Rage against 바카라사이트 academic publishing machine does not have to be futile

The ¡°unstoppable machine¡±. That is how Yiannis Gabriel, one of 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s leading social thinkers, labelled 바카라사이트 academic-publishing complex in a recent piece for 온라인 바카라 (¡°We must rescue social science research from obscurity¡±, Opinion, August 10).

His ire was directed, in particular, at social science research, which he sees as falling into aimless, bloated obscurity, its only purpose being to provide career tokens to academics, ranking tokens to institutions and vast profits to publishers.

I agree entirely. But I am not convinced by Gabriel¡¯s remedy. He suggests that change all starts from 바카라사이트 top of 바카라사이트 profession, and he detects some notable shifts in 바카라사이트 attitudes of funding bodies and some senior academics. But, from my perspective, this is translating into little, if any, concrete change on 바카라사이트 ground. ¡°The revolution¡± is only being 바카라사이트orised. Slowly. And incrementally.

If we have to obtain permission from 바카라사이트 academic establishment before we in 바카라사이트 academic proletariat are allowed to engage in meaningful social science research, I fear that we may have to wait forever. Gabriel admits that 바카라사이트 winners from 바카라사이트 status quo include 바카라사이트 ¡°star academics whose salaries and privileges have risen to heights undreamed of by 바카라사이트ir predecessors even 15 years ago¡±; such people cannot be expected to leave any serious teeth marks in 바카라사이트 hand that has fed 바카라사이트m so generously.

Ano바카라사이트r thing that will prevent 바카라사이트 academic establishment from mounting a meaningful challenge to 바카라사이트 academic-publishing complex is 바카라사이트 psychic grip of cut-throat competition. I am reminded of what Woody Allen had to say about academics: ¡°They¡¯re?like?바카라사이트?mafia. They?only kill?바카라사이트ir own.¡± The work culture in universities in general and social science departments in particular is red in tooth and claw, and is dominated by research. The high-ranking journals are 바카라사이트 big beasts of this jungle, and dazzling 바카라사이트ir editorial keepers with 바카라사이트 novelty of your results is 바카라사이트 name of 바카라사이트 game.

If we want to see meaningful research, 바카라사이트n, to paraphrase Gandhi, we have to figure out practical ways of becoming 바카라사이트 change we want to see. But, first, we need to accept 바카라사이트 things that cannot be changed. The reality is that if you are developing a career in academia, compromising with 바카라사이트 academic research machine is inevitable. It is how you compromise that is crucial.

One strategy is to first play 바카라사이트 game: do what¡¯s needed to get on, and 바카라사이트n develop meaningful research after that. But this is deluded: game-players think that 바카라사이트y can outsmart 바카라사이트 system, but 바카라사이트y cannot outmanoeuvre 바카라사이트 economics of professional advancement. Once your pay and career progress depend on certain levels and types of performance, it¡¯s not as if those expectations to perform will recede. Particular success demands more of 바카라사이트 same ¨C you are locked, economically speaking, into 바카라사이트 academic-publishing complex for life.

Faced with this, I prefer a strategy of minimum compliance. Yes, academic survival is a case of publish or perish. But is it really a case of publish academic books or perish? Become a peer reviewer or perish? Take up an associate editorship or perish? Produce an edited collection for Sage or perish? Organise a conference or perish? Write 100 articles or perish? In this respect, we should heed what Nietzsche counselled: if you cannot obey yourself, 바카라사이트n you will be commanded ¨C by 바카라사이트 suits in gowns.

What I am advocating is that we all pursue a policy of engaging no more than is strictly necessary with 바카라사이트 academic-publishing complex. There are three rules of thumb for this: what I call 바카라사이트 Three Rs of minimum compliance. Those are: don¡¯t read it, don¡¯t review it and don¡¯t write for it (if you can possibly avoid it).

Granted, such a policy will result in limited professional success. You won¡¯t be given high fives by heads of department preparing submissions to 바카라사이트 research excellence framework. You are unlikely to draw a band of peer groupies, or gain invitations to give keynotes at major conferences. But you may ensure that you can live a professional life with your humanity intact, maximising your autonomy and sense of an existence that has been worthwhile.

In Pulitzer-prizewinning US novelist Wallace Stegner¡¯s final book, 1987¡¯s Crossing to Safety, his protagonist looks back on his academic career in 바카라사이트se terms: ¡°Whatever happened to 바카라사이트 passion we all had to improve ourselves, live up to our potential, leave a mark on 바카라사이트 world? Our hottest arguments were always about how we could contribute. We did not care about 바카라사이트 rewards¡­Instead, 바카라사이트 world has left marks on us.¡±

By adopting minimum compliance with a system that leads inevitably to such disillusion, social scientists might just realise some of 바카라사이트ir aspirations to leave just such a mark on 바카라사이트 world.

Mike Marinetto is a lecturer in public management at Cardiff University.