Academic evaluation systems continue to evolve as institutions reconsider how scientific contributions should be measured and rewarded. Traditional metrics like publication counts and journal impact factors are increasingly scrutinized for their limitations in capturing the full spectrum of academic value, including mentorship, open science practices, and societal impact. How we evaluate scientists directly shapes research incentives, career trajectories, and ultimately, the knowledge enterprise itself.
This SciPoll explores expert perspectives on which performance metrics should carry the most weight in promotion and award decisions, providing insights that could help academic institutions develop more balanced and effective evaluation frameworks that align with the changing landscape of scientific contribution and impact.
This SciPoll explores expert perspectives on which performance metrics should carry the most weight in promotion and award decisions, providing insights that could help academic institutions develop more balanced and effective evaluation frameworks that align with the changing landscape of scientific contribution and impact.