good. Again the question of sustainability (and quality) of a good training record without strong international presence seems to be of central importance.
Local Education [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1561]
The performance of the group is unequal. Their productivity in terms of international publications is poor while both the relevance of their research projects and their capacity to transform these plans into practical projects are very good. Finally, the training (ie. rate of completion) of PhDs and master students is excellent. However, it is absolutely essential for them to improve their poor international presence (via publications). If one wishes to offer quality training to new researchers the links with the relevant international scientific community are vital.
School, Curriculum and Identities Training [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1559]
The performance of this group is surprisingly just below average. They have all the prerequisites to build up a good record ie. capacity to transform interesting plans into practical projects which are socially relevant and academically useful. However, their international publication record is poor and the rate of PhDs completion is not very high. It is essential for them to improve their international visibility. Introvert attitudes bear upon the quality of their research and their policy recommendations.
Studies in Educational and Educational Sciences Policies [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1528]
Clearly, in terms of research, the best performing group in the CIIE - Universidade do Porto, and one leading in the whole country. Given the number of the PhD researchers belonging to the group, their publication record is very good while excellent is their training performance. The group was formed and inspired, as evidenced by its members, by late Prof. S. Stoer. Thus, the members of the group should try to open new areas of work, since their performance still reflects Stoer's work.
Studies in Personnal and Social Development and Environment [RG-EDU-Norte-Porto-167-1563]
Relatively, the strong point of this group is the training of young researchers. However, this strength is mitigated by their rather poor record of international publications. Additionally, the performance of this group is just about average in terms of the relevance of their research choices and their capacity to transform plans into practical projects. Thus, their overall performance needs improvement.

Comentários da unidade

The CIIE expresses its disagreement with some of the comments made by the evaluation panel regarding the period 2003-2006. Indeed, a number of aspects, valued by the former evaluation panel, were not taken into account and that, in the absence of more explicit criteria, became guidelines for our research activity.

Specifically, the present evaluation does not take into account:
1. the congruence between the research activities and the policy and epistemological foundations of the Centre, defined in its statuses and accepted by FCT, namely the collaboration with the Portuguese-speaking countries;
2. the recognition of a diversity of internationalisation forms, both in terms of audience and formats - such as networks, research consortiums and projects, post-graduation courses, organization of international conferences; additionally, the academic peer-reviewed journal Educação, Sociedade & Culturas, as a platform for internationalisation, was ignored;
3. the existence of different forms of dissemination of scientific knowledge, according to domains of research and social issues they deal with, should also imply differentiated and multi-referential modes of evaluation (whereas the panel appears to focus almost exclusively on publications in peer-reviewed journals in languages other than Portuguese);
4. the role of the Centre in the promotion of an informed public opinion in education, namely through the organization of a series of open debates on educational problems with national relevance;
5. the existence of emerging areas with a useful potential for innovation, in the educational research field;
6. the number of FCT financed projects, among which some evaluated as Excellent by international panels.

Even considering the formative value that an evaluation represents, as it can guide our future work and reveal areas that should be promoted, some of the criteria used in the present evaluation exclude relevant dimensions of the research in this field.