IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v32y2023i2p515-525..html

Boundary-work and social closure in academic recruitment: Insights from the transdisciplinary subject area Swedish as a Second Language

Author

Listed:
  • Natalia Ganuza
  • Linus Salö

Abstract

This article explores practices of evaluation in academic recruitment in Swedish as a Second Language (SSL), an expanding and transdisciplinary subject area. As is common elsewhere, Swedish academia relies on a tradition of external expert review intended to ensure a meritocratic process. Here, we present an analysis of 109 written expert reports concerning recruitment to 57 positions in SSL during 2000–20. Because SSL lacks institutional autonomy, and is spread across several sub-disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, the material encompasses experts with diverse academic backgrounds. The SSL reports are broadly characterized by qualitative assessment. In contrast to other fields, the SSL experts seldom use quantitative proxy measures. Instead, they mainly rely on received conceptions of the boundaries of SSL as a means of justifying their inclusion and exclusion of candidates. This dominant regularity consists of attempts to define and delimit SSL and its core research areas, to locate the candidates in a core-to-periphery scheme with respect to these boundaries, and to rank them accordingly. This mechanism of social closure serves to restrict access to SSL to candidates with qualifications that conform to the experts’ own conceptions of SSL. As we show, the experts’ internally ambiguous conceptions of SSL tend to be constructed in relation to their own scientific habitus and investments. Beyond evaluating applicants’ possession of scientific capital, their distinctive style of reasoning around research qualifications and skills thus involves power-laden boundary-work, which leaves ample room for individual, yet habitus-specific arbitrariness.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalia Ganuza & Linus Salö, 2023. "Boundary-work and social closure in academic recruitment: Insights from the transdisciplinary subject area Swedish as a Second Language," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 515-525.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:2:p:515-525.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvad015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Björn Hammarfelt & Alexander D. Rushforth, 2017. "Indicators as judgment devices: An empirical study of citizen bibliometrics in research evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 169-180.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    2. Mona Farouk Ali, 2025. "Investigating shifts in publication patterns after launching scientometric evaluation at Egyptian universities: an analysis of submitted research for promotion," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(3), pages 1751-1787, March.
    3. Sven Helmer & David B. Blumenthal & Kathrin Paschen, 2020. "What is meaningful research and how should we measure it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 153-169, October.
    4. Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Bibliometrics in Press. Representations and uses of bibliometric indicators in the Italian daily newspapers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2195-2233, May.
    5. Julian Hamann & Frerk Blome & Anna Kosmützky, 2022. "Devices of evaluation: Institutionalization and impact—Introduction to the special issue," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 423-428.
    6. Katerina Guba, 2024. "Why do sociologists on academic periphery willingly support bibliometric indicators?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 497-518, January.
    7. Helena Francke & Björn Hammarfelt, 2022. "Competitive exposure and existential recognition: Visibility and legitimacy on academic social networking sites," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 429-437.
    8. Brito, Ricardo & Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso, 2019. "Evaluating research and researchers by the journal impact factor: Is it better than coin flipping?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 314-324.
    9. Julian Hamann & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, 2022. "Biographical representation, from narrative to list: The evolution of curricula vitae in the humanities, 1950 to 2010," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 438-451.
    10. Tony Ross-Hellauer & Thomas Klebel & Petr Knoth & Nancy Pontika, 2024. "Value dissonance in research(er) assessment: individual and perceived institutional priorities in review, promotion, and tenure," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(3), pages 337-351.
    11. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:515-525. is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Stephan Puehringer & Georg Wolfmayr, 2023. "Competitive Performativity of (Academic) Social Networks. The subjectivation of Competition on ResearchGate, Google Scholar and Twitter," ICAE Working Papers 150, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    13. David A. Pendlebury, 2019. "Charting a path between the simple and the false and the complex and unusable: Review of Henk F. Moed, Applied Evaluative Informetrics [in the series Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Scientific and Scholarly Communication, Wolfgang Glänzel, A," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 549-560, April.
    14. Alessandro Margherita & Gianluca Elia & Claudio Petti, 2022. "What Is Quality in Research? Building a Framework of Design, Process and Impact Attributes and Evaluation Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, March.
    15. Anne K. Krüger, 2020. "Quantification 2.0? Bibliometric Infrastructures in Academic Evaluation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 58-67.
    16. Kyle J. Burghardt & Bradley H. Howlett & Audrey S. Khoury & Stephanie M. Fern & Paul R. Burghardt, 2020. "Three Commonly Utilized Scholarly Databases and a Social Network Site Provide Different, But Related, Metrics of Pharmacy Faculty Publication," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-10, April.
    17. Stephan Puehringer & Theresa Hager, 2023. "Gendered Competitive Practices in Economics. A Multi-Layer Model of Womens Underrepresentation," ICAE Working Papers 148, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    18. Nicolas Robinson-Garcia & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Daniel Torres-Salinas & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Juan Gorraiz, 2024. "Errors of measurement in scientometrics: classification schemes and document types in citation and publication rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(10), pages 6455-6475, October.
    19. Qiang Wang & Feng Ren & Rongrong Li, 2024. "Exploring the impact of geopolitics on the environmental Kuznets curve research," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 1700-1722, June.
    20. Stephan Puehringer, 2023. "Wie viel Wettbewerb wollen wir (uns leisten)? Zur Verwettbewerblichung der Universitaeten in Oesterreich und darueber hinaus," ICAE Working Papers 149, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    21. Judit Dobránszki & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2019. "Corrective factors for author- and journal-based metrics impacted by citations to accommodate for retractions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 387-398, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:32:y:2023:i:2:p:515-525.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.