Abstract
Research agenda setting is a critical dimension in the creation of knowledge since it represents the starting point of a process that embeds individual researchers’ (and the communities that they identify themselves with) interest for shedding light on topical unknowns, intrinsic and extrinsic factors underpinning that motivation, and the ambition and scope of what a research endeavor can bring. This article aims to better understand the setting of individual research agendas in the field of higher education. It does so by means of a recently developed framework on research agenda setting that uses cluster analysis and linear modeling. The findings identify two main clusters defining individual research agenda setting—cohesive and trailblazing—each with a different set of determining characteristics. Further analysis by cross-validation through means of sub-sampling shows that these clusters are consistent for both new and established researchers, and for frequent and “part-time” contributors to the field of higher education. Implications for the field of higher education research are discussed, including the relevance that each research agendas cluster has for the advancement of knowledge in the field.
Highlights
Academic research is a dynamic process containing several layers of complexity (Latour and Woolgar, 2013)
The findings identify two main clusters defining in individual research agenda setting – cohesive and trailblazing – each with a different set of determining characteristics
Environmental pressures such as competitive research funding, the drive to ‘publish or perish’, and the increasing tensions between teaching and research foci are associated with the introduction of managerialist practices at universities all over the world; all of these have a substantial impact on career progression and academic work itself, which further complexifies the understanding of what academic research is, and what being an academic researcher means (Shattock, 2014)
Summary
Academic research is a dynamic process containing several layers of complexity (Latour and Woolgar, 2013). Academic research is not definable, which accounts for the many dimensions associated with it (Brew et al, 2016) These dimensions encompass issues related to the sense of belonging and identity, including which research communities individual academic researchers serve, contribute to, and receive value and normative input from (Fyfe, 2015). These communities provide guidance for the research engagement of individual researchers, but increasingly overlap (while sometimes competing) within frameworks that foster co-existing, competing, or cooperative logics framed by multidimensional dichotomies such as international versus national research communities, interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and disciplinary priorities, and quality or quantity, among others (Lauto and Sengoku, 2015). Environmental pressures such as competitive research funding, the drive to ‘publish or perish’, and the increasing tensions between teaching and research foci are associated with the introduction of managerialist practices at universities all over the world; all of these have a substantial impact on career progression and academic work itself, which further complexifies the understanding of what academic research is, and what being an academic researcher means (Shattock, 2014)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
