More on PBRF
An update to my earlier post.
- The total mount of PBRF funding is $250m a year, not $500m. I did take my figure from the Treasury Appropriations, but obviously misinterpreted it.
- PBRF funding is itself based on actual research done, not the level of research per average staff member, so the tactics used by VUW will not in itself lead to any increase in funding.
- It does however allow them to be placed higher up the comparative table with other universities. This is designed to increase their reputation, attract more staff, and possibly win contests with other universities for new schools, if any eventuate. Ironically I think their reputation gets lowered, not increased, by their attempt to artificially boost their average.
- Considering that they don’t actually gain any extra government funding from it (which I wasn’t clear about in the earlier post), I think it is ridiculous they spend so much time and energy trying to skew their averages, so people are fooled into thinking they are better ranked than they are.
- I understand that the tertiary education union has been concerned about this for sometime. Sadly their solution seems to be common to education unions – wanting the research data kept confidential! But they do support an investigation, which is good.
There’s been a number of releases in response to my blog post. They are:
- VUW, saying their independent investigation found no grounds for the allegations
- The TEU, backing the call for an independent investigation over the sector
- Labour saying there should be a review of the system
- Greens saying the system is at fault, not Vic Uni
It is worth noting that the PBRF was introduced by the former Labour Government, as far as I can tell.