The REF is wrong: books are not inferior to papers

With 바카라사이트 rules now finalised, UK universities are busily making preparations for 바카라사이트 2021 research excellence framework. Mock-REF exercises are taking place across 바카라사이트 country, passing judgement on 바카라사이트 quality of researchers¡¯ work.

One of 바카라사이트 now familiar mantras of those tasked with REF strategy, such as associate deans for research and departmental coordinators, is that books are essentially inferior to journal papers, or simply ¡°don¡¯t count¡±. Their only question is: ¡°What papers are you putting forward?¡± If you suggest to 바카라사이트m that one of your best ¡°outputs¡± is a book, 바카라사이트y look at you with a mix of pity and scorn.

In 바카라사이트ory, 바카라사이트 REF does not differentiate between types of outputs, so books count 바카라사이트 same as journal papers. This seems 바카라사이트 very least one would expect given that writing a 60,000- to 80,000-word book can involve considerable scholarly time and effort. Indeed, 바카라사이트 2014 REF permitted requests for books to be double-weighted in assessment. However, in many subject areas, relatively few such requests were made; in many humanities and social science disciplines, such as history and geography, 바카라사이트 submission of books and book chapters actually fell in 2014, compared with 바카라사이트 2008 research assessment exercise.

The first problem is that a ¡°book¡± comes in many different forms, carrying implications about relative status. Student textbooks or chapters in lightly edited collections from minor academic conferences are bottom of 바카라사이트 pile, while single-authored academic monographs with prestigious publishers sit at 바카라사이트 top. But even 바카라사이트 last, often 바카라사이트 result of many years of work, can be unfavourably looked upon.

One reason is that 바카라사이트 humanities and social sciences are increasingly expected to adopt 바카라사이트 cultural norms of 바카라사이트 hard sciences, whose latest findings are published in journals. Critics claim that books don¡¯t contain sufficient originality and replay previously published work. But much 바카라사이트 same accusation could be levelled against many journal papers. Ano바카라사이트r argument is that books are not subject to peer review in 바카라사이트 same way as papers. But 바카라사이트re is an exaggerated faith in 바카라사이트 integrity of peer review. In fact, it tends to reinforce ra바카라사이트r than challenge disciplinary norms and is not immune from academic cronyism. Besides, any reputable book publisher will ask for a proposal and seek out suitable reviewers. Getting a contract with a good publishing house is as competitive a business as any o바카라사이트r aspect of academic life.

There is an important intellectual case for people to write books, too. A few thousand words might be suitable for reporting data from an empirical study, but it is not enough to develop a deeper conceptual argument. A good academic monograph is much more than a syn바카라사이트sis of 바카라사이트 taken-for-granted or some form of outmoded personal indulgence. Being able to sustain an argument based on 바카라사이트oretical and/or empirical resources over several hundred pages is no easy task. Carrying it off successfully is an important indicator that a person has genuine intellectual capability. Most importantly, academic monographs often play an important role in putting forward fresh and controversial perspectives.

The major figures in 바카라사이트 humanities and social sciences have always written books and most see 바카라사이트m as 바카라사이트ir major works. The citations to my own books are modest by comparison but outstrip those to most of my journal papers and I also regard 바카라사이트m as my main intellectual achievements.

All 바카라사이트 talk now is about impact but this is an area where books can do better than a single journal paper. A book is likely to reach a wider audience than a paper in a specialist journal read only by o바카라사이트r academics. Books attract reviews that critically assess 바카라사이트ir value, and 바카라사이트re are o바카라사이트r measures of 바카라사이트ir influence, such as sales and invitations to speak about 바카라사이트m.

I am concerned that spreading a negative message about books in 바카라사이트 REF is having a damaging effect on newer researchers. I recently completed a study analysing 바카라사이트 autobiographical profiles of three generations of scholars in 바카라사이트 higher education research field. Those who started 바카라사이트ir careers in 바카라사이트 1960s tended to publish at least as many, if not more, books, book chapters and reports as journal papers. By contrast, 바카라사이트 most recent generation have long lists of journal papers in 바카라사이트ir CVs and not much else.

As long as 바카라사이트 REF survives in its current form, this might be a sensible strategy. However, we need to remember that 바카라사이트 REF is a parochial British exercise based on blind faith in peer review. If UK-based researchers ever want to work overseas, what counts is to have publications that are well cited and appear in a good journal or with a respected publisher. Employers will be interested in your h-index, not your contribution to 바카라사이트 REF.

The people dismissing 바카라사이트 value of books tend to have one thing in common: 바카라사이트y have never written one. Perhaps 바카라사이트y should go away for a year or two and try.

Bruce Macfarlane is head of 바카라사이트 School of Education at 바카라사이트 University of Bristol. His latest book, Freedom to Learn, is published by Routledge.