Internacjonaliści i miejscowi – międzynarodowa współpraca badawcza w Polsce na mikropoziomie indywidualnych naukowców
Main Article Content
Abstrakt
W tekście porównano „internacjonalistów” i „miejscowych” (czyli badaczy umiędzynarodowionych i lokalnych w badaniach naukowych) – pierwsi to naukowcy zaangażowani w międzynarodową współpracę badawczą, a drudzy w nią niezaangażowani. Jako wyraźnie zdefiniowana grupa polskich naukowców (51,4%), internacjonaliści stanowią ich odrębny typ. Dehermetyzacja polskiego systemu nauki stawia miejscowych w radykalnie trudniejszej sytuacji. Procesy nazwane przez nas „skumulowaną przewagą z racji umiędzynarodowienia” i „skumulowaną stratą z racji braku umiędzynarodowienia” zachodzą jednocześnie, dzieląc środowisko naukowe pod względem prestiżu, uznania i dostępu do konkurencyjnego finansowania badań. Umiędzynarodowienie w badaniach naukowych jest potężną siłą rozwarstwiającą nie tylko instytucje (powodującą ich pionowe zróżnicowanie), ale także ich wydziały (doprowadzając do segmentacji poziomej). Wyłaniają się zatem wysoce umiędzynarodowione instytucje, wydziały, grupy badawcze i indywidualni naukowcy. Przetestowano dziewięć hipotez roboczych dotyczących płci, wieku i stanowiska, współpracy krajowej, poziomu produktywności badawczej, rozkładu czasu pracy, orientacji na role akademickie, predyktorów bycia internacjonalistą i typu produktywności badawczej. Internacjonaliści to głównie mężczyźni i naukowcy starsi, mający dłuższe doświadczenie akademickie i wyższe stopnie naukowe. We wszystkich klastrach dyscyplin akademickich internacjonaliści generują ponad 90% publikacji powstałych w ramach współpracy międzynarodowej: brak współpracy międzynarodowej w praktyce oznacza brak międzynarodowych publikacji współautorskich. Internacjonaliści są znacznie bardziej produktywni jeśli chodzi o międzynarodowe publikacje współautorskie: reprezentują 2320% produktywności miejscowych w przypadku artykułów recenzowanych i 1600% w przypadku ich ekwiwalentów. Internacjonaliści poświęcają mniej czasu na działalność dydaktyczną, więcej na badania i więcej na obowiązki administracyjne. W Polsce większość kobiet naukowców stanowią miejscowi (55%), a większość mężczyzn – internacjonaliści (56%). W związku z tym awans kobiet na drabinie akademickiej opartej o osiągnięcia czysto naukowe będzie z czasem prawdopodobnie dłuższy, a dostęp do coraz bardziej konkurencyjnych funduszy indywidualnych na badania – coraz bardziej utrudniony. Nasze analizy wielowymiarowe (regresja logistyczna) zidentyfikowały nowe predyktory zaangażowania w międzynarodową współpracę badawczą. Wyniki analiz przeprowadzonych w oparciu o rozległe badanie ankietowe (n = 3704 zwróconych kwestionariuszy) prowadzą do wniosków dotyczących kariery akademickiej, wzorców produktywności i umiędzynarodowienia badań naukowych.
Downloads
Article Details
Referencje
- Abrahamson, M. (1965). Cosmpolitanism, Dependence-Identification, and Geographical Mo¬bility. Administrative Science Quarterly 10: 98–106.
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., Di Costa, F. (2019). A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy. Scientometrics. Publikacja online: 30 maja 2019.
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., Murgia, G. (2013). Gender Differences in Research Collaboration. Journal of Informetrics 7: 811–822.
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., Solazzi, M. (2011a). The Relationship between Scientists’ Research Per-formance and the Degree of Internationalization of Their Research. Scientometrics 86. 629–643.
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A. i Murgia, G. (2014). Variation in Research Collaboration Patterns across Academic Ranks. Scientometrics 98(3), 2275–2294.
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., Di Costa, F. (2018). The collaboration behavior of top scientists. Scientometrics. Publikacja online: 29 listopada 2018.
- Abramo., G., D’Angelo, C.A., Solazzi, M. (2011b). Are researchers that collaborate more at the in-ternational level top performers? An investigation on the Italian university system Journal of Informetrics. 5: 204–213.
- Abramo., G., D’Angelo, C.A., Murgia, G. (2016). The combined effect of age and seniorityon research performance of full professors. Science and Public Policy 43(3): 301–319.
- Ackers, L. (2008). Internationalization, mobility and metrics: A new form of indirect discrimi¬nation? Minerva 46: 411–435.
- Aksnes, D.W., Piro, F.N., Rørstad, K. (2019). Gender gaps in international research collaboration: a bibliometric approach. Scientometrics. Publikacja online: 13 czerwca 2019.
- Antonowicz, D. (2016). Digital players in an analogue world: Higher education in Poland in the post-massification era. W: B. Jongbloed i H. Vossensteyn (red.), Access and expan¬sion post-massification. Opportunities and barriers to further growth in higher education participation (ss. 63–81). London: Routledge.
- Antonowicz, D., Kwiek, M. i Westerheijden, D.F. (2017). The government response to the pri¬vate sector expansion in Poland. W: H. de Boer, J. File, J. Huisman, M. Seeber, M. Vukas¬ovic i D.F. Westerheijden (red.), Policy analysis of structural reforms in higher education(ss. 119–138). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Arimoto, A. (2011). Japan: Effects of Changing Governance and Management on the Academic Profession. W: W. Locke, W.K. Cummings, D. Fisher (red.), Changing Governance and Man-agement in Higher Education. The Perspectives of the Academy (ss. 281–319). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Bentley, P.J. (2015). Cross-country differences in publishing productivity of academics in research universities. Scientometrics 102(1), 865–883.
- Bieliński, J. i Tomczyńska, A. (2018). The Ethos of Science in Contemporary Poland. Minerva. Publikacja online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11024-018-9365-1.
- Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C. (2003). Age effects in scientific productivity. The case of the Italian National Research Council (CNR). Scientometrics 58(1): 49–90.
- Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods. 4th Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Carvalho, T. (2017). The study of the academic profession – contributions from and to the sociol¬ogy of professions. W: Huisman, J. i M. Tight (red.), Theory and method in higher education research. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, First edition, 59–76.
- Cohen, L., Manion, L. i Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge.
- Cole, J.R. i Cole, S. (1973). Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T.N, Bordons, M. (2010). A Bibliometric Classificatory Approachfor the Study and Assessment of Research Performance at the Individual Level: the Effectsof Age on Productivity and Impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61(8): 1564–1581.
- Cummings, J.N., Kiesler, S. (2007). Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations. Research Policy 36: 1620–1634.
- Dakowska, D. (2015). Between competition imperative and Europeanisaton: the case of higher education reform in Poland. Higher Education 69(1): 129–141.
- Finkelstein, M. i Sethi, W. (2014). Patterns of Faculty Internationalization: A Predictive Model. W: F. Huang, M. Finkelstein i M. Rostan (red.), The Internationalization of the Academy. Changes, Realities and Prospects. Dordrecht: Springer. 237–258.
- Finkelstein, M.J., Walker, E. i Chen, R. (2013). The American faculty in an age of globalization: predictors of internationalization of research content and professional networks. Higher Education 66: 325–340.
- Finkelstein, M.J., Seal, R.K. i Schuster, J.H. (1998). The New Academic Generation. A Profession in Transformation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Fox, M.F. (1992). Research, teaching, and publication productivity. Mutuality versus competition in academia. Sociology of Education 65(4), 293–305.
- Fox, M.F., Realff, M.L., Rueda, D.R. i Morn, J. (2006). International Research Collaboration Among Women Engineers: Frequency and Perceived Barriers, by Regions. Journal of Tech¬nology Transfer. Published online: 17 października 2016.
- Gazni, A, Sugimoto, C.R i Didegah, F. (2012). Mapping World Scientific Collaboration: Au¬thors, Institutions, and Countries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(2): 323–335.
- Georghiou, L. (1998). Global cooperation in research. Research Policy 27: 611–628.
- Glaser, B.G. (1963). The Local-Cosmopolitan Scientist. The American Journal of Sociology 69, 249–259.
- Godin, B. i Gingras, Y. (2000). Impact of Collaborative Research on Academic Science. Science and Public Policy 27(1). 65–73.
- Gorelova, O. i Lovakov, A. (2016). Academic Inbreeding and Research Productivity of Russian Faculty Members. Working Papers. WP BRP 32/EDU/2016.
- Gouldner, A. (1957). Cosmopolitans and Locals: Toward an Analysis of Latent Social Rules. Administrative Science Quarterly 2, 281–306.
- Groves, R.M. (2006). Nonresponse Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Household Surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 70(5), 646–675.
- Guldbrandsen, M. i Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy 34, 932–950.
- GUS (2011). Higher Education Institutions and Their Finances in 2010. Warsaw: GUS (Central Statistical Office).
- Hibberts, M.R., Johnson, B. i Hudson, K. (2012). Common survey sampling techniques. W: L. Gideon, (red.), Handbook of survey methodology for the social sciences (ss. 53–74). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Hoekman, J., Frenken, K. i Tijssen, R.J.W. (2010). Research collaboration at a distance: chnag¬ing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research Policy 39: 662–673.
- Huang, F., Finkelstein, M. i Rostan, M. (2014). The Internationalization of the Academy. Changes, Realities and Prospects. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Jeong, S., Choi, J.Y. i Kim, J.-Y. (2011). The determinants of research collaboration modes: Exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship. Sciento¬metrics 89, 967–983.
- Jeong, S., Choi, J.Y., Kim, J.-Y (2014). On the drivers of international collaboration: the impact of informal communication, motivation, and research resources. Science and Public Policy 41 (4): 520–531.
- Jones, G.A., Gopaul, B., Weinrib, J., Metcalfe, A.S., Fisher, D., Gingras, Y., Rubenson, K. (2014). Teaching, Research, and the Canadian Professoriate. W: J.C. Shin, A. Arimoto, W.K. Cum¬mings, U. Teichler (red.), Teaching and Research in Contemporary Higher Education. Systems, Activities and Rewards (ss. 335–355). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Jung, J. (2014). Research Productivity by Career Stage among Korean Academics. Tertiary Education and Management Vol. 20(2). 85–105.
- Jung, J., Kooij, R. i Teichler, U. (2014). Internationalization and the New Generation of Academics. W: F. Huang, M. Finkelstein i M. Rostan (red.), The Internationalization of the Academy. Changes, Realities and Prospects (ss. 207–236). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Kwiek, M. (2012). Changing higher education policies: From the deinstitutionalization to the re-institutionalization of the research mission in Polish universities. Science and Public Policy 35(5), 641–654.
- Kwiek, M. (2015a). The internationalization of research in Europe. A quantitative study of 11 national systems from a micro-level perspective. Journal of Studies in International Edu¬cation 19(2), 341–359.
- Kwiek, M. (2015b). The unfading power of collegiality? University governance in Poland in a Eu-ropean comparative and quantitative perspective. International Journal of Educational Development 43, 77–89.
- Kwiek, M. (2015c). Academic generations and academic work: Patterns of attitudes, behaviors and research productivity of Polish academics after 1989’. Studies in Higher Education 40(8), 1354–1376.
- Kwiek, M. (2016a). The European research elite: A cross-national study of highly productive academics across 11 European systems. Higher Education 71(3), 379–397.
- Kwiek, M. (2016b). From Privatization (of the Expansion Era) to De-privatization (of the Contrac¬tion Era). A National Counter-trend in a Global Context. W: S. Slaughter i B.J. Taylor (red.), Higher Education, Stratification, and Workforce Development. Competitive Advantage in Europe, the US and Canada (ss. 311–329). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Kwiek, M. (2017). A generational divide in the Polish academic profession. A mixed quantitative and qualitative approach. European Educational Research Journal 17, 1–26.
- Kwiek, M. (2018a). Academic top earners. Research productivity, prestige generation and salary patterns in European universities. Science and Public Policy 45(1). February 2018. 1–13.
- Kwiek, M. (2018b). International Research Collaboration and International Research Orienta¬tion: Comparative Findings About European Academics. Journal of Studies in International Education 22(2): 136–160.
- Kwiek, M. (2018c). High Research Productivity in Vertically Undifferentiated Higher Education Systems: Who Are the Top Performers? Scientometrics 115(1). 415–462.
- Kwiek, M. (2019). Changing European Academics: A Comparative Study of Social Stratification, Work Patterns and Research Productivity. London and New York: Routledge.
- Kwiek, M. (2020). Międzynarodowa współpraca badawcza w Europie w świetle dużych danych i jej globalne konteksty. Nauka 1(2020).
- Kwiek, M. i Szadkowski, K. (2018). Higher Education Systems and Institutions: Poland. W: International Encyclopedia of Higher Education Systems, red. Pedro N. Texteira i J.C. Shin, 1–20. Cham: Springer.
- Kyvik, S. (1990). Age and scientific productivity. Differences between fields of learning. Sciento-metrics 19(1): 37–55.
- Kyvik, S. i Aksnes, D.W. (2015). Explaining the increase in publication productivity among aca¬demic staff: A generational perspective. Studies in Higher Education 40, 1438–1453.
- Kyvik, S., Larsen, I.M. (1997). The exchange of knowledge. A small country in the international research community. Science Communication 18(3). 238–264.
- Kyvik, S., Teigen, M. (1996). Child Care, Research Collaboration, and Gender Differences in Sci¬entific Productivity. Science, Technology, & Human Values 21(1): 54–71.
- Kyvik, S., Olsen, T.B. (2008). Does the aging of tenured academic staff affect the research per-formance of universities? Scientometrics. Vol. 76(3). 439–455.
- Levin, S.G., Stephan, P.E. (1989). Age and research productivity of academic scientists. Research in Higher Education Vol. 30(5). 531–549.
- Levin, S.G., Stephan, P.E. (1991). Research Productivity Over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Aca¬demic Scientists. The American Economic Review Vol. 81(1). 114–132.
- Locke, W., Benion, A. (2011). The United Kingdom: Academic Retreat or Professional Renewal? W: W. Locke, W.K. Cummings, D. Fisher (red.), Changing Governance and Management in Higher Education. The Perspectives of the Academy (ss. 175–197). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Luukkonen, T., Persson, O. i Sivertsen, G. (1992). Understanding Patterns of International Sci¬entific Collaboration. Science, Technology, & Human Values 17(1): 101–126.
- Marquina, M. i Jones, G. (2015). Generational Change and Academic Work: An Introduction. Studies in Higher Education 40(8), 1349–1353.
- Marquina, M., Yuni, J., Ferreiro, M. (2015). Generational Change in Argentine academic profes¬sion through the analysis of ‘life courses’. Studies in Higher Education 40(8), 1392–1405.
- McNeeley, S. (2012). Sensitive Issues in Surveys: Reducing Refusals While Increasing Reliability and Quality of Responses to Sensitive Survey Items. W: G. Lior Gideon (red.), Handbookof survey methodology for the social sciences (ss. 377–396). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy 29: 31–34.
- Merton, R.K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Ostrowicka, H. i Stankiewicz, L. (2018). The truths of business and the lies of academia: the order of discourse on higher education in Poland. Higher Education Research & Development. On-line first: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1545746.
- Piro, F.N., Aksnes, D.W. i Rørstad, K. (2013). A Macro Analysis of Productivity Differences Across Fields: Challenges in the Measurement of Scientific Publishing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64(2), 307–320.
- Piro, F.N., Rørstad, K. i Aksnes, D.W. (2016). How does prolific professors influence on the citation impact of their university departments? Scientometrics 107(3), 941–961.
- Ramsden, P. (1994). Describing and explaining research productivity. Higher Education 28(2), 207–226.
- Rhoades, G., Kiyama, J.M., McCormick, R., Quiroz, M. (2008). Local Cosmopolitans and Cos-mopolitan Locals: New Models of Professionals in the Academy. The Review of Higher Education 31/2: 209–235.
- Rostan, M., Ceravolo, F.A. i Metcalfe, S.A. (2014). The Internationalization of Research. W:F. Huang, M. Finkelstein i M. Rostan (red.), The Internationalization of the Academy. Chang¬es, Realities and Prospects. Dordrecht: Springer: 119–144.
- Rostan, M., Ceravolo, F.A. (2015). The internationalization of the academy: convergence and di-vergence across disciplines. European Review 23(S1): 38–54.
- Rørstad, K. i Aksnes, D.W. (2015). Publication rate expressed by age, gender and academic posi¬tion – A large-scale analysis of Norwegian academic staff. Journal of Informetrics 9, 317–333.
- Santiago, R., Carvalho, T. i Cardoso, S. (2015). Portuguese Academics’ Perceptions of Higher Education Institutions’ Governance and Management: A Generational Perspective. Studies in Higher Education 40(8), 1471–1484.
- Shin, J.C., Arimoto, A. i Cummings, W.K. (2014). Teaching and Research in Contemporary Higher Education. Systems, Activities and Rewards. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Shin, J.C., Jung, J., Kim, Y. (2014). Teaching and Research of Korean Academics Across Career Stages. W: J.C. Shin, A. Arimoto, W.K. Cummings, U. Teichler (red.), Teaching and Research in Contemporary Higher Education. Systems, Activities and Rewards (ss. 177–197). Dor¬drecht: Springer.
- Smeby, J.-Ch. i Gornitzka, Å. (2008). All Cosmopolitans Now? The Changing International Con¬tacts of University Researchers. W: Å. Gornitzka i L. Langfeldt (red.), Borderless Knowledge. Understanding „New” Internationalisation of Research and Higher Education in Norway. Dordrecht: Springer. 37–50.
- Sooryamoorthy, R. (2014). Publication productivity and collaboration of researchers in South Africa: new empirical evidence. Scientometrics 98: 531–545.
- Spector, P.E. (1981). Research designs. London: Sage.
- Stephan, P. (2012). How economics shapes science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Stephan, P.E., Levin, S.G. (1992). Striking the mother lode in science: the importance of age, place, and time. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Teichler, U. i Höhle, E.E. (red.). (2013). The Work Situation of the Academic Profession in Eu¬rope: Findings of a Survey in Twelve Countries. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Teichler, U., Arimoto, A. i Cummings, W.K. (2013). The Changing Academic Profession. Major Findings of a Comparative Survey. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Teodorescu, D. (2000). Correlates of faculty publication productivity: A cross-national analysis. Higher Education 39(2), 201–222.
- Thelwall, M., Maflahi, N. (2019). Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields. arXiv:1910.00789.
- Uhly, K.M., Visser, L.M., Zippel, K.M (2015). Gendered patterns in international research col-laboration in academia. Studies in Higher Education 42(4): 760–782.
- Urbanek, P. (2018). Reform of the Higher Education System in Poland from the Perspectiveof Agency Theory. European Journal of Higher Education. Publikacja online: 20 grudnia 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2018.1560344.
- Vabø, A., Padilla-Gonzales, L.E., Waagene, E., Naess, T. (2014). Gender and Faculty Interna-tionalization. W: F. Huang, M. Finkelstein i M. Rostan (red.), The Internationalizationof the Academy. Changes, Realities and Prospects. Dordrecht: Springer: 183–206.
- Vaus, D. de (2002). Surveys in Social Research. 5th Edition. Routledge: Milton Park
- Villanueva-Felez, A., Molas-Gallart, M. i Escribá-Esteve, A. (2013). Measuring Personal Networks and Their Relationship with Scientific Production. Minerva 51, 465–483.
- Wagner, C.S. (2006). International collaboration in science and technology: promises and pitfalls. W: Science and Technology Policy for Development, Dialogues at the Interface, red. L. Box i R. Engelhard. London: Anthem Press.
- Wagner, C.S. (2008). The New Invisible College. Science for Development. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
- Wagner, C.S. (2018). The Collaborative Era in Science. Governing the Network. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Wagner, C.S, Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growthof international collaboration in science. Research Policy 34: 1608–1618.
- Weert, E. de, Kaap, H. van der (2014). The Changing Balance of Teaching and Research in the Dutch Binary Higher Education System. W: J.C. Shin, A. Arimoto, W.K. Cummings, U. Teichler (red.), Teaching and Research in Contemporary Higher Education. Systems, Activities and Rewards (ss. 113–133). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Wolszczak-Derlacz, J. i Parteka, A. (2010). Scientific Productivity of Public Higher Education Institutions in Poland. A Comparative Bibliometric Analysis. Warsaw: Ernst and Young.
- Ziman, J. (1991). Academic science as a system of markets. Higher Education Quarterly 45(1), 41–61.
- Zippel, K. (2017). Women in Global Science. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
- Zuckerman, H. (1970). Stratification in American science. Sociological Inquiry 40(2), 235–257.