{"title":"管理和激励研究影响:来自澳大利亚的证据","authors":"Joshua Newman","doi":"10.1057/s41307-024-00351-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Views on the impact of academic research are divided, with some voices advocating for more impact and others calling attention to pathologies of the “impact agenda”. One point of interest to most observers is the degree of alignment between academics, who do the research, and university leaders, who control rules and resources relating to research. Using a survey of academics and interviews with university leaders at a large, representative, research-focused university in Australia, this article contributes to the scholarship on research impact by investigating and analysing perceptions of what impact is and how it can be achieved. The study finds that in this case, there was significant disagreement between academics and university leaders on the meaning of impact and how it should be incentivised. These disagreements present a serious obstacle for universities advancing impact strategies and create vulnerabilities for conflict between university management and academic staff as envisioned by critics of the impact agenda.</p>","PeriodicalId":47327,"journal":{"name":"Higher Education Policy","volume":"153 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing and Incentivising Research Impact: Evidence from Australia\",\"authors\":\"Joshua Newman\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41307-024-00351-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Views on the impact of academic research are divided, with some voices advocating for more impact and others calling attention to pathologies of the “impact agenda”. One point of interest to most observers is the degree of alignment between academics, who do the research, and university leaders, who control rules and resources relating to research. Using a survey of academics and interviews with university leaders at a large, representative, research-focused university in Australia, this article contributes to the scholarship on research impact by investigating and analysing perceptions of what impact is and how it can be achieved. The study finds that in this case, there was significant disagreement between academics and university leaders on the meaning of impact and how it should be incentivised. These disagreements present a serious obstacle for universities advancing impact strategies and create vulnerabilities for conflict between university management and academic staff as envisioned by critics of the impact agenda.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47327,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Higher Education Policy\",\"volume\":\"153 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Higher Education Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-024-00351-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Higher Education Policy","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-024-00351-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Managing and Incentivising Research Impact: Evidence from Australia
Views on the impact of academic research are divided, with some voices advocating for more impact and others calling attention to pathologies of the “impact agenda”. One point of interest to most observers is the degree of alignment between academics, who do the research, and university leaders, who control rules and resources relating to research. Using a survey of academics and interviews with university leaders at a large, representative, research-focused university in Australia, this article contributes to the scholarship on research impact by investigating and analysing perceptions of what impact is and how it can be achieved. The study finds that in this case, there was significant disagreement between academics and university leaders on the meaning of impact and how it should be incentivised. These disagreements present a serious obstacle for universities advancing impact strategies and create vulnerabilities for conflict between university management and academic staff as envisioned by critics of the impact agenda.
期刊介绍:
Higher Education Policy is an international peer-reviewed and SSCI-indexed academic journal focusing on higher education policy in a broad sense. The journal considers submissions that discuss national and supra-national higher education policies and/or analyse their impacts on higher education institutions or the academic community: leadership, faculty, staff and students, but also considers papers that deal with governance and policy issues at the level of higher education institutions. Critical analyses, empirical investigations (either qualitative or quantitative), and theoretical-conceptual contributions are equally welcome, but for all submissions the requirement is that papers be embedded in the relevant academic literature and contribute to furthering our understanding of policy.
The journal has a preference for papers that are written from a disciplinary or interdisciplinary perspective. In the past, contributors have relied on perspectives from public administration, political science, sociology, history, economics and law, but also from philosophy, psychology and anthropology. Articles devoted to systems of higher education that are less well-known or less often analysed are particularly welcome.
Given the international scope of the journal, articles should be written for and be understood by an international audience, consisting of researchers in higher education, disciplinary researchers, and policy-makers, administrators, managers and practitioners in higher education. Contributions should not normally exceed 7,000 words (excluding references). Peer reviewAll submissions to the journal will undergo rigorous peer review (anonymous referees) after an initial editorial screening on quality and fit with the journal''s aims.Special issues
The journal welcomes proposals for special issues. The journal archive contains several examples of special issues. Such proposals, to be sent to the editor, should set out the theme of the special issue and include the names of the (proposed) contributors and summaries of the envisaged contributions. Forum section
Occasionally, the journal publishes contributions – in its Forum section – based on personal viewpoints and/or experiences with the intent to stimulate discussion and reflection, or to challenge established thinking in the field of higher education.