[csaa-forum] ERA rankings

[Ned Rossiter]

after an exchange off-list, I've decided to qualify my earlier posting.

I appreciate the strategic need and rationale for nationally  
published, independent journals like MIA and also Arena, Meanjin,  
Overland, Fibreculture Journal, etc to be playing the ERA game.  And  
in that sense, the case and success of MIA is one I would support.  I  
didn't mean to dispute the quality or role of MIA (it is one of the  
few journals I have subscribed to, and intend to renew once I settle  
into wage labour again). My post was blunt to the point of reducing  
the complications/complexities that operate within the research  
funding/award system. Part of my intention was to hint at the  
(national/local) politics/vested interests that have obviously shaped  
the ranking outcomes.  The farce of impartiality is something that I  
find very difficult to take seriously in such exercises (many of  
which, it has to be said, define institutional life in academia), and  
because self-interest can never be declared as such, the academic  
community is supposed to accept a system that is, I would still  
maintain, inherently flawed.  For that reason I would reject it.

I'm also aware that it's easier to adopt such a position from outside  
Australia (though I remain institutionally connected/affiliated in  
Australia and therefore subject to its funding/research system).   
Nonetheless, I do not foresee the outcomes of the ERA determining  
where I (or others) publish, despite the documented funding/ 
institutional ramifications.

An alternative position: given the rule of the bell curve why not  
insist that all nationally/locally/independent published journals are  
assigned A* (MIA, Meanjin, Arena, FCJ, etc), journals that  
predominantly feature Australian academics get an A-B, and all T&F,  
Sage, etc journals get a C.  T&F journals like Continuum fall into C,  
but because they publish the work of many Australian academics they  
might as well get an A or B.

A proposal of this kind is as rational as any other, it supports  
local publishing industries, and it keeps many people happy. And it  
would ensure that the ERA as a system of self-interest and silly bell  
curves remains intact (which it no doubt will anyway).

Ned