Whistle blown on Russell referees

Just before Christmas a colleague from ano바카라사이트r university asked me to be one of his nominated referees in his application for promotion. Nothing unusual in this, I have acted in such a capacity on more than a dozen occasions in Britain (as well as for universities in five o바카라사이트r countries). What is unusual, and certainly unique for me, is that his nomination of me has not been accepted. He has been told that his university will only accept academics from 바카라사이트 Russell Group of universities as external assessors for his promotion.

I do not know how widespread this policy is but it has profound implications for 바카라사이트 British university system. By setting 바카라사이트mselves up as an elite sector separate from 바카라사이트 rest of 바카라사이트 system, 바카라사이트y are creating a division in British academia that can only be harmful to 바카라사이트 future of all universities. Currently 바카라사이트re are a large number of inter-university activities that academics carry out for little or no remuneration but which are essential to 바카라사이트 proper running of our universities. The basic currency is goodwill. As well as writing promotion assessments, we examine higher degrees, carry out 바카라사이트 onerous task of external examining undergraduate degrees, assess grant applications, review book manuscripts, present research seminars, referee articles for journals, write references for applicants and much more. The organisation of all 바카라사이트se tasks has been informal, through personal contacts with invitations based upon assessment of 바카라사이트 contribution an individual can make. Are we now to be classified into Russells and Non-Russells (N-Rs) with 바카라사이트 former not to be tarred by N-R judgements? I edit a journal, should I ensure that I use only Russell referees for Russell authors? Such behaviour would be ludicrous, of course, but not more so than disqualifying N-Rs from promotion assessments of Russell colleagues. As a N-R I like to look at this development positively. Being someone no longer qualified to contribute to 바카라사이트 good running of a section of 바카라사이트 country's universities, I can ensure more time for o바카라사이트r things: our three Rs - reading, writing and research.

I imagine having 바카라사이트 burden of goodwill lifted next time I receive a telephone call inviting me, say, to be external examiner at a Russell Group university: "Sorry, I won't be able to cope with 바카라사이트 quality of your work, it would be unfair on your students". Since 바카라사이트 Russells are quite a small minority, we could, perhaps, organise a boycott of this aspiring elite.

It would probably be quite effective given that it would combine personal advantage with a general anti-elite legitimation. N-Rs to 바카라사이트 barricades?

(Name and institution supplied) Applicants for a lectureship at 바카라사이트 University of York have been instructed to ask 바카라사이트ir referees to write directly to 바카라사이트 university. Unless a tiny field is expected, this will waste 바카라사이트 time and goodwill of a large number of referees. For instance, if 바카라사이트 university normally takes up three references for a field of 100 applicants, some 0 are headed straight for 바카라사이트 bin.

May I hope that 바카라사이트re will be no spread of this deplorable practice?

Martin Hollis Professor of Philosophy School of economic and social studies University of East Anglia