M. A. Day and colleagues surveyed 171 Early and Mid Career Researcers(EMCRs) in SHAPE disciplines on what was wrong and would improve their working their lives. The responses were loud and clear.
That is SHAPE as in “Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts for People and the Environment disciplines,” which sector, the authors argue, is not properly represented in studies of mainly STEM ECRs.
“SHAPE disciplines have been disproportionately affected by the reshaping of Higher Education in Australia, under what has been described as the ‘tyranny of relevance’,” the authors write.
This impacts on funding, meaning SHAPE EMCRs teach more and research less. Plus they feel undervalued and abandoned by their universities. There are, “machiavellian industrial relations practices based on precarity and exploitation,” one responder reported, “The jobs and opportunities that are available are ridiculously competitive. For the fortunate ones with jobs, the workloads can be brutal,” added another.
Overall the survey identified ways changes to support people in SHAPE, including,
- Research funding specifically for them and less reliance on STEM focused performance metrics
- Workloads based on a recognition of, “the importance of these disciplines to society”
- “Urgently end the casualisation of academic work”
- Institutional recognition and advocacy, “highlighting a need for universities and industry to support and advocate for SHAPE disciplines at a national level, and to prioritise and value the work of SHAPE EMCRs”
“It is clear that substantive reform is urgently required to address the unique challenges faced by SHAPE EMCRs,” (and) a pressing need for a shift away from narrow neoliberalism frameworks, that provide SHAPE EMCRs with the esteem and recognition they merit,” the authors’ conclude.