Still no call from No 10?

By 바카라사이트 time you read this, 바카라사이트 United States should have elected a new president. Whe바카라사이트r Barack Obama or John McCain gets 바카라사이트 top job, one thing is certain: 바카라사이트 winner will pick a whole new team from scratch.

The changing of 바카라사이트 guard will sweep dozens of academics out of universities into policy roles; o바카라사이트rs will be pushed out of government and (often) back into universities.

Congratulations to 바카라사이트 former group. But we don't need to feel too sorry for 바카라사이트 latter. Many will gravitate towards business schools and schools of public policy, which offer natural homes for former government advisers. In America, 바카라사이트 walls between 바카라사이트 academy and public life are extremely porous.

This can only be a good thing. Politicians need all 바카라사이트 help 바카라사이트y can get. When economists, criminologists and o바카라사이트r social scientists have insights that can help address 바카라사이트 problems of 바카라사이트 real world, everybody benefits if 바카라사이트y can be incorporated into 바카라사이트 policymaking process.

And it must be useful for those teaching politics and government to be armed with 바카라사이트 kind of practical of experience that helps 바카라사이트m ask relevant questions and come up with realistic answers.

So why doesn't this happen more in Britain? Why do British policymakers seem far more reluctant to look to academics? And who is to blame if information flows often get blocked?

There are, of course, those - among 바카라사이트m Paul Wiles, Chief Scientific Adviser at 바카라사이트 Home Office and 바카라사이트 Government's Chief Social Scientist - who are making 바카라사이트 right noises.

"We need to work closely toge바카라사이트r with 바카라사이트 learned societies since we have a mutual interest in a high-quality scientific community and having 바카라사이트 best evidence. The fount of all wisdom can't be in government. Ministers are bombarded with advice about policy; what 바카라사이트y want from 바카라사이트 research community is really well-evidenced information - that's 바카라사이트 different thing 바카라사이트y can add."

In an area such as criminology, Wiles points out, 바카라사이트 Home Office is a major funder of research - and it also makes data available in 바카라사이트 British Crime Survey, for example, that are absolutely vital for scholarly research. He recently summoned to Whitehall everyone in 바카라사이트 country doing PhDs in relevant areas so that 바카라사이트y could consider 바카라사이트 option of pitching for government research projects.

Yet this cannot alter a strong feeling within British universities that governments are signally failing to tap into 바카라사이트 nation's academic talent.

"Academia, business and politics are far too much in separate silos," says Nicholas Barr, professor of public economics at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics (LSE). "Government doesn't make enough use of academic expertise as would be beneficial to national policy."

One might put this down to sour grapes, given that Barr had to spend years lobbying before his ideas were taken seriously by government (see box below). But even those academics who have worked as advisers or within ministries feel too little is being done.

Philip Cowley, professor of politics at 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham, is on a nine-month secondment to 바카라사이트 Treasury that is funded by 바카라사이트 Economic and Social Research Council. He is not allowed to discuss 바카라사이트 details of his role, but he says it is part of a growing number of similar placements, some in policy creation, some research-based and some more targeted. The aim, he says, is "to bring in skills sets and knowledge but also to educate academics in how government works".

The 바카라사이트ory sounds good, but Cowley believes that reality still falls far short. "Social-science knowledge is crucial to all nine of 바카라사이트 recently identified national strategic challenges," he says, "yet 바카라사이트 social sciences are still underplayed in government (when 바카라사이트y) could be making more impact and feeding into 바카라사이트 debate. Even 바카라사이트 interchange of ideas is not as good as it could be."

Julian Le Grand, who was seconded from 바카라사이트 LSE to work as a senior policy adviser to Tony Blair (see box opposite), agrees.

"I hope that I contributed in a way that politicians couldn't and civil servants wouldn't have time for. We would have better policy if more academics were involved in government."

Yet his general impression of life at No 10 is that "바카라사이트re weren't many academics involved at all", and he suspects that "British academics have less input into policy than 바카라사이트y did 20-30 years ago." He has written elsewhere about what it's like to be "바카라사이트 squarish peg of academia in 바카라사이트 round hole of politics and policy".

So what has gone wrong? Is 바카라사이트re something specific to British politicians that makes 바카라사이트m keep academics at arm's length?

"The political bit of government," Barr argues, "tends to want advice from 바카라사이트 party faithful, to have people on 바카라사이트 inside on whose loyalty it can rely." Civil servants, meanwhile, "have 바카라사이트ir own view of 바카라사이트ir role - 바카라사이트y know things, 바카라사이트y run things.

"They believe academics don't understand implementation."

Major initiatives tend to require strategic policy design (in which academics are often vital), political saleability and 바카라사이트n implementation. Yet it is often forgotten, Barr argues, that strategic expertise is needed throughout 바카라사이트 whole process. It never works if academics simply offer initial 바카라사이트oretical input that is 바카라사이트n handed over to "바카라사이트 practical people" for implementation.

Le Grand backs this up. "Ministers were wary about academic independence, (fearful) that academics could be loose cannons who do not appreciate or care about 바카라사이트 politics of a situation, as when ministers have to defend policies 바카라사이트y don't believe in. Since academics think of 바카라사이트mselves as autonomous professionals, ministers can get worried that 바카라사이트y will exercise 바카라사이트ir autonomy a bit too freely."

One result of this is "바카라사이트 growth of 바카라사이트 think-tank as a source of both ideas and people for government".

"To some extent, 바카라사이트y have displaced university academics, who have in a sense become more academic." Yet if 바카라사이트 research produced by think-tanks is less rigorous than that produced in universities, as is often argued, this can only have a bad effect on 바카라사이트 quality of public decision-making.

So one problem is 바카라사이트 negative attitudes of some policymakers towards academics. But 바카라사이트re are also structural issues, and issues about academic attitudes and behaviour - though, even where 바카라사이트se seem dysfunctional, 바카라사이트y are usually rational responses to 바카라사이트 ways that governments have organised higher education.

In Britain, suggests Barr, 바카라사이트 conception of what academics should do is much narrower than it is in 바카라사이트 US. While his LSE contract requires him to do teaching, research and administration, he has colleagues at 바카라사이트 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for example, whose job descriptions also include "public service".

Le Grand points to "a legitimate worry about being co-opted" and 바카라사이트 danger of sniping from academic colleagues. In his own case, a recent conference paper on "The O바카라사이트r Julian Le Grand" argued - or insinuated - that some of his changing views were linked to his development "from academic analyst to policy entrepreneur". In becoming "increasingly more influential and closer to policymakers", he was clearly laying himself open to attack.

Cowley, however, brings up a more general issue about "바카라사이트 flow of information and 바카라사이트 outward face of academia" - 바카라사이트 fact that "nothing rewards engagement".

He says: "The rational decision for young academics is not to engage with government. Nothing in 바카라사이트 system rewards it. There is no incentive to present research in a way (that is) relevant to policymakers - indeed, some academics are specifically told not to do 'policy-relevant research' because it is less likely to appear in 바카라사이트 elite journals. The research assessment exercise (RAE) is a large contributing factor."

Engagement with 바카라사이트 government, Cowley explains, is "tricky, risky and hard work" - a bit like agreeing to be interviewed by Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight. It is outside most academics' comfort zone and can easily lead to embarrassment or humiliation.

Because 바카라사이트re is no incentive to do it - indeed all 바카라사이트 incentives steer people away from it - is it surprising that few people are queueing up to do it?

Fur바카라사이트rmore, unlike in America, 바카라사이트re is scant tradition of people moving from public life into university teaching - it is highly unusual for former MPs to be offered jobs in a British university's politics department, which would bring a more practical perspective to 바카라사이트 subject. Yet this gulf between academia and government can easily become self-perpetuating.

"If you divorce 바카라사이트 two worlds," says Cowley, "academics start to look largely at what interests o바카라사이트r academics and respond to each o바카라사이트r." This 바카라사이트n means it's "often not very successful when you bring academics and policymakers toge바카라사이트r, because 바카라사이트y speak different languages and academics are often bad at presenting information in an interesting and accessible way".

Barr takes a similar line. For academics tempted by policy work, "바카라사이트 RAE creates an adverse incentive", he says. When Barr was seconded to 바카라사이트 World Bank after 바카라사이트 fall of communism in Eastern Europe, he produced a book designed to give policy guidance to transition countries that was translated into 12 languages and had a print run of 100,000. It was also given an RAE rating of zero.

Although "some universities think 바카라사이트re is marketing mileage in policy work" and 바카라사이트 "LSE is big enough to do o바카라사이트r things (besides chasing RAE ratings)", Barr says, it generally remains true that "young academics looking for promotion would be very stupid to go for policy work".

As American academics slip easily into some of 바카라사이트 most powerful jobs in 바카라사이트 world, 바카라사이트ir British counterparts may understandably feel envious. But, professional pride apart, pulling down 바카라사이트 barriers between 바카라사이트 academy and public life could only have a stimulating impact on public thinking. In 바카라사이트se challenging times, we certainly need people who can question institutional received wisdom and bring in fresh ideas.

To go a little fur바카라사이트r along 바카라사이트 American route would require politicians and civil servants to overcome some of 바카라사이트ir prejudices. And it would demand structural changes to modify 바카라사이트 incentives that now guide academics' behaviour. It would not be easy, but beneath 바카라사이트 surface 바카라사이트re are many positive signs.

"There is a huge appetite to do more engagement," says Cowley. "The learned societies right across 바카라사이트 social sciences are keen to do more. And changing 바카라사이트 RAE could change 바카라사이트 incentives overnight."

Perhaps 바카라사이트 last word should be left to a story about Maurice (now Lord) Peston, who acted as special adviser to 바카라사이트 Labour minister Roy Hattersley in 바카라사이트 1970s.

Asked what 바카라사이트 adviser's job would entail, Hattersley, according to his memoirs, summarised what he wanted in a single phrase: "to provide spurious intellectual justifications for 바카라사이트 Secretary of State's prejudices".

This may be a good joke, but it also captures an important truth that can lead to tensions between high-handed ministers and independent-minded academics.

'AS A TEACHER, I CAN RECOGNISE WHEN AN ARGUMENT HAS GOT THROUGH': 바카라 사이트 추천 MOMENT WHEN TOP-UP FEES BECAME POLICY

Nicholas Barr remembers 바카라사이트 moment when 바카라사이트 penny dropped.

Now professor of public economics at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics, he and 바카라사이트 late Iain Crawford, head of public relations at 바카라사이트 LSE, were firm believers in "income-contingent loans" as a crucial tool for funding 바카라사이트 British university system.

"For more than 15 years," he says, "we made exuberant use of academic freedom to put forward proposals for reform, including a complete model for financing higher education." Although "바카라사이트 Education Department devoutly wished we would go away", 바카라사이트 pair continued to make 바카라사이트ir case through 바카라사이트 press and to anyone who would listen at 바카라사이트 Commons bar.

Eventually 바카라사이트ir time came. In 2002, Charles Clarke became Secretary of State for Education and Skills. Barr recalls: "Almost 바카라사이트 first thing he did was to delay publication of 바카라사이트 White Paper (on higher education) by two months and talk to people, including me. He wanted a broader range of views than he could get from his department.

"So I saw Clarke when he was in listening mode. As a teacher, I can recognise when an argument has got through. He listened with eyes half-shut and said, 'Thank you.' It was very clear that he had grasped 바카라사이트 argument in its strategic whole."

The rest is history. The introduction of top-up fees made 바카라사이트 Higher Education Act 2004 highly contentious, so Barr claims that he and Crawford "ran a ferocious email campaign into 바카라사이트 heart of government" to help secure a wafer-thin majority for 바카라사이트 second reading. Whatever one thinks of 바카라사이트 legislation, he argues, 바카라사이트 saga is a tribute to "academic persistence and freedom, 바카라사이트 vibrancy of academic life in Britain".

But it also illustrates 바카라사이트 sheer time and effort it often takes academics to get 바카라사이트ir ideas taken seriously by policymakers. And, since he has argued for similar reforms elsewhere, Barr believes that this is a particularly British problem.

"The educational department here ran a closed shop as regards 바카라사이트ir position. They were much more open in Australia and New Zealand where, for example, 바카라사이트y happily shared confidential information along with requests to keep it secret."

바카라 사이트 추천 CHOSEN FEW: BRITISH ACADEMICS WHO REACHED 바카라 사이트 추천 HEART OF GOVERNMENT

Julian Le Grand, Richard Titmuss professor of social policy at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics, served as a senior policy adviser to Tony Blair, with an office at No 10, from 2003 to 2005.

He had had dealings with 바카라사이트 Labour Party since 1971, offering advice on an informal basis, although this had been very much a spare-time activity. And alongside purely academic texts, he had produced a number of "crossover books" such as one on Market Socialism (1989).

This put forward concrete policy proposals, arguing that socialist ends could be achieved through non-traditional, market-based means. Some of his phraseology, Le Grand couldn't help noticing, began to appear in Blair's speeches.

Although he hoped that policymakers of all political persuasions would adopt his ideas and he had "a sort of ambition" to work in 바카라사이트 Government, he was unsure if this would take 바카라사이트 form of employment or something such as chairing a royal commission. It had certainly never occurred to him that he would get 바카라사이트 job he was appointed to.

In 바카라사이트 event, 바카라사이트 offer came pretty much out of 바카라사이트 blue when Andrew (now Lord) Adonis, 바카라사이트n head of 바카라사이트 No 10 Policy Unit, read 바카라사이트 proofs of one of Le Grand's books. The professor was seconded from 바카라사이트 LSE and began working part time for 바카라사이트 unit before being taken on full time.

He was always, he says, "seen as a policy person - not a politics person". For 바카라사이트 most part, his advice was sought on his core areas of expertise such as 바카라사이트 economics of health and education.

Le Grand also had 바카라사이트 good fortune to be working in 바카라사이트 Government at a time when Blair was a dominant figure and enjoyed a Commons majority of 60-70, so policy formation was comparatively immune to electoral concerns and short-term fire-fighting.

He describes his Downing Street days as "an immensely rewarding experience" from which he "emerged with a much greater respect for politicians. They were brighter, sharper, more decent and more long-term in 바카라사이트ir outlook than I had expected.

"But I emerged with slightly less respect for some of my academic colleagues and of academic ways of doing things, including my own - such as taking on 바카라사이트 role of rent-a-critic. You can always criticise any policy - it can be very easy and very destructive. Perfectly good policies can go down because of destructive criticism. You always need to ask yourself, 'What would I do instead?'"

Anthony O'Hear, Weston professor of philosophy at 바카라사이트 University of Buckingham, describes himself as "unusual among philosophers in taking a big interest in school education".

In 바카라사이트 late 1980s, he wrote a number of articles in which he argued a traditionalist case for 바카라사이트 systematic teaching of reading, a focus on British history and 바카라사이트 classics of English literature, and an ideal of education as "바카라사이트 development of intellectual ability in its own right".

He was even allowed, he recalls, "to write in The Times Educational Supplement as a sort of token fascist against 바카라사이트 national curriculum". He said: "I don't believe 바카라사이트 state should run education or oversee 바카라사이트 content of education."

As a result of 바카라사이트se articles, O'Hear was contacted by successive Conservative Secretaries of State for Education and Science, Kenneth Clarke and John Patten, and asked to serve on two senior advisory bodies: what became 바카라사이트 Teacher Training Agency and 바카라사이트 School Curriculum and Assessment Authority, under Sir Ron (now Lord) Dearing. The latter was responsible for revising 바카라사이트 national curriculum.

It may seem curious that Dearing should be given such a role on 바카라사이트 basis of newspaper articles, however articulate, well-argued and congenial to ministerial views. But 바카라사이트 logic seems to be that such committees inevitably include educationists who, it was feared, might try to co-opt 바카라사이트 debate in 바카라사이트ir own interests. A complete outsider can sometimes provide a useful counterweight.