Order:
  1.  28
    Supervision, Mentorship and Peer Networks: How Estonian Early Career Researchers Get (or Fail to Get) Support.Jaana Eigi, Katrin Velbaum, Endla Lõhkivi, Kadri Simm & Kristin Kokkov - 2018 - RT. A Journal on Research Policy and Evaluation 6 (1):01-16.
    The paper analyses issues related to supervision and support of early career researchers in Estonian academia. We use nine focus groups interviews conducted in 2015 with representatives of social sciences in order to identify early career researchers’ needs with respect to support, frustrations they may experience, and resources they may have for addressing them. Our crucial contribution is the identification of wider support networks of peers and colleagues that may compensate, partially or even fully, for failures of official supervision. On (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  46
    Supervision and Early Career Work Experiences of Estonian Humanities Researchers Under the Conditions of Project-Based Funding.Jaana Eigi, Pille Põiklik, Endla Lõhkivi & Katrin Velbaum - 2014 - Higher Education Policy 27 (4):453 - 468.
    We analyze a series of interviews with Estonian humanities researchers to explore topics related to the beginning of academic careers and the relationships with supervisors and mentors. We show how researchers strive to have meaningful relationships and produce what they consider quality research in the conditions of a system that is very strongly oriented towards internationalization and project-based funding, where their efforts are compromised by a lack of policies helping them establish a stable position in academia. Leaving researchers to face (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  55
    Epistemic Injustice in Research Evaluation: A Cultural Analysis of the Humanities and Physics in Estonia.Endla Lõhkivi, Katrin Velbaum & Jaana Eigi - 2012 - Studia Philosophica Estonica 5 (2):108-132.
    This paper explores the issue of epistemic injustice in research evaluation. Through an analysis of the disciplinary cultures of physics and humanities, we attempt to identify some aims and values specific to the disciplinary areas. We suggest that credibility is at stake when the cultural values and goals of a discipline contradict those presupposed by official evaluation standards. Disciplines that are better aligned with the epistemic assumptions of evaluation standards appear to produce more "scientific" findings. To restore epistemic justice in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography