Show Less
Restricted access

(Un)pädagogische Visionen für das 21. Jahrhundert / (Non-)Educational Visions for the 21st Century

Geistes- und sozialwissenschaftliche Entwürfe nach dem Ende der ‹großen› Menschheitsgeschichte / Humanities and Social Science Concepts after the End of the ‹Great› History of Mankind


Edited By Gerd-Bodo von Carlsburg and Annette Miriam Stross

Sind Visionen Phantasievorstellungen, Einbildungen oder gar Trugbilder vergangener Zeiten? Oder ist Visionen, retro- wie auch prospektiv gesehen, ein Potential zu eigen, das Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftler.innen in der Gegenwart nutzen können und sollten?

In diesem Band zeigen Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler aus Deutschland, Litauen, Estland, Polen, Schweden und China, dass die aktuellen Debatten in den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften zu Themen wie Ökologie, interreligiöser Dialog, Identitätsbildung, Gesundheitserziehung, digitale Partizipation, (Welt-)Frieden, Sakrotourismus, Kulturmanagement durch die Einbeziehung visionärer Perspektiven aus unterschiedlichen Disziplinen neu belebt werden können.

Are visions imaginations of fantasies and illusions or even hallucinations of past times? Or has a vision, in retrospect and in preview, a potential that humanists and social scientists can and should use in the present?

In this volume scientists from Germany, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, Sweden and China show that current debates in the humanities and social sciences on topics such as ecology, interreligious dialogue, identity learning, health education, digital participation, (world) peace, sacrotourism, cultural management can be revitalized by including visionary perspectives from different scientific disciplines.

Show Summary Details
Restricted access

Data-Driven Research Management: What We Owe to Rankings1


Julija Kiršienė &Lina Bloveščiūnienė

Abstract: The ranking of universities is a relatively new phenomenon, the beginning of which coincides with the third phase of changing societal expectations on research, but it does not necessarily correspond to the programs of this phase. Shortcomings of university rankings show that most of the current university ranking indicators are in line with the programs of the first and partly the second research phases, but far from reaching the third, leading to a lot of discussion in both academic and political discourses. Therefore, in this paper, we analyze how changing societal expectations are transforming research assessment. It also deals with the experience of creating a centralized model of current research information system (CRIS) in VMU, and how its development has affected the visibility of the institution on the rankings and the quality of the university.

Keywords: University rankings, Visibility of the University, Research management, Current research information system (CRIS).

International university rankings are an inescapable reality of the higher education landscape (Millot 2015, 156). Annual rankings of world universities are published by QS (“QS World University Rankings 2019”), Leiden Ranking (Studies (CWTS), Shanghai (“ARWU World University Rankings 2020”), SCImago (“SCImago Institutions Rankings”), URAP (“URAP − University Ranking by Academic Performance”), US News and World Report (“The Best High Schools in America”), U-Multirank (“2020 World University Rankings − Compare Universities & Colleges | U-Multirank”), the Times Higher Education Supplement (“World University Rankings”), the rankings based on Web visibility by...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.