ABSTRACT

The intensification of the researcher's work and his submission to new forms of scientific evaluation characterize the current scenario of Brazilian research. Despite the multiple criticisms of productivism (epistemic colonialism, geopolitics of knowledge, mimicry of publish or perish), few studies reach the empirical field from the researcher as subject. Thus, the article aims to analyze the positioning of Brazilian researchers who have published most in the Administration area in relation to the scientific evaluation policies adopted by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), the production strategies adopted and the main challenges faced. For the analysis, the voices were read as statements, as understood by the Philosophy of the Bakhtinian Language (PBL), and analyzed based on the Critical Epistemology of Concrete (CEC), which makes it possible to consider its contradictions. Thus, each of the statements was opposed to what is simultaneously silenced / unspoken, but which has a direct relationship with what is stated, thus composing a dialectic unit, as the CEC and PBL theorize. The results demonstrate that researchers have prioritized individual strategies and sometimes do not consider the meaning of the research beyond the evaluation metrics. Finally, knowing how researchers react to the evaluation proved to be fundamental to question the current model of scientific evaluation, which directly affects both teaching health and the country's scientific production.

Keywords:
Scientific evaluation; Subjective precariety; Productivism