What might happen to me?

[SuzieQuatro]

I'm a lecturer at a very prestigious university.

I'm shit at research and I actually hate doing it.

I really struggle to write papers (two so far this REF period, one graded 2 and the other 3 by internal review). I have attracted startlingly little research funding (less that £50,000 since January 2014).

I might just scrape four papers for REF 2021 if I can co-author with PhD students or colleagues. I can't see me attracting any remarkable funding.

I suspect that after REF 2021, everyone will be scrutinised for their contribution and I'll be identified as under-performing.

Do you think I'll get shifted on to a teaching only contract? Or do you think they'll put the wheels in motion to have me fired?

I'm a lecturer at a very prestigious university.

I'm shit at research and I actually hate doing it.

I really struggle to write papers (two so far this REF period, one graded 2 and the other 3 by internal review). I have attracted startlingly little research funding (less that £50,000 since January 2014).

I might just scrape four papers for REF 2021 if I can co-author with PhD students or colleagues. I can't see me attracting any remarkable funding.

I suspect that after REF 2021, everyone will be scrutinised for their contribution and I'll be identified as under-performing.

Do you think I'll get shifted on to a teaching only contract? Or do you think they'll put the wheels in motion to have me fired?

Sorry, no idea what just happened there.

Does your institution have permanent (and full-time?) teaching-only contracts in your field? I ask because in my subject-area teaching-only contracts are the first step after PhD - they are rarely longer than a year, or a year and then a further year, and the only ones which last longer are part-time. So there wouldn't be an option for a straightforward switch to teaching-only, really. There are also issues with workload - depending on the way workload models are handled, even fixed-term teaching-only roles can be really absurd in terms of amount of teaching - because the standard model isn't really designed for handling it.

The other thing to think about, is if you don't like the research, are you sure you want to stay in academia? For a lot of academics I know, the research is a big part of what keeps them in the job! I don't feel that way myself - I love teaching and don't always hate the admin, but having said that, research definitely consoles me for the worst parts of the latter two (and I am on one of these fixed-term teaching only contracts, so research isn't even a real part of my job at the moment).

The university I work at is putting in place a number of REF coordinator/facilitator type roles, who will be working with academics to identify ways of ensuring that the next REF submission is excellent. So I suspect you won't be left to drift until 2021. Can you engage now with the REF champions in your department or central administration and identify other ways of demonstrating impact without writing lengthy papers?

Yes, we do. Our university moved to a multi-track progression last year. We now have assistant through to full professors on either the research (100% research), teaching (80% teaching, 20% admin) or academic (40% teaching, 40% research and 20% admin) track. I'm on the academic track at the moment.

We do also have short term post-PhD teaching fellow contracts which are 1 year long.

You're right, I''m not sure I want to stay in academia but I'm also not sure what else I can do

I'm a social scientist so there's not exactly a thriving private sector for us like there would be in STEM.

Plus, I do absolutely love the teaching so I don't really want to leave that behind.

thereinmadnesslies We are also appointing these REF manager-type people but they tend to work with heads of research rather than individual staff. The issue is that I'm not sure what working with these REF people could do for me because I know I'm shit at research, I know I need more grants and more papers it's just that I'm not good enough to get them. Plus, I'm not actually that bothered about getting them- I find research tedious, difficult and unrewarding.

Could you positively move into full teaching track now, before ref 2021? Os there a mentor / someone you could talk to about switching and running down grants etc? That would be seen more positively than drifting I would think.

bigkidsdidit I'm torn about this. I can see the benefits but those on the teaching only track are treated like second class citizens and it's very very hard to get promoted on the teaching track.

It might be hard to get promoted on the teaching track but realistically with what you describe above you won't be able to stay on the academic track. Pretty much all UK universities are likely to become harsher over the coming years and you can anticipate being managed out of your jobs unless your research performance improves.

You could be me. I have survived 25 years in a research intensive university without being research active to any great extent. I have survived a couple of culls, but that has been by being part-time.

Options - attach yourself to a successful research group and do the dull things that nobody enjoys like analysis of data, polishing publications (working with researchers whose first language is not English gets you onto papers without too much effort). This is how I got through the last REF (only needed 2 publications for that one due to part-time). This will get you through REf but won't be good for promotion etc, this is a survival tactic rather than prospering.

• take up a significant admin role (this is how I got promoted in the end) and use this to further justify doing less research (I developed a detailed workload model for my dept which was a deliverable for my promotion and also justified my non-research activeness). The risk with this is that admin roles tend to be for fixed periods so you can suddenly get dropped back into vulnerability.

-go for a teaching only job, I would do this in an instant if my institution had them. With TEF rolling down the road I can see a clear change in attitude towards teaching focus, I think we will see a clearer equivalence of status between teaching and research in the near future. My University has now explicit promotion criteria for teaching and admin based cases, unthinkable a few years ago.

In the meantime, record all positive evidence of teaching excellence, student feedback etc and be as good a teacher as you can. I think that a clear focus on excellent teaching and admin is better than half-hearted research. I do this job because I genuinely enjoy being with and helping students; this has been deeply unfashionable in academia for a long time, but I think the tide is turning (even in this university which does not mention "student", "teaching" or "education" in its mission statement!).

I think we will see a clearer equivalence of status between teaching and research in the near future.

I don't agree. In every university I have worked at, there has been a strong correlation between strong teaching and strong research. Those who are strongest in teaching are also strong in research - although there are certainly some who are strong in research but lazy/not interested in teaching.

In the coming years I think there will be pressure to deliver good teaching in addition to, rather than instead of, strong research. This is certainly the strategy of my own university.

TEF is also a game playing exercise. It does not measure actual teaching quality, but proxy measures. The focus will be on playing those measures.

userI think has identified some important points- you might expect the TEF to refocus on teaching, but in fact the TEF main measures are things like the NSS which often founders on things like library resources and the other measure employability which needs specific attention. In other words, unless the modules/teaching offered is sub-standard, being a good teacher is now becoming a standard which everyone is expected to attain rather than something that only a few individuals can excel at. So, your value to the institution as an individually brilliant teacher is not as high as as an individually brilliant (or leading a workstream) researcher.

I think chemenger has some good points, however I also think that the pressure to perform must make for some troubling and stressful times, because essentially the game is still to produce research. If you really hate research that much, and aren't just having a lull which we all have, then perhaps swapping to the teaching pathway wouldn't be that bad anyway?

It sounds like trying to proactively move to a teaching-only role is the best option then - the other options would probably be either more admin (e.g. Dean type roles, as pps suggested), or perhaps even thinking about working in one of the support areas? For example, moving into Student Support services (including Study Advice), or the Careers service, or something like that? You'd still have the interaction with students, but would be taking a step away from academia if that's what you'd prefer.

Have you considered educational research in your field?

You could look at moving to a less prestigious/research intensive university. There tends to be more emphasis on teaching there.

Otherwise try and carve a niche for yourself. Get involved in student experience work maybe- that is clearly where all the TEF effort is going to end up focused rather than actually improving teaching

Collaboration. Get talking to interesting colleagues at your own or other institutions. Become a very good Co-Investigator - be prepared to do RA type work as a collaborator. Organise seminars, conferences. Go to seminars, conferences. Get a network active, and supporting you.

But I do find it odd to hear an academic say she doesn't like doing research. It's the only reason I'm in the job - although I'm a good teacher & enjoy teaching. If it weren't for the research I'd go & earn pots of money & only work 40 hours a week in the civil service.

Can you articulate what it is you "hate" about research?

And can you have a good think about the possible connection between your (very harsh) self-assessment that you're "shit" at it, and that you say you "hate" it?

THese 2 statements seem to me to have a connection. It sounds to me as though you judge yourself very harshly to the point where it's not constructive. YOu need to be easier on yourself.

If you were my colleague, I would be probing this, and trying to get you to break down those big concepts: "shit at research" and "hate research" - which bits are the bits you think you're no good at? Which bits are the bits you hate?

It distresses me to hear such distress & self-beating up. it's unnecessary. Just by doing are jobs reasonably well, at the minimum, we are doing very well - academics are extraordinarily hard workers just by doing the minimums required of us. We hold ourselves to such high standards.

I want you just to breathe, and try to break down your feelings into constituent parts (analyse!) to see where there can be gains made, initially in your own mind set and professional self-esteem. It sounds as though you have imposters syndrome times 10!

If you do't want to answer the questions I pose here in MN, that's understandable, but if you do, I'm sure we're all here for you.

Thanks everyone. I guess being performanced managed onto a teaching contract would be my ideal situation . But I'm reluctant to jump before I'm pushed because I don't want to be perceived as having taken the "easy" option (not that I think teaching is easy but that's certainly the perception where I work).

I hear the point about moving to a less prestigious university but the reason I enjoy teaching so much is because my students are mostly incredibly bright, engaged and motivated and will challenge me and have excellent debates. I've heard some real horror stories about teaching intensive universities!

Wayhey Your post is incredibly supportive, thank you. I think I'm shit at research because it seems everything I do is continually rejected. The two papers I have for REF2021 were both written with massive inputs from colleagues. I have a poor grasp of the literature as I find reading papers really difficult (I struggle to follow them and straight after reading them I find myself stumped as to what they were actually about!).
I think it's partly because of this that I don't enjoy research. I also don't enjoy the theoretical framing of papers (partly because I have a poor grip on these theoretical frameworks) which likely ends up not right for the reviewers anyway. I also don't actually like the academic publishing model very much as it feels like navel gazing and lacking in any sort of impact or importance.

I am a very good networker but no networking has produced grants yet. This networking has got me co-authorships but mostly on articles outside of my core discipline so not REFable.

I'm in social sciences, not sure if I mentioned that before.

Might you have more to offer on the impact side then? I struggled with the REF as I face a REF panel which is not my natural discipline and my papers are well-received and have impact in good clinical/applied journals but aren't theoretically dense enough to please the REF panel. I've kind of made my peace with this, or do the odd REF facing article, and then others which keep my funders/core audience happy. It can be difficult to please everybody. If you have colleagues/networks and prefer the impact/applied side, then getting grants may be a strength for you, so start to fish about for who is interested in collaborating and put in at least a couple of small/medium ones for yourself. Then if your papers are solid rather than sparkling REF-wise, that won't matter so much. That's my strategy anyway, I do well on grants/impact, less well on 4 papers, there are people who manage to do all, but if I look at my colleagues, very few have huge grants, 4 and impact case studies, there's far more that don't than do. It's easy to see the few 'stars' and imagine everyone in your department is like that, but I recently had to look through grant holdings and I was surprised how few academics actually were holding current grants at our research intensive uni.

Could you also look at placements in government policy units so that a) you get insight into the more applied side of social research and b) develop another string to your bow (impact and/or consultancy type work). At my research intensive institute they're always offering such placements. They look like very interesting possibilities.

And yes, check you're not being too hard on yourself. I should know, see my user name!

Are you an academic yourself, user?

If so, have you not noticed that the culture is changing and things that previously seemed unthinkable (e.g. widespread redundancies) are actually happening at some UK universities? Those being sacked at Manchester weren't alcohols or physically violent.

I left academia after the PhD. I've actually sent this friend some of the threads from this forum, and he still thinks academia is a better gig than the private sector. (I'm expecting the usual "that's because he is a privileged white man" reply to this).
I think job security in academia remains significantly better than any other profession (even though it has got more insecure, everything else has become super-insecure so the gap has been retained overall).
There is also a well known tactic among academics of exaggerating how bad the conditions are to put-off any potential upstarts who might come in and take there jobs (I'm not saying this is happening here, but I have seen it happen in a couple of universities I've studied at, and I think it is a very distasteful thing to do).
There was a thread on here a while ago. A couple of professors said they wouldn't go down the academic route again, and then another poster said they thought a lot of the scientific research could be done outside of a university setting. Those two professors then reacted very angrily, and suddenly became pro-university. Something similar is happening to Academics Anonymous - some posters are now saying it should be taken down as it is doing harm to the sector.
It's hard to discriminate on Academics Corner between the posts in which someone is merely venting after a hard week, and when they are making a legitimate point about conditions in the sector.
I left academia because I wasn't happy with the tuition fee rises. I disagree with a system that puts young people into so much debt.
I know plenty of people who went on the marches then knuckled down and are doing very nicely. So my sympathy is limited.

There is also a well known tactic among academics of exaggerating how bad the conditions are to put-off any potential upstarts who might come in

Oh that's rubbish. In fact I think my junior colleagues (are they "upstarts" in your definition?) have it far worse than me in terms of what they're expected to do early in a career. Doesn't stop them being enthusiastic about the work & HE generally, and excellent & encouraging PhD supervisors.

I know plenty of people who went on the marches then knuckled down and are doing very nicely. So my sympathy is limited.

Well, you know, I know vegetarians who wear leather shoes. I know people who work on climate change research who have children, drive cars, and travel by aeroplane.

We can't all be sea green incorruptible. We all make compromises. We all have rent to pay, food to buy, need clothes, heating, and medical care.

user Are you on glue? I think academia can be a better gig than the private sector but it's still fucking shit. It's not a race to the bottom.

Thanks for everyone's replies. Unfortunately part of my being shit at research is also being pretty hopeless at impact . Because I haven't had any big grants in, I've not had any projects to sink my teeth into and get some real impact work done. I've had conversations with 'stakeholders' but that's been about it- I don't have the substantial research evidence to support impactful work.

I know about the policy placements you mean but they often require a move to London, which I can't do for family reasons.

It sounds like I'm making excuses for my crapness and just batting away all of your great suggestions- I'm not, I'm just trying to demonstrate that I really am shit at research