Science in Transition How Science Goes Wrong and What to Do About It

Science in Transition, which started in 2013, is a small-scale Dutch initiative that presented a systems approach, comprised of analyses and suggested actions, based on experience in academia. It was built on writings by early science watchers and most recent theoretical developments in philosophy, history and sociology of science and STS on the practice and politics of science. This chapter will include my personal experiences as one of the four Dutch founders of Science in Transition. I will discuss the message and the various forms of reception over the past 6 years by the different actors in the field, including administrators in university, academic societies and Ministries of Higher Education, Economic Affairs and Public Health but also from leadership in the private sector. I will report on my personal experience of how these myths and ideologies play out in the daily practice of 40 years of biomedical research in policy and decision making in lab meetings, at departments, at grant review committees of funders and in the Board rooms and the rooms of Deans, Vice Chancellors and Rectors.It has in the previous chapters become clear that the ideology and ideals that we are brought up with are not valid, are not practiced despite that even in 2020 they are still somehow ‘believed’ by most scientists and even by many science watchers, journalists and used in political correct rhetoric and policy making by science’s leadership. In that way these ideologies and beliefs mostly implicitly but sometimes even explicitly determine debates regarding the internal policy of science and science policy in the public arena. These include all time classic themes like the uniqueness of science compared to any other societal activity; ethical superiority of science and scientists based on Mertonian norms; the vocational disinterested search for truth, autonomy; values and moral (political) neutrality, dominance of internal epistemic values and unpredictability regards impact. These ideas have influenced debates about the ideal and hegemony of natural science, the hierarchy of basic over applied science; theoretical over technological research and at a higher level in academic institutions and at the funders the widely held supremacy of STEM over SSH. This has directly determined the attitudes of scientists in the interaction with peers within the field, but also shaped the politics of science within science but also with policy makers and stakeholders from the public and private sector and with interactions with popular media.Science it was concluded was suboptimal because of growing problems with the quality and reproducibility of its published products due to failing quality control at several levels. Because of too little interactions with society during the phases of agenda setting and the actual process of knowledge production, its societal impact was limited which also relates to the lack of inclusiveness, multidisciplinarity and diversity in academia. Production of robust and significant results aiming at real world problems are mainly secondary to academic output relevant for an internally driven incentive and reward system steering for academic career advancement at the individual level. Similarly, at the higher organizational and national level this reward system is skewed to types of output and impact focused on positions on international ranking lists. This incentive and reward system, with flawed use of metrics, drives a hyper-competitive social system in academia which results in a widely felt lack of alignment and little shared value in the academic community. Empirical data, most of it from within science and academia, showing these problems in different academic disciplines, countries and continents are published on virtually a weekly basis since 2014. These critiques focus on the practices of scholarly publishing including Open Access and open data, the adverse effects of the incentive and reward system, in particular its flawed use of metrics. Images, ideologies and politics of science were exposed that insulate academia and science from society and its stakeholders, which distort the research agenda and subsequentially its societal and economic impact.

The relationship between managers’ ideal intelligence as a hybrid model and employees’ organizational commitment: a case study in Tehran University of Medical Sciences

High ideal hybrid intelligence of managers is among the factors that can improve employees’ organizational commitment. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the relationship between managers’ ideal hybrid intelligence and employees’ organizational commitment in the Vice Chancellors’ Headquarters of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. This was a descriptive-analytical and cross-sectional study conducted in 2017 - 2018. The research sample size consisted of 86 senior and middle-level managers selected through census method, as well as 181 employees, selected using the Kerjecie and Morgan table. The research tool was an ideal hybrid intelligence questionnaire consisting of 102 questions on cultural, moral and spiritual intelligence, and also Meyer and Allens’ organizational commitment questionnaire including 24 questions. Face validity and reliability of each questionnaire were confirmed by an expert panel and Chronbach’s alpha method. The data were analyzed by SPSS software, and descriptive results were shown through mean and standard deviation, and analytical results by inferential tests. The results showed that the ideal hybrid intelligence of the Vice Chancellors’ Headquarters managers and employees’ organizational commitment were at a desirable level. Also, there was a significant correlation between cultural, moral and spiritual intelligence as constituents of the ideal hybrid intelligence of managers and employees’ organizational commitment. We found that ideal hybrid intelligence may affect employees’ organizational commitment, but it should be mentioned that other forms of intelligence may also affect organizational commitment.

Editorial 18:3 Celebrating women in higher education on International Women’s Day

We have timed publishing our first standard issue of the year to coincide with International Woman’s Day, 8 March 2021 to celebrate the contribution women have made to higher education. The first woman documented as teaching in a university was more than 800 years ago, and yet it is only the last century that the number of female academics has started to increase (Whaley, 2011). In Australia, the first university was established in 1851, yet it would be another 32 years until Julia Guerin graduated in 1883 from the University of Melbourne with a Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in 1883 (Women's Museum of Australia, 2020). And another 10 years when Leonora Little graduated from Melbourne University with a Bachelor of Science in 1983. Despite these accomplishments in the late 19th century, it was not until 1959 when the first woman, Dorothy Hill, was awarded a Chair appointment (Chair of Geology) in an Australian university, and nearly a century before Australia has its first female Vice Chancellor, when Dianne Yerbury became the Vice-Chancellor of Macquarie University in 1987, a position she held for twenty years. Australia’s higher education history tells a clear story of the slow integration of women in higher education, particularly within the STEM fields. For example, Little graduated in 1893 with a Bachelor of Science, but it was 1928 before the first female Lecturer in Mathematics, Ethel Raybould was appointed, and another 36 years before Hanna Neumann became the first female Professor of Pure Mathematics in 1964. It was just over 60 years ago that Margaret Williams-Weir was the first female Indigenous Australian to graduate with a university qualification in 1959. Female Indigenous Australians remain under-represented in the Australian university graduate population. The current situation for Australian higher education still retains a dominance of males within academic roles, such as 30 percent more men in Associate and Full Professor roles than women (Devlin, 2021). And whilst there has been progress in some jurisdictions, such as the majority of Queensland vice chancellors are women in 2021, these continue to be the exception, for example only 28% of vice chancellors in Australia are women. International Woman’s Day is an opportunity to reflect on the significant contribution women make in higher education in Australia and globally. We celebrate through the publication of this issue, with many female authors from across higher education globally.

A Comparative Study on Research Performance of Indian Universities with NAAC A++ grade Accreditation

Background/Purpose: Developing and Maintaining quality in higher education is an essential aspect of the sustainability of universities. National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), India has developed a new model of HEIs assessment and accreditation from July 2017. Based on its assessment, NAAC announces the final result in the form of Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) between 0 to 4.0, which is a combination of evaluation of qualitative and quantitative metrics with three parts including peer team report, graphical representation based on quantitative metric, and institutional grade sheet. Out of more than 380 universities assessment out of about 950 universities as on 30/042021, only 9 universities have been graded as A++ letter grade by NAAC. Objectives: Study on Criteria wise performance of top nine A++ scored Indian Universities according to NAAC Accreditation, full scores obtained in various criteria with reasons, compare research performance and analyse it using ABC model of research productivity, the effect of organizational leaders as role models on the research output, and to critically analyse the organizational SWOC based on NAAC data and outcome. Design/Methodology/Approach: Analysis of information collected from self-study reports of NAAC A++ graded universities, comparing and analyzing criteria wise, and analyzing research productivity of these universities and their leaders using ABC model of annual Research performance framework. Findings/Result: Out of nine NAAC A++ graded universities, five universities got full scores in the Curricular Aspects criterion. The universities are ranked based on their overall scores in the accreditation process. Based on the scores obtained in different criteria, the strengths and weaknesses of these universities are studied. These nine universities are further ranked based on their annual research performance and the leaders/Vice-chancellors research annual research productivity by considering the last five years research productivity. It is observed that many vice-chancellors failed to contribute to universities research outcomes as role models and motivators to other researchers of these universities. A comparative study on research performance-based grading is found to be ambiguous and little disparity is observed on key indicator-based university grading. Based on observations, some general recommendations are suggested. Research limitations/implications: This study used the data from the Self-study Report, Peer Team Report, and Grade Report of respective universities kept for public reference in the NAAC website in accordance with the new accreditation framework, downloaded on 30/04/2021. Originality/Value: This paper compares the research performance of nine NAAC A++ accredited universities of India using their last 5 years’ research data and identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges of these universities for further improvement. Paper Type: Explorative Research based on research analysis.

Higher education leadership and context: a study of university vice-chancellors and presidents

PurposeUniversities claim to provide many benefits to their context. What remains less clear is what is meant by context. Whatever it is, context is fundamental to decision-making. Understanding what context means is crucial to understanding leadership in higher education.Design/methodology/approachTheoretically informed by Eacott's relational approach, this study is based on interview data from a purposive sample of ten English vice-chancellors and nine Canadian university presidents. Transcripts were analysed for the assumptions participants held regarding the work of universities and how that played out in practice.FindingsContext is not an external variable engaged with or acted upon. It is not separate to leadership and the work of universities but is constitutive of and emergent from activities. There is no single definition of context, and this has major implications for university activities.Research limitations/implicationsContext(s) is based on assumptions. Making explicit the assumptions of participants, without pre-defining them, is a key task of research on leadership in higher education.Practical implicationsLeaders need to explicitly articulate their assumptions regarding the work of universities. Assessment should be based on the coherence between the espoused position and activities undertaken.Originality/valueThrough the emerging resources of relational scholarship, this paper demonstrates how context is constitutive of and emergent from the activities of universities. More than novel vocabulary, the paper makes a fundamental point about the generative nature of context. De-centring entities (e.g. university, leader, context) and focusing on relations our approach provide a path forward by encouraging the articulation of intended purpose(s) and perspective on the work of universities.

Peak bodies: Indigenous representation in the Australian higher education sector

The number of Indigenous Australians engaged in the higher education has risen steadily in recent years. Since the 1970s, several groups have been established to represent issues impacting Indigenous staff and students across the Australian higher education sector. Despite the deep passion and commitment by Indigenous leaders to advance Indigenous education in general, no single group currently provides adequate representation and advocacy on these issues. This article reports on findings from an Australian Research Council-funded study on Indigenous leadership in higher education. In doing so, it shares the perspectives of senior Indigenous leaders, university executive such as Vice-Chancellors and Indigenous academics. Ultimately, this article purports that it is necessary for the Federal Government and Universities Australia to work collaboratively with Indigenous People if we are going to see collective advancement across the sector and that this needs to occur in a more meaningful way than currently exercised.

Between “Free Use” and Denial of Access: A Critical Analysis of the Copyright Licensing Scheme for Scholarly Materials in Higher Education in Tanzania

Over the past ten years universities in Tanzania through the Committee of Vice Chancellors, Principals of Public and Private Universities in Tanzania (CVCPT), have been in dispute with the Copyright Society of Tanzania (COSOTA) over the exploitation of literary copyright protected works. This long-standing dispute has centered on a controversial copyright licensing of reproduction and rental rights scheme issued by COSOTA. On the one hand, universities claim reproduction and rental rights for educational purposes are exempted from the requirement of license under the doctrine of “free use” while the licensing body refutes such claim. This article is set to critically discuss this tension and suggest how the dispute may be resolved. The present analysis is governed by the international and national legal framework on copyright exemptions and limitations.

Influence of Performance Appraisal in Determining Academic Staff Performance in Public Universities in Uganda

In an effort by public universities to improve the performance of lecturers in Uganda, universities are implementing annual performance appraisal. Despite this move, ineffective teaching, low research and publication continue to prevail, making it difficult for public universities to produce the needed human resources for national development. This study investigated the relationship between performance appraisal and teaching and research outputs of academic staff in selected public universities. A mixed method design using convergent parallel approach was employed to collect and analyse data from a population of 4 Vice-Chancellors, 4 Directors of Human Resources and 1127 full-time academic staff. Four universities were selected using purposive sampling based on the year of establishment before 2011. The academic staff was selected by the use of the stratified random sampling technique. A total sample of 299 participants was involved made up of 291 academic staff, 4 directors of human resources and 4 Vice-chancellors in the study. Data collection employed the use of semi-structured questionnaires for the academic staff and interview guides for the Vice-Chancellors and Directors of Human Resources. Analysis of quantitative data collected was done using Pearson’s Correlation, linear regression and factor analysis. Qualitative data was analysed based on thematic content analysis. Results indicated that a moderate positive relationship existed between performance appraisal and academic staff teaching output in public universities (r = 0.452, p < 0.01) and a moderately positive relationship existed between performance appraisal and academic staff research output (r = 0.379, p < 0.01). It was recommended that Ugandan public universities need to revise the existing performance appraisal system to make it more relevant to the key work roles of academic staff of teaching and research outputs.