The rhetoric of "excellence" is pervasive across the academy. It is used to refer to research outputs as well as researchers, theory and education, individuals and organizations, from art history to zoology. But does "excellence" actually mean anything? Does this pervasive narrative of "excellence" do any good? Drawing on a range of sources we interrogate "excellence" as a concept and find that it has no intrinsic meaning in academia. Rather it functions as a linguistic interchange mechanism. To investigate whether this linguistic function is useful we examine how the rhetoric of excellence combines with narratives of scarcity and competition to show that the hyper-competition that arises from the performance of "excellence" is completely at odds with the qualities of good research. We trace the roots of issues in reproducibility, fraud, and homophily to this rhetoric. But we also show that this rhetoric is an internal, and not primarily an external, imposition. We conclude by proposing an alternative rhetoric based on soundness and capacity-building. In the final analysis, it turns out that that "excellence" is not excellent. Used in its current unqualified form it is a pernicious and dangerous rhetoric that undermines the very foundations of good research and scholarship. This article is published as part of a collection on the future of research assessment.

Spinal cord injury often results in permanent and devastating neurological deficits and disability. This is due to the limited regenerative capacity of neurones in the central nervous system (CNS). We recently demonstrated that a transcription factor retinoic acid receptor beta2 (RARbeta2) promoted axonal regeneration in adult sensory neurones located peripherally. However, it is not known if RARbeta2 can promote axonal regeneration in cortical neurones of the CNS. Here, we demonstrate that delivery of RARbeta2 via a lentiviral vector to adult dissociated cortical neurones significantly enhances neurite outgrowth on adult cortical cryosections, which normally provide an unfavourable substrate for growth. We also show that lentiviral-mediated transduction of corticospinal neurones resulted in robust transgene expression in layer V corticospinal neurones and their axonal projections in the corticospinal tract (CST) of the spinal cord. Expression of RARbeta2 in these neurones enhanced regeneration of the descending CST fibres after injury to these axons in the mid-cervical spinal cord. Furthermore, we observed functional recovery in sensory and locomotor behavioural tests in RARbeta2-treated animals. These results suggest that a direct and selective delivery of RARbeta2 to the corticospinal neurones promotes long-distance functional regeneration of axons in the spinal cord and may thus offer new therapeutic gene strategy for the treatment of human spinal cord injuries.

No abstract

Increasingly, preprints are at the center of conversations across the research ecosystem. But disagreements remain about the role they play. Do they “count” for research assessment? Is it ok to post preprints in more than one place? In this paper, we argue that these discussions often conflate two separate issues, the history of the manuscript and the status granted it by different communities. In this paper, we propose a new model that distinguishes the characteristics of the object, its “state”, from the subjective “standing” granted to it by different communities. This provides a way to discuss the difference in practices between communities, which will deliver more productive conversations and facilitate negotiation, as well as sharpening our focus on the role of different stakeholders on how to collectively improve the process of scholarly communications not only for preprints, but other forms of scholarly contributions.

No abstract