Methodical significance of activities research results


Popova O.B.

Cand. Sci. (Techn.), Assoc. Prof. of the Kuban State Technological University, Krasnodar, Russia popova_ob@mail.ru

Romanov D.A.

Cand. Sci. (Ped.), Assoc. Prof. of the Kuban State Technological University, Krasnodar, Russia romanovda1@rambler.ru

Loyko V.I.

Dr. Sci. (Techn.), Prof., Head of the Department of Computer Technologies and Computer Systems, Kuban State Agrarian University, Krasnodar, Russia loyko1@pisem.net

Evseeva M.A.

Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Chief lecturer, Kuban State Agrarian University, Krasnodar, Russia khizova2004@mail.ru

ID of the Article:


For citation:

Popova O.B., Romanov D.A., Loyko V.I., Evseeva M.A. Methodical significance of activities research results. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2017. No 3. P. 79-87




Abstract

The aim of the study is to elaborate models and techniques for assessing methodical significance of research results. It is fairly common knowledge that theoretical significance of individual research outcome is evaluated by means of scientometric parameters based on citation rating, first of all – on Hirsch index and on the total number of references to researcher’s papers; theoretical significance of collective results is evaluated similarly. However, these methods and techniques based on citation rating have one fundamental flaw – they fail to assess permanence of research outcomes utilization for further scientific and technological developments. Assessment of practical significance of research is even more challenging. Therefore, the authors suggest an additional integrative indicator, an intermediary between theoretical and practical significance of individual and collective research results – methodical significance. This indicator can be also viewed as an integrative criterion for assessing the interrelation between science and education, as the most important common feature of science and education is spreаding (dissemination) of accumulated knowledge.


Keywords
research activity; outcomes; scientometric parameter; productivity; methodical significance; assessment

References

Chlopova T.P., Romanova M.L., Shaposhnikova T.L. (2013). Monitoring kashestva obrazovanija v sovremennych uslovijach [Monitoring of Education Quality in Modern Conditions]. Krasnodar, KubGTU. (In Russ.)

Efendiev A.G., Sorokin P.S., Balabanova E.S. (2015) Crisis in russian sociology: main problems and thematic deadlocks. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 9: 36–49. (In Russ.)

Gadjieva M.M. (2014). Soznanije organizatsyonnych struktur, orientirovannych na innovationnoje razvitije [Establishment of organizational structures focused on innovative evolution]. Teoria I praktica obshestvennogo razvitija [Theory and Practice of Social Development]. No 2: 392–393. (In Russ.)

Gavrilova E.V., Ushakov D.V., Yurevich A.V. (2016). Translation of scientific experience and tacit knowledge. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 9: 28–35. (In Russ.)

Gazizov R.R. (2016). Soderjanije i osnovnyje elementy innovacionnogo potenciala personala predprijatija [The Content and the Key Elements of the Innovation Potential of the Company Personal]. Teoria I praktica obshestvennogo razvitija [Theory and Practice of Social Development]. No. 16: 77–81. (In Russ.)

Jonash R.S., Sommerlatte T. (2000) The Innovation Premium: How Next Generation Companies are Achieving Peak Performance and Profitability. Massachusetts: Cambridge.

Pashukus N.A., Pashukus V.Y. (2014) Konkurentosposobnost vuza v usloviach novoj ekonomiki: podhody k ocenkie [The Competitiveness of a Higher Educational Institution in Terms of the New Economy: Approach to Evaluation]. Teoria I praktica obshestvennogo razvitija [Theory and Practice of Social Development]. No. 12: 122–127. (In Russ.)

Sychov A.V. (2014) Negosudarstvennyje VUZy v usloviach sovremennoj Rossii: tendenzii razvitia, kriterialnyje priznaki, naucznyj potenzial [Private Higher Schools in the Conditions of Contemporary Russia: Development Trends, Criteria Features, Research Potential]. Teoria I praktica obshestvennogo razvitija [Theory and Practice of Social Development]. No. 12: 144–146. (In Russ.)

Tolstova J.N., Voronina N.D. (2012) O neobchodimosti raschirenija poniatija sociologicyeskogo izmerenija [About the need to expanding of the concept of sociological measurement]. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 7: 67–77. (In Russ.)

Veldajeva T.A. (2014). Sociokulturnaja sostavlajushiaja obrazovatelnogo prostranstva [Socio-Cultural Components of Educational Space] Sredneje professionalnoje obrazovanije [The Journal of secondary vocational Education]. 2014. No. 2: 35– 36. (In Russ.)

Yasvin V.A. (2001). Obrazovatelnaja sreda: ot modelirovanija k projektirovaniju [Educational Environment: from Modeling to Project]. Moscow: Smysl.

Yurkina L.V. (2014). Integracija nauki I obrazovanija: tendenzii I vozmozhnosti [Integration of Science and Education: Trends and Opportunities]. Teoria i praktika obshestvennogo razvitija [Theory and practice of social development] No. 2: 147– 149. (In Russ.)

Zalibekova D.Z (2014). Aspekty povyshenija roli nauchnogo potentiala Rossijskoj Federacii [Aspects of increasing role of scientific potential of the Russian Federation] Teoria I praktica obshestvennogo razvitija [Theory and Practice of Social Development]. No. 3: 246–248. (In Russ.)

Content No 3, 2017