Advertisement

International Review of Education

, Volume 53, Issue 4, pp 349–365 | Cite as

Neoliberalism, Performativity and Research

  • Peter RobertsEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper provides a critical analysis of New Zealand’s Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF). The first section sketches the development and implementation of the PBRF. The second section evaluates the scheme, concentrating on three themes: the relationship between privatization, competition and research performance; the standardization of research; and motivations for research. The paper acknowledges the thorough work completed by the Tertiary Education Advisory Commission and other policy groups in laying the foundation for the adoption of performance-based research funding in New Zealand. It is argued, however, that when viewed in its larger context, the PBRF constitutes a continuation of neoliberal trends already well established in New Zealand’s tertiary education system.

Keywords

Knowledge Society Research Assessment Exercise Tertiary Education Institution External Panel Performance Base Research Fund 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Résumé

NÉO-LIBÉRALISME, PERFORMATIVITÉ ET RECHERCHE - Cet article fournit une analyse critique des Fonds de Recherches sur la Base de la Performance en Nouvelle ZÉlande (Performance Based Research Fund : PBRF). La première section livre une esquisse du dÉveloppement et de l’exÉcution du PBRF. La deuxième section en Évalue le schÉma, se concentrant sur trois thèmes: le rapport entre la privatisation, la concurrence et les performances de la recherche ; la standardisation de la recherche ; et les motivations pour la recherche. L’article reconnaît la minutie des travaux accomplis par la Commission Consultative de l’Enseignement SupÉrieur et par d’autres groupes politiques ayant posÉ les fondations pour l’adoption du financement de la recherche sur la base de la performance en Nouvelle ZÉlande. On y affirme cependant que, dans un contexte plus large, le PBRF constitue une continuation des tendances nÉo-libÉrales dÉjà bien Établies dans le système de l’enseignement supÉrieur de la Nouvelle ZÉlande.

Zusammenfassung

NEOLIBERALISMUS, LEISTUNGSSTÄRKE UND FORSCHUNG – Dieser Beitrag stellt eine kritische Analyse des neuseelÄndischen leistungsorientierten Forschungungsfonds (PBRF) dar. Der erste Abschnitt skizziert Entwicklung und Anwendung des PBRF. Der zweite Abschnitt evaluiert das Projekt unter Konzentration auf drei Themen: die Bezüge zwischen Privatisierung, Konkurrenz und Forschungsleistung, die Standardisierung der Forschung sowie die Forschungsmotivation. Der Beitrag erkennt die gründliche Arbeit an, die von der Hochschulberatungskommission und von anderen politischen Gruppen geleistet wurde und durch die der Grundstein für die Annahme des leistungsorientierten Forschungsfonds in Neuseeland gelegt wurde. Er vertritt jedoch den Standpunkt, dass der PBRF im größeren Zusammenhang gesehen neoliberale Trends fortsetzt, die bereits jetzt im neuseelÄndischen Hochschulsystem verankert sind.

Resumen

NEOLIBERALISMO, PERFORMATIVIDAD E INVESTIGACIÓN - El presente trabajo ofrece un análisis crítico del New Zealand’s Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF). La primera parte esboza el desarrollo y la implementaciÓn del PBRF. La segunda parte evalúa el proyecto, concentrándose en tres temas: las relaciones entre privatizaciÓn, competiciÓn y resultados de la investigaciÓn; la estandarizaciÓn de la investigaciÓn y las motivaciones que dan lugar a la investigaciÓn. El trabajo es una respuesta a la vasta tarea realizada por la Tertiary Education Advisory Commission y otros grupos de estrategias para establecer los fundamentos sobre los que se adoptará en Nueva Zelanda una financiaciÓn de la investigaciÓn basada en prestaciones. No obstante, en el trabajo se argumenta que, visto en un contexto más amplio, el PBRF constituye una continuaciÓn de las tendencias neoliberales que ya se han afianzado en el sistema de la educaciÓn terciaria de Nueva Zelanda.

Open image in new window

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Association of University Staff. 2005. Review Should Mean Less Waste in Tertiary Education Courses (Media Release). http://www.aus.ac.nzGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernard G. W. 2000. History and Research Assessment Exercises. Oxford Review of Education 26(1): 95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Codd John. 2001. The Third Way for Tertiary Education Policy: TEAC and Beyond. New Zealand Annual Review of Education 10: 31–57Google Scholar
  4. Elton L. 2000. The UK Research Assessment Exercise: Unintended Consequences. Higher Education Quarterly 54(3): 274–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Harley S. 2002. The Impact of Research Selectivity on Academic Work and Identity in UK Universities. Studies in Higher Education 27(2): 187–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harvie D. 2000. Alienation, Class and Enclosure in UK Universities. Capital and Class 71: 103–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lyotard, J.-F. 1984. The Postmodern Condition, trans. G. Bennington and B. Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota (Original work published 1979)Google Scholar
  8. Ministry of Education. 1997. A Future Tertiary Education Policy for New Zealand: Tertiary Education Review (Green Paper). Wellington: Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar
  9. Ministry of Education. 1998. Tertiary Education in New Zealand: Policy Directions for the 21st Century (White Paper). Wellington: Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar
  10. Ministry of Education. 2001. Export Education: Towards a Development Strategy for New Zealand. Wellington: Ministry of EducationGoogle Scholar
  11. Ministry of Education. 2002. Tertiary Education Strategy, 2002/07. Wellington: Ministry of Education (Office of the Associate Minister of Education – Tertiary Education)Google Scholar
  12. Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1966. Beyond Good and Evil, trans. W. Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books (Original work published 1886)Google Scholar
  13. Olssen, Mark. 2002. The Neo-Liberal Appropriation of Tertiary Education Policy in New Zealand: Accountability, Research and Academic Freedom, “State-of-the-Art” Monograph No. 8. Palmerston North: New Zealand Association for Research in EducationGoogle Scholar
  14. Ozga Jenny. 1998. The Entrepreneurial Researcher: Re-formations of Identity in the Research Marketplace. International Studies in Sociology of Education 8(2): 143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Performance-Based Research Fund Working Group. 2002. Investing in Excellence: The Report of the Performance-Based Research Fund Working Group. Wellington: Ministry of Education and Transition Tertiary Education CommissionGoogle Scholar
  16. Peters Michael., Roberts Peter. 1999. University Futures and the Politics of Reform in New Zealand. Palmerston North: Dunmore PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Roberts, Peter. 2001. Nietzsche and the Limits of Academic Life. In: Nietzsche’s Legacy for Education: Past and present values, ed. by Michael Peters, James Marshall and Paul Smeyers, 125–137. Westport, CT: Bergin and GarveyGoogle Scholar
  18. Roberts Peter. 2005. Tertiary Education, Knowledge and Neoliberalism. In: John Codd, Keith Sullivan (eds) Education Policy Directions in Aotearoa New Zealand, (pp. 39–51). Palmerston North: Dunmore PressGoogle Scholar
  19. Senyshyn Yaroslav. 2005. Rise of Authoritarianism in Higher Education: A Critical Analysis of the Research Assessment Exercise in British Universities. Journal of Educational Thought 39(3): 229–244Google Scholar
  20. Tertiary Education Advisory Commission. 2000, July. Shaping a Shared Vision. Wellington: TEACGoogle Scholar
  21. Tertiary Education Advisory Commission. 2001a, February. Shaping the System. Wellington: TEACGoogle Scholar
  22. Tertiary Education Advisory Commission. 2001b, July. Shaping the Strategy. Wellington: TEACGoogle Scholar
  23. Tertiary Education Advisory Commission. 2001c, November. Shaping the Funding Framework. Wellington: TEACGoogle Scholar
  24. Tertiary Education Commission. 2004. Evaluating Research Excellence: The 2003 Assessment – Overview and Key Findings. www.tec.govt.nzGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social and Policy Studies, Faculty of Education (Epsom Campus)University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations