Research Assessment Exercise's

[YellowPete]

Research Assessment Exercise

After looking at the data I was wondering about how do they judge the data itself.

I mean, we can't all produce high standards with all our work; otherwise we would never churn out the required number of papers to keep the employers happy.

So my question is:

What is a good standard balance between the output (required) and the standard achieved?



txt is
Mike

[YellowPete]

Too high a standard seems like playing safe with a formula, that meets the grade, when the output required is centred on having the best reputation.

Sort of like drill instruction and indoctrination, with more opportunities made available for institutes to get involved at that level thereby maintaining that level.

But the thing is, if you have such a high reputation, that in itself, will bring more students to study, because as you apply you think either about the output you will have learnt (as an assumption to be equal to the research), or the ability to remain within that institutions' research system.


This seems like a good idea if it becomes really bad economically, but that means all of the possible diversity of intellectual thought will be left in the books, journals and the internet from times gone by.

It almost harks of the self-perpetuation that the economy itself has been working on over the last few years. This I think may be the intellectual manifestation of the same thing.


Poor standards being met could appear as though the institutions are based around teaching, but then if an institution is to survive, it needs students to be taught in a way that the students can and will engage with the material and maybe step up towards further learning.


Would the best result come from institutions, which in fact move up and down the scale as a process of attaining the right balance for everyone?s benefit not purely on the basis standards?

This harks too strongly of the argument for standards within the commercial field practice of archaeology.

I don't think there will be a consensus, because, especially for now, there is too much at risk, or of being lost.

All flexibility and adaptability will revolve around maintaining rigor.

Significance will be flexible by its nature, of what is hot and what is not.

Originality will be based upon the PhD's, which have to be original.

I think it may be worth discussing, as institutional survival may possibly be built upon the exploitation of the resources at hand.

I think it will be important to discuss the notion of what is exploitation and what level of it would be acceptable, or even appropriate?

I merely ask as this makes my hopes for an archaeological future. Not popular, I understand and could even be considered rude, but I would like to hope.


As for student enrolments, I think the entry requirements may need to be tightened up, or become much more orientated at getting a real feel of the students applying, through an increase in the involvement of interviews being used as a major part of selection, rather than being just grades.

Those who know me may recognise my grammatical inconsistency, as a cause for my concern, for undergraduate applicants.

I think this is something of significant worth, to discuss.




txt is
Mike

[YellowPete]

The 1996, 2001 RAEs? and the 2009 RAE just aren't quite that comparable.

Though the most telling part of the 2009 RAE would note that there has been an expansion, on applicable research staff has increased by 27.79 FTE (Full Time Equivalent), across the field of research since 2001.

On top of that the criteria seem to have evolved somewhat, into what appears to be a more transparent analytical format than the 2001 RAE, but the international recognition and excellence criteria are a little too vague.

To be honest, I think this may just be as a result of a complexity to the organisation of educational structures as creative pools, with a best face forward approach.

However, what is worth noting is that there was a growth of 111.5 FTE, across the field of research from 1996-2001. This steep climb considerably shallowed to a mere 27.79 FTE for 2001-2009.

But this still means that in a period of 13years we are left with an increase of 139.29 FTE across the research sector.

I think this is a major boundary to be broached before we are ready to move any discussions forward on the industries future in any serious capacity.



txt is
Mike

[YellowPete]

The education system as I left it, at the level of debt accruded per year conservatively continuing form instigation comes to a vast cash sum of ?11.8 Billion, which lie paid for, being repaid, or in some cases as sold to some will never have to be repaid.

My interest rate at the moment is about ?600 a yr and my PAYE rate doesn't even match half of this.

I can't keep up the payments so its out of control.

I'll say it again imagine a debt of ?11.8 Billion accruing interest beyond control.


On the TV last night there were students pinning up numbers as high as ?40,000 debts as the price of their education.

This is insanity, and the university vice chancellors want to up the ante?

Its too late now, we must pay, but the real issue is what are we paying for?

Education, into employment?
Education to employability?
Education for Educations sake?
Or a further mental faculty development oportunity?

For now the champion will be the two former, but social mobility and social inclusion required the later, maybe misunderstood as the third.

However, if we are to be a society where we are not bound to breeding and elitist redoubts, then we really must challenge the boundaries of what is education, to each of us, individually and decide what on earth is it worth?

What price would you place on a future beyond your horizon?

What price would you pay for the freedom of your own thoughts?

What price would you place on your ability to articulate your soul?

What price would you place on a fullfilling career?


This is ultimately going to be the battleground of the future, where green technology futures will be meated out.

We may be cash cows, but we certainly aren't mindless foder, to feed the future.


I only wish I had met more people and experienced more of the diversity on offer in my early days.



txt is
Mike

[kevin wooldridge]

I beleive we had a discussion on BAJR about student loans a couple of years back.

I pointed out then (and repeat it now) that in Scandinavia it is not unusual for students to be at or close to ?40,000 in debt by the time they finish their education. My Norwegian father in law who has worked as a relatively well paid geologist since graduating in the early 70s, finally paid off his student loan at the age of 53!!

Whilst the government will claim that student debts are only repayable when salary reaches a certain level, they fail to tell you some disadvantages i.e try talking to a mortgage broker when you are on a low income and have a putative student debt of ?30,000; having to inform the student loan board and get permission if you want to leave the UK to work abroad etc etc.

And that's before we start talking about top-up fees.....





With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...