[1] Islamic Parliament Research Center. 2024. Examining the second part of the country's 1403 budget bill (17): the field of higher education, research and technology. {In Persian} [2] Smith, D. O. (2011). Managing the research university. OUP USA.
[3] Franssen, T., Scholten, W., Hessels, L. K., & de Rijcke, S. (2018). The drawbacks of project funding for epistemic innovation: Comparing institutional affordances and constraints of different types of research funding. Minerva, 56(1), 11-33.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9338-9
[4] Whitley, R., Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2018). The impact of changing funding and authority relationships on scientific innovations. Minerva, 56(1), 109-134.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-018-9343-7
[5] Geuna, A. (2001). The changing rationale for European university research funding: are there negative unintended consequences?. Journal of economic issues, 35(3), 607-632.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2001.11506393
[6] Langfeldt, L., Bloch, C. W., & Sivertsen, G. (2015). Options and limitations in measuring the impact of research grants—evidence from Denmark and Norway. Research Evaluation, 24(3), 256-270.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv012
[7] Neufeld, J. (2016). Determining effects of individual research grants on publication output and impact: The case of the Emmy Noether Programme (German Research Foundation). Research Evaluation, 25(1), 50-61.
https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv029
[8] Schneider, J. W., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2014). Analysing robustness and uncertainty levels of bibliometric performance statistics supporting science policy. A case study evaluating Danish postdoctoral funding. Research evaluation, 23(4), 285-297.
https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu016
[9] Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2011). The impact of NIH postdoctoral training grants on scientific productivity. Research policy, 40(6), 864-874.
doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.04.003
[10] Van den Besselaar, P. and Sandstro¨m U. (2015), ‘Early Career Grants, Performance, and Careers: A Study on Predictive Validity of Grant Decisions’, Journal of Informetrics, 9/4: 826–38.
DOI:10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.011
[11] Bornmann, L. and Daniel H.-D. (2008), ‘Reliability, Fairness, and Predictive Validity of the Peer Review Process for the Selection of Research Fellowshi Recipients of the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds’. In Kehm, B. M. (ed.) Hochschule im Wandel. Die Universita¨t als Forschungsgegenstand, pp. 365–76. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
[12] Torka, M. (2018). Projectification of doctoral training? How research fields respond to a new funding regime. Minerva, 56(1), 59-83.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-018-9342-8
[13] Connell, Raewyn, and Catherine Manathunga. 2012. On Doctoral Education: How to Supervise a PhD, 1985–2011. Australian Universities’ Review 54(1): 5–9.
https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.424243731811708
[14] Louvel, Se ´verine. 2012. The ‘Industrialization’ of Doctoral Training? A Study of the Experiences of Doctoral Students and Supervisors in the French Life Sciences. Science & Technology Studies 25(2): 23–45.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.55274
[15] Laudel, G., & Gläser, J. (2014). Beyond breakthrough research: Epistemic properties of research and their consequences for research funding. Research Policy, 43(7), 1204-1216.
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.02.006
[16] Ossenblok, T. L., Engels, T. C., & Sivertsen, G. (2012). The representation of the social sciences and humanities in the Web of Science—a comparison of publication patterns and incentive structures in Flanders and Norway (2005–9). Research Evaluation, 21(4), 280-290.
DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvs019
[17] Aagaard, K., Bloch, C., & Schneider, J. W. (2015). Impacts of performance-based research funding systems: The case of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. Research evaluation, 24(2), 106-117.
DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvv003
[18] Vanecek, J., & Pecha, O. (2020). Fast growth of the number of proceedings papers in atypical fields in the Czech Republic is a likely consequence of the national performance-based research funding system. Research Evaluation, 29(3), 245-262.
DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvaa005
[19] Anderson, D. L., & Tressler, J. (2014). The New Zealand performance-based research fund and its impact on publication activity in economics. Research Evaluation, 23(1), 1-11.
DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvt017
[20] Braun, D. (1998). The role of funding agencies in the cognitive development of science. Research policy, 27(8), 807-821.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00092-4
[21] Braun, D. (2006). Delegation in the distributive policy arena: the case of research policy. In Delegation in contemporary democracies, Braun, D., & Gilardi, F., 162-186. Routledge.
[22] Laudel, G. (2006). The ‘quality myth’: Promoting and hindering conditions for acquiring research funds. Higher Education, 52(3), 375-403.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6414-5
[23] Faiz, A., & Shahabi, A., )2009(. Evaluation and prioritization of university-industry communication barriers: (Semnan city case study). Educational Leadership & administration,2(4)97-124. {In Persian}
https://journals.iau.ir/article_538788.html
[24] Khaleghi Soroush, F., Abolghasemi, M., Gara Nejad, G., & Dolo. M., (2017) Designing a model for the allocation of higher education resources in Iran. Financial Economics. 39(11).147-170. {In Persian}
https://journals.iau.ir/article_535188.html
[25] Entezari, Y., & Gharun, M. (2015). Rationality and performance of government on financing higher education in Iran. Higher Education Letter, 8(29), 11-38. {In Persian}
https://journal.sanjesh.org/article_14809.html
[26] Galini Moghadam, G., & Heidarinasab, L. (2015). The Grant-Based Research System at Shahed University: from Regulations to Administration. Higher Education Letter, 8(30), 85-96. {In Persian}
https://journal.sanjesh.org/article_15406.html
[27] Galyani-Moghaddam, G., & Heydarinasab, L. (2016). Analysis, Evaluation and Pathology of Research Grants: A Case Study of Two Universities in Tehran. Digital and Smart Libraries Researches, 3(2), 63-74. {In Persian}
https://lib.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_4288.html
[28] Chen, H. T. (2015). Practical program evaluation: Theory-driven evaluation and the integrated evaluation perspective. Sage Publications.
[29] Chen, H. T.(1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Sage.
[30] Coryn, C. L., Noakes, L. A., Westine, C. D., & Schröter, D. C. (2011). A systematic review of theory-driven evaluation practice from 1990 to 2009. American journal of Evaluation, 32(2), 199-226.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214010389321
[31] Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage publications.
[32] Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications.
[33] Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage publications.
[34] Abedi Ja’fari, H., Taslimi, M. S., Faghihi, A., & Sheikhzade, M. (2011). Thematic Analysis and Thematic Networks: A Simple and Efficient Method for Exploring Patterns Embedded in Qualitative Data Municipalities). Strategic Management Thought, 5(2), 151-198. {In Persian}
https://smt.isu.ac.ir/article_163.html
[35] National Consultative Assembly.1944. Annotated deliberations of the fourteenth term of National Consultative Assembly. 1/23/1945. {In Persian}
[36] Siassi,. A. (2015). A political life. Tehran: Sales. {In Persian}
[37] National Consultative Assembly.1978. Annotated deliberations of the fourteenth term of National Consultative Assembly. 9/13/1978. {In Persian}
[38] National Consultative Assembly.1978. Annotated deliberations of the fourteenth term of National Consultative Assembly. 7/2/1967. {In Persian}
[39] National Consultative Assembly.1967. Annotated deliberations of the fourteenth term of National Consultative Assembly. 3/14/1967. {In Persian}
[40] Farasatkhah,. M. (2014). Eighty-year history of technical faculty of Tehran University: the story of a house, the story of a land.Tehran: nashreney {InPersian}
)