| Creator |
|
| Language |
|
| Publisher |
|
|
|
| Date |
|
| Source Title |
|
| Vol |
|
| First Page |
|
| Last Page |
|
| Publication Type |
|
| Access Rights |
|
| JaLC DOI |
|
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was two-fold: first, the study critically reflected the current qualifications of humanities and social sciences researches in Seoul National University (SNU). Secondly, the ...study examined the institutional structure of research centers inside SNU, comparing American and European models of institutional arrangement. Based upon the above analyses the study attempted to propose strategic measures to improve quality of research in the humanities and social sciences. The study found that SNU’s research policy and faculty evaluation have heavily focused upon individual performance among faculties and researchers. Moreover, all of professors belong to the departments and only loosely affiliated to research institutes and centers. There are few professors who are willing to do research collaborations crossing departments and colleges. Such kind of institutional arrangement hardly produces long term researches which could be done by a group of common research interests. In contrast to the individually based model of research promotion which most American universities are following, the European model tends to emphasize more concentrated research topic or themes to preserve the research quality. Many European and Japanese research institutes inside or outside universities do have their own tenured professors and researchers, concentrating small numbers of research clusters or themes. Such an “independent model” is effective when research funding and human resources are limited. Taking into account different models of research institutes, the study proposed an integrated model of institutional arrangements. And it also suggested that performance evaluations of professors and researchers need to emphasize group collaborations and institutional researches.show more
|
Export Mendeley
p051