Hobson’s choice: the effects of research evaluation on academics’ writing practices in England

Sharon Mcculloch

doi:10.1108/ajim-12-2016-0216

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of research evaluation policies and their interpretation on academics’ writing practices in three different higher education institutions and across three different disciplines. Specifically, the paper discusses how England’s national research excellence framework (REF) and institutional responses to it shape the decisions academics make about their writing.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 49 academics at three English universities were interviewed. The academics were from one Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics discipline (mathematics), one humanities discipline (history) and one applied discipline (marketing). Repeated semi-structured interviews focussed on different aspects of academics’ writing practices. Heads of departments and administrative staff were also interviewed. Data were coded using the qualitative data analysis software, ATLAS.ti.FindingsAcademics’ ability to succeed in their career was closely tied to their ability to meet quantitative and qualitative targets driven by research evaluation systems, but these were predicated on an unrealistic understanding of knowledge creation. Research evaluation systems limited the epistemic choices available to academics, partly because they pushed academics’ writing towards genres and publication venues that conflicted with disciplinary traditions and partly because they were evenly distributed across institutions and age groups.Originality/valueThis work fills a gap in the literature by offering empirical and qualitative findings on the effects of research evaluation systems in context. It is also one of the only papers to focus on the ways in which individuals’ academic writing practices in particular are shaped by such systems.

Highlights

Almost every aspect of an academic’s work is mediated by writing, both in terms of the day-to-day tasks that consume their time and in terms of their scholarship over the course of a career
The results of the project reveal tensions between the forms of knowledge that were valued for the purposes of the national research excellence framework (REF) and those that were valued by the academics themselves
The effects of research evaluation systems were unevenly distributed across disciplines, institutions and academic age groups, with implications for disciplinary values and career mobility

Summary

Introduction

Almost every aspect of an academic’s work is mediated by writing, both in terms of the day-to-day tasks that consume their time and in terms of their scholarship over the course of a career. This writing and the practices around it are changing as the demands of academic life have changed. One of the most significant of these demands on academics’ writing practices relates to systems for evaluating research quality, which, in the UK, where the current study is located, takes the form of the national research excellence framework (REF). The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion