Abstract
Acker and Webber present results of their qualitative interviews with 47 early-career academics in five social science fields in Ontario, Canada. Using a theoretical framework drawn from Michel Foucault and scholarship on gender and organizations, they show how regulatory mechanisms such as the tenure review operate through surveillance, discipline and self-discipline. In the process of conforming to real or imagined standards, junior academics narrow their research, over-emphasize performativity and experience high anxiety. Gender, race and class contribute to differentiated experiences. The tenure review is a high-stakes “examination” that determines whether or not an academic gains a permanent position. While the tenure review process is not new, its intensity and impact on subjectivity have increased in line with the audit cultures spreading globally through academe.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
