Frank, yes, I know, you are quite right in your realism, but how far do we
let them push us into this market-driven number-crunching madness where
the numbers are all made up anyway and where there aren't even enough
people on the panel to do the counting?
soyez realistes, demandez l'impossible and all that.
Sorry, it's been a tough week.
Peter
--
Dr Peter Thompson
Director, Centre for Ernst Bloch Studies
http://shef.ac.uk/ernstbloch/)
Senior Lecturer in German
Department of Germanic Studies
Jessop West
1 Upper Hanover Street
Sheffield S3 7RA
tel: 0114 222 4907
fax: 0114 2222 888
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/peter-thompson
Quoting Frank Finlay <[log in to unmask]>:
> Peter, Colleaagues
>
> In relation to the 3* 4* thread: the important distinction is that HEFCE
> will not fund research rated below this level. That is a different
> proposition than research only of that level being submitted.
>
> Imagine Dr X with a profile of published 4 outputs rated, respectively
> 1@ 4* 1@ 3* and and 2@ 2* or lower.
>
> Were Dr X not to be submitted, the institution would pass on funding for
> the outputs at 3 and above.
>
> They would also lose Dr X's students, any grant funding and place in any
> potential impact case study, all of which would feed into the
> environment and impact scores which make up 45% of the overall
> submission (score).
>
> They would be plain daft to do so.
>
> That doesn't of course mean that our institutions will be deliberating
> on what quality thresholds will have to be met to allow for submission.
>
>
> As last time it is likely to be derived from a grade point average.
>
> In the above example Dr X would have 2.75 GPA. Depending on your
> institutional policy, that might suffice. Clearly other profiles are
> possible.
>
> Please take this as a hopefully helpful comment on the practicalities
> with a view to allaying concerns, not as an apology for the REF or
> indeed the multipliers which will be applied to divide up the money.
> HEFCE has already instructed that present funding for 2* will be reduced
> and redistributed across 3 and 4* for 11/12 and it is my understanding
> that there will be nothing for 2* thereafter.
>
> As to a boycott, given that the REF is there, in part, as with the RAE
> before it, to provide public accountability for the tax payer, I am not
> sure it would be an approach that would be particularly helpful to the
> cause of ML or Arts and Humanities in these austere times.
>
> Best, Frank
>
> Frank Finlay, Professor of German | Dean of the Faculty of Arts| The
> University of Leeds, UK | President, Association for German Studies in
> Great Britain and Ireland
>
> T: 0113 343 2687 | E: [log in to unmask] | W:
> http://www.leeds.ac.uk/german/staff/frank_finlay.htm
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JISCmail German Studies List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Thompson
> Sent: 04 March 2011 16:54
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: FW: AGS consultation
>
> Ian and Erica
> Of course, if - as seems the case from the other thread on this list -
> we
> are only going to be able to submit 3* and 4* material then the overall
> number of submissions will be considerably lower.
> It seems to me that we are reaching a stage where we are being asked to
> jump through very smaller hoops held ever higher off the ground for
> ever
> diminishing resources. Might it not be time to start to think about
> modern
> languages or even humanities as a whole boycotting the whole sorry and
> stressful exercise? We are not performing circus poodles after all.
> Peter
>
> Dr Peter Thompson
> Director, Centre for Ernst Bloch Studies
> http://shef.ac.uk/ernstbloch/)
> Senior Lecturer in German
> Department of Germanic Studies
> Jessop West
> 1 Upper Hanover Street
> Sheffield S3 7RA
> tel: 0114 222 4907
> fax: 0114 2222 888
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/peter-thompson
>
>
>
>
> Quoting "Ian F. Roe" <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> > Dear Frank and all
> >
> > Although retirement next year will save me from the lunacy that is
> REF,
> > I can only agree with the criticisms that have been aired. It seems
> > rather curious that German departments seek to emphasise that even
> their
> > undergraduate courses are taught by staff who are an expert in the
> > particular field, yet when it is a matter of professional judgments
> > affecting millions of pounds of public money and even - dare one say
> -
> > the survival or otherwise of some parts of the sector, then suddenly
> two
> > colleagues are expected to cover the entire discipline.
> >
> > Regards, Ian
> >
> > From: JISCmail German Studies List
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carter, Erica
> > Sent: 02 March 2011 11:27
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: AGS consultation
> >
> > Dear Frank,
> >
> > I agree with Dan that this looks like a very skewed panel. Simply in
> > terms of workload, it is unworkable - there is no way that two
> people,
> > however committed and knowledgeable, can deal with the volume of
> > material likely to be submitted. And there is of course also an issue
> of
> > coverage. We will all have personal axes to grind on this question -
> my
> > own would be the absence of significant representation on
> > German-language film - but that could be dealt with if there was
> > critical mass for German on the panel.
> >
> > Since there is so much at stake here for the discipline, we surely
> need
> > to protest as vigorously as possible at this point. I understand that
> > you don't want to add to members' inboxes, but if you're to make
> > representation on our behalf, it would make sense for those of us who
> > want to see the panel changed to add our names to a list. So count me
> > in.
> >
> > Erica
> >
> >
> > Professor Erica Carter
> > Department of German (Incoming HOD)
> > School of Arts and Humanities
> > King's College London
> > The Strand
> > London
> > WC2R 2LS
> >
>
|