¿Cualquier parecido con la realidad será mera coincidencia?
Contrapartida Pontificia Universidad Javeriana
De Computationis Jure Opiniones
Número 3183, Noviembre 20 de 2017
Se lee en el artículo de Martin-Sardesai, A., Irvine, H., Tooley, S. and Guthrie, J. (2017), Accounting for Research: Academic Responses to Research Performance Demands in an Australian University. -Australian Accounting Review, 27: 329–343. doi:10.1111/auar.12151- “(…) The objective of this study was to examine the effect on academics of PMS developed by an Australian university to meet government research assessment requirements. Documentary analysis revealed the way research was accounted for within UniA through research-oriented PMS, the aspirations and requirements of which were filtered down to faculties, departments and individual academics. UniA underwent major changes in anticipation of an assessment exercise such as ERA, positioning itself by realigning its research aspirations and research management systems. The study revealed that while the efforts of senior management were rewarded in terms of ERA outcomes for UniA in the 2010 evaluations, academics’ perceptions were different. ERA as a PMS was invoked to support the university’s commitment to improve its research ranking, but there were negative responses from academics regarding workloads and job satisfaction.
Viewed through the theoretical lens of commodification, the paper identifies academics as having been commodified into productive achievers of research rankings and attractors of funding (Gray et al. 2002; Willmott 1995b). PMS within universities are designed to improve and develop the performance of individual academics, motivating them to acquire new skills and perspectives about research and teaching (Henk ter Bogt and Scapens 2012). However, as evident in this study, PMS were perceived to be used to assess the performance of individual academics to ensure their contribution enabled a good ERA outcome for UniA, rather than being a development tool to assist academics. This focus on high-performing academics is similar to findings in other countries such as the UK and the Netherlands (Henk ter Bogt and Scapens 2012). (…)”
En nuestro medio no contamos con estudios como el que hemos aludido. Pero nuestras cortas apreciaciones nos ponen en alerta sobre la diversidad de pareceres de los investigadores, muchos de los cuales simplemente están dentro de una fábrica de artículos publicables en las revistas mejor indexadas por instrumentos que miran mucho la forma y poco la utilidad. Mientras no se conozcan los conceptos de los evaluadores, así sus nombres permanezcan en secreto, no se sabrá si realmente los aplausos se destinan a verdaderos avances provechosos y no a la mera contribución de datos que, sin embargo, no permiten alterar conductas, debido a la precariedad de los análisis respectivos.
Digan lo que digan muchos están presionados más por las calificaciones que por el impacto en la sociedad. No parece que ello pueda atraer muchos patrocinadores.
Hernando Bermúdez Gómez
De Computationis Jure Opiniones
Número 3183, Noviembre 20 de 2017
Tomado de: https://www.javeriana.edu.co/personales/hbermude/contrapartida/
