Working Groups are central to CoARA’s mission to enable systemic reform of research assessment. Based on a bottom-up approach with members’ voluntary involvement, Working Groups operate as ’communities of practice’, providing mutual learning and collaboration on specific thematic areas. Participating members exchange knowledge, learn from each other’s experience, discuss and develop outputs to advance research assessment and support the implementation of members’ commitments.
Please note that for now Working Groups are open to CoARA members only.
If you would like to join the Coalition as a member, please follow the link here to sign up. If you are already signatory and would like to become a member, please contact the CoARA secretariat.
If you are a CoARA member and you would be interested in joining one (or more) of the groups, please find a contact person affiliated to each Working Group listed below.
To request changes on you Working Group webpage, please use this online form.
Towards Open Infrastructures for Responsible Research Assessment
Open research information is crucial for responsible research assessment, which needs data, tools, infrastructures that secure transparency, reproducibility, geographic-discipline-output coverage in data and indicators. Their sustainability, interoperability, openness, and community-based accountability are key to the reform. This working group’s mission is to enable institutions to move from proprietary infrastructure and research information, to open (interoperable) alternatives–in support of the transition to responsible research assessment practices. This effort will take into consideration the wide range of research outputs and open science […]
Multilingualism and language biases in research assessment
By addressing language diversity and biases in assessment, this WG supports the EU (and other) institutions in fulfilling their duty to enhance, promote and uphold linguistic equity, diversity and non-discrimination in Europe and globally. This requires fostering an academic culture that values diverse competencies, interactions and communications in all languages without exclusions or priorities.
The main objectives are 1) to raise awareness across all fields about the importance of “multilingualism in practice of science, in scientific publications and in academic communications” (UNESCO); 2) to provide institutions with guidelines, toolbox […]
Experiments in Assessment – Idea generation, co-creation, and piloting
The mission of this group is to form an incubator for experimental ideas in research assessment. We aim to establish a process to enable change: collecting, refining, and piloting new initiatives. The group will be a ‘safe space’ for collaboration and brainstorming of unconventional ideas that will shift assessment in line with the goals of CoARA. We will consider a wide variety of approaches, including those that might consider the recognition and rewarding of under-represented and under-rewarded scholarly practices and alternative methodologies and values in the evaluation decision-making processes. This group involves funders, institutions […]
Reforming Academic Career Assessment
The Working Group on Reforming Academic Career Assessment (ACA) is based on the premise that ACA systems should adequately reflect the different tasks, functions and roles academics fulfil over the course of their career. The aim is to broaden the reflection on research assessment to ACA, taking into account the full range of work conducted by academics in research, teaching and learning, innovation, management/leadership and service to society. The WG brings together a critical mass of academic stakeholders to 1) define the objectives and principles of reforming ACA, from the perspectives of institutions and academic staff being assessed, and to […]
Responsible metrics and indicators
Stage 1: Assessing the status quo: Which indicators are currently employed? We investigate this across varied disciplines and cultural contexts, specifically in the evaluation of researchers, awards, institutional assessments, and the progression of scientific advancement (like tenure, PhD, habilitation, professor titles, etc.). Starting with CoARA members, institutions are asked to provide information on their current usage of indicators via a structured survey. Stage 2: Critical evaluation of the indicators and recommendations. Based on the survey results, we develop guiding questions and recommendations (2a) when to use indicators (and when not) […]
Improving practices in the assessment of research proposals
The overall objective of the Working Group is to improve practices in the assessment of research proposals, ultimately supporting higher quality and more impactful projects, in line with the principles and commitments of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, while respecting the autonomy of each member. This will include work on: Criteria for the selection of research projects and innovative approaches to review processes. The Working Group will exchange information and learn mutually on how quality is understood and operationalised by research funding and other organisations through their assessment criteria. It will share experiences […]
Supporting the alignment of research assessment systems with CoARA in biomedical disciplines through administrative reforms and governance
In biomedical institutions, research assessments are highly regulated and procedurally institutionalized. Administrative reform is a crucial part of sustainable and successful research assessment reforms (RAR). The goals of the WG are to 1) identify barriers and facilitators, 2) evaluate existing examples, 3) consolidate experiences and 4) identify best practice scenarios. Translating CoARA into organizational practice requires not only the agreement of the broader science community, but its implementation success also depends on other factors that facilitate or hinder the RAR within an organization’s administration and governance (A&G) […]
Towards Transformations: Transdisciplinarity, Applied/Practice-Based Research, and Impacts
New real-world challenges and frontiers in science require collaborations across a range of actors in order to arrive at solutions. Climate change is a case in point. For research to play a transformative role in how our societies are shaped locally, in Europe, and world-wide, science systems need to adopt new assessment approaches. Our working group involves 40+ organisations. It aligns three distinct yet interconnected streams of activities towards
transformations and will deliver shared workshops and products.
Recognizing and Rewarding Peer Review
Research assessment needs to take into account a broad range of scholarly activities. Formal peer review plays a crucial role in research and must therefore be given appropriate recognition in assessment processes. This working group will develop systematic approaches for recognizing and rewarding peer review activities. Efforts will be made at a number of different levels: (1) Collecting systematic evidence on ways in which high-quality peer review activities can be recognized and rewarded; (2) Using this evidence to develop principles and guidelines for recognizing and rewarding peer review activities; (3) Piloting the implementation […]
Early-and-mid-Career Researchers (EMCRs) – Assessment and Research Culture
EMCRs working in different types of environments, including universities, research institutes or the private sector, are subject to precarity and hypercompetition, and are most strongly affected by research culture and by assessment practices. These assessments happen at a variety of occasions and for different purposes, including hiring and promotion, yearly cadre reviews and success evaluations, project applications, habilitation, defending a disposition or a doctorate, etc. Moreover, EMCRs particularly in earlier career stages face an uncertainty about the academic system, as there is little coaching and training on the existing requirements […]
TIER - Towards an Inclusive Evaluation of Research
In research assessment, systematic biases can be present when the evaluation criteria do not take properly into account the career path of individuals (for instance, maternity or health leaves not considered in the quantitative evaluation of the scientific production). In addition, accidental confirmation biases may arise when evaluators lack sufficient information about the candidates or valorise stereotyped attitudes. These are more likely to drive the peer evaluation, especially under conditions of high time pressure and cognitive load. These biases can lead to a systematic asymmetry in the evaluation of researchers belonging to different groups, compromising diversity in scientific research – especially in STEMM – as proved by statistics.
Ethics and Research Integrity Policy in Responsible Research Assessment for Data and Artificial Intelligence (ERIP)
ERIP builds global expertise to address the transformative cross-disciplinary impact of data and AI on research culture (values, processes, structures, perceptions) supported by data and AI integrity for the ethical development of AI in research and institutional assessment framed in human-centric quantitative and qualitative metrics/indicators for data/AI research activities. ERIP’s mission is to develop policy, guidance, and tools for advancing research assessment that promote the role of, and define the ethical and integrity characteristics of, a responsible culture for the assessment of data and AI in research, fostering responsibility, transparency, and societal benefit.
Evaluating Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) research globally
Assessment of research in the SSH fields and disciplines is challenging because of:
– the diversity of knowledge production, communication, and outreach practices.
– the plurality of methods, processes, applications, and impacts, between and within disciplines,
– The strong national focus in SSH in many SSH fields creates distinct practices,
– a higher proportion of outputs published in languages other than English (WG will liaise closely with Multilingualism WG via our common partners TSV and EASSH).
