Read on Twitter
I just finished reading ‘Science Fictions: Exposing Fraud, Bias, Negligence and Hype in Science’ by @StuartJRitchie, an exploration of problems in scientific research. https://www.penguin.com.au/books/science-fictions-9781473564251 It strikes me that some problems he raises apply more broadly to academia in general.
One problem is the ‘publish or perish’ mentality. In other words, academics are given targets of how many pieces they should publish a year, a perverse incentive which doesn’t actually ensure productivity.
Another problem is the way in which academics are required to apply for grants. A substantial amount of energy and time is put into such applications. And, as Ritchie points out, who ultimately gets a grant is luck as much as anything else, as many projects are excellent.
I am really lucky that I research and teach in compulsory black letter law subjects. I’m needed for teaching compulsory subjects. I understand that some law schools make it compulsory for academics to apply for grants. I do not think this is advisable.
A third problem is the perverse incentives produced by citation measures as a measure of quality. (This is something I’ve written on before in law, in the context of the High Court citing academic work - I keep meaning to go back to that).
Publishing in professional journals is not looked upon highly. Textbooks and case books often do not “count” as publications for promotion (this might astonish practitioners).
Publication in top international journals is prestigious. Of course this means you can’t just concentrate on Australian law if you want to be promoted swiftly. (I have written on English, NZ, HK, Singaporean, Canadian and Indian law, among others).
One thing I hope about COVID-19 (silver lining) is that it will cause us to reassess what we are doing as academics and what constitutes “quality” work. That we will stop relying so much on blunt and frankly perverse metrics to measure quality.
Anyway, I suppose my point is - some of the problems Ritchie points to pervade academia generally. (And I now feel pretty proud that the one time I did empirical research I said, “Data available on request” so others could check it - apparently this is rare?!!)
Also I feel strongly about science because my parents are scientists, and my husband did a PhD in science but works in industry because he couldn’t stand the precarious nature of relying on grants. Something needs to change.
