1. Research with impact: Academic perspectives from the UK and Australia
Jennifer Chubb
Department of Education
University of York
SRHE New Researchers Conference
Newport, 8th December 2015

2. This study focuses on the impact agenda which continues to generate debate in the UK (Ladyman, 2009; Watermeyer, 2014) and in Australia where a similar “chorus of opposition” is observed (Cuthill et al., 2013, Bexley et al, 2011).
Impact accused of imposing a ‘scientific model’ or positivist, reductionist interpretation of research across fields of study.
Impact is seen to inhibit and even impair the possibility of academic freedom and autonomy where a systemic focus on academic performativity as an expression of accountability is overvalued (Braben et al., 2009). 
Further analysis will serve to highlight the ‘cultures’ of impact with respect to the disciplinary differences and similarities observed (Snow, 2012). Gender and national context also frame discussion.
Context: The effects of new managerialism for freedom, integrity and autonomy

3. Impact definitions & terms
RCUK definition (pathways to impact) “The demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to society and the economy” (RCUK, 2015) REF definition “An effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia” ( HEFCE, 2013)
This description has been agreed on a cross-council basis a year ago
Since then, much discussion about how to handle `academic impact` so…
Impact definitions & terms

4. Why Australia?
“A growing international realisation of the need for universities to demonstrate the benefit, or impact of their research – to government, to funders and to the broader society” (ATN, 2012)
Terms of reference:
Measure the innovation dividend of research generated by Australian Universities
A precursor to a possible companion piece to ERA in the allocation of research funding. \

5. How do academic researchers conceive of their role and public duty in the context of the ‘impact agenda’?
What challenges do academic researchers perceive to be presented by the impact agenda?
How do academic researchers’ responses vary across fields of study and different national contexts?
Research questions

6. Drawing on 50 interviews with a broad demographic of senior researchers working across the disciplines from two research intensive universities, (one in the UK and another in Australia) Data sample

7. Research methodology Interpretative ontology (Walsham 1995)
Constructivist epistemology – knowledge is constructed through human perception and social experience.
Qualitative research methods using in-depth interviews.
The research has characteristics of a case study research approach.
Using a grounded theory approach and thematic analysis. Findings were drawn from the data, inductively.
Research methodology

8. Personal and practical circumstances affect academic responses to impact: i.e. personality ( extroversion/ introversion), Skills, HE culture and peer perception, reward and incentives.
Policy related considerations funding and assessment: Funding guidance, Language and Terminology, Metrics, Timelines, Processes, for ex Peer review relating to new managerialism and neoliberalism
Philosophical and conceptual: research paradigms, characterisations, freedom, duty, responsibility, reductionism and instrumentalism – a corruption of core values at odds with integrity?
There’s no great value in anything except instrumental knowledge”.
Emerging themes

9. Consequences for research?
“There are deep ethical concerns – it flies in the face of scientific practice” ( UK, Professor)
“We are just endlessly measuring/ auditing and to what end?” ( Australia, Professor)
Consequences for research?

10. Epistemic vice or virtue?
Are the value systems or motivations of individuals within the community appear somewhat at odds with an instrumentalised view of research?
“The authority of academics must be rooted in truthfulness” (Williams, 2002)
Honesty is justified because it contributes to the advancement of knowledge, not because it brings scientists money, prestige or power. Indeed if money, prestige or power constituted some of science’s ultimate aims, we would not expect scientists to be honest” (Resnik, 1998, p. 41). 
“Science is a high calling in the pursuit of truth which needs to be pursued in a proper and ethical manner. “ Nurse Review, 2015, p15
“I’m having to write statements that bear no resemblance to the truth” (UK, Professor)
Epistemic vice or virtue?

11. Concerns for research integrity and a potential corrosion of epistemic values ( Nixon, 2008)
These are creative people, clever people – and sometimes they go a little bit too far ( UK, Professor)
Its really virtually impossible to write an ARC grant now without LYING and this is the kind of issue that they should be looking at ( Australia, Professor)
Now have to have in the Australian research council grants, you have to make up stories ( Australia, Professor)
Research integrity?

12. Snow, C. P. (2012). The Two Cultures
Snow, C. P. (2012). The Two Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Braben, D., Allen, J. F., Amos, W., Ashburner, M., Ashmore, J., Birkhead, T….& Woodruff, P. (2009). Only scholarly freedom delivers real 'impact' 1: An open letter to Research Councils UK. Times Higher Education. Retrieved on March 5, 2015 
Ladyman, J. (2009) Scientists call for a revolt against grant rule they claim will end blue skies research. Times Higher Education. Retrieved from  March 5, 2015.
Bexley, E. & James, R. & Arkoudis, S. (2011). The Australian academic profession in transition: Addressing the challenge of reconceptualising academic work and regenerating the academic workforce. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.
Cuthill, M. & O’Shea, E. (2013).Universities and the public good, a review of knowledge exchange policy and related university practice in Australia. Australian Universities’ Review, 56, (2),
References