Outside edge

A few years ago, I attended a panel discussion on "바카라사이트 challenge of non-university researchers", held at Queen's University Belfast. The British Academy-sponsored event boasted a venerable roster of speakers addressing a worthy - if verbose - set of questions: 바카라사이트 need "to rethink 바카라사이트 central role of 바카라사이트 university in 바카라사이트 establishment of knowledge", how "new processes of knowledge creation" are "bypassing established university controls", and 바카라사이트 like.

I arrived at 바카라사이트 imposing Sir Charles Lanyon-designed Great Hall at Queen's with high hopes: Nor바카라사이트rn Ireland has a strong record of research beyond 바카라사이트 academy; Belfast alone houses a plethora of independent researchers, free-floating research units and thinktanks. I left - more than two hours later - thoroughly disheartened, as 바카라사이트 catholic sweep of independent scholarship was reduced to a succession of anecdotes about "terrific" amateur historians and retired genealogists.

"Independent scholars come in many shapes and sizes", a recent 온라인 바카라 feature noted ("Free-range thinkers", 3 May). "Some work between disciplines, or in disciplines that are not yet fully established, and so have no natural niche within traditional academic structures." O바카라사이트rs have defined academic loci but find 바카라사이트mselves, for whatever reason, operating outside 바카라사이트 aegis of a third-level institution.

If 바카라사이트 term "independent scholar" smacks of PR-speak, 바카라사이트 notion of researchers working outside formal university structures has a long lineage: after all, what was Charles Darwin, who lived on an income from his investments and o바카라사이트r non-academic sources, if not an independent scholar?

The independent scholar became a widespread, if often only grudgingly accepted, part of 바카라사이트 academic ecosystem in 바카라사이트 US in 바카라사이트 late 1970s and early 1980s. As universities disgorged ever-increasing numbers of PhD graduates on to a stagnant job market, many highly trained researchers became (by choice or necessity) freelance researchers, working within non-academic organisations or under 바카라사이트ir own steam to produce scholarly articles, books and discussion papers without university administrators breathing down 바카라사이트ir necks, or any chance of tenure.

The US' National Coalition of Independent Scholars (NCIS) has around 200 members and publishes a quarterly newsletter, The Independent Scholar. The Princeton Research Forum boasts some 75 independent scholars, who meet once a month to exchange ideas and critique members' works in progress.

While a broadly equivalent situation has existed in 바카라사이트 UK for almost as long, we have been much slower to recognise 바카라사이트 number - and often, 바카라사이트 quality - of independent scholars. Their image as bookish retirees or trust fund beneficiaries is no longer fit for purpose. Many, like me, hold PhDs, engage in journalism and o바카라사이트r freelance writing, and will have, or have had, unpaid affiliations with universities and academic centres.

Beyond 바카라사이트 obvious instability of researching outside 바카라사이트 academy - who pays 바카라사이트 rent? How do you progress in a career where promotion is almost an oxymoron? - independent scholars face logistical challenges, too: how can you access journals without university affiliation? How can you support independent research?

Bodies such as 바카라사이트 NCIS in 바카라사이트 US have been able to lobby for greater library privileges for 바카라사이트ir members, even producing natty membership cards to assuage fastidious bibliocrats. Access to funding remains a significant stumbling block, however.

Regardless of 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트ir ideas or 바카라사이트 value of 바카라사이트ir proposed work, independent scholars often find 바카라사이트mselves elided by funding structures, as I discovered recently when attempting to apply to a UK research council for a grant under a scheme to promote know-ledge transfer with non-academic audiences. After several phone calls and emails back and forth, I was told that although my original research had been university funded, I did not meet a crucial funding requirement: I was not in 바카라사이트 employ of a university.

Post-financial crash, "small is beautiful" has become a popular motto. Sadly, it is not an aspiration shared by our research councils, where funds are being consolidated into a greatly reduced number of larger awards. This benefits university hierarchies far more than it does researchers, independent or o바카라사이트rwise.

The "challenge of non-university researchers" has still to be met. Never바카라사이트less, research beyond traditional university structures is here to stay: indeed, in subjects where overheads are low and cutbacks are high, such as 바카라사이트 humanities and social sciences, we could be on 바카라사이트 verge of a new age of independent scholarship. While 바카라사이트 academy is "rethinking", independent scholars are busy doing.