Valutare per migliorare?
We argue that the National Agency for the Evaluation of the University System (ANVUR), apart from not improving science, is also an epistemic detriment to the research system. Our aim is not to discuss and criticise its specific actions, rather to shed light on the culture and éthos in which it is r...
Enregistré dans:
| Dans: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/qds, |
|---|---|
| Auteur principal: | |
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Langue: | Italien |
| Publié: |
Quaderni di Sociologia
2025
|
| Accès en ligne: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Résumé: | We argue that the National Agency for the Evaluation of the University System (ANVUR), apart from not improving science, is also an epistemic detriment to the research system. Our aim is not to discuss and criticise its specific actions, rather to shed light on the culture and éthos in which it is rooted and from which its political legitimacy comes from. Our contribution is not intended to be a technical expertise that advances remarks on how ANVUR manages evaluation practices, but a radical critique (in the sense that it aims to get to the root of the matter) of the purposes and very ratio essendi of the governmental philosophy that underlies its institutional mandate. To engage in a discussion of procedures means to depoliticise critique within a technical framework whose rules of engagement and stakes are defined within that “managerial domination” – to borrow a phrase from Luc Boltanski (2009) – which, in our view, is precisely the main problem requiring attention. |
|---|