Accountants divided: research selectivity and academic accounting labour in UK universities |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Wanping Nan Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, China;2. Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 600 Wanping Nan Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, China;3. Department of Psychiatry & Behavior Science, Emory University School of Medicine, 1551 Shoup Court, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States;1. Department of Sociology, State University of New York at Geneseo, Geneseo, NY, USA;2. Department of Sociology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY, USA;1. Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey;2. Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey;3. Rutgers School of Dental Medicine, Newark, New Jersey;1. Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Sarawak, Malaysia;2. University College of Technology Sarawak, Malaysia;3. Institute for Intelligent Systems Research and Innovation, Deakin University, Australia;1. Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Kuantan, Pahang, 26300, Malaysia;2. Biological and Ecological Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97333, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | This paper presents data from a postal survey designed to explore the impact of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) on academic accounting labour in the UK. The RAE is seen as integral to the growth of managerialism in UK higher education and to the increasing commodification of academic labour. The data indicates that academic accountants are divided in their perceptions of and reactions to the RAE. It is argued that in co-opting peer review for managerial ends, the RAE appeals to traditional academic identities, re-enforcing existing divisions within the academic accounting community and dissipating resistance to its perceived negative effects. The conclusion is that despite a significant degree of hostility to the RAE, UK accountants are themselves in large part responsible for enacting this particular managerial control strategy. In the process, there is a danger that academic accounting knowledge is being distorted, the profession divided and academics disillusioned by its power to direct what “counts" as high status academic research. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
