Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Research Area
Search Tips
Meeting Home Page
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Session Submission Type: Open Panel
New forms of evaluation are reconfiguring professional and organisational life in ways we are only beginning to understand. Not only has the number of evaluations multiplied; multiple evaluative agencies often co-exist. Recent sociological research has therefore emphasised the empirical importance of focusing on the dynamics that occur when activities in an organisation become subject to multiple (sometimes competing) e/valuation registers (Brandtner 2017; Pontikes 2012; Stark 2009). This research also suggests that the plurality of e/valuation registers to which an organisation is subject may actually strengthen the ‘resilience’ and ‘creative potential’ of that organisation. In this track, we wish to bring into awareness the multiplicity of e/valuation practices and how these influence organisational practices, including practices of knowledge production and healthcare.
Expanding STS insights in the enactment of e/valuation in contemporary society, this track attends to evaluative actions; exploring the ‘critical multidimensionality’ of how professional work is assessed and configured numerically, verbally and visually through the use of metrics – both by ‘outside’ actors and practitioners themselves. Metrics allow for experimenting; using performance measurement to enhance healthcare quality, or arranging a more sensitive and nuanced process of intellectual production assessment in which metrics are embedded in wider practices of valuation (de Rijcke et al. 2016, Bal 2017). Yet, e/valuation may also involve strategic ignorance (Pinto 2015, Gross & McGoey 2015); rendering certain aspects invisible, while strengthening others. We are interested in these evaluative actions, and seek to raise questions about their practices and consequences for public and professional life. Questions that may be raised: How to analyse the complex relationship between evaluative knowledges and practices? Which valuation practices and commitments (professional, ethical, material) are we ourselves entangled with in our own work? What ‘comfortable’ and less fitting subjectivities are interpellated in certain evaluative systems? Whose voice is or becomes legitimate?
E/Valuation in Designing Indigenous Services Delivery in Alice Springs - Matthew Campbell, Charles Darwin University
Indexical Judgment: The Construction of Valuation Devices for Art and Antiques - Erica Coslor, The University of Melbourne; Yuval Millo, Warwick University
Metrics and the Commercialization of Open Access Scholarship - Alexandra Sharp Lippman, UCLA
Rethinking Academic Value: Experiments in Research Assessment with the ‘Evaluative Inquiry’ Approach - Thed van Leeuwen, Leiden University; Tjitske Holtrop; Sarah de Rijcke, Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)
Towards Meta Principles Based Evaluation Framework For Community Sustainable Transformation Programs - Saurabh Biswas, Arizona State University; Rimjhim Aggarwal, Arizona State University