Campus Review Volume 27 Issue 12 | December 17 | Page 21

industry & research campusreview.com.au turning the pursuit of truth into the pursuit of money. Baldly put, the hyper‑focus on research metrics leads universities to lose sight of what research actually is. To understand the invidious nature of the problem, consider its effects on the main government tool for promoting research quality: the Australian Research Council’s (ARC) Excellence in Research Australia (ERA) exercise. In peer review disciplines, ERA has the great advantage that the research universities actually conduct – the books, articles and reports actually written in specific disciplines – is assessed by national and international experts. Yet even here research income (remember, an input in to research) is a factor in determining the final grade achieved. The reason given is that research income is a proxy for research quality. This too is patently absurd. What kind of signal is sent by crediting researchers at one university over researchers at another simply because they have been funded? In other areas of life, people are rewarded for what they do, not what they are paid to do. Judgements about quality are made when there are outcomes of quality to judge. Cometh the hour, cometh the spieler. This is the modern scholar the current system promotes: a researcher‑cum‑entrepreneur who has an ear to the ground for changes in government priorities and is willing to turn a hand to whatever new project is strategically appealing. They know which prestigious international professor is willing to come Down Under for a spot of research and put their name to an ARC grant at 0.2 for three years. Will they spend that much time on it? It doesn’t matter. They say they will, and that is what gets rewarded. So it goes on. For a while things look good. The grants pile up and the money rolls in. But the reality cannot be avoided forever. Eventually someone asks: What is your research agenda? What, in terms of scholarship, have you have achieved? And that agenda is revealed for what it is: a jumble of opportunistic applications and disconnected results. An empire of scraps. Research leaders in our universities need to understand this path for what it is: a temptation to short-term gain at the expense of the long-term mission and international standing of the universities they serve. And the Productivity Commission should not confuse two different things: a hyper‑focus on competitive research metrics, with the important public commitment, via individual researchers and their institutions, to research itself. ■ Associate Professor Craig Taylor is director of the Flinders Institute for Research in the Humanities. Professor Julian Meyrick is strategic professor of creative arts at the College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University. SUBSCRIBE FOR LESS THAN $2 A WEEK THE LATEST NEWS AND RESOURCES FOR SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS ACROSS AUSTRALIA Education Review is Australia’s highly-respected industry publication, providing unrivalled coverage of the primary and secondary school education sectors to thousands of schools and teachers every day. • • • • • • Comprehensive coverage of a variety of relevant topics Latest in technology and enhanced teaching strategies A professional development resource 8 issues per year Interviews and opinion pieces from professionals Written by an independent voice Please call 02 9936 8666 to find out more. 19