Regenerating the academic workforce: the careers, intentions and motivations of higher degree research students in Australia

Abstract The main findings of this report are based on the outcomes from the National Research Student Survey (NRSS) conducted in June 2010 across 38 of the 39 universities in Australia. In total 11,710 Higher Degree by Research students (those enrolled in PhD and masters by research degrees, also referred to simply as ‘research students’ in this report) responded to the NRSS, providing a 25.5 per cent response rate across the country. These response numbers represent the largest collection of survey responses from research students ever undertaken in Australia. The report primarily explores the career intentions and motivations of these students. It provides particular emphasis on the interests of Higher Degree by Research (HDR) students (referred to in this report as ‘research students’) in following an academic career on completion of their degree and the support they have received in terms of preparation for university teaching during their candidature. In the context of growing student enrolments and the large numbers of predicted retirements associated with an ageing academic workforce there is a need to examine the career intentions of research students. This report explores the extent to which the current cohort of research students may be a source of replenishment for the academic profession in the context of an ageing academic workforce. It is important to remember that the traditional notion of an academic being someone who has made a linear transition from school to university, to a HDR and on to academia is outdated. Research students come to the HDR from a diverse variety of professional backgrounds and have equally diverse aspirations for their careers after gaining their qualification. Some research students m y already be working in universities in an academic capacity. Many intend to use their research degree as a springboard to a career outside of the university sector. Others undertake a research degree out of interest in the subject matter and simply for the pleasure of studying at an advanced level. Nevertheless, those research students who aspire to an academic career do represent an important source of future academics. The findings of this report raise a number of crucial issues relating to the research degree in Australian universities, the career aspirations of research students and potential issues for the future of the academic workforce over the coming decade. Recommended Citation Edwards, Daniel; Bexley, Emmaline; and Richardson, Sarah, "Regenerating the academic workforce: the careers, intentions and motivations of higher degree research students in Australia: findings of the National Research Student Survey (NRSS)" (2011). http://research.acer.edu.au/higher_education/2

I want it all and I want it now. Challenging the traditional nursing academic paradigm

A recent Twitter chat facilitated by the @NurseEducToday socialmedia team provoked a particularly strong reaction among a range of contributors. The focus of the discussion – expectations of the nurse academic – resulted in a high level of engagement from several participants who clearly held strong views, which were surprisingly polarised. Here we explore aspects of this polarization; and what it might mean for nurses working in academia. Our aim is to reflect on what this dialogue might tell us about current thinking in the profession, specifically around how nurse academics see themselves, what they expect from self and others, and what they are prepared to do to meet these,often, self-generated expectations

External pressures on teaching

[FIRST PARAGRAPHS] The primary role of the PRS-LTSN is to improve the quality of education by encouraging the sharing of good practice and innovation, and the discussion of common problems. However, there are other forces at play, which are pursuing the same end by different means. The purpose of this article is to explain what these forces are, and how the PRS-LTSN can help departments to satisfy their demands. The first set of pressures comes from the Government via the funding councils, namely the requirement for higher education institutions (HEIs) to be publicly accountable for the services they provide with Government funding. The assumption is that the two main activities of HEIs are teaching and research: ● The Research Assessment Exercise2 (RAE) is conducted by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) on behalf of the other funding councils, and research ratings have a major influence on funding. ● The assessment of the quality of teaching and of institutional quality assurance mechanisms is the responsibility of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) (see Appendix), which is an independent body funded jointly by the funding councils, Universities UK (UUK) and the Standing Conference of Principals (SCoP). Ratings do not affect funding, except that there is the ultimate sanction of withdrawal of funding for persistently unsatisfactory programmes of study. ● More recently, the Transparency Review commissioned by the funding councils evaluates the extent to which funding for research is actually spent on research, and funding for teaching is actually spent on teaching

It's Very Different Here: Practice-Based Academic Staff Induction and Retention

The sociologist, Max Weber (1864-1920), suggested that few could withstand the frustrations of academic life. As the strategic management of human resources begins to differentiate higher education institutions (HEIs) in league tables, the costs of voluntary staff turnover (attrition) become more significant. In this paper, we consider links between induction (orientation) and retention for academic staff. We report on a qualitative study of thirty academic staff in five United Kingdom HEIs who were recruited on the basis of their professional experience. Their practice-based knowledge lends our participants particular insight into their HEI induction experience which, where found wanting, led in several cases to resignation. We analyse the induction experiences of our participants to glean explanations for these perceived shortcomings. Since induction interventions are thought to lead to improved retention, we recommend policy and practice changes to induction which may benefit all academic staff