During the Recognition & Rewards Festival there will be two rounds of workshops. In the table below you will find an overview of the workshops. In the register form you can select the workshops you would like to join. You are welcome to join any workshop, however to ensure that the choice of workshops fits you well, we classified it into several levels:
No specific prior knowledge is required to participate in these sessions. However, it is helpful to attend the pre-program information session and read the position paper Room for Everyone’s Talent.
These sessions require some prior knowledge and are aimed at those directly or indirectly involved in Recognition & Rewards initiatives: members of the committees at the institutions, policy makers, members of the Executive Boards and other administrators, international counterparts, and academics in general.
These sessions are small-scale and interactive and are aimed at those involved in shaping Recognition & Rewards, e.g. members of the steering committee, project leaders, and chairs of the committees at the institutions. The goal of these sessions is to actively engage and exchange good practices and experiences.
|Workshop round 1 | 11.40 - 12.55h|
|1.1 A co-creative session: from individual to collective recognition and Rewards (G)
Iris Lechner, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, PhD candidate; Prof. dr. ir. Jeroen de Ridder, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, associate professor & dr. Joeri Tijdink, MD, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, assistant professor
The Netherlands can be seen as a forerunner in making the recognition and rewards system more fair, inclusive and aimed at diversifying career pathways. So far, however, the debate has largely focused on individual academics. In order to change the system, redesigning the recognition and rewards systems for teams, departments and universities is also needed. The question then becomes how to align individual and collective recognition and rewards.
One way to think about alternative ways to value universities is by focusing on the responsibilities they have towards knowledge – i.e. good education, good research and serving society well – we call these the epistemic responsibilities of universities. In a recent research project we developed a practical tool to which can contribute to redefining the ways in which universities are currently valued and evaluated – by shifting the focus to these epistemic responsibilities.
During this co-creative workshop you will engage in an interactive session through various exercises. The workshop specifically focuses on the question: how can individual recognition and rewards be aligned with collective recognition and rewards?
|1.2 Assessment of teacher quality in the University Teaching Practice from Different Perspectives (G)
Max Kusters, Msc, ICLON Leiden University, PhD-candidate; Prof. dr. Roeland van der Rijst, ICLON Leiden University, Full professor of Educational Sciences & Dr. Arjen de Vetten, ICLON Leiden University, Educational advisor and researcher
In this workshop participants will experience how reflecting on real-life teaching scenarios provides insight into what choices lecturers make in action and how that provides insight into teacher quality. The main question guiding this workshop is: Are you able to assess the quality of a teacher by just reflecting on real-life teaching situations?
To enable lecturers to think and reflect on real-life teaching situations in a relevant way, we have developed narratives of actual teaching situations. The purpose of these scenarios is to portray a situation about which lecturers need to make judgments in action. A scenario is a highly practical method to stimulate lecturers' reflection and foster the conversation about teaching and learning, since one does not have to wait for the event to occur as in an actual situation. During this workshop, participants work in groups of three. Each participant performs an academic role from which to approach the scenario. Finally, we reflect on whether and how we have been able to assess teacher quality in this way.
|1.3 Enabling Diversity - addressing silent assessment (I)
Jacqueline Kool, PhD student in Disability Studies, University of Humanistic Studies and disability advocate; Liorah Hoek, PhD student in Disability Studies, University of Humanistic Studies and publicist and senior researcher at HandicapNL; Alice Schippers , professor of Disability Studies and member of the steering committee on Diversity and Inclusion, University of Humanistic Studies & Carolina Suransky, associate professor of Humanistic Studies and Social Change and chair of the steering committee on Diversity and Inclusion, University of Humanistic Studies
This interactive and playful workshop uncovers the silent assessment that systematically excludes people with a disability (and others) from the academic field. It focusses on core concepts like crip time, disability management and the spoon theory. This will help you to understand the main challenges that disabled people face when they enter the academic field. In an open conversation about real life cases and by using existing best practices, tools and knowledge, we will explore what each of us can do to create an inclusive academic environment where everybody can flourish.
|1.4 From words to deeds: concrete actions to reward and assess societal impact (A)
Dr. Annelinde Vandenbroucke, Leiden University & VUmc, assistant professor; Dr. Sharon Unsworth, Radboud University, associate professor; Dr. Jeanette Mostert, Radboudumc Nijmegen, assistant professor & Ymke Bresser MSc, TU Delft Library, communications advisor
Achieving societal impact through science communication and public engagement is an important part of research, but is not yet rewarded as such. Although universities generally appreciate the efforts made by science communicators – whether they are researchers, communication specialists, or both – structural time for such activities and career prospects for those who pursue them remain limited. In this workshop we will work together to formulate concrete actions and recommendations to reward societal impact for all these kinds of science communicators. Questions we will discuss include: What forms could rewarding societal impact take? For example, can organising a public event substitute writing a high impact paper? Should we make science communication part of annual appraisal criteria? And if so, how can we assess the quality of any societal impact activities? Or should we create new job profiles for embedded science communicators or public engagement stewards, where science communication and public engagement are an official (and substantial) part of the job description? We invite science communicators of all kinds, research directors and policy makers to exchange good practices, experiences and ideas, so that we can go from words to deeds.
|1.5 How does leadership become everyone’s (I)
Maaike Verbree, Hoofd academische zaken BETA-faculteit, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam & Rolien Walinga, manager Leadership Development, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Leadership is not a role, position or box to be ticked, but an everyday behavior that benefits you and others. It can be shown in small ways to make a valued difference. Are you looking for some concrete examples to operationalize leadership? Do you also find it a difficult challenge to bring all separate concepts of leadership, management, teamwork, behavior, culture change well into coherence across the stage? Come listening and discussing with us in the workshop ‘How does leadership become everyone’s’. In this workshop, Technische Universiteit Delft and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam are pleased to take you through their quest how to make leadership both practical and recognizable, and in the meanwhile create commitment and common language. We worked out a similar premise about leadership, but translated it into different tools as Profile, Framework Management, Dialogue Game and Art of Engagement. We like to share these tools in the workshop with you.
|1.6 Interdisciplinary collaborations: business as unusual? (A)
Anke de Vrieze, Rural Sociology, Wageningen University and Research and Learning Officer Centre for Unusual collaborations (CUCo) & Sylvia Brugman, Host Microbe Interactomics, Associate Professor in TT, Wageningen University and Research, founding board member of CUCo
The workshop will introduce an assessment strategy that can reward interdisciplinary work as an integrated and embedded part of the academic career. We aim to inspire and explain interdisciplinary scientists need to be rewarded and feel at home in the tenure track. In this interactive workshop, the Centre for Unusual Collaborations (CUCo) wants to illustrate the often difficult and slow, but fun process of interdisciplinary work. Participants will speak with aliens and experience disciplinary grounding and perspective taking, the first two necessary steps for successful interdisciplinary collaboration. We hope to inspire those involved in assessment committees and involved in the career progress decision making process to rethink the way interdisciplinarity is assessed.
|1.7 Moving debate about new forms of research assessment (G)
Rinze Benedictus, Sander van der Laan, and others, to be invited
We aim to bring together those that are more sympathetic towards the transition towards R&R and those that take a critical stance. We want to do so by a moving, interactive debate, actively moderated so that all possible voices will be heard.
The session consists of a number of separate but interlinked moderated, interactive debates on the basis of a statement (either slightly provocative or more consensual). Each debate is kickstarted by two invited 'guest speakers' who position themselves vis-a-vis the statement.
|1.8 Recognising supporting roles (I)
Jeroen Sondervan, Utrecht University Library, Publishing consultant; Jeroen Bosman, Utrecht University Library, Open science specialist, Shauna Ni Fhlaithearta, Research Data Management, Wageningen University and Research, Esther Plomp, Data Steward at TU Delft, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Maria Cruz, Open Science Policy Advisor at NWO, Marta Teperek, Head of Research Data Services at TU Delft/Director of 4TU.ResearchData, Sander Bosch, Open Science Coordinator at the VU Amsterdam, Dieudonnée van de Willige, Science communications advisor at Maastricht University, Nicoleta Nastase, Innovation Advisor Research Support, TU Delft Library & Dan Rudmann, Digital Scholarship Librarian at Leiden University
The position paper ‘Room for everyone's talent’ focusses, amongst other things, on diversifying career paths and how to recognise team performances. This should be a key opportunity to involve staff at research institutions that have more specialised or supporting tasks in these teams. This workshop aims to increase awareness regarding supporting roles, what role they play in Team Science and how to recognise their expertise. During this interactive workshop we will exchange practices and start with setting up a survey and roadmap to ensure that supporting roles are involved in current and future Recognition and Rewards efforts.
|1.9 Recognizing the diversity of Open Science Practices across different research communities (I)
Dr. Maxi Kindling, Head of Open-Access-Büro Berlin, University Library, Free University Berlin; Dr. Maike Neufend, Open Access Consultant, Open-Access-Büro Berlin, University Library, Free University Berlin & Maaike Duine, Open Science Officer, Open-Access-Büro Berlin, University Library, Free University Berlin
Acknowledging Open Science activities is an important part of reforming research assessment. However, due to the difference in Open Science uptake and variety in OS Practices across disciplines and communities, developing meaningful and trustworthy indicators to acknowledge and monitor these activities is not that straightforward. Many OS Monitoring activities have been focusing on Open Access Article Publishing but OS practices extend beyond that. Open preprints, code and research data have become more prevalent in some disciplines, whereas Citizen Science and Public Engagement are increasingly important in other domains. To enable new insights, create incentives and to understand the adoption of OS Practices over time, monitoring the diversity of these OS practices is crucial. Meaningful and trustworthy discipline-specific OS indicators should be developed to recognize the quality and impact of OS practices. In this workshop, we would like to discuss the development of trustworthy and meaningful Open Science indicators.
|1.10 The Alternative C.V: What should it look like? (G)
Dr. Chris Hartgerink, CEO & Founder; Liberate Science GmbH & Dr. Daan Rutten, Open Science Librarian; Tilburg University Library
An academic Curriculum Vitae seems an indispensable overview to obtain an impression of research quality and to assess it. The question is if the academic C.V. is still compatible with current developments in academia, such as new principles of Open Science and Team Science. The conventional academic C.V. tends to reproduce closed science and to favor old hierarchies and preferences, such as individual success and length (e.g., long publication lists). In this workshop, we engage participants to creatively construct alternatives. Would it be possible to reshape the form of the C.V. in a way which renders it more open, inclusive and content-related? What kind of signifiers or markers can we find, use and collect to establish an academic C.V. that embraces Open Science? What would we love to be able to say but don’t right now?
|1.11 Implementing R&R: A Dilemma for Early Career Academics (G)
Annemijn Algra and Max van Haastrecht on behalf of several early career networks (YoungSiT, PNN, PhDoc, LAP). Panel members: Marieke Adriaanse, Professor Behavioral Interventions in Population Health Management, LUMC/Leiden University; Lisa Oskam, Board Member Recognition and Rewards – Open Science, PNN, PhD Utrecht University & Sean Sapcariu, Programme Manager, Luxembourg National Research Fund
Join the "Implementing R&R: A Dilemma for Early Career Academics" workshop if you want to be part of the future of R&R! The discussion around R&R has traditionally centred around senior scientific staff, but they form only a small fraction of the academic staff at our universities. In an interactive fishbowl panel we will tackle the dilemmas faced by early career academics as R&R is being implemented. Early career academics must be involved in the R&R debate, especially when it comes to implementation, since we will be impacted for the rest of our careers. Let's kickstart this debate together!
|Workshop round 2 | 13.45 - 15.00h|
|2.1 Recognizing open science in research assessments: Issues, challenges, and opportunities (A)
Hans De Jonge, Director of Open Science Regieorgaan, NWO; Sarah de Rijcke, Professor of science, technology and innovation studies, CWTS, Leiden University & Alex Rushforth, Assistant professor, CWTS, Leiden University
This interactive workshop invites participants to address whether open science practices should feature in research funding, hiring, and promotion assessments, and if so, then how? We invite experienced practitioners and stakeholders ‘at the coalface’ of planning and implementing open science reforms in research assessments to attend and contribute to this interactive workshop. The session will be chaired by two academics specializing in research assessment reforms (Alex Rushforth and Sarah de Rijcke) and the Director of the new Open Science Regieorgaan, NWO (Hans De Jonge). They will provide a series of fictional vignettes relating to attempts to introduce and mainstream open science practices into research assessment contexts of funding and academic appointments and promotions. The aim is to bring together policymakers and practitioners, to cultivate shared learning and dialogue about this timely but sometimes contested topic.
|2.2 Academic Career Track at TU Delft (G)
Meike Blokland, TU Delft (Team Development), Senior policy advisor & Evan van de Leur, TU Delft (Team Development), Project leader Recognition & Rewards
In the first quarter of 2023 TU Delft introduced the Academic Career Track for Assistant Professors. Assistant Professors hired in this track get the opportunity to develop to Associate Professor within eight years. In this workshop we will give you a short introduction on the Academic Career Track, the development programme and personal development plan. Then we would like to give the floor to the participants to share their experiences in transforming their Tenure Track propositions and ask questions.
|2.3 Are narrative CVs proving effective in achieving desired outcomes of recognition and reward initiatives? (G)
Dr. Noémie Aubert Bonn – Postdoctoral Researcher at Hasselt University and Amsterdam UMC; Dr. Karen Stroobants – Policy adviser and consultant on research policy and strategy, Vice-Chair of the Coalition on Reforming Research Assessment (CoARA); Dr. James Morris – Science Europe, Senior Policy Officer & Dr. Sean Sapcariu – Luxembourg National Research Fund, Programme Manager
This workshop will be an interactive exploration of how narrative CVs are contributing (or are not yet contributing) to the aims and goals of recognition and rewards initiatives, guided by a team with experience in research, funding, and policy. The workshop will include an interactive presentation, showcasing the history, outcomes of current use, and potential for impact on research culture. The audience will be invited to give immediate feedback and other input during the presentation using online participation tools. After the presentation will be a guided and moderated discussion in smaller groups, focusing on the perspective of those involved in research around the potential and actual impact of narrative CVs on recognition and rewards, as well as their ability to shift research culture. These discussions fed back to the group at the end of the session, and recorded in a workshop report that will be published openly for the research community through the CoARA toolbox.
|2.4 Devising career tracks and criteria: the process as part of the change (I)
Martyna Janowicz & Iris Goedhart
The Tilburg School of Economics and Business Administration (TiSEM) has developed a diversified academic career track framework by way of a bottom-up process, designed to generate early support and initiate culture change within the School. In designing the process the specific circumstances of the School were considered. In this workshop the TiSEM approach will serve as a starting point for identifying the internal and external contextual factors that could be taken into account in developing the process for effectively designing and implementing a diversification of the academic career path.
|2.5 Impact-by-design: Drafting, assessing and rewarding performance and learning through impact thinking (G)
Jeroen Jansen, Program manager Recognition and Rewards University of Twente, Coordinator Talent development Faculty od Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation at University of Twente; Joost Teuben, Policy officer capacity development & impact at University of Twente; Wiebke Eberhardt, Strategic policy advisor for research, innovation & impact at University of Twente & Fran Meissner, Assistant Professor Critical Geodata Studies and Geodata Ethics at University of Twente
As a participant in this interactive workshop, you have an important role to develop, think and act along with us about a Theory of Change approach to career development. In a pilot at the University of Twente, aimed towards academia in a career track, people design their individual growth, performance and assessment plans by applying an impact model based on the Theory of Change. These plans focus on their individual learning and performance, but also on their evolvements within the university, amongst other academia and within society as a whole. After sharing our experience with this pilot, three parallel discussion groups will start. One group will be encouraged to reflect on the feasibility, opportunities and barriers of the approach. The second group identifies potential qualitative and quantitative indicators. The third group focuses on the procedural process and enabling conditions required for the organizational embedding of the approach.
|2.6 No R&R without accountability, leadership and inclusion (G)
Dr. Giulia Evolvi of 0.7, PhD-candidate; Tim Winkel of 0.7; Dr. Younes Saramifar of 0.7, Lotje Siffels of 0.7, PhD Candidate ERC Project Digital Good, Radboud University & PhD-candidate Maranke Wieringa of Accessible Academia
Zeropointseven as an activist group that has voiced the complexities of systematic injustice in Dutch academia, proposes an interactive workshop centred around three themes: leadership, accountability, inclusion. The Recognition and Rewards transformation is very much focused on the ‘ happy few’. In other words those with a permanent contract as an assistant, associate and full professor position. Up till now little or no attention is paid to more vulnerable groups such as early career academics such as PhD students, postdoc researchers and 0.7 lecturers without permanent contracts. Reward and Recognition framework will fall short as long as accountability, leadership and inclusion are not systematically addressed. This workshop will start an open discussion that will start from the experiences of vulnerable groups in academia, and investigate how the Recognition and Rewards programme could be implemented to meet not just the paper reality, but the reality of the unhappy few.
|2.7 Recognition & Rewards for science communication – in practice (G)
Drs. Marja van der Putten, director KNAW Science Funds, supervisor programme Rewarded!, KNAW & Dr. Frank Kupper, Athena Institute VU, Associate Professor Science Communication & Public engagement
How to discuss your ambitions to make science communication an integral part of your academic activities?
As became apparent in the guide Science Communication by scientists Rewarded! (Gewaardeerd!, financed by OCW and performed by a project team within the KNAW) many scientists still experience a big gap between the theory and practice of career profiles in which they can excel in science communication instead of, or next to, research and education. So, how do you talk about assessing science communication and how to address implicit assumptions and norms about science communication with your superiors, colleagues and others? During this ‘interactive theatre’-workshop two professional trainer actors perform 2 to 3 sketches exploring the required culture and systemic changes in a practical way. Together with other participants you will provide input for a possible approach to the conversation and together negotiate the necessary support for science communication. In this manner you get to learn about providing different angles of assessment and next steps that you can take to kick-off your next conversation about assessing science communication practices.
|2.8 Recognizing and rewarding scientists: Time for bias-free assessments (G)
Thomas Hoogeboom, PhD, Senior researcher at IQ healthcare of the Radboudumc; Nellie Konijnendijk, Senior policy officer Diversity & Inclusion of the KNAW and founder of the company Structural Change consultancy & Soraya Refos, Policy advisor Diversity & Inclusion of the KNAW
The purpose of this interactive session is to rethink the way we recognize and reward scientists in the Netherlands. To do this, it is important that we recognize the biases in the current methods of assessment. During this session participants will work in small groups. We will provide the participants with insights from the scientific literature regarding the current assessment methods and potential intervention options. Subsequently, we will promote impartial decision-making with a fun method, where participants are challenged to rethink assessment criteria from different perspectives. At the end of the session, we will collate the different insights per group and draw conclusions from the workshop.
|2.9 Reimaging assessment: how to balance between the individual and the team (G)
Prof. dr. Hanneke Hulst, Leiden University, member of national Steering group Recognition and Rewards and (former) board member of The Young Academy & Prof. dr. Hilde Verbeek, Maastricht University, board member of the The Young Academy
The Young Academy recently launched a podcast series called “At the top”, in which we speak with six Dutch senior top scientists. In the podcast they discuss the themes of the Recognition and Reward movement in relation to their own careers. One recurring theme across all interviews is the role of team science and how assessment plays a part in promoting it. In this workshop, The Young Academy tackles the question of the assessment of team science through real-life scenarios, asking the participants to reflect on the best ways to assess them.
|2.10 Research Quality Assessment in an era of change: let’s co-create a research assessment framework! (I)
Dr. Klodiana Daphne Tona, Donders Center for Medical Neuroscience, Radboudumc, Postdoc researcher; MD Myrthe Verhees, Radboudumc Health Academy, Radboudumc Physician-researcher/PhD candidate; Prof. MD Lia Fluit, Radboudumc Health Academy, Radboudumc, Professor of person centered and innovative learning, working in healthcare & Prof. MD Guillen Fernández, Donders Center for Medical Neuroscience, Radboudumc, Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience and scientific director Radboudumc
Currently, at a global and national level, there is a desire to assess research quality by taking into consideration several important factors and not just bibliometric metrics and checklists (number of publications, h-index and journal impact factors). Although several suggestions have been made towards this goal, the operationalization is still lacking (i.e., a multidimensional assessment tool that puts into practice these new and highly important developments). In this twilight of new developments, with a new light on the horizon but the operationalization is still pending, general guidelines have been offered and faculties have been advised to experiment with different methods until the best method is found.
In this workshop we aim to contribute to the current attempt of research quality assessment and, in an interactive manner, to:
1. Co-develop criteria of research quality assessment regarding a) the framework and b) the process of assessment.
2. Discuss how we can operationalize these criteria: how can we turn this framework into a practical, multidimensional assessment tool that can be transparently used?
|2.11 Writing and assessing impact narratives (I)
Dr. Stefan de Jong, Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration and Sociology, Erasmus University Rotterdam; Dr Giovanna Lima, Impact Project Officer, Evaluating Societal Impact project, Erasmus University Rotterdam; Lisa Burghardt, Junior Researcher, Evaluating Societal Impact project, Erasmus University Rotterdam; Erika Hajdu, Design Researcher, Evaluating Societal Impact project, Erasmus University Rotterdam & Bart Wesstein, Strategy Trainee, Evaluating Societal Impact project, Erasmus University Rotterdam
In this workshop, team members of the Evaluating Societal Impact at Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR) will share their national and international experiences in developing guidelines and tools for writing and assessing impact narratives. Attendees will be invited to share their own experiences and resources, and have an opportunity to reflect on challenges and opportunities of adopting impact narratives in the context of Recognition & Rewards.