the pbrf and bibliometric measures

21
The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Upload: ania

Post on 13-Jan-2016

45 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

The PBRF and bibliometric measures. Introduction. Use of bibliometrics by the Ministry of Education Part 1 – presentation of latest bibliometric results Part 2 – what if bibliometrics was used to allocate PBRF funding? – a case study. Bibliometrics. Thomson Reuters bibliometrics dataset - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Page 2: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Introduction

• Use of bibliometrics by the Ministry of Education

• Part 1 – presentation of latest bibliometric results

• Part 2 – what if bibliometrics was used to allocate PBRF funding? – a case study

Page 3: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Bibliometrics• Thomson Reuters bibliometrics dataset

– Reasonably stable– Long time series– External to the PBRF system – can triangulate and calibrate– International benchmarking– Limitations of bibliometrics

• Useful monitoring tool– But don’t see bibliometrics as a way of dispensing research

funding at this time

Page 4: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Bibliometrics measures – NZ universities

– Share of world publications– Share of world citations– Relative impact:

(citations per paperNZ universities)

(citations per paperworld)

Page 5: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Share of world publications and citations

Source: Thomson Reuters

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

0.5%

81-85 83-87 85-89 87-91 89-93 91-95 93-97 95-99 97-01 99-03 01-05 03-07

Sha

re o

f w

orld

Publications Citations

Page 6: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact – NZ vs Australia

Source: Thomson Reuters

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

81-85 83-87 85-89 87-91 89-93 91-95 93-97 95-99 97-01 99-03 01-05 03-07

Rel

ativ

e im

pact

(wor

ld a

vera

ge =

1)

NZ G8 Non-G8

Page 7: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact – by panel

Source: Thomson Reuters

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

81-85 83-87 85-89 87-91 89-93 91-95 93-97 95-99 97-01 99-03 01-05 03-07

Rel

ativ

e im

pact

(wor

ld a

vera

ge =

1)

Engineering Maths Physical science

Page 8: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact – by panel

Source: Thomson Reuters

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

81-85 83-87 85-89 87-91 89-93 91-95 93-97 95-99 97-01 99-03 01-05 03-07

Rel

ativ

e im

pact

(wor

ld a

vera

ge =

1)

Biological sciences Medicine & public heath Health

Page 9: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact – by panel

Source: Thomson Reuters

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

81-85 83-87 85-89 87-91 89-93 91-95 93-97 95-99 97-01 99-03 01-05 03-07

Rel

ativ

e im

pact

(wor

ld a

vera

ge =

1)

Business Education

Page 10: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact – by panel

Source: Thomson Reuters

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

81-85 83-87 85-89 87-91 89-93 91-95 93-97 95-99 97-01 99-03 01-05 03-07

Rel

ativ

e im

pact

(wor

ld a

vera

ge =

1)

Social sciences Humanities & law

Page 11: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact – by panel

Source: Thomson Reuters

Engineering

Maths

Physical science

Biological sciences

Medicine & public heath

Health

Business

Education

Social sciences

Humanities & law

World 1998-2002 2003-2007

Page 12: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

NZ vs Australian universities 2003-2007

Engineering

Maths

Physical science

Biological sciences

Medicine & public heath

Health

Business

Education

Social sciences

Humanities & law

World NZ G8 Non-G8Source: Thomson Reuters

Page 13: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

What if citations were used to allocate PBRF funding?

• Case study – Earth Science

• Method– Compare funding allocated to each university in

2007 via the PBRF quality evaluation with what would have been allocated if based on citations

Page 14: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Funding via the PBRF 2007University PBRF score FTE PBRF funding

($000s)

Lincoln 3.0 8.0 $146

Massey 4.7 15.7 $453

Auckland 4.6 26.5 $742

Canterbury 5.4 21.0 $695

Otago 5.5 17.7 $598

Waikato 5.0 18.3 $555

VUW 4.9 25.8 $763

Total $3,952

Page 15: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Funding via relative impact in 2007

• Relative impact in five year overlapping time periods

• Use three year weighted average– 1999-2003 (15%)– 2000-2004 (35%)– 2001-2005 (50%)

• Then adjust by PBRF FTE

Page 16: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Relative impact

University 99-03 00-04 01-05 Weighted

Lincoln 1.04 0.56 1.04 0.87

Massey 0.73 0.50 0.60 0.59

Auckland 0.77 0.82 0.84 0.82

Canterbury 0.73 0.78 0.64 0.70

Otago 1.68 1.63 1.28 1.46

Waikato 0.97 1.06 1.05 1.04

VUW 1.10 0.96 1.02 1.01

Source: Thomson Reuters

Page 17: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Comparing PBRF scores and weighted relative impact

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

PBRF average quality score

Rel

ativ

e im

pact

OU

AU

VUWWU

CU

LU

MU

Page 18: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Comparing funding allocations 2007

$0.0

$0.2

$0.4

$0.6

$0.8

$1.0

VUW Auckland Canterbury Otago Waikato Massey Lincoln

$mill

ion

PBRF Relative impact

Page 19: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Issues

• Capturing all indexed research vs 4 nominated research outputs

• Size of NZ subject areas

Page 20: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

University staffing trends

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Professors AssociateProfessors

Senior Lecturers Lecturers Research OnlyStaff

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Page 21: The PBRF and bibliometric measures

Ministry of Education monitoring

• Ministry of Education reports assessing research performance can be found at the Education Counts website:

www.educationcounts.govt.nz