首页> 外文期刊>Aslib Proceedings >Hobson's choice: the effects of research evaluation on academics' writing practices in England
【24h】

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

机译:霍布森的选择:研究评估对英格兰学者写作实践的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose - The 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/approach - In 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. Findings - Academics' 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/value - This 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.
机译:目的-本文的目的是研究研究评估政策及其解释对三个不同的高等教育机构和三个不同学科的学者写作实践的影响。具体来说,本文讨论了英格兰的国家卓越研究框架(REF)及其对制度的回应如何影响学者对其写作的决策。设计/方法/方法-总共采访了三所英国大学的49位学者。这些学者来自一门科学,技术,工程和数学学科(数学),一门人文学科(历史)和一门应用学科(市场营销)。重复的半结构化访谈集中在学者写作实践的不同方面。部门负责人和行政人员也接受了采访。使用定性数据分析软件ATLAS.ti对数据进行编码。调查结果-学术界人士在其职业生涯中取得成功的能力与他们达到由研究评估系统驱动的定量和定性目标的能力密切相关,但这些前提是基于对知识创造的不切实际的理解。研究评估系统限制了学者对知识选择的选择,部分原因是它们将学者的写作推向与学科传统相冲突的体裁和出版场所,部分原因是它们在机构和年龄组中平均分布。原创性/价值-这项工作通过提供有关环境中研究评估系统效果的实证和定性研究结果,填补了文献中的空白。这也是重点研究个人的学术写作实践如何被此类系统塑造的仅有论文之一。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号