S/he who pays the piper calls the tune? Professionalism, developmentalism, and the paucity of in‐service education within the research profession

Abstract

This paper focuses on the research‐related, in‐service professional development of social science academic researchers. It identifies as a gap in provision the paucity of provision of career‐long training in the ‘creative’ elements of research practice—specifically the methodological skills that have the potential to enhance individuals’ research capacity. It is observed that academic researching generally lacks the regulatory and quality control mechanisms to which many other professions are subject. This has led to continuing professional development being under‐prioritised, as well as being largely determined by employers (mainly universities). Since these employers are primarily concerned with the benefits that research activity brings to institutional status, prestige and reputation, and, connected to this, income generation, the continuing professional development they provide and promote is directed towards achieving these benefits, which—for the most part—are achievable irrespective of researchers’ development levels in relation to the ‘creative’ elements of research practice. Development of these elements therefore remains under‐prioritised.

Notes

1. I use the term ‘researcher’ in the context of this paper to refer both to academics for whom research is, or is intended to be, a component of their work and of their contractual responsibilities, and to those employed in research‐only roles.

2. Hoyle has recently re‐named these terms as ‘the institutional component of professionalization’ and ‘the service component connoting the process whereby the knowledge, skill and commitment of practitioners is continuously enhanced in the interests of clients’ (Hoyle, 2008, pp. 287 & 288; original emphases).

3. The precise meaning of ‘better’, in this context, is an issue that needs analysing, but space restrictions prevent its analysis in this paper. Such analysis would incorporate consideration of, inter alia, interpretations of ‘better’ in relation to for whom and from whose perspective.

4. Used here as a noun.