View in EDS

The genre regime of research evaluation: contradictory systems of value around academics' writing.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The genre regime of research evaluation: contradictory systems of value around academics' writing.
Authors: Tusting, Karin
Source: Language & Education: An International Journal; Nov2018, Vol. 32 Issue 6, p477-493, 17p
Subject Terms: RESEARCH evaluation, ACADEMIC discourse, EDUCATIONAL accountability, RESEARCH personnel attitudes
Geographic Terms: UNITED Kingdom
Abstract: This article addresses how academics navigate different kinds of prestige and different systems of value around what 'counts' in academic writing, focusing particularly on the impact of the genre regime associated with research evaluation in the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF). It draws on data from an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)-funded project working with academics across different disciplines and different institutions in England. We interviewed people about their writing practices several times, exploring their practices, life histories, institutional contexts, and the tools and resources they draw on as they write. Academics' research writing is framed within explicit institutional and departmental strategies around the numbers and publication venues of research outputs, driven by institutions' need to succeed in the national competitive research evaluation system. Such institutional strategies do not always map well onto other values systems in which academics have been trained and within which they locate themselves. The articles analyses the interviews we carried out, exploring how academics negotiate tensions between these systems of value and considering the implications of this for what is considered to be important in academic work and, therefore, what it means to be an academic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Language & Education: An International Journal is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Complementary Index
Description
Abstract:This article addresses how academics navigate different kinds of prestige and different systems of value around what 'counts' in academic writing, focusing particularly on the impact of the genre regime associated with research evaluation in the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF). It draws on data from an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)-funded project working with academics across different disciplines and different institutions in England. We interviewed people about their writing practices several times, exploring their practices, life histories, institutional contexts, and the tools and resources they draw on as they write. Academics' research writing is framed within explicit institutional and departmental strategies around the numbers and publication venues of research outputs, driven by institutions' need to succeed in the national competitive research evaluation system. Such institutional strategies do not always map well onto other values systems in which academics have been trained and within which they locate themselves. The articles analyses the interviews we carried out, exploring how academics negotiate tensions between these systems of value and considering the implications of this for what is considered to be important in academic work and, therefore, what it means to be an academic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:09500782
DOI:10.1080/09500782.2018.1505905