Ranking Research: Rankings as Devices in Higher Education Governance
Schlagworte:
Rankings, Hochschulforschung, Universität, Performativität, Leistung, Bewertung, GovernanceAbstract
In the last decades, most countries in the western world have introduced some form of centralized quality assessment and control in academia. This paper presents different rankings that are produced from the data of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) / Research Excellence Framework (REF) in the United Kingdom. Among them are rankings produced directly by the RAE/REF, and rankings that media outlets produce drawing on the RAE/REF data. Informed by these case examples, the paper looks into the implications and effects rankings and the associated performance assessments have on higher education institutions, their personnel, and the personnel’s practices. The paper contributes to a discussion on the performativity of rankings as devices in the governance of higher education.
Literaturhinweise
Bence, V., Oppenheim, C. 2005: The evolution of the UK's research assessment exercise: Publications, performance and perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration and History, Vol. 37, Issue 2, 137–155.
Benner, M., Sandström, U. 2000: Institutionalizing the triple helix: Research funding and norms in the academic system. Research Policy, Vol. 29, Issue 2, 291–301.
Bourdieu, P. 1988: Homo Academicus. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P., Boltanski, L., de Saint-Martin, M., Maldidier-Pargamin, P. (Hg.) 1981: Titel und Stelle. Über die Reproduktion sozialer Macht. Frankfurt am Main: Europäische Verlags-Anstalt.
Bovens, M., Goodin, R. E., Schillemans, T. (eds.) 2014: The Oxford handbook of public accountability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burris, V. 2004: The academic caste system: Prestige hierarchies in PhD exchange networks. American Sociological Review, Vol. 69, Issue 2, 239–264.
Campbell, K., Vick, D. W., Murray, A. D., Little, G. F. 1999: Journal publishing, journal reputation, and the United Kingdom's Research Assessment Exercise. Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 26, Issue 4, 470–501.
Collins, R. 1979: The credential society: A historical sociology of education and stratification. New York: Academic Press.
Elton, L. 2000: The UK Research Assessment Exercise: Unintended consequences. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 54, Issue 3, 274–283.
Espeland, W. N., Sauder, M. 2007: Rankings and reactivity. How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 113, Issue 1, 1–40.
Espeland, W. N., Stevens, M. L. 1998: Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 24, 313–343.
Geuna, A., Martin, B. R. 2003: University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, Vol. 41, Issue 4, 277–304.
Hamann, J. 2016: The visible hand of research performance assessment. Higher Education, Vol. 72, Issue 6, 761–779. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-015-9974-7
Hamann, J. 2017: The production of research elites. Research performance assessment in the United Kingdom. In R. Bloch, A. Mitterle, C. Paradeise, T. Peter (eds.), Universities and the production of elites. Discourses, policies, and strategies of excellence and stratification in higher education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 175–199.
Harman, G. 2005: Australian social scientists and transition to a more commercial university environment. Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 24, Issue 1, 79–94.
HEFCE. 2015: How we fund research. Higher Education Funding Council England, http://www.hefce.ac.uk/rsrch/funding/mainstream/ (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Henkel, M. 1999: The modernisation of research evaluation: The case of the UK. Higher Education, Vol. 38, Issue 1, 105–122.
Jessop, B., Fairclough, N., Wodak, R. 2008: Education and the knowledge-based economy in Europe. London: Sense Publishers.
Kehm, B. M., Leišytė, L. 2010: Effects of new governance on research in the humanities. The example of medieval history. In D. Jansen (ed.), Governance and performance in the German public research sector. Disciplinary differences. Berlin: Springer, 73–90.
Lamont, M. 2009: How professors think. Inside the curious world of academic judgement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lamont, M., Huutoniemi, K. 2011: Comparing customary rules of fairness: Evaluative practices in various types of peer review panels. In C. Camic, N. Gross, M. Lamont (eds.), Social knowledge in the making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 209–232.
Lee, F. S., Pham, X., Gu, G. 2013: The UK Research Assessment Exercise and the narrowing of UK economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 37, Issue 4, 693–717.
Leišytė, L., Westerheijden, D. 2014: Research evaluation and its implications for academic research in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Discussion papers des Zentrums für HochschulBildung, Nr. 1-2014, 3–32. Dortmund: Technische Universität Dortmund.
Maeße, J. 2015: Economic experts. A discursive political economy of economics. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, Vol. 10, Issue 3, 279–305.
Maeße, J. 2016: The elitism dispositif. Hierarchization, excellence orientation and organizational change in economics. Higher Education, accepted for publication.
Maeße, J., Hamann, J. 2016: Die Universität als Dispositiv. Die gesellschaftliche Einbettung von Bildung und Wissenschaft aus diskurstheoretischer Perspektive. Zeitschrift für Diskursforschung, Heft 2016-1, 29–50.
Martin, B. R., Whitley, R. D. 2010: The UK Research Assessment Exercise. A case of regulatory capture? In R. D. Whitley, J. Gläser, L. Engwall (eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production. Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 51–80.
Merton, R. K. 1968: The Matthew effect in science. Science, Vol. 159, Issue 3810, 56–63.
Morgan, K. J. 2004: The Research Assessment Exercise in English universities, 2001. Higher Education, Vol. 48, Issue 4, 461–482.
Morris, N., Rip, A. 2006: Scientists' coping strategies in an evolving research system: The case of life scientists in the UK. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 33, Issue 4, 253–263.
Morrissey, J. 2013: Governing the academic subject: Foucault, governmentality and the performing university. Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 39, Issue 6, 797–810.
Münch, R. 2008: Stratifikation durch Evaluation. Mechanismen der Konstruktion und Reproduktion von Statushierarchien in der Forschung. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 37. Jg., Heft 1, 60–80.
Münch, R. 2014: Academic capitalism. Universities in the global struggle for excellence. New York: Routledge.
Münch, R., Schäfer, L. O. 2014: Rankings, diversity and the power of renewal in science. A comparison between Germany, the UK and the US. European Journal of Education, Vol. 49, Issue 1, 60–76.
Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, I., Ferlie, E. (eds.) 2009: University governance. Western European perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.
RAE. 2001a: 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. Institution: H-0114, University of Cambridge. http://www.rae.ac.uk/2001/Submissions/UoA.asp?HESAInst=H-0114 (Accessed 28. December 2016).
RAE. 2001b: 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. Unit of assessment: 59, History. http://www.rae.ac.uk/2001/results/byuoa/uoa59.htm (Accessed 08. August 2015).
RAE. 2001c: What is the RAE 2001? http://www.rae.ac.uk/2001/AboutUs/ (Accessed 08. August 2015).
RAE. 2008a: Changes since the RAE 2001. http://www.rae.ac.uk/aboutus/changes.asp (Accessed 08. August 2015).
RAE. 2008b: Quality profiles. http://www.rae.ac.uk/aboutus/quality.asp (Accessed 12. October 2014).
REF. 2011: Assessment framework and guidance on submissions. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/assessmentframeworkandguidanceonsubmissions/GOS%20including%20addendum.pdf (Accessed 08. August 2015).
REF. 2012: Panel criteria and working methods, part 2D: Main panel D criteria. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/panelcriteriaandworkingmethods/01_12_2D.pdf (Accessed 08. August 2015).
REF. 2014a: Annex A. Assessment criteria and level definitions. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/REF%2001%202014%20-%20Annexes.pdf (Accessed 16. January 2016).
REF. 2014b: View results and submissions by institution. http://results.ref.ac.uk/Results/SelectHei (Accessed 15. January 2016).
REF. 2014c: View results and submissions by UOA. http://results.ref.ac.uk/Results/SelectUoa (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Sayer, D. 2014: Rank hypocrisies. The insult of the REF. New York: Sage.
Sharp, S., Coleman, S. 2005: Ratings in the Research Assessment Exercise 2001. The patterns of university status and panel membership. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 59, Issue 2, 153–171.
Shin, J. C., Toutkoushian, R. K., Teichler, U. (eds.) 2011: University rankings. Theoretical basis, methodology and impacts on global higher education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Strathern, M. 2000a: Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics and the academy. London/New York: Routledge.
Strathern, M. 2000b: The tyranny of transparency. British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 26, Issue 3, 309–321.
Tapper, T., Salter, B. 2002: The external pressures on the internal governance of universities. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 56, Issue 3, 245–256.
Tapper, T., Salter, B. 2004: Governance of higher education in Britain: The significance of the Research Assessment Exercise for the founding council model. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 58, Issue 1, 4–30.
The Guardian 2014: University Research Excellence Framework 2014: The full rankings. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/ng-interactive/2014/dec/18/university-research-excellence-framework-2014-full-rankings (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Times Higher Education 2014a: REF 2014 results by subject. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/ref-2014-results-by-subject/2017594.article, https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/sites/default/files/Attachments/2014/12/17/x/o/z/sub-14-01.pdf (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Times Higher Education 2014b: REF 2014 results: Table of excellence. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ref-2014-results-table-of-excellence/2017590.article (Accessed 16. January 2016).
Times Higher Education 2014c: REF 2014: Winners and losers in 'intensity' ranking. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ref-2014-winners-and-losers-in-intensity-ranking/2017633.article (Accessed 16. January 2016).
Tomlin, R. 1998: Research League Table: Is there a better way? Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 52, Issue 2, 204–220.
Walker, H. A., Thomas, G. M., Zelditch, M. 1986: Legitimation, endorsement, and stability. Social Forces, Vol. 64, Issue 3, 620–643.
Whitley, R. D., Gläser, J., Engwall, L. (eds.) 2010: Reconfiguring knowledge production. Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilsdon, J. 2015: In defence of the Research Excellence Framework. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2015/jul/27/in-defence-of-the-ref (Accessed 04. January 2016).
Wooding, S., van Leeuwen, T. N., Parks, S., Kapur, S., Grant, J. 2015: UK doubles its "world-leading" research in life sciences and medicine in six years: Testing the claim? PLOS ONE, Vol. 10, Issue 7: e0132990.
Yokoyama, K. 2006: The effect of the research assessment exercise on organisational culture in English universities: Collegiality versus managerialism. Tertiary Education and Management, Vol. 12, Issue 4, 311–322.
Benner, M., Sandström, U. 2000: Institutionalizing the triple helix: Research funding and norms in the academic system. Research Policy, Vol. 29, Issue 2, 291–301.
Bourdieu, P. 1988: Homo Academicus. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P., Boltanski, L., de Saint-Martin, M., Maldidier-Pargamin, P. (Hg.) 1981: Titel und Stelle. Über die Reproduktion sozialer Macht. Frankfurt am Main: Europäische Verlags-Anstalt.
Bovens, M., Goodin, R. E., Schillemans, T. (eds.) 2014: The Oxford handbook of public accountability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burris, V. 2004: The academic caste system: Prestige hierarchies in PhD exchange networks. American Sociological Review, Vol. 69, Issue 2, 239–264.
Campbell, K., Vick, D. W., Murray, A. D., Little, G. F. 1999: Journal publishing, journal reputation, and the United Kingdom's Research Assessment Exercise. Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 26, Issue 4, 470–501.
Collins, R. 1979: The credential society: A historical sociology of education and stratification. New York: Academic Press.
Elton, L. 2000: The UK Research Assessment Exercise: Unintended consequences. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 54, Issue 3, 274–283.
Espeland, W. N., Sauder, M. 2007: Rankings and reactivity. How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 113, Issue 1, 1–40.
Espeland, W. N., Stevens, M. L. 1998: Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 24, 313–343.
Geuna, A., Martin, B. R. 2003: University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, Vol. 41, Issue 4, 277–304.
Hamann, J. 2016: The visible hand of research performance assessment. Higher Education, Vol. 72, Issue 6, 761–779. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-015-9974-7
Hamann, J. 2017: The production of research elites. Research performance assessment in the United Kingdom. In R. Bloch, A. Mitterle, C. Paradeise, T. Peter (eds.), Universities and the production of elites. Discourses, policies, and strategies of excellence and stratification in higher education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 175–199.
Harman, G. 2005: Australian social scientists and transition to a more commercial university environment. Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 24, Issue 1, 79–94.
HEFCE. 2015: How we fund research. Higher Education Funding Council England, http://www.hefce.ac.uk/rsrch/funding/mainstream/ (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Henkel, M. 1999: The modernisation of research evaluation: The case of the UK. Higher Education, Vol. 38, Issue 1, 105–122.
Jessop, B., Fairclough, N., Wodak, R. 2008: Education and the knowledge-based economy in Europe. London: Sense Publishers.
Kehm, B. M., Leišytė, L. 2010: Effects of new governance on research in the humanities. The example of medieval history. In D. Jansen (ed.), Governance and performance in the German public research sector. Disciplinary differences. Berlin: Springer, 73–90.
Lamont, M. 2009: How professors think. Inside the curious world of academic judgement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lamont, M., Huutoniemi, K. 2011: Comparing customary rules of fairness: Evaluative practices in various types of peer review panels. In C. Camic, N. Gross, M. Lamont (eds.), Social knowledge in the making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 209–232.
Lee, F. S., Pham, X., Gu, G. 2013: The UK Research Assessment Exercise and the narrowing of UK economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 37, Issue 4, 693–717.
Leišytė, L., Westerheijden, D. 2014: Research evaluation and its implications for academic research in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Discussion papers des Zentrums für HochschulBildung, Nr. 1-2014, 3–32. Dortmund: Technische Universität Dortmund.
Maeße, J. 2015: Economic experts. A discursive political economy of economics. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, Vol. 10, Issue 3, 279–305.
Maeße, J. 2016: The elitism dispositif. Hierarchization, excellence orientation and organizational change in economics. Higher Education, accepted for publication.
Maeße, J., Hamann, J. 2016: Die Universität als Dispositiv. Die gesellschaftliche Einbettung von Bildung und Wissenschaft aus diskurstheoretischer Perspektive. Zeitschrift für Diskursforschung, Heft 2016-1, 29–50.
Martin, B. R., Whitley, R. D. 2010: The UK Research Assessment Exercise. A case of regulatory capture? In R. D. Whitley, J. Gläser, L. Engwall (eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production. Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 51–80.
Merton, R. K. 1968: The Matthew effect in science. Science, Vol. 159, Issue 3810, 56–63.
Morgan, K. J. 2004: The Research Assessment Exercise in English universities, 2001. Higher Education, Vol. 48, Issue 4, 461–482.
Morris, N., Rip, A. 2006: Scientists' coping strategies in an evolving research system: The case of life scientists in the UK. Science and Public Policy, Vol. 33, Issue 4, 253–263.
Morrissey, J. 2013: Governing the academic subject: Foucault, governmentality and the performing university. Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 39, Issue 6, 797–810.
Münch, R. 2008: Stratifikation durch Evaluation. Mechanismen der Konstruktion und Reproduktion von Statushierarchien in der Forschung. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 37. Jg., Heft 1, 60–80.
Münch, R. 2014: Academic capitalism. Universities in the global struggle for excellence. New York: Routledge.
Münch, R., Schäfer, L. O. 2014: Rankings, diversity and the power of renewal in science. A comparison between Germany, the UK and the US. European Journal of Education, Vol. 49, Issue 1, 60–76.
Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, I., Ferlie, E. (eds.) 2009: University governance. Western European perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.
RAE. 2001a: 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. Institution: H-0114, University of Cambridge. http://www.rae.ac.uk/2001/Submissions/UoA.asp?HESAInst=H-0114 (Accessed 28. December 2016).
RAE. 2001b: 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. Unit of assessment: 59, History. http://www.rae.ac.uk/2001/results/byuoa/uoa59.htm (Accessed 08. August 2015).
RAE. 2001c: What is the RAE 2001? http://www.rae.ac.uk/2001/AboutUs/ (Accessed 08. August 2015).
RAE. 2008a: Changes since the RAE 2001. http://www.rae.ac.uk/aboutus/changes.asp (Accessed 08. August 2015).
RAE. 2008b: Quality profiles. http://www.rae.ac.uk/aboutus/quality.asp (Accessed 12. October 2014).
REF. 2011: Assessment framework and guidance on submissions. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/assessmentframeworkandguidanceonsubmissions/GOS%20including%20addendum.pdf (Accessed 08. August 2015).
REF. 2012: Panel criteria and working methods, part 2D: Main panel D criteria. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/panelcriteriaandworkingmethods/01_12_2D.pdf (Accessed 08. August 2015).
REF. 2014a: Annex A. Assessment criteria and level definitions. http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/REF%2001%202014%20-%20Annexes.pdf (Accessed 16. January 2016).
REF. 2014b: View results and submissions by institution. http://results.ref.ac.uk/Results/SelectHei (Accessed 15. January 2016).
REF. 2014c: View results and submissions by UOA. http://results.ref.ac.uk/Results/SelectUoa (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Sayer, D. 2014: Rank hypocrisies. The insult of the REF. New York: Sage.
Sharp, S., Coleman, S. 2005: Ratings in the Research Assessment Exercise 2001. The patterns of university status and panel membership. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 59, Issue 2, 153–171.
Shin, J. C., Toutkoushian, R. K., Teichler, U. (eds.) 2011: University rankings. Theoretical basis, methodology and impacts on global higher education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Strathern, M. 2000a: Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics and the academy. London/New York: Routledge.
Strathern, M. 2000b: The tyranny of transparency. British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 26, Issue 3, 309–321.
Tapper, T., Salter, B. 2002: The external pressures on the internal governance of universities. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 56, Issue 3, 245–256.
Tapper, T., Salter, B. 2004: Governance of higher education in Britain: The significance of the Research Assessment Exercise for the founding council model. Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 58, Issue 1, 4–30.
The Guardian 2014: University Research Excellence Framework 2014: The full rankings. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/ng-interactive/2014/dec/18/university-research-excellence-framework-2014-full-rankings (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Times Higher Education 2014a: REF 2014 results by subject. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/ref-2014-results-by-subject/2017594.article, https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/sites/default/files/Attachments/2014/12/17/x/o/z/sub-14-01.pdf (Accessed 15. January 2016).
Times Higher Education 2014b: REF 2014 results: Table of excellence. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ref-2014-results-table-of-excellence/2017590.article (Accessed 16. January 2016).
Times Higher Education 2014c: REF 2014: Winners and losers in 'intensity' ranking. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ref-2014-winners-and-losers-in-intensity-ranking/2017633.article (Accessed 16. January 2016).
Tomlin, R. 1998: Research League Table: Is there a better way? Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 52, Issue 2, 204–220.
Walker, H. A., Thomas, G. M., Zelditch, M. 1986: Legitimation, endorsement, and stability. Social Forces, Vol. 64, Issue 3, 620–643.
Whitley, R. D., Gläser, J., Engwall, L. (eds.) 2010: Reconfiguring knowledge production. Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilsdon, J. 2015: In defence of the Research Excellence Framework. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2015/jul/27/in-defence-of-the-ref (Accessed 04. January 2016).
Wooding, S., van Leeuwen, T. N., Parks, S., Kapur, S., Grant, J. 2015: UK doubles its "world-leading" research in life sciences and medicine in six years: Testing the claim? PLOS ONE, Vol. 10, Issue 7: e0132990.
Yokoyama, K. 2006: The effect of the research assessment exercise on organisational culture in English universities: Collegiality versus managerialism. Tertiary Education and Management, Vol. 12, Issue 4, 311–322.
Downloads
Veröffentlicht
2017-09-07
Ausgabe
Rubrik
Ad-Hoc: Rankings – historisch-soziologisch gesehen
Lizenz
Beiträge im Verhandlungsband des 38. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie werden unter der Creative Commons Lizenz "Namensnennung-Nicht kommerziell 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)" veröffentlicht.
Dritte dürfen die Beiträge:
-
Teilen: in jedwedem Format oder Medium vervielfältigen und weiterverbreiten
-
Bearbeiten: remixen, verändern und darauf aufbauen
unter folgenden Bedinungen:
-
Namensnennung: Dritte müssen angemessene Urheber- und Rechteangaben machen, einen Link zur Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden
-
Nicht kommerziell: Dritte dürfen das Material nicht für kommerzielle Zwecke nutzen
