Education research Australia: a changing ecology of knowledge and practice

Education journals: A comparison of publishing patterns in Australian, German and English education journals

“…In fact, the Australian system was originally modelled on the English system (Forsyth, 2014; Gannaway, 2015; Marginson, 2014), but it equally developed its own unique features (Gannaway, 2015; Marginson, 2002). This was also the case for the discipline of education, as indicated for instance by Seddon et al (2013). Another reason for a comparison of the Australian and English HE contexts is the relatively frequent policy borrowing between the two contexts, as for instance in the area of quality assurance (e.g.…”

“…Yet, in 2009 the ACDE found that Australia was producing 5.4% of educational research published around the world. Subsequently, to investigate this mismatch and the ‘sub-ecologies’ of Australian educational research (Seddon et al, 2013), in 2011 the ARC funded an AARE/ACDE Strategic Capacity Building initiative which was aimed at strengthening national research capacity in the field of education (Harrison and Seddon, 2013). The project was undertaken by senior researchers from around Australia who volunteered to get involved and was aimed at mapping educational research in Australia to inform a strategic response to ERA 2010 and 2012.…”

“…Bobis et al further argued that the division of universities and teacher training colleges initiated by the former prime minister Menzies in 1958, the unification of the national system instigated by the Dawkins reforms in the late 1980s/early 1990s, and the more recent division of the system into HE and the vocational education and training sector in the late 2000s have all impacted on the educational research community in Australia. This historical development of Australian educational research has created divisions between distinctive educational communities of practice or as Seddon et al (2013) called them ‘sub-ecologies’. Seddon et al highlighted that recognising the historical complexities in the divisions between individual ‘sub-ecologies’ of Australian educational research which formed to support a range of ‘adult and school-based learning and development programs’ (Seddon et al, 2013: 447) could open up space for discussion about how these ‘sub-ecologies’ can inform and learn from one another.…”

“…This historical development of Australian educational research has created divisions between distinctive educational communities of practice or as Seddon et al (2013) called them ‘sub-ecologies’. Seddon et al highlighted that recognising the historical complexities in the divisions between individual ‘sub-ecologies’ of Australian educational research which formed to support a range of ‘adult and school-based learning and development programs’ (Seddon et al, 2013: 447) could open up space for discussion about how these ‘sub-ecologies’ can inform and learn from one another. The AARE/ACDE project revealed that the educational research community in Australia was spread among researchers in Education ‘academic organisational units’ (AOUs) classifying their research outputs as belonging to the Education ‘field of research’ (FoR), researchers in education AOUs perceiving their research as belonging to other FoRs, and researchers in other AOUs perceiving their research as belonging to the education FoR.…”

“…Bobis et al (2013) pointed out that the Education FoR should not be considered as synonymous with educational research. Adding to Seddon et al’s (2013) argument about building capacity in educational research by sharing across ‘sub-ecologies’, Bobis et al suggested the need to acknowledge the input of academic disciplines associated with Education and also the input beyond the Academy by ‘schools, workplaces and community learning agencies’ (Bobis et al, 2013: 469). Although seemingly more inclusive than the RAE/REF, as indicated by Furlong (2013), Bobis et al, on the other hand, perceived the ERA as an exercise similarly controlled by the ‘professional elites’ (Bobis et al, 2013: 469) which subscribes to the notion of ‘international excellence’ and that the ERA is driven by and drives internal promotion, tenure and review processes, as Yates (2016) reflected.…”