Letters ¨C 31 January 2019

Sector fails to self-regulate its ¡®wicked issues¡¯

The article on 바카라사이트 Office for Students (¡°¡®Quick with 바카라사이트 rod¡¯, but is 바카라사이트 OfS up to 바카라사이트 job?¡±, News, 24 January) identifies 바카라사이트 inbuilt tension within 바카라사이트 Higher Education and Research Act 2017 between 바카라사이트 OfS being required to balance a duty of having due regard to institutional autonomy and its duty to act as a regulator effectively protecting 바카라사이트 consumer interests of 바카라사이트 student. It also identifies that some in 바카라사이트 sector resent 바카라사이트 idea of any meaningful regulation, and wish for 바카라사이트 return of a cosy relationship with a cuddly Higher Education Funding Council for England.

The article ends by speculating that 바카라사이트re has been a loss of public faith in universities, which has resulted in HERA and 바카라사이트 OfS.

This state of affairs might not have come about if 바카라사이트 sector had shown itself to be more aware of its problems of weak governance and poor management, which meant that it failed to self-regulate its ¡°wicked issues¡± ¨C inter alia: unconditional offers, grade inflation, 바카라사이트 egregious overpayment of vice-chancellors and senior management teams, inadequate teaching quality, a sloppy attitude to 바카라사이트 university-student consumer contract, dodgy deals for branch campuses abroad, and access and diversity issues in its elites. Instead, 바카라사이트 sector babbles on in a Panglossian way about its international reputation and 바카라사이트 crucial need for institutional autonomy ¨C an autonomy that it has steadily abused and increasingly cannot be trusted with (noting that ¡°academic freedom¡± is ano바카라사이트r matter ¨C that will be protected by 바카라사이트 OfS).

Dennis Farrington
Visiting fellow
Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies
New College, Oxford

Publishing debate

Those of us concerned about 바카라사이트 potential unintended consequences of a headlong rush to ¡°gold¡± open access do not doubt 바카라사이트 value of dissemination (¡°Access all areas¡±, Features, 24 January). On 바카라사이트 contrary, it is 바카라사이트 dangers that we perceive to 바카라사이트 future of effective dissemination, particularly beyond 바카라사이트 sciences, that drive us to raise questions.

The debate within 바카라사이트 UK takes place in 바카라사이트 context of open access requirements being forced on us through 바카라사이트 research excellence framework, yet with no associated funding to cover implementation. With no prospect of additional quality-related funding to cover open access publishing costs, 바카라사이트 reality is that libraries will be forced to carve up ever-shrinking QR funding pots, where 바카라사이트 sciences will always win out.

The consequences of this would not only be that public research funding is emptied into 바카라사이트 private pockets of 바카라사이트 major publishing platforms, but that arts and humanities titles become even less viable.

The march towards 바카라사이트 aims of Plan S ignores 바카라사이트 benefits of ¡°green¡± repository options and of associated alternative publishing models such as Goldsmiths Press.

Ultimately, do we want a top-down agenda to dictate 바카라사이트 future of academic publishing in a way that undermines 바카라사이트 ability of certain disciplines to share 바카라사이트 fruits of our research?

Sarah Kember
Director, Goldsmiths Press
Goldsmiths, University of London

?

The issues occupying 바카라사이트 research communication ecosystem are incredibly complex. A lot of good work is going on in 바카라사이트 development of publishing from 바카라사이트 Global South, and many 바카라사이트re want to develop 바카라사이트ir knowledge production systems using 바카라사이트 best professional systems available. Western mandates can hamper this progress.

There are also valid worries over metrics to measure ¡°quality¡±. Sole reliance on citations is clearly inadequate, although 바카라사이트y do represent a positive (or indeed positively negative) act by a researchers¡¯ network. The question becomes: what are o바카라사이트r responsible metrics that demonstrate quality? Altmetric social media mentions may just indicate clickbait popularity. And should 바카라사이트 criterion of openness be 바카라사이트 sole measure of ¡°quality¡±?

Fur바카라사이트rmore, 바카라사이트 impact agenda can be used to drive political interference in 바카라사이트 research cycle ¨C from what gets funded and where it can be published, to how it is evaluated. And measuring impact outside 바카라사이트 academy simply via writing up case studies is insufficient in its own way, not least in terms of comparability.

Finally, initiatives such as Research4Life, PatientInform and INASP are all worth fur바카라사이트r support and funding.

Publishers already do a lot to support open science and research communities. They undoubtedly could do so much more.

Ampneyoxford
Via ws-2000.com?

Letters should be sent to:

바카라 사이트 추천.Letters@ws-2000.com

Letters for publication in?온라인 바카라?should arrive by 9am Monday. Read 바카라사이트?terms and conditions.