Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSmith, C.
dc.contributor.authorBennett, Dawn
dc.date.accessioned2017-01-30T13:25:53Z
dc.date.available2017-01-30T13:25:53Z
dc.date.created2016-04-13T19:30:18Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationSmith, C. and Bennett, D. 2015. Will the impact framework fix the problems the research audit found, in The Conversation, Dec 15, 2015.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/31527
dc.description.abstract

The results from the latest university research audit indicate that research in Australia is improving. This suggests that the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) exercise is working: ERA has achieved its main aim of boosting the quality of Australian research. However, this headline statement masks a plethora of concerns. Under the government’s latest reform of research funding, academics will be assessed not only on their quality of research through the ERA, but also on the economic, social and environmental impacts of their research through a new impact framework The impact and engagement measures herald a new era that rewards researchers for collaborating beyond their institutions. It is timely, then, to reassess ERA’s utility. Is it fit for purpose? Will these two assessment systems complement or contradict one another?

dc.titleWill the impact framework fix the problems the research audit found
dc.typeNon traditional textual works
dcterms.source.startPage1
dcterms.source.endPage3
curtin.note

This open access article is distributed under the Creative Commons license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/

curtin.departmentResearch and Creative Production
curtin.accessStatusOpen access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record