Impact of Stern REF review assessed

August 4, 2016

Re “Stern aims for lower REF workload, more ‘game-changing’ research” (28 July). As someone doing good research, this is how I read the recommendations of Lord Stern’s Review of the UK’s Research Excellence Framework: let’s not make life difficult for underperformers, and, above all else, let’s ensure that successful academics don’t dare move and “rent-seek” (ie, expect a decent wage). More money for administrators and vice-chancellors.

Even more than Brexit, this is a wake-up call for all serious researchers to get out of the UK as soon as possible.

poli1
Via timeshighereducation.com

It seems to me there are some distinct and unexamined biases in the report: Stern is thinking from the perspective of employers, rather than employees (ie, researchers, who come across as all rather difficult); concentrates on the sciences rather than the humanities (hence the madness of focusing on the date a publication is contracted); and is focused on bigger and more established universities/departments rather than those with “pockets of excellence”. These recommendations could substantially alter relations between research, researchers and universities.

a.mcrae_261090
Via timeshighereducation.com

Re “Will REF ‘portability’ plans hobble early career academics?” (30 July).

The problem with the Stern review is that the group doing it is packed with “the good and the great” and those in high administrative positions. The voice of those affected is hardly heard. Its “Proposal 3” stops game-playing by individuals (who are clearly “rent seekers”) but just replaces this with “rent grabbers” (ie, institutions). It is hardly unexpected that a committee packed with vice-chancellors would want to capture the rents associated with those pesky faculty wanting to be rewarded for their work. And who is more easily exploited than those at the bottom of the food chain? Rest assured that those failing to meet their REF quota will find themselves on the breadline or pushed into teaching positions so that they do not count. Under the old rules, at least they could move someplace else.

T.Devinney_255157
Via timeshighereducation.com


Send to

Letters should be sent to: THE.Letters@tesglobal.com
Letters for publication in Times Higher Education should arrive by 9am Monday.
View terms and conditions.

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

Laurel and Hardy sawing a plank of wood

Working with other academics can be tricky so follow some key rules, say Kevin O'Gorman and Robert MacIntosh

Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford will host a homeopathy conference next month

Charity says Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford is ‘naive’ to hire out its premises for event

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations