The sector is moving away from impact factors, h-indexes and journal quartiles as proxies for the worth of a scholar — toward assessment that is holistic, transparent, field-fair and values-aligned. This is a curated map of that movement: the declarations, guides, good practices, case studies and tools, gathered from DORA's Resource Library — and NTLSN's own contribution to it.
A free, open, DORA-aligned 1–7 spectrum of teaching-&-learning scholarship — field-normalised, valuing openness and teaching focus over journal prestige, fully decomposed so it can never be a hidden ranking.
The founding declaration: stop using journal-based metrics as a surrogate for the quality of individual research. Signed by the ARC and most Australian universities.
Ten principles for the appropriate, transparent and contextual use of metrics in research evaluation.
Five principles to reward and recognise behaviours that strengthen research integrity, not just outputs.
National position papers (Netherlands; Finland) rethinking reward, recognition and language diversity in scholarly assessment.
Action-oriented guidance for funders, with DORA, the Global Research Council and Science Europe — plus quick-reference sheets and informational briefs.
The companion guide for universities and institutes reforming their assessment policies and practices.
On the JIF, citation counts, the h-index, field-normalised indicators and altmetrics — five principles: be clear, transparent, specific, contextual and fair.
Short animated explainers on how the h-index is calculated, how it's misused, and its limitations.
Questions and definitions for assessing research, education, outreach and leadership through an open-scholarship lens (Netherlands).
APLU's action framework for public research universities — broadening what counts as scholarship.
Critiques over-reliance on JIF and citation counts; sets out how to recognise and reward genuine quality.
"Recognising what we value" — practical recommendations to drive positive research culture at institutional level.
A qualitative study of how RRA plays out in real faculty hiring, promotion and tenure decisions.
A controlled trial on the effects of narrative CVs — which move beyond publication and grant lists — in recruitment.
Impact case studies evaluating real-world, non-academic impact rather than citation counts.
Resources for academic units transforming how faculty are rewarded — an "impact as access" approach.
UNESCO's WHEC2022 roadmap for more open, inclusive, equitable and collaborative higher-education systems.
A global assessment from the Global Young Academy, InterAcademy Partnership and International Science Council.
Evidence-based guidance (University of Surrey, with DORA) on how CV language affects equity in funding.
Addressing the limitations of global university rankings, and a framework for responsible research evaluation.
Building shared understanding and best practice for responsible assessment among funders worldwide.
Community-led initiatives developing open, responsible research-data metrics and a meta-research hub.
A community framework describing how data are accessed, used and applied — across Access, User and Application dimensions.
A searchable dataset to explore real examples of research-assessment reform across institutions.
A peer-exchange platform for narrative CVs, and a worksheet to align promotion/tenure with institutional values.