Aotearoa/New Zealand and Practice as Research

Abstract

As I write this chapter, arts academics throughout Aotearoa/New Zealand are preparing their ‘evidence portfolios’ (EPs) for the 2012 Performance- Based Research Fund (PBRF) round as instituted by the national Tertiary Education Organisation (TEO). The performance referred to in PBRF is the more prosaic meaning of the word, referring to working effectiveness and assessable accomplishments. In PBRF this is measured through ‘quality evaluation’ of research outputs, the number of student degree completions within departments and the wider university and, the amount of external research income attracted within the given five-year period. A large percentage of government funding and overall university rankings is determined through the PBRF process. As such, universities are pitted against each other in a race for the best funding and the most prestigious ranking. The process invariably filters down to individual academic staff with the pressure to procure the highest possible individual grade for their own research and in turn lift the ranking of their university. At the moment to be considered non-research-active in an Aotearoa/New Zealand university may be tantamount to being persona non grata. With seemingly every university and academic focused on research ranking and assessment it is an appropriate time to pause and reflect on Practice as Research (hereafter PaR) and its place within Aotearoa/New Zealand.