On the Shapley value and its application to the Italian VQR research assessment exercise

Research assessment exercises have now become common evaluation tools in a number of countries. These exercises have the goal of guiding merit-based public funds allocation, stimulating improvement of research productivity through competition and assessing the impact of adopted research support policies. One case in point is Italy's most recent research assessment effort, VQR 2011–2014 (Research Quality Evaluation), which, in addition to research institutions, also evaluated university departments, and individuals in some cases (i.e., recently hired research staff and members of PhD committees). However, the way an institution's score was divided, according to VQR rules, between its constituent departments or its staff members does not enjoy many desirable properties well known from coalitional game theory (e.g., budget balance, fairness, marginality). We propose, instead, an alternative score division rule that is based on the notion of Shapley value, a well known solution concept in coalitional game theory, which enjoys the desirable properties mentioned above. For a significant test case (namely, Sapienza University of Rome, the largest university in Italy), we present a detailed comparison of the scores obtained, for substructures and individuals, by applying the official VQR rules, with those resulting from Shapley value computations. We show that there are significant differences in the resulting scores, making room for improvements in the allocation rules used in research assessment exercises.     

Increasing the impact of a Master’s programme on teacher leadership and school development by means of boundary crossing

In this case study, we investigate how the development and impact of teacher leadership through a Master’s programme can be supported by a design that encourages boundary crossing activities between schools and universities. The case study focuses on 42 experienced teachers from three vocational colleges who were promoted to senior teacher positions and participated in a Master’s programme. Through individual and focus group interviews, data were collected on how boundary crossing activities can connect professional development and school development, and on favourable conditions for effective boundary crossing. The study shows that strategic alignment and shared ownership between university and school, a collective approach with multiple participants from one school, and the use of boundary objects, created the conditions through which the Master’s programme could serve as a catalyst, stimulating innovation of work practices and development of new leadership practices. The leadership of the senior teachers initiated a development process that shifted from formally mandated forms of leadership to more culturally embedded forms of leadership. This case study leads to a new understanding of design criteria for Master’s programmes and boundary objects that can support the process of developing teacher leadership within schools by facilitating boundary crossing between university and school.     

The Role of Historical-Philosophical Controversies in Teaching Sciences: The Debate Between Biot and Ampère

This paper evaluates the viability of using controversies in teaching. An educational project has been elaborated in which some historical-philosophical clashes were introduced into the classical syllabus of physics. The historical-philosophical controversy dealt with here, took place between the French physicists Biot and Ampère in the 19th century and referred to distinct interpretations of the Oersted experiment. This controversy was inserted into the syllabus of the 12th grade of a Brazilian secondary school.     

Recruiting Principals to Lead Low-performing Schools: Effects on Job Attractiveness

This study addressed recruiting principals into low performing schools. A sample (N = 619) of principals, assistant principals, central office administrators, school counselors, and teacher-leaders from the 29th largest school district in the United States role-played as applicants for principal vacancies at schools classified as low-performing based on results of standardized student achievement tests. The study had an experimental design and involved use of a recruitment simulation. Rating jobs depicted on simulated principal recruitment announcements, principals and assistant principals rated the job highest while school counselors rated the jobs lowest. Among the teacher-leaders, teacher-administrative interns rated the job higher than did highly skilled educators or resource teachers. Implications for recruitment practice and future evaluation research are discussed.     

Expert Judgment Versus Public Opinion – Evidence from the Eurovision Song Contest

For centuries, there have been discussions as to whether only experts can judge the quality of cultural output, or whether the taste of the public also has merit. This paper tries to answer that question empirically, using national finals of the Eurovision Song Contest. We show that experts are better judges of quality in the sense that the outcome of finals judged by experts is less sensitive to factors unrelated to quality than the outcome of finals judged by public opinion. Yet, experts are not perfect; their judgment does still depend on such factors. This is also the case in the European finals of the contest.