SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Robert Leonard)
Date:
Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:49:00 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (240 lines)
Colleagues, 

A few weeks ago on this list, Roy Weintraub drew attention to the revolt
amongst 
editors of journals in history and philosophy of science against the
ranking 
exercise of the European Science Foundation.  HES members concerned with
this 
issue may be interested in the latest contribution to the debate from
Professor 
Frank James of the Royal Institution, London, former President of the
British 
Society for the History of Science.  It appeared on both the MERSENNE
(UK 
history of science) and HOPOS (history of philosophy of science)
discussion 
lists, and was in response to a message from P. Hurst of the 
Royal Society.  Both the James and Hurst letters appear below.

Robert Leonard 



------ Forwarded Message 
From: Frank James <FJames at RI.AC.UK> Reply-To: Frank James <[log in to unmask]> 
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:26:45 +0100 
To: <MERSENNE at JISCMAIL.AC.UK> 
Conversation: Journals under threat 
Subject: Re: Journals under threat 

Dear Colleagues, 
 
Following on from Phil Hurst?s message earlier in the week on Mersenne
(see 
below), I would like to further add that the British Society for the
History 
of Science together with other learned societies (or subject
associations as 
the AHRC like to call them) has been actively campaigning against the 
journal rankings being imposed by European Science Foundation. The
rankings 
can be found at the rather long address pasted below. In a letter of 8
May 
2008 that I wrote as President of the BSHS  to Professor Philip Esler,
chief 
executive of the AHRC (which purports to ?champion? arts and humanities 
research in this country), I gave him details of a statistical analysis
that 
I had undertaken on the list entitled ?History and Philosophy of
Science?. 
 
I pointed out that of the 166 journals ranked in this list, 94 are in
the 
area of History of Science, Technology, Engineering, Medicine and 
Mathematics (HSTEMM), 67 in philosophy of science and 5 were general 
journals which are not especially connected with either the history or
the 
philosophy of science, but which usually contain some material on the 
subjects. Of the 94 HSTEMM journals 14.4% were graded A while 27.6% of
the 
67 philosophy of science journals received the same grade. I asked
whether 
AHRC endorsed the view that the overall quality of the philosophy of
science 
journals was significantly superior to HSTEMM journals, but Esler
refused to 
engage with this question. I also pointed out that those who compiled
these 
rankings (listed below - none of whom are members of the BSHS) were
entirely 
out of touch with the development of HSTEMM in recent years. I also
noted my 
surprise that such a ?forward looking and innovatory organisation? as
the 
AHRC should support outdated disciplinary definitions. Again Esler, as 
champion of arts and humanities research in this country, chose not to 
engage with the issue. 
 
In line with the editorial in more than 50 HSTEMM journals which has
begun 
to be published, I urge the community to have nothing whatsoever to do
with 
these rankings as it will only lead to the destruction of journals and 
restrict the free dissemination of the results of our collective
scholarly 
endeavour. 
 
I would like to conclude with the observation that for nearly 30 years
we 
have lived under a regime that believed that these kind of evaluations, 
audits etc had a beneficial value despite the considerable evidence to
the 
contrary. That regime is now bankrupt in all senses of the word and I
see 
this as an opportunity to bring these exercises in controlling academia
to a 
halt. 
 
Please do feel free to forward this to other lists. 
 
Frank James 
 
----- 
 
These are the people responsible for drawing up the History and
Philosophy 
of Science journal rankings 
 
 
Maria Carla Galavotti (Chair), Universit? di Bologna 

Christopher Cullen, Needham Research Institute, Cambridge 

Jaroslav Folta, National Technical Museum, Prague 

Juho Sihvola, University of Helsinki 
 
---- 
 
The rankings can be found at: 
 
http://www.esf.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&file=fileadmin/be_user/r 
esearch_areas/HUM/Documents/ERIH/IL-Scope_notes_Merged/Hist%20and%20philo%20 
of%20Sc%20M.pdf&t=1224753574&hash=11c9f7103706b71b30231c0214204994 

<http://www.esf.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&amp;u=0&amp;file=fileadmin/ 
be_user/research_areas/HUM/Documents/ERIH/IL-Scope_notes_Merged/Hist%20and%2 
0philo%20of%20Sc%20M.pdf&amp;t=1224753574&amp;hash=11c9f7103706b71b30231c021 
4204994> 
 
 
 

____________________________________________________________________________

___ 
New: 
 
Volume 5 of Faraday's correspondence has now been published. Further
details 
from 
http://www.theiet.org/publishing/books/history/faraday-correspondence-vol5.c

fm 
 
 
Frank A.J.L. James 

Professor of the History of Science 

The Royal Institution, 
21 Albemarle Street, 
London, 
W1S 4BS, 
England. 
Direct line 020 7670 2924 
Switchboard 020 7409 2992 
Mobile 07957 172 123 

E-mail: fjames at ri.ac.uk <mailto:fjames at ri.ac.uk> 



Registered charity number 227938 
 

From: Promoting discussion in the science studies community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hurst, Phil 
Sent: 20 October 2008 14:12 
To: MERSENNE at JISCMAIL.AC.UK 
Subject: Journals under threat 
 
Notes and Records of the Royal Society, has just published an editorial
(see 
http://journals.royalsociety.org/content/x503128311743u02 for details)
with 
text that has been agreed upon by the editors of over fifty journals of
the 
history of science, technology, and medicine across the world. It is to 
appear in each of the journals as a protest against the European Science

Foundation?s initiative for a European Reference Index for the
Humanities 
(ERIH).   
 
ERIH is an attempt to grade journals in the humanities  including
?history 
and philosophy of science?. The initiative proposes a league table of 
academic journals, with premier, second and third divisions. What is
implied 
is: if research is published in a premier league journal it will be 
recognized as first rate; if it appears somewhere in the lower
divisions, it 
will be rated (and not funded) accordingly. 
 
The editors who have signed ?journals under threat? believe that such a 
process is unnecessary and potentially damaging to the interests of 
scholarship.  Along with many others in our field, Notes and Records has

concluded that we want no part of this dangerous and misguided exercise.

 
What do you think of a ?league table? of history of science journals?
Please 
comment via our ?have your say forum? at 
http://publishing.royalsociety.org/notes 
 
Phil 
 
Phil Hurst 
Publisher 
Notes and Records 
 
tel  +44 (0)20 7451 2630 
fax +44 (0)20 7976 1837 
web royalsociety.org <http://royalsociety.org/> 
 
The Royal Society 
6-9 Carlton House Terrace 
London SW1Y 5AG 
 
Registered Charity No 207043 
 
twenty ten and beyond | 350 years of excellence in science 
 
Notes and Records, the Royal Society's journal in the history of
science, 
offers rapid publication, quality peer review and an international
audience. 
Visit http://publishing.royalsociety.org 
<http://publishing.royalsociety.org/>  for further details. 


Humberto Barreto
Elizabeth P. Allen Distinguished University Professor
Dept. of Economics & Management
DePauw University
Greencastle, IN 46135



ATOM RSS1 RSS2