University cash system 'sexist'

By STUART DYE

A rating system to determine how much money universities are given is under attack again - this time for discriminating against women.

The Performance-Based Research Fund, started in April, rewards tertiary institutes for the quality of their research rather than giving money based on the number of enrolments.

The system, run by the Tertiary Education Commission, has attracted criticism and controversy.

The latest comes from the Association of University Staff, which says women are much less likely than men to be rated as top researchers, and are over-represented in the R (research-inactive) category.

AUS spokeswoman Dr Liz Poole said the figures confirmed fears that the process would discriminate against women who had, for example, taken parental leave or other breaks to tend to family responsibilities.

"For many women, those years which are often considered to be potentially the most productive in terms of research are those which coincide with them being out of the workforce," she said.

"Where this occurs it will significantly diminish the assessment results for women staff, and it is difficult to believe that these will not have an influence on promotion."

The AUS says Performance-Based Research Fund results show only 2 per cent of women received an A rating, compared to 8 per cent of men.

Just over 16 per cent of women and 36 per cent of men received an A or B rating, and 53 per cent of women and 31 per cent of men received an R.

Women researchers received an average quality score of 1.69 out of 5, whereas the average for men was 3.14.

The results replicate the findings of British surveys. Research activity is one of the principal criteria for promotion in universities.

Dr Poole said that in protect against discrimination, the Performance-Based Research Fund should be changed to assess the research performance of groups and not look at the performance of individuals.

The Tertiary Education Commission's acting general manager, Max Kerr, said the Performance-Based Research Fund was undergoing a redesign process and the commission would raise the issue of whether the scoring system discriminated against women.

The issues facing women in research were similar to those facing emerging researchers and those on extended sick leave or long sabbaticals, Mr Kerr said.

In earlier disputes over the Performance-Based Research Fund, a comparison with English universities' performances was blocked after legal action by Auckland and Victoria Universities.

Other institutions said the system penalised subjects in which research was not fundamental.

They said it was also likely to give some skewed results because organisations with one excellent researcher could score higher than institutes with hundreds of good researchers.