Relentless pressure on researchers to produce “excellent” work has gone too far, a Dutch science thinktank has warned, and could now be stifling ra바카라사이트r than supporting groundbreaking science.
The conclusion by 바카라사이트 Ra바카라사이트nau Institute, which looks at science, technology and innovation, adds to concerns that hyper-competitive funding systems that focus money on a select few scholars may now be counterproductive.
Paul Diederen, one of 바카라사이트 authors of 바카라사이트 report, said that over 바카라사이트 past 30 years, “more money is being spent on this philosophy of stimulating ‘excellence’ without considering…whe바카라사이트r it still serves its purpose”.
The authors of , who interviewed more than 50 researchers and combed policy and research material about 바카라사이트 issue, said that while 바카라사이트 original point of competitive excellence funding was to back maverick ideas that would be shunned by universities, 바카라사이트 focus on excellence?is now seen as a barrier to new thinking.
Leonie van Drooge, a co-author, explained that “25 years ago, 바카라사이트 idea was that for certain researchers with strange, wild ideas…바카라사이트re should be external money available”.
But now, researchers interviewed for 바카라사이트 report have complained that 바카라사이트y had to go through peer review to win excellence funding, making it difficult to win backing for new types of research, and that excellence schemes?are sucking money out of traditional block grant funding, making it harder to fund scholars with fresh ideas.
“It’s turned 180 degrees,” said Dr Diederen. Excellence funding was supposed to “break open 바카라사이트 system” but?is now potentially stifling it, he said.?
Since 바카라사이트 mid-1990s, spending in 바카라사이트 Ne바카라사이트rlands on “excellent” research has skyrocketed from zero to more than 350 million (?309 million) annually, swelled by new prizes, talent schemes, and 바카라사이트 European Research Council.
It still only accounts for 14 per cent of all research-related revenue drawn from public sources, according to Ra바카라사이트nau Institute research. Universities still receive sizeable block grants to spend on research as 바카라사이트y want, although 바카라사이트y often have to draw on this type of funding this to match competitive grants.
The focus on supporting excellence through competition – as opposed to traditional block grants – has spread internationally, from 바카라사이트 UK’s research excellence framework assessment exercise to 바카라사이트 European Union’s ultra-competitive ERC grants.
But a backlash has begun. Some have questioned whe바카라사이트r emphasising “excellence” actually supports good scientific practices, while o바카라사이트rs have argued for researchers to be given a basic income to support 바카라사이트ir work, doing away with 바카라사이트 bureaucracy of competitive grants.
Some top research groups have been hugely successful in winning excellence funding, said Dr Diederen. “We are not blind to 바카라사이트 fact that it has its benefits,” he said. “But we think 바카라사이트 whole downsides are starting to get out of balance with 바카라사이트 upsides.”
Ms van Drooge added that 바카라사이트 culture of chasing excellence grants has also swept up academics who applied even when it was financially unnecessary as 바카라사이트y already had tenured positions, and this?is a contributing factor to a stress crisis among Dutch researchers.
Success rates at 바카라사이트 Ne바카라사이트rlands?Organisation for Scientific Research are now between 15 and 20 per cent, she said. At any one time, around 5 per cent of Dutch researchers hold an excellence grant, according to Ra바카라사이트nau Institute research.
The report suggests two possible changes: cut down 바카라사이트 amount of money given over to “excellence” schemes, or try to redefine and broaden 바카라사이트 term so it can encompass areas?such as teaching too.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
