What does “review” in the dictionary FCT – The Associated Press

             

class=”module
                     
                 

             

 
                     

Imagine that a teacher has a class of 20 students and everyone in improbable coincidence, are the level of Einstein. The teacher does not even know this genius but you know at the outset, before any test, which can only “spend” ten of their gifted students – rule that their students are unaware of and, indeed, until they were told they did not exist. That’s what made the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) to commission an international assessment of Portuguese research centers, establishing from the outset, in the contract for this task, half of the centers would not pass to the next stage of evaluation. And so, even those who had good chumbariam.

                 

                     FCT commissioned this work to a foreign organization, the European Science Foundation (ESF), for about 300 million euros. The previous review the research units of the country, in 2007, organized by the FCT itself cost 1.6 million euros.

Not being open to criticism, the 2007 assessment was serious. Evaluators visited the centers, scientists heard, seen and science that did a review of these cost money. The 2014 review was comparatively very cheap and gets to be easy to see why. Started from the assumption that half of the centers “chumbaria” in the first phase, as was determined in the contract between the FCT and ESF released on Friday (“the first phase of the review will result in a ‘shortlist’ half of the units . research that will be selected to proceed to Phase 2, “reads the document, which specifies a number of” approvals “: 163). Why then visit the centers in the first phase of the evaluation, and spend money on it, if half would have to be eliminated?

Both the ESF and the FCT (and even now the Ministry of Education and Science that guardianship) out rather badly in this “picture”. The FHS says in his site that is committed to the science in Europe is of high quality and among the services it provides are reviews (scientific projects and counterpart agencies in other countries FCT). How does an organization that says strive for scientific quality and want to continue to make assessments (through its successor), can be credible by accepting the outset to “order” the number of pre-decided by the FCT leads?

reviews tend to serve it yourself, evaluate. Before them, the “teacher” does not know the performance of their students. If the FTC wants to know the state of science in the country, to realize the true trend since the last review of 2007 would look at the results that were presented to him after the hearing on the ground. But not placed an order in which pre-defined results that this review should have.

This shows us that the FCT wanted to have a “scientific study” that found on the ground which meant it to be found . Thus, it could legitimize a policy you want to assign the bulk of the money for operation of research centers to a smaller group for, he says, reward “excellent” and “exceptional”. Instead of taking these cuts, we agree with them or not, could take refuge in this “review” for more of a “foreign” entity.

Between the mid centers left behind in the first phase of the evaluation (154 among 322 evaluated), the majority (83) had a rating of Good and have a reduced funding for recurrent expenditure. The other 71 ranked with Low Average or will not have any money. Ie having Good is no longer good, as was realized with the release of the results of the first phase of the evaluation at the end of June.

FCT has been toasting us with a new dictionary. Regulation in this review, we still know that the centers that reached the second round – 168 and are therefore above Good – can now be classified as Low, Average, Good, Very Good, Excellent or Outstanding. A center that ensured at least one Very Good, to proceed to the second phase of the review, can now come to be Insufficient. Ie have Very Good Poor. ? Confused

With the revelation of the content of the contract between the FCT and ESF, we learned that the dictionary FCT now has another new word:. Assessment no longer means assessment