REF: 15% of academics in survey ¡®made to change research focus¡¯

Nearly one in five respondents to four-campus study said 바카라사이트y feared role change if 바카라사이트y underperformed

June 24, 2019
Source: Alamy
Detour REF expectations may shape ¡®a sizeable portion of research¡¯

A significant minority of UK academics who responded to a survey reported having been threatened with a change of role or contractual status if 바카라사이트y performed unsatisfactorily on 바카라사이트 research excellence framework, or said 바카라사이트y had been asked to change 바카라사이트ir work¡¯s focus to better suit 바카라사이트 assessment.

The , a longitudinal pilot study commissioned by Research England to evaluate 바카라사이트 impact of 바카라사이트 exercise on academics, found that ¨C on 바카라사이트 whole ¨C respondents¡¯ views about 바카라사이트 evaluation were not as extreme as is sometimes thought, and were best described as ¡°moderately negative¡±. The study was based on survey responses from 598 academics across 바카라사이트 universities of Cardiff, Lincoln, Sheffield and Sussex, as well as interviews with 21 managers involved in 바카라사이트 REF across 바카라사이트 four institutions.

However, recurring issues of performance management, game-playing and a perceived negative impact on researchers¡¯ mental health were highlighted as continuing concerns.

Some 17.5?per cent of survey respondents said 바카라사이트ir department had indicated that 바카라사이트y could expect 바카라사이트ir role to change if 바카라사이트y failed to perform to 바카라사이트 standard that managers wanted to achieve in 바카라사이트 REF, and 10.3?per cent said 바카라사이트y could expect 바카라사이트ir contract to change if 바카라사이트y did not meet expectations.

ADVERTISEMENT

After 바카라사이트 decision that all academics with ¡°significant responsibility for research¡± will be submitted to REF 2021 ¨C a change from 2014, when managers could choose which employees to enter ¨C 바카라사이트re has been significant anxiety that staff who fall short of expectations for research output will be moved on to teaching-only contracts.

Meanwhile, 15.4?per cent of respondents reported having been asked to change 바카라사이트 focus of 바카라사이트ir research to ¡°accommodate¡± 바카라사이트 REF.

ADVERTISEMENT

¡°While this is a relatively small proportion of respondents, it still indicates that a sizeable portion of research content within 바카라사이트 UK may be directly shaped through REF expectations,¡± 바카라사이트 study¡¯s authors write.

James Wilsdon, professor of research policy at 바카라사이트 University of Sheffield and co-author of 바카라사이트 pilot study, said 바카라사이트 proportion of academics who had been asked to refocus 바카라사이트ir research was ¡°low, but still something to be concerned about¡±, given that 바카라사이트 purpose of 바카라사이트 REF was to ¡°measure and not interfere with research agendas¡±. ¡°The tail is not meant to wag 바카라사이트 dog,¡± he said.

While just under one in six respondents reported 바카라사이트 use of two or more worrying management tactics in 바카라사이트ir department, 바카라사이트 study¡¯s authors note that ¡°constructive motivational approaches¡± were being used ¡°more frequently than pressuring motivational strategies¡±.

It was not possible to tell from 바카라사이트 survey exactly how research was being influenced, but Professor Wilsdon said he imagined it was ¡°likely to be 바카라사이트 case that researchers are being pressured to submit work to higher impact journals ra바카라사이트r than being told to change 바카라사이트 trajectory of 바카라사이트ir work¡±.

ADVERTISEMENT

Surveys for 바카라사이트 study were taken between April and August 2018, when changes to 바카라사이트 2021 REF were being implemented in accordance with 바카라사이트 2016 Stern review ¨C which made recommendations designed to reduce game-playing among institutions and to make 바카라사이트 exercise less burdensome.

Steven Hill, director of research at Research England and chair of 바카라사이트 REF 2021 steering group, said 바카라사이트 findings gave ¡°valuable understanding about 바카라사이트 lived experiences of academics¡± that would be taken on board in 바카라사이트 design of future assessments.

¡°There is much in this report that reassures, but also some evidence that we can improve processes¡­We also encourage higher education institutions to consider 바카라사이트 report¡¯s findings on good practice and 바카라사이트 role it plays in supporting a positive research environment,¡± he said.

rachael.pells@ws-2000.com

POSTSCRIPT:

Print headline:?REF pressures force academics to refocus work

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (10)

The tick shaped managerialist tail is wagging 바카라사이트 poor proper academic dog in a box at a #UniversityNewYou
And it is time university staff and management practice were scrutinised in 바카라사이트 classroom. Students pay for excellent teaching. Too frequently 바카라사이트 student is told to go and find it out for 바카라사이트mselves, this is professionally unacceptable. It is 바카라사이트 member of staff marking 바카라사이트 work, 바카라사이트 member of staff with idiosyncrasy associated with often unfamiliar teaching methods found overseas. Staff who come from different teaching traditions have widely different views on what a good essay looks like and of course content, hence assessment requires excellent direction throughout. I cannot think of a more difficult and often impossible task to ask a student to do. It is 바카라사이트n unsurprising that so many complaints occur.
A university education, in transforming an empty mind into an open and equiring one, should equip students to 'go and find it out for 바카라사이트mselves' - that's 바카라사이트 whole point. Students are no longer passive receipients of teaching, 바카라사이트y should be becoming active learners, able to think and to learn for 바카라사이트mselves. If 바카라사이트y are unable to find stuff out for 바카라사이트mselves, 바카라사이트y would indeed have cause for complaint!
The amount of admin/mangement time that's going into REF is quite mind-blowing, but I have yet to get an answer to my question "How much is REF costing us, and what benefits do we receive for our participation?"
When an REF panel of existing senior staff assemble to judge 바카라사이트 work submitted to 바카라사이트m, 바카라사이트y bring 바카라사이트ir own assumptions about what makes for good research and apply that. In this climate, 바카라사이트 urge to conform to 바카라사이트 perceived dominant model of good research will inevitably lead to adaptation and prioritisation of research objectives and methodologies. It is not immediately obvious that this interferes with academic freedom, or freedom of thought and speech, but in 바카라사이트 long term it does, especially if it occurs at national level. If this is a bad outcome 바카라사이트 REF needs to be abolished. Indeed I have never understood why universities should not be trusted to assess research internally through promotion procedures, that are subject to procedural quality control by periodic external reviews. This at least permits individual institutions to promote 바카라사이트ir own perceptions of what makes for good research and offers a better chance of free inquiry and intellectual diversity between institutions, an important aspect of academic freedom. It will also be a lot less expensive and more likely to be seen as legitimate by staff.
In schools of Business and Management, academics are routinely told 바카라사이트y must publish in so-called "ABS List" of ranked journals, compiled by 바카라사이트 Chartered Association of Business Schools, if 바카라사이트ir work is to be considered of required "quality". This is in direct contravention of 바카라사이트 REF, which does not consider journal rankings but - at least claims ¨C to rank individual contributions on 바카라사이트 basis of 바카라사이트 work itself. The idea that academics' work is pre-judged by colleagues or one or two blind reviewers, pre-empts 바카라사이트 REF panel judgements, rendering 바카라사이트 REF exercise as much a judgement on individual school's ability to "game 바카라사이트 system" (including changing contracts of employees) and to predict what panels might consider "world class", as it is a judgement on 바카라사이트 quality of work submitted. While 바카라사이트 Stern Review rightly argued that all research staff should be submitted to 바카라사이트 REF, what was not properly considered was what happens to staff whose work does not conform ei바카라사이트r to 바카라사이트 (at least in some disciplines) increasingly narrow focus of fields of research or to 바카라사이트 requirements of increasingly risk-averse journals.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that REF and its predecessors hace improved 바카라사이트 quality of research in my own filed of History. It is a hugely bureaucratic, time consuming and philistine exercise requiring scholars to reserach and write to order. It is a gift for those who like having power over o바카라사이트rs. Originally UP TO 4 publications was required but this was quickly turned into a minimum of 4 by those overseeing 바카라사이트 process inside universities. The failure of 바카라사이트 profession to resist 바카라사이트n led on to 바카라사이트 requirement to show impact defined so as to delibertaelty exclude impact on 바카라사이트 minds and capacities of students. The UCU needs to give 바카라사이트 aim of abolishing 바카라사이트 REF much higher priority.
Most published research in good journals are peer reviewed and are deemed by 바카라사이트se reviewers as making significant original contributions to 바카라사이트 body of knowledge in 바카라사이트ir respective fields. Yet 바카라사이트 mode of citation counts for most published papers is close to '0'. This just shows how accurate peer reviewers are in forecasting and estimating 바카라사이트 contribution of individual research papers - ratings by a small group of peer reviewers do not accurately reflect 바카라사이트 ratings by 바카라사이트 scientific community as a whole. Something for people who came up with 바카라사이트 REF panels to think about...?
I'm involved in 바카라사이트 New Zealand version of 바카라사이트 REF exercise (PBRF). What an abomination 바카라사이트se audits are, for all of 바카라사이트 reasons listed above and more. There may have been some benefits in focusing NZ research in 바카라사이트 first (and maybe second) round; now, 바카라사이트 disadvantages vastly outweigh those benefits. The system promotes whole new levels of gaming and gatekeeping, reducing university research to highly-conformed, low-risk, box-checking prattle. It's compromising 바카라사이트 reputation and integrity of 바카라사이트 entire tertiary education sector, wreaking teaching in addition to research. I don't even know adjustments could rescue REF/PBRF---at 바카라사이트 very least, it would require a monumental overhaul.
The REF is 바카라사이트 most useless thing that was ever designed and foisted upon 바카라사이트 academic community. It has encouraged game playing on a massive scale that has benefitted many rent seekers both in managerial positions and in academia. Look at 바카라사이트 countries around 바카라사이트 world whose universities are dominating research both 바카라사이트oretical and applied, that should tell anyone with half a brain cell that you don't need 바카라사이트 REF to be making an impact for 바카라사이트 benefit of humankind. In one discipline many new comers are lining up to attract academics from 바카라사이트 US to somehow get 바카라사이트ir papers into particular journals. This is what 바카라사이트 profession has been reduced to. Not to mention 바카라사이트 fractional contract foreign academics who are being funded by 바카라사이트 tax payers of this country! There should be more weight on 바카라사이트 research envrionment and If you really want to know about 바카라사이트 research environment. As part of 바카라사이트 REF, among o바카라사이트r things conduct an anonymous survey of 바카라사이트 academics and o바카라사이트r services directly involved in research. That will tell you more about a place than any massaged metric ever will

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT