Resource environment and hierarchy in universities

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-193
Author(s):  
Jonas K Lind
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
External Funding ◽  
Management Reform ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Funding Environment ◽  
Resource Environment

Abstract This article investigates the influence of changes in the research funding environment on hierarchy in Danish universities. The article concludes that the claims made by some scholars in the field—that external funding of research and the introduction of ‘strong’ research evaluation systems have penetrated or weakened hierarchy in universities—need to be moderated. In some ways, the developments in the resource environment, in tandem with the implementation of a management reform in Danish universities, have worked to underpin hierarchy in universities.

scholarly journals Fast Professors, Research Funding, and the Figured Worlds of Mid-Career Ontario Academics

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
Sandra Acker ◽  
Michelle K McGinn
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Figured Worlds ◽  
External Funding ◽  
Justice Research ◽  
Research Production ◽  
Social Justice Research ◽  
Research Accomplishment ◽  
The Way

Heightened pressures to publish prolifically and secure external funding stand in stark contrast with the slow scholarship movement. This article explores ways in which research funding expectations permeate the “figured worlds” of 16 mid-career academics in education, social work, sociology, and geography in 7 universities in Ontario, Canada. Participants demonstrated a steady record of research accomplishment and a commitment to social justice in their work. The analysis identified four themes related to the competing pressures these academics described in their day-to-day lives: getting funded; life gets in the way; work gets in the way; and being a fast professor. Participants spoke about their research funding achievements and struggles. In some cases, they explained how their positioning, including gender and race, might have affected their research production, compared to colleagues positioned differently. Their social justice research is funded, but some suspect at a lower level than colleagues studying conventional topics. In aiming for the impossible standards of a continuously successful research record, these individuals worked “all the time.” Advocates claim that slow scholarship is not really about going slower, but about maintaining quality and caring in one’s work, yet participants’ accounts suggest they have few options other than to perform as “fast professors.” At mid-career, they question whether and how they can keep up this pace for 20 or more years.

University research funding: Why does industry funding continue to be a small portion of university research, and how can we change the paradigm?

2020 ◽  
pp. 095042222096228
Author(s):  
Behnam Pourdeyhimi
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
University Research ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
External Funding ◽  
Industry Funding ◽  
Full Picture ◽  
The Usa

In the USA, the federal government is still the chief source of external funding for R&D across all industries and academia. Industry funding for universities continues to remain low. There have been many attempts to increase the interactions between industry and academia and, while there is a great deal of interest in building public–private partnerships, the results have not been promising. In this article, the author analyzes data from a number of government sources and other organizations to provide a full picture of the funding landscape in the USA. Some thought is given to why such interactions have not been successful and how we may be able to realign university activities and policies to embrace partnerships with industry.

scholarly journals Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities?

2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 592-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim C.E. Engels ◽  
Andreja Istenič Starčič ◽  
Emanuel Kulczycki ◽  
Janne Pölönen ◽  
Gunnar Sivertsen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Book Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Book ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Comprehensive Coverage

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the evolution in terms of shares of scholarly book publications in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in five European countries, i.e. Flanders (Belgium), Finland, Norway, Poland and Slovenia. In addition to aggregate results for the whole of the social sciences and the humanities, the authors focus on two well-established fields, namely, economics & business and history. Design/methodology/approach Comprehensive coverage databases of SSH scholarly output have been set up in Flanders (VABB-SHW), Finland (VIRTA), Norway (NSI), Poland (PBN) and Slovenia (COBISS). These systems allow to trace the shares of monographs and book chapters among the total volume of scholarly publications in each of these countries. Findings As expected, the shares of scholarly monographs and book chapters in the humanities and in the social sciences differ considerably between fields of science and between the five countries studied. In economics & business and in history, the results show similar field-based variations as well as country variations. Most year-to-year and overall variation is rather limited. The data presented illustrate that book publishing is not disappearing from an SSH. Research limitations/implications The results presented in this paper illustrate that the polish scholarly evaluation system has influenced scholarly publication patterns considerably, while in the other countries the variations are manifested only slightly. The authors conclude that generalizations like “performance-based research funding systems (PRFS) are bad for book publishing” are flawed. Research evaluation systems need to take book publishing fully into account because of the crucial epistemic and social roles it serves in an SSH. Originality/value The authors present data on monographs and book chapters from five comprehensive coverage databases in Europe and analyze the data in view of the debates regarding the perceived detrimental effects of research evaluation systems on scholarly book publishing. The authors show that there is little reason to suspect a dramatic decline of scholarly book publishing in an SSH.

scholarly journals Hobson’s choice: the effects of research evaluation on academics’ writing practices in England

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 503-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Mcculloch
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Writing Practices ◽  
Institutional Responses ◽  
Qualitative Data Analysis Software ◽  
And Mathematics

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of research evaluation policies and their interpretation on academics’ writing practices in three different higher education institutions and across three different disciplines. Specifically, the paper discusses how England’s national research excellence framework (REF) and institutional responses to it shape the decisions academics make about their writing. Design/methodology/approach In total, 49 academics at three English universities were interviewed. The academics were from one Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics discipline (mathematics), one humanities discipline (history) and one applied discipline (marketing). Repeated semi-structured interviews focussed on different aspects of academics’ writing practices. Heads of departments and administrative staff were also interviewed. Data were coded using the qualitative data analysis software, ATLAS.ti. Findings Academics’ ability to succeed in their career was closely tied to their ability to meet quantitative and qualitative targets driven by research evaluation systems, but these were predicated on an unrealistic understanding of knowledge creation. Research evaluation systems limited the epistemic choices available to academics, partly because they pushed academics’ writing towards genres and publication venues that conflicted with disciplinary traditions and partly because they were evenly distributed across institutions and age groups. Originality/value This work fills a gap in the literature by offering empirical and qualitative findings on the effects of research evaluation systems in context. It is also one of the only papers to focus on the ways in which individuals’ academic writing practices in particular are shaped by such systems.

Between internationalising science and multilingualising knowledge

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-101
Author(s):  
Laurent Gajo ◽  
Gabriela Steffen ◽  
Patchareerat Yanaprasart
Keyword(s):  
Language Policy ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Funding Agency ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Academic Institutions ◽  
Socially Responsible ◽  
Linguistic Practices ◽  
Research Funding Agency

This article raises the question of the conditions for the internationalisation of universities, its links with linguistic practices and its impact on the dynamics of scientific knowledge. First, it questions the notion of internationalisation, defined in a variable manner and affecting both institutions and knowledge. The links between internationalisation and language (non-)choices (monolingual or plurilingual) have been established. They challenge both the governance of universities and the implementation of curricula. Secondly, this article proposes a reflection on three major functions of language and discourse: communication, representation and contextualisation. It shows that policies in favour of monolingualism in science generally favour the function of communication. The importance of these functions varies, moreover, according to the nature of the scientific practices considered, more or less contextualised and more or less central for the development of knowledge. Third, the article looks at a study carried out within the framework of a national research funding agency in a multilingual country. It describes language practices in research evaluation across a variety of disciplines but focuses in particular on the representations of research advisers regarding the links between science and language(s). In conclusion, this article emphasises the importance, for academic institutions, to develop an explicit, socially responsible language policy that is aware of the consequences of decisions made along the entire educational chain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document