The CHG group at Leeds have been reflecting on the recent RAE
(Reasearch Assessment Exercise) conducted in British Universities. We
came up with a number of questions and observations we felt deserved
an airing on this forum. (Hopefully members beyond Britain will not
find this issue too parochial given its broader implications and
parallels elsewhere.)
1) Whilst we're sure most of us would _want_ to argue that 'critical
human geography' is vital to the discipline, is there any actual
evidence (even prima facie evidence) that this was the case in the
RAE? How important was critical human geography to determining the
ratings of departments? Would a geography department _without_ a
complement of critical human geographers be regarded as missing out a
component of the discipline? Or was it a case of it not mattering
quite _what_ people did as research, as long as they did it well?
2) Peer-reviewed international journal articles seem to have been
vital RAE indicators. Yet despite established journals like 'Society
and Space' and new journals like 'Space and Culture', much critical
human geography gets published in edited book chapters and as books.
(There has been talk of using citation indices in future REAs, and
journals rahter than books form the ususal database here.) Is this an
accurate characterisation of the situation? What are its
implications? If they're inapproprate, can we do anything to change
them?
3) Research income is another key 'performance indicator'. An
important observation here is that critical human geography can be
far less demanding than physical geography and approaches such as
'computational' human geography. Critical research _can_ attract and
use big research grants. But much of it doesn't have this as a basic
requirement; some of it can't attract big grants (e.g.
'unfashionable' or 'politically contentious' topiccs); and some of it
might well be compromised by the source of the money. In short, there
is arguably a far more complex situation facing critical appraches
than 'scientific' ones. Again, what are the implications? Can we do
anything to change these?
We imagine there are numerous individual and collective strategies
for dealing with the RAE -- stop writing books and write grant
proposals and research papers; treat it with the contempt it
deserves; play the game cynically; etc. We didn't wish to start a
debate that would adjudicate on such matters but felt that raising
the issue on this forum might improve the level of information and
consideration of this issue, thereby permitting more informed
practices.
Dave Clarke, Niall Majury, Debbie Phillips, Martin Purvis, Paul
Waley.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|