Spoilage signified

October 24, 2013

Your excellent feature “Evolution of evaluation” (17 October) did not discuss the importance of the name change from the research assessment exercise to the research excellence framework. This actually signifies a profound shift in the governance of UK research.

The former suggests some kind of survey aimed at assessing research, a survey of what exists. “Exercise” suggests something provisional, temporary, improvised to meet a particular need, so not to be taken too seriously. The term “research assessment exercise” therefore is a neutral term implying a descriptive survey of the reality of the research going on in universities. If some choose to try to influence it by “game-playing”, that is something pathological and to be deplored.

But “research excellence framework” signifies something else entirely. A framework is a permanent structure set in place in order to shape that which is within it. While the term “assessment” is neutral, the term “excellence” is normative: excellence is a good thing, something to be aspired to. So a “research excellence framework” should promote excellence in research within universities. It is a policy, a system of incentives placed on institutions, which must adopt strategies, however Procrustean, in response to comply. The REF has strategising at its heart. If universities try to manipulate the outcome by game-playing, that is only natural.

This framework is damaging to UK research. It does not promote excellence but rewards conformity and penalises the interdisciplinarity from which intellectual advances often spring.

Dennis Leech
Professor of economics
University of Warwick

登录 或者 注册 以便阅读全文。

请先注册再进行下一步

获得一个月的无限制地在线阅读网站内容。只需注册并完成您的职业简介.

注册是免费的,而且非常简单。一旦成功注册,您可以每个月免费阅读3篇文章。:

  • 获得编辑推荐文章
  • 率先获得泰晤士高等教育世界大学排名相关的新闻
  • 获得职位推荐、筛选工作和保存工作搜索结果
  • 参与读者讨论和公布评论
注册

欢迎反馈

Log in or register to post comments

评论最多

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October