Devaluing the critical space: How the adherence to policy can steer perceptions of impact in educational research

This paper problematizes the concept of higher education as a critical space for academic research and informed debate when addressing impact in educational research. It suggests that academic institutions are complicit in meeting the assumed needs of government. Through an analysis of education-related impact case studies, submitted to the research exercise framework of 2014, academics are seen to value research studies that are perceived to comply with policy agenda. Despite a system of peer review, it appears that top-down implementation of policy is prevalent whilst criticality is compromised. It is argued, then, that in the current model, academics’ interpretation of the REF process can impact on the perceived quality of academic research in education, and the nature and purpose of higher education institutions; thus, generating much potential for anti-intellectualism.