May 2022
This month’s reports summarises four articles that in/directly relate to the impact of universities. The first paper is a report that analysed the change to the university staff over the past two decades, commenting upon the implication of reduced departmental autonomy (Wolf & Jenkins, 2021). The second study discusses that the academic reward structure physically changes the brains of researchers (Paulus et al. 2015). The third piece of research explored the tensions between gatekeeping and community development faced by journal editors (Acker et al. 2022). The last item makes the case for the connection between being at the research front, and ‘best care’ within the health care sector (Brown et al. 2022).
[1]) They used a mixed method approach, combining Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) data for 15 years over 117 ‘generalists’ institutions. In combination with case studies different ‘types’ of institutions, using two Scottish and four UK institutions. Among non-academic staff, the main area of growth was that of managers and non-academic professionals. Other noteworthy trends were a substantial increase in teaching only staff, increasing with more than 80 percent from 2005/05 to 2018/19. Arguably, such changes are justified due to external evaluation pressures like that of the Research Excellence Framework. However, their individual responses by the universities, have restricted freedom of individual departments and made the decision process more opaque.
[2]) The researchers utilised a sample size of 35 eligible neuroscientists, whom all voluntary participated within the study. They designed a control and real signal experiment to test end-goal motivation. The control related to monetary rewards for a desired behaviour, meanwhile the real signal experiment related to publication prospects in high impact factor journals. Their results showed that the neuroscientists, according to their publication record respond positively to the prospect of high impact factor publication, compared to the control in relation to their stimulation of their neural reward centres. They speculate that the observed phenomena is an ecological adaptation to the working realities modern scientists find themselves within, but are unsure what the community implications are.
[3]) The study is based on 11 semis-structured interviews with journal editors in the fields related to higher education. They results showed that the editors oftentimes faced demands that in certain instances became contradictory. For instance, maintaining a certain threshold of quality whilst also encouraging and developing young academics can be challenging. Furthermore, such tensions is heightened by neoliberal measures of what counts as quality in modern day academia. They conclude, by drawing attention to the wider implications of such tensions for knowledge production as a whole, not merely seeing editors’ work as a ‘role’, but a vital important piece in need of specialised training and support within discussions of the health of research communities and the development of such communities.
[4]) The authors conducted a mixed method research approach, using documentation, interviews with 15 staff and available databases to identify research investments, outcomes and contextual conditions influencing them. Their current situation of representing a leading research centre in northern Australia remained aspirational; they could show a clear translational effect from research investments to patient outcomes. They identified three implications for policy and practice, firstly; there needs to be a routine tracking of impact data, secondly; removal of bottlenecks of career progressions into research domains for practitioners, and lastly; support infrastructure for the dissemination of research results to wider audiences.
[1] Wolf, J. & Jenkins, A. (2021) Managers and academics in a centralising sector - The new staffing patterns of UK higher education. The Policy Institute – Kings College London.
[2] Paulus, F. M., Rademacher, L., Schäfer, T. A. J., Müller-Pinzler, L., & Krach, S. (2015). Journal impact factor shapes scientists’ reward signal in the prospect of publication. PloS one, 10(11), e0142537.
[3] Acker, S., Rekola, M., & Wisker, G. (2022). Editing a higher education journal: Gatekeeping or development?. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(1), 104-114.
[4] Brown, A., Edelman, A., Pain, T., Larkins, S., & Harvey, G. (2022). “We’re Not Providing the Best Care If We Are Not on the Cutting Edge of Research”: A Research Impact Evaluation at a Regional Australian Hospital and Health Service. International Journal of Health Policy and Management.
