Hi Susan
Yes, English Lit/Lang Panel criteria (sub-panel of M panel) are very
poor indeed.
I am putting my School's Creative Writing through European Studies
UOA which has a much better creative practice criteria (bizarrely)
and I have personally complained to RAE Manager about the current sub-
panel criteria.
Likewise we (executive committee of NAWE) have complained about the
current English UOA criteria for creative writing as, candidly and
speaking entirely personally, they are retrograde, misinformed and
inadequate. Apart from that, O they're just great. ;-)
all best wishes
Graeme
http://www.newwriting.up.to
http://www.creativewritingdoctorate.org.uk
On 11 Aug 2005 at 22:30, Susan Greenberg wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I wonder if I could ask people on this email list if you have any
> observations on how the provisions made in the RAE sub-group for
> creative writing compare with provisions for other practice-based
> media subjects.
>
> At the Bath Spa meeting on research in June, there was a suggestion
> that comparisons should be made, to see if there were any tricks we
> could pick up, or areas where Creative Writing could equalise
> upwards. And the deadline for consultations submissions is looming -
-
> at Roehampton we are being asked to submit them now.
>
> Several people have pointed out that the although RAE itself is
> fairly flexible, universities themselves can be very defensive
about
> how they interpret the rules. So it's all the more important to get
> the wording of the RAE document clear enough that the research
> director understands just what is possible.
>
> To get technical for a moment, I'm thinking particularly of a
> comparison between Creative Writing within the English Lang and Lit
> section (UOA 57 in Main panel M) and media practice within the
> Communication, Cultural and Media Studies section (UOA 65 and 66 in
> Main panel O). This covers journalism, screenwriting, film-making
and
> performance arts generally.
>
> Panel O and the sub-groups seem to be more detailed and explicit
> about the leeway being given to practice-based research, by
treating
> it as a separate type of research, rather than subsuming it in
> "applied". In addition, they give more weighting to "esteem" (10%)
> than the English sub-panel (5%) and this is a factor that can help
> professional writers and practice-based researchers generally.
>
> At a recent meeting of AMPE (Association of media practitioners in
> education) there was agreement to propose amendments which would
> tighten things up even more. These were:
>
> * To recommend that the distinct category of "practice research" be
> added in the main RAE document as a type of research (in addition
to
> the existing scholarly, basic, strategic and applied), and that
this
> wording be repeated throughout the documentation wherever
appropriate.
>
> * To add to the criteria of "esteem" something that explicitly
> includes professional activity
>
> * The add to the criteria of "constraints" (ie the reasons why
> someone might be allowed to submit fewer than four pieces of
> research) the need for staff members to be professionally active.
>
>
> Is it worth suggesting such changes for the M panel as well? I'd be
> very interested in other people's thoughts on the matter.
>
> Many thanks,
> --
> Susan Greenberg
> Lecturer Creative Writing (Nonfiction)
> Roehampton University
> [log in to unmask]
> tel 020 7263 9525
--
Professor Graeme Harper BA MLitt DCA PhD FRGS
Head, School of Creative Arts, Film and Media,
University of Portsmouth, UK
http://www.port.ac.uk/departments/academic/scafm
[log in to unmask] Ph: 00 44 23 92846132
Join the Top Ten - See our School website for Details.
Visit: http://www.brookebiaz.co.uk -- [log in to unmask]
|