1. The database Lituanistika and the evaluation of SSH research Rūta Petrauskaitė, Research Council of Lithuania

2. Historical context 1995 – the first evaluation of academic institutions by the expert group from Norway 1997 – evaluation of Research Institutes by national experts, drive for interdisciplinarity 2001 – request to publish in ISI journals, fight for the Lithuanian language in academic discourse for SSH 2005 – demand to publish in the journals included in the international DB

3. Historical context 2006 – ISI for SSH abolished, president’s appeal to Constitutional law concerning SSH 2007 – answer from the constitutional law, favourable for SSH 2009 – request to publish in the peer- reviewed journals 2010 – lists of international DB abolished

4. DB Lituanistika 2006-2008 compilation of the bibliografic DB for additionally peer- reviewed publications on Lithuanian studies 2009-2010 extention of the DB, widening of the horizon 2011-2014 introduction of bibliometic approach

5. Procedures of peer-review Search for publication in LT and abroad List of publications for the reviewers to choose from (2+1 experts per text) Administrative evaluation (since 2012) for qualitatively reliable publications Prevention of conflict of interests automatic individual

6. Evaluation forms Five forms for different genres monographs et al., papers, analytical reviews, university textbooks, archival document publication, informational resources

7. Evaluation criteria Formulation of aims and tasks Importance of the problem, its critical reflection Originality and novelty (thematic, methodological, empirical Possibilities and importance of the continuation of the research Importance of the research in the development of the field

8. Specific elements of methodology Choice of methods Presence of critical reflections Validity of theoretical approach Validity of argumentation Soundness of conclusions Clarity of the structure of the text and its academic style

9. Plans for the nearest future To decrease the number of peer- reviewed texts To make the evaluations public To look for other ways of rating publications