IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v9y2000i1p27-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The South African system of evaluating and rating individual researchers: its merits, shortcomings, impact and future

Author

Listed:
  • Magdal Pienaar
  • William Blankley
  • Gudrun U Schirge
  • Gerhard von Gruenewaldt

Abstract

The Foundation for Research Development (FRD) in South Africa has for the last 15 years developed and applied a unique research evaluation and rating system in the fields of the natural sciences, engineering and technology. A multi-dimensional, multi-phased evaluation process is followed to judge the quality and impact of research-based outputs. Individual researchers are ranked in terms of the FRD rating categories, and this is eventually one of the mechanisms used both to identify suitable candidates in whom to invest and to determine levels of investment. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Magdal Pienaar & William Blankley & Gudrun U Schirge & Gerhard von Gruenewaldt, 2000. "The South African system of evaluating and rating individual researchers: its merits, shortcomings, impact and future," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 27-36, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:9:y:2000:i:1:p:27-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154400781777395
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:9:y:2000:i:1:p:27-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.