The Performance of German Research Training Groups in Different Disciplinary Fields – An Empirical Assessment
In the early 1990s, the German Research Foundation established a new form of graduate education: the so-called Research Training Groups (RTGs). Comparable to PhD programmes in the US, RTGs offer a structured course-programme and a framework for collaborative research for young researchers who are to be integrated in the research activities and the scientific networks of the participating institutions. As a result, the time span needed to complete a doctorate was expected to decrease and the scientific visibility of doctoral and post-doctoral research was held to increase. However, the performance of German RTGs has not been evaluated as yet. In this chapter, we undertake a first step in that direction and assess the performance of German RTGs in different disciplines (humanities social sciences vs. natural life sciences) in two important respects: (1) Doctoral degrees as an immediate outcome of the graduate teaching undertaken and (2) scientific visibility of doctoral and post-doctoral students as measured by their publication output (supplemented by data on presentations). In our analysis of 86 German RTGs we present first empirical data on the two measures and are able to show that the performance of German RTGs varies considerably in and between the different disciplines. An additionally performed data envelopment analysis (DEA) reveals that even though a considerable share of RTGs operates at relative efficiency, there still seems to be remarkable potential for performance improvement.
KeywordsData Envelopment AnalysisData Envelopment Analysis Life Science Doctoral Student Data Envelopment AnalysisData Envelopment Analysis Model Publication Output
Financial support by the German Research Foundation as well as support concerning the collection of the data is gratefully acknowledged.
- Backes-Gellner, U., Zanders, E. (1989). Lehre und Forschung als Verbundproduktion: Data-Envelopment-Analysen und organisationsökonomische Interpretationen der Realität in wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Fachbereichen. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 59(3), 271–290.Google Scholar
- Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., Tone, K. (2006). Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and Its Uses. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. (2008). Research Training Groups. http://www.dfg.de/en/research_funding/coordinated_programmes/research_training_groups/index.html. Accessed 01 December 2009.
- Fabel, O., Lehmann, E., Warning, S. (2003). Vorträge als Qualitätsindikator. Empirische Evidenz der Jahrestagungen des Vereins für Socialpolitik. In U. Backes-Gellner, C. Schmidtke (Eds.), Hochschulökonomie – Analysen interner Steuerungsprobleme und gesamtwirtschaftlicher Effekte (pp. 13–31). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
- Laudel, G. (1999). Interdisziplinäre Forschungskooperation: Erfolgsbedingungen der Institution “Sonderforschungsbereich”. Berlin: Edition Sigma.Google Scholar
- Pull, K., Unger, B. (2008). Die Publikationsaktivität von DFG-Graduiertenkollegs und der Einfluss nationaler und fachlicher Heterogenität. Hochschulmanagement, 3(3), 58–61.Google Scholar
- Schneider, P., Thaller, N., Sadowski, D. (2010). Success and Failure of PhD Programs: An Empirical Study of the Interplay between Interests, Resources, and Organisation. In D. Jansen (Ed.), Disciplinary Differences in Governance and Performance. The German Public Research Sector (pp. 125–143). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Snow, C.P. (1964). The Two Cultures, and a Second Look. An Expanded Version of the Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar