Abstract Curricula vitae (CVs) are a crucial device for the evaluation of academic personae and biographies. They play a key role in the competitive assessments that underpin the reproduction of the academic workforce. Drawing on 80 CVs which have been part of candidates’ applications for vacant professorships, our article provides a longitudinal study of the development of CVs used by German scholars in professorial appointment procedures in the disciplines of German studies and history between 1950 and the late 2010s. The analysis reveals the evolution of CVs by tracing their various morphological shifts. We distinguish four formats throughout the period of study: CVs initially had a (1) narrative format that develops into an (2) intermediary segmented form before CVs take on a (3) list form in which biographical information congeals into distinct categories. In the 2010s, the list form develops into a (4) hyper-differentiated list form in which coherent biographical representations are finally dissolved into almost eclectic accumulations of finely grained performance categories. Against the backdrop of this finding, the contribution concludes with three general observations: First, the evolution of CVs reflects changes in the institutional environment, not least the increased competitive pressures in academic careers. Second, the evolution of biographical representations also conveys a transformation of the academic persona throughout which boundaries between personal and professional biographies are established. Third, we propose a reactivity of current list form CVs through which academics are disciplined to live up to the categories that wait to be realized in their CVs. 

/pdf/biographical-representation-from-narrative-to-list-the-1x0ztavq.pdf

Biographical representation, from narrative to list: The evolution of curricula vitae in the humanities, 1950 to 2010


 As the academic community has become increasingly concerned about the drifts of research evaluation, mostly researchers’ evaluation, because of the overreliance on metrics, many expert groups have made recommendations to improve the way researchers should be evaluated. In this study, we focus on the recommendation to use narrative curriculum vitae (CVs). We review 28 opinion pieces and 7 experiments to better understand what a narrative CV can refer to, and to explore whether the narrative function that is specific to this kind of CV is proving effective in response to the concerns raised by evaluation practices. A close reading of these documents reveals the conceptual basis of the narrative CV and the problems it is intended to solve; we propose five commonly reported features of the narrative CV: avoid lists, contextualize achievements, fight metrics, enlarge the spectrum of contributions taken into consideration and foster diversity and inclusion. But the promoters of the narrative CV pay little to investigate how the narrative feature itself can lead to any benefits. However, the feedback collected from both applicants and evaluators is quite positive. Regardless of whether it is justified or not, the enthusiasm aroused by the implementation of this new type of CV undeniably has the advantage of opening up the debate, raising awareness and calling to question the bad practices and biases that exist in the researchers’ assessment processes. The narrative nature of the CV is, in the end, just a pretext for raising interest and working towards the adoption of good practices.

Promoting narrative CVs to improve research evaluation? A review of opinion pieces and experiments

Fresh formats showcase researchers’ work more effectively. Fresh formats showcase researchers’ work more effectively. 

/pdf/time-to-rethink-the-scientific-cv-25ipzep1.pdf

Time to rethink the scientific CV

The Swiss National Science Foundation’s ‘narrative’ template seeks evidence of applicants’ wider contributions to science. The Swiss National Science Foundation’s ‘narrative’ template seeks evidence of applicants’ wider contributions to science. 

Swiss funder unveils new CV format to make grant evaluation fairer

Background The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) tested a new CV format called SciCV to encourage fair, DORA-compliant assessment of grant applicants. It was developed in close collaboration with the academic evaluation community and international experts, introduced through detailed change management and finally tested in its utility by an independent research team of the Center for Science and Technology Studies Leiden (CWTS). Methods We present the development of the SciCV pilot and its evaluation by the CWTS research group. The analysis comprised both quantitative and qualitative methods, with (i) surveys and semi-structured interviews with applicants and reviewers, (ii) text analysis of the narrative elements of SciCV, and (iii) participant observation in ten evaluation panel meetings. Results Narrative elements and the inclusion of the academic age were rated as most useful new CV elements, while the inclusion of two metrics, the h-index and the relative citation ratio, were received more critically. The omission of a full publication list had similar numbers of supporters and opponents among applicants and reviewers. Less experienced and junior applicants and reviewers rated the new format generally more positively than more senior applicants and reviewers. The text analysis of narrative elements yielded no significant gender specific differences. The participant observation revealed that the new elements in SciCV broadened the information base used in the evaluation of applicants but did not fundamentally alter traditional, publication-centred evaluation practices. Conclusion SciCV was a relevant and successful initiative for the SNSF, which showed that the implementation of a new, well-structured CV format is not only feasible but also something that many stakeholders welcome.The extensive experience and results obtained during the change process formed the basis for the development of SciCV 2.0 at the SNSF. It also offers a basis and guidance for other funding organisations planning similar initiatives.

/pdf/scicv-the-swiss-national-science-foundations-new-cv-format-3cw5wv6w.pdf

SciCV, the Swiss National Science Foundation’s new CV format

Academic CVs are ubiquitous and play an integral role in the assessment of researchers. They define and portray what activities and achievements are considered important in the scientific system. Developing their content and structure beyond the traditional, publication-focused CV has the potential to make research careers more diverse and their assessment fairer and more transparent. This comment presents ten ways to further develop the content and structure of academic CVs. The recommendations are inspired by a workshop of the CV Harmonization Group (H-Group), a joint initiative between researchers on research, academic data infrastructure organizations, and representatives from >15 funding organizations. The proposed improvements aim at inspiring development and innovation in academic CVs for funding agencies and hiring committees.

/pdf/ten-ways-to-improve-academic-cvs-for-fairer-research-2w8trdod1x.pdf

Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment

EMBO Reports (2019) 20: e47437[OpenUrl][1][FREE Full Text][2]

When preparing for that important interview or your big night out, you might first carefully select and then lay out and check your outfit. After spending far too much time making yourself look just so, you will then probably take a final review in the mirror before legging it for your taxi, still holding on to that faint worry that corduroy was the wrong choice.

That initial laying out of your outfit constitutes a forward‐looking review, the careful consideration of a well thought through plan before putting it into action. That critical final look in the mirror is your consolidatory review, to check whether your plan has worked out and whether you have made the right amendments before introducing your fashion statement to the world.

In academia, assessment of grant proposals is the forward‐looking review, the laying out and checking of your research plan, while peer reviews in journals are the final, consolidatory scrutiny before publication. An important difference between these academic checkpoints and my, admittedly somewhat forced fashionista analogy, is that in academia the two stages of review take place independently of each other. Journals do not know what …

 [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DEMBO%2BReports%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.15252%252Fembr.201847437%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F30518624%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx
 [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=FULL&journalCode=embor&resid=20/1/e47437&atom=%2Fembor%2F20%2F1%2Fe47437.atom

/pdf/closed-loop-peer-review-3wg3hvhxq7.pdf

Closed loop peer review

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Michael Hill

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment

SciCV, the Swiss National Science Foundation’s new CV format

Closed loop peer review