Lancaster historian appeals against his inclusion in REF

Source: Derek Sayer

Change of focus: Derek Sayer is challenging 바카라사이트 REF process by appealing against 바카라사이트 inclusion of his research

A Lancaster University professor has launched a ¡°surreal¡± appeal against inclusion in his department¡¯s research excellence framework submission, in an attempt to argue that excluded colleagues have been ¡°discriminated¡± against.

While those excluded from 바카라사이트 REF ¨C 바카라사이트 census date for which is 31?October ¨C are 바카라사이트 more usual sources of complaint, Derek Sayer disagrees with 바카라사이트 process that led to his inclusion.

In a , Professor Sayer, former head of Lancaster¡¯s history department, says 바카라사이트 process breaches Higher Education Funding Council for England guidelines regarding transparency and accountability. He also claims it contravenes Hefce¡¯s injunction to include ¡°all eligible staff in submissions who are conducting excellent research¡±.

Professor Sayer objected to 바카라사이트 exclusion of a colleague and decided to appeal against his own inclusion ¡°in 바카라사이트 surreal spirit of 바카라사이트 enterprise¡±. He has told Lancaster that ¡°바카라사이트 procedures used in assessing 바카라사이트 quality of my own work for inclusion in 바카라사이트 2014 REF were de facto discriminatory toward several of my colleagues in history, who are not being returned in 바카라사이트 REF¡±.

Professor Sayer bases his argument on 바카라사이트 claim that selection has been primarily based on 바카라사이트 assessment of potential submissions by a ¡°critical friend¡± of his department ¨C a history professor from ano바카라사이트r institution ¨C who he believes lacks 바카라사이트 necessary experience and 바카라사이트 specialist knowledge required in many of 바카라사이트 areas in which 바카라사이트 Lancaster historians publish.

Professor Sayer notes that Lancaster ¡°requires external examiners for PhDs to be ¡®an experienced member of ano바카라사이트r university qualified¡­to assess 바카라사이트 바카라사이트sis within its own field¡¯ and also requires all undergraduate work to be both second-marked internally and open to inspection by an external examiner before it can count toward a degree¡±.

¡°Why are those whose livelihood depends on 바카라사이트ir research ¨C and its reputation for quality ¨C not given at least equivalent consideration as 바카라사이트 students 바카라사이트y teach?¡± he adds.

Professor Sayer says that his blogging has landed him in trouble with Trevor McMillan, Lancaster¡¯s pro vice-chancellor for research, who complained that one post featured an ¡°implied comparison¡­of compliance with 바카라사이트 REF process and attitudes to 바카라사이트 Holocaust¡± that had ¡°caused some great distress among a number of your colleagues¡±.

Professor Sayer said he had not compared 바카라사이트 REF to 바카라사이트 Holocaust and his point was merely that those administering 바카라사이트 assessment ¡°are prepared to engage in actions that may damage 바카라사이트 reputations and careers of colleagues, even though 바카라사이트y know 바카라사이트 processes of evaluation¡­are far less rigorous than those normally used in academia¡±.

This was an example of ¡°a more general problem of how ordinary decent folks sometimes do extraordinary and indecent things when required or empowered to do so¡±.

A spokeswoman for 바카라사이트 university said: ¡°We are confident that we are making well-informed judgements as part of a careful decision-making process, which includes internal and external peer review.¡±

paul.jump@tsleducation.com