Starting in 2018, Australian universities will be required to prove their research provides concrete benefits for taxpayers and the government, who fund it.
Evidence shows that the Australian government’s ‘nudge unit’ may be the wrong way to address major problems like inequality, argue Andrew Frain and Randal Tame.
Why does it matter if research is ethical or not? And what steps could or should have been taken to ensure that issues such as those the Australian Human Rights Commission now faces — in a case related to well-intentioned research into sexual assault — are avoided?
An Australian directive to measure the engagement with and impact of academic research can itself by improved by applying new research.
Academics need to retain their freedom to speak on matters of interest, which intersect with their specialized knowledge, even where that intersection is tangential or not visible to others.
Perhaps the solution to conflicting spending priorities, write Rod Lamberts and Will J. Grant, is simply to acknowledge that people will always have conflicting priorities, and think about how best to live alongside each other: mythical, homogeneous pub-goer and irrelevant, out-of-touch academic alike.
Shonkily researched assertions are okay if you enjoy the safe patronage of a major news organisation, argues Rob Brooks. But know, he adds, you would never get away with such abject laziness, or such contempt for professional disinterest in a grant proposal to a federal funding body.
Academia has long recognized that wicked problems require cross-disciplinary research approaches, yet Australia’s Science and Research Priorities enthrall mainly STEM researchers. This divide puts academia back into silos: those on the sunny side of funding decisions and those under a constant rain cloud.
“We are, as a species, addicted to story,” says English professor Jonathan Gottschall in his book, The Storytelling Animal. “Even when the […] Tom Burns, whose combination of play — and plays – with teaching in higher education added a light, collaborative and engaging model […] The creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) has led to a heated debate on the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. Luciana Balboa, Elizabeth Gadd, Eva Mendez, Janne Pölönen, Karen Stroobants, Erzsebet Toth Cithra and the CoARA Steering Board address these arguments and state CoARA’s commitment to finding ways in which peer review and bibliometrics can be used together responsibly. “We are, as a species, addicted to story,” says English professor Jonathan Gottschall in his book, The Storytelling Animal. “Even when the […] The interactional skill of large language models enables them to carry out qualitative research interviews at speed and scale. Demonstrating the ability of these new techniques in a range of qualitative enquiries, Friedrich Geiecke and Xavier Jaravel, present a new open source platform to support this new form of qualitative research. Title of course: Space/Power/Species What prompted the idea for the course? A few years ago, I came across the architect Joyce Hwang’s […]
EXPLORE
Impact
Canada’s Storytellers Challenge Seeks Compelling Narratives About Student Research
READ MORE
Tom Burns, 1959-2024: A Pioneer in Learning Development
READ MORE
Research Assessment, Scientometrics, and Qualitative v. Quantitative Measures
READ MORE
Innovation
Canada’s Storytellers Challenge Seeks Compelling Narratives About Student Research
READ MORE
Our Open-Source Tool Allows AI-Assisted Qualitative Research at Scale
READ MORE
This Anthropology Course Looks at Built Environment From Animal Perspective
READ MORE
