Search

This paper reports on research exploring the academic workload and performance practices of Australian universities. This research has identified a suite of activities associated with teaching, research and service, each with an associated time value (allocation). This led to the development of the academic workload estimation tool (AWET). In 2020, to validate the findings, we contacted academics willing to participate further and conducted interviews. We used the AWET to estimate workload for each individual for the previous year and compared it to the workload allocated according to their institutional workload model. Discrepancies were then discussed to ascertain to what extent the AWET was able to capture their work. In general, the participants thought the AWET provided a more realistic estimate of their actual work and highlighted how much is underestimated or unaccounted for by the workload models used within their institutions. It also showed how academic performance policies, focussed primarily on research output, disadvantaged many individuals because they ignored or minimised many scholarly, teaching and service-related tasks inherent in the academic role. Overall, the findings showed the AWET was a useful tool to discuss academic work and assisted them to better capture the complexity and extent of what they did. We offer the AWET as a validated approach for academics to estimate their workload in a holistic and transparent manner. We suggest its implementation institution-wide, along with an aligned performance policy, will facilitate negotiation of reasonable performance expectations. This will rebuild trust in the processes and improve a university's effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internationally, much has changed in the governance of universities since the adoption of corporate management approaches. A strong focus on efficiency, productivity and accountability arising from these approaches has been well documented in the literature. Reductions in government funding have caused universities to become more competitive and entrepreneurial. However, little is known about the impacts of these changes on the working lives of individual academics. This paper is part of an ongoing study exploring the lived experiences of 2526 Australian academics who responded to a national questionnaire. This paper builds on earlier work by holistically drawing together the earlier findings which separately analysed the teaching, research and administration/service aspects of their work. In examining the effectiveness of universities through the ability of their academics to undertake their roles, we found the voices of academics that need to be heard in the development and implementation of key policies, such as academic workload and performance, to preserve the essentially self-managed nature of their work. By combining the learning from the project through the literature review, the statistical analysis and themes from the open-ended questions, we developed a set of principles to underpin these policies in universities. These principles can guide universities to shift towards a more collaborative working relationship with academics, based on trust, and actively encourage them to play be more active in institutional decision-making, especially in relation to policies that directly affect their work. These results have implications for improving the productivity of academics and the institutions in which they work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides insight into the nature of research workload allocation for Australian academics. It explores the distinction between research perfonnance and research workload allocation. Research performance can be judged at an institutional level, a work group level or an individual level. The process by which an institution's research performance is judged is not necessarily suitable at the level of the individual academic. The research performance of individual academics is based on their 'research output', in the form of publications, grants or supervision of research students, but historically, little attention has been paid to the 'input' or the time required to achieve these outputs. To determine the real costs of research, and to examine academic working conditions, this paper argues the clear distinction must be made that 'output' is about research performance; whereas 'input' is about research workload allocation. Therefore, what is needed is a suite of reasonable time allocations which can be associated with research activities, as is the case for teaching related activities. The paper analyses data from an online survey, circulated to academics across Australia in 2016, in which staff estimated the typical time spent on a wide range of research related tasks. The findings from the 2059 respondents show staff strongly support a transparent and holistic approach to workload planning which acknowledges the full range of activities they undertake. Analysis of the times associated with the research tasks led to the development of a table of suggested time estimates, based on the median values, for many common research activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neo-liberal reforms in higher education have resulted in corporate managerial practices in universities and a drive for efficiency and productivity in teaching and research. As a result, there has been an intensification of academic work, increased stress for academics and an emphasis on accountability and performativity in universities. The paper proposes that while managerialism in modern universities is now the norm, corporate approaches have disempowered academics in their institutions and reduced productivity because they ignore the nature of academic work. Using Foucault's conception of power relations in institutions, policies that directly affect academic work such as workload allocation and performance management are identified as key ways in which power is exercised in universities. The paper reports on a case study in one university which explored the relationship between the academic workload allocation and performance management policies and concludes that a more balanced power relationship is needed in which academics can have more influence over these key processes which control their work so they preserve the self-managed aspects of academic work and the intrinsic motivations driving their careers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neoliberal reforms in higher education have resulted in corporate managerial practices in universities and a drive for efficiency and productivity in teaching and research. As a result, there has been an intensification of academic work, increased stress for academics and an emphasis on accountability and performativity in universities. This paper critically examines these developments in institutions and draws on evidence from universities across the sector and a detailed case study in one university to identify the impacts of these changes on academic work. Given its ubiquity and the link of academic productivity to institutional experience, the paper argues that assumptions underpinning academic performance management need to be rethought to recognise the fundamentally intrinsic motivational nature of academic work. The paper explores the effects of performance management on individual academics as a case study in one institution and proposes a re-design of academic performance management to improve productivity based on the evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An online survey of workload activities was circulated to academics across Australia seeking estimates for the time to undertake a range of academic-related tasks associated with teaching, research and service. This article summarises the most important findings from the teaching data of the 2059 respondents. This detail of workload data has not been reported before across the Australian university sector. The findings showing that most academics work more than 50 h per week are consistent with previous studies. Although the estimates of the individuals varied greatly, statistical inquiry indicated the median time required does not vary by experience and online teaching generally requires more preparation time than on-campus teaching. The paper proposes this methodology as a credible means to derive realistic time-based standards for other aspects of academic work and will assist university managers by providing an external benchmark upon which to develop local academic workload models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a reflection on my journey in a work-based (WB) research project while completing my PhD at a large Australian university. The paper explores issues that arose as I studied strategic change in the university and my role evolved from that of a 'change agent' working as part of a project team to that of a researcher. A case study format is used to describe the many twists and turns in the project at the centre of the study and how they impacted the research and my development as a researcher. This reveals issues which may be relevant to researchers in similar situations including: the tension between my duty to communicate research findings, which were at times critical of the approach adopted in the organisation; and the expectation to follow the organisational strategic plan. The paper recounts the complexity and unpredictability of researching an on-going project and concludes with suggestions pertinent to individuals and organisations implementing WB research programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is little doubt that the modern university is far different to that of the early 90s and the work of academics has changed considerably over this time driven by the efficiency and accountability agenda. In taking stock of the changes, it needs to be recognised that often the cry for efficiency and accountability has been used as a mechanism for control, cost reductions and to drive particular policy agendas. In broad terms, management practices in the tertiary education sector have shifted from a collegial to a corporate or commercial paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an Interpretive Framework stemming from a longitudinal and iterative multiple case study of five Australian universities examining the cogent and unique practices underpinning their established and successful school-based science teacher education programs. Results from interviews with teacher educators, school staff and pre-service teachers, show four components that guide the successful and sustainable use of university-school partnerships. These components: Guiding Pedagogical Principles; Growing University-School Partnerships; Representations of Partnership; and Growth Model provide a scaffold for initiating, growing and sustaining partnerships that maximise the benefits for all. The essential role of both university and school staff is also highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]