A reading list for university research policy

A friend recently contacted me saying that he has the opportunity to be involved in redesigning a national university research system. He asked if I could suggest a reading list. So, here is Part 1 focused on the guiding principle that research policy shapes research practice, so proceed with caution! Part 2 is available here.


Diana Hicks, 'Performance Based University Research Funding Systems'

Why read it? The main lesson for me is that when employing a PRFS (and more broadly when designing programs and policies in this space), you WILL influence the behaviours of researchers. There are basically two levers that can be pulled, peer esteem and financial reward. 


Sarah de Rijcke 'Thinking with indicators. Exploring the Epistemic Impacts of Academic Performance Indicators in the Life Sciences.'  

Why read it? Recent examples of how metrics and assessment have shaped the choices made by academic researchers including what research to pursue and what to ignore. Research evaluation is not just a measure of science, but actually dictates to some extent the shape and nature of scientific enquiry by setting the goal posts. De Rijcke has other research into this topic and it is worth reading a few if you have the time.


Linda Butler, 'Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications: the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts'

Why read it? More of the unintended consequences of research performance metrics. A perfect case study of all of the above (n fact, Australian university research evaluation from the 1990s to today would be a great microcosm of these issues). Basically, Linda shows that when the Australian government introduced a publication quantum which rewarded universities for their publication volume, surprise surprise, the volume of publications went up. the quality of the venues where they appeared, however, went down! In my view, the introduction of ERA in the 2000s was a corrective measure - or perhaps the trajectory through volume to quality is a necessary one...

And my favorite, Productivity Commission (2007). Public Support for Science and Innovation. Research report. Melbourne, Productivity Commission: 1-875. (https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/science/report/scienceoverview.pdf). Which could be an appendix to Diana Hicks' paper and an example of PRFS in action. In other words it needs to be treated carefully.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Tim Cahill的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了