English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article analyzes the main differences between the Academia 2.0 and Academia 3.0 programs, after its publication in November 2016. We take the category of senior lecturer in the field of research in Sociology as a reference point. One of the highlights is the centrality acquired by the research activity and the incorporation, as a mandatory criterion, of articles published in journals indexed in the first quartiles the Journal Citation Reports for the evaluation of the category of senior lecturer and university professors. The aim is to show the academic and policy implications of these changes. For this, an analysis is carried out in which the new requirements for the accreditation of teachers with a broader context are related. On the one hand, in this context, the origin and scope of the evaluation agencies and the indexing system of academic journals are considered. On the other, their connection with quantification logics, the devaluation of the teaching function, and the neoliberal character of these reforms in the university context are also given consideration.

El programa Academia 3.0 y la evaluación del profesorado en el área de Sociología a partir de los índices de impacto de las revistas