COLUMN: Measured by merit – how do we measure and acknowledge knowledge exchange?
A modern university is more than just research and education. Knowledge exchange with the surrounding society plays an increasingly important role – but how can we measure and acknowledge knowledge exchange in a meaningful way without it becoming a time-consuming burden or constraint, asks Tore Rye Andersen, associate professor of comparative literature and academic staff representative on the Aarhus University board.
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE’S COLUMN
This column is written by one or more of the staff representatives on the Aarhus University Board or chairs of the university’s five academic councils.
The views expressed in this column are the author’s own.
Would you like to join the debate?
- Send your content to omnibus@au.dk
Disclaimer: This text was translated using machine translation / AI and post-edited by Maria Nielsen Pedersen
When recruiting new academic colleagues at AU, the assessment committees’ statements still place significant emphasis on research and, to some extent, teaching, while various forms of knowledge exchange play a secondary role. Research and teaching are, with good reason, given high priority at the university, which is distinguished by its research-based teaching, but a modern university is much more than that. This is clearly emphasised in the research evaluation that all departments and schools at AU are conducting these years. A common point across many academic environments has been that colleagues, in addition to research and teaching, are deeply engaged in a broad spectrum of knowledge exchange activities. At the same time, they find that formal recognition of activities other than publishing, securing external funding, and teaching leaves something to be desired, even though, for example, external collaboration or research dissemination can often create greater impact than peer-reviewed research articles in high-ranking journals.
AU's upcoming 2030 strategy, which is currently under review, places great emphasis on the value of various exchanges with the surrounding society. The European Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment (CoARA), which has served as a value-based foundation for the university's research evaluation, also emphasises the importance of recognising a wide range of activities. Finally, Universities Denmark have authored a Framework for the merit recognition of competencies and experiences in knowledge exchange with excellent recommendations on how we can operate with broader criteria for recognising merit. The area should therefore be gaining momentum, but in practice, it is still lagging.
Do we really want more metrics?
The question of broader merit recognition is also associated with several dilemmas. Prior to the research evaluation, the academic councils recommended that AU develop more comprehensive impact indicators, and several foreign universities are currently working on creating meaningful methods to register activities such as research dissemination, industry collaboration, and academic citizenship. That makes immediate sense, but on the other hand, we might ask ourselves whether we are not already spending more than enough time and energy documenting and measuring our efforts, and whether we really want more metrics.
How should junior researchers approach this?
At the same time, we risk putting younger colleagues at a disadvantage if we actively encourage them to engage in activities like research dissemination to a broader audience, only for them to later apply to other universities that still prioritise research and teaching above all. Additionally, many of the foundations that finance a significant portion of the university's research are likely to still focus on traditional research merits when evaluating an applicant's CV. In this perspective, how should we advise our younger colleagues to act in order to remain competitive internationally?
Let’s keep the discussion alive in all corners of the university
The best solutions to these challenges will most likely vary across different fields. Universities Denmark’s framework allows individual institutions and academic environments to decide how they will implement the document’s recommendations. This is commendable, but leaving the entire responsibility to individual departments also risks the framework’s good intentions being forgotten amid the Master’s reform and other urgent matters on the departments and schools’ daily agendas. Therefore, I urge that the discussion about broader merit recognition is kept alive in all corners of the university.
Let's start the discussion in the lunchroom
A natural starting point could be a review of our local hiring procedures. Typically, job advertisements include a short section on the importance of knowledge exchange, but are the applicants actually asked to document their experiences with this, and are the assessment committees instructed to emphasise it? Does the news on the websites reflect the width of the departments and schools' activities, or is the predominance of the news about major research grants? And do we have administrative staff at all faculties to support such activities? The formal framework is an important part of the issue, and there is undoubtedly room for improvement, but equally important is the culture within individual academic environments. How do we actually discuss the value of research dissemination, knowledge exchange, and academic citizenship over lunch? It is certainly of high importance that we talk about it.