Knowledge production and consumption in British academia

Sharon McCulloch*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to Book/Report typesChapterpeer-review

Abstract (may include machine translation)

Both the production and consumption of knowledge in British academia have been transformed through changes in universities’ relationships with their staff and students. The introduction of tuition fees and the associated discourse around ‘value for money’ position students as making a personal investment intended primarily to contribute to economic rather than personal growth. The value of knowledge gained through higher education is, in this way, measured against graduates’ earnings and perceived usefulness to the economy.

Academics’ knowledge production is also subject to epistemological tensions. For example, increased pressure to win external funding may re-shape research agendas if priority is given to certain types of research likely to generate profit through commercial applications, patents, or spin-off projects. Even the language used to communicate institutional expectations about research to academics foregrounds certain aspects of knowledge production, obscuring its social aspects and disguising hierarchies of status and power that make good research possible. This chapter examines how language is used to promote an instrumental view of knowledge production, one that privileges its role in contributing to a strong economy at the expense of other purposes, such as the promotion of human flourishing or the creation of critical thinkers.


Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationLanguage and the Knowledge Economy
Subtitle of host publicationMultilingual Scholarly Publishing in Europe
PublisherTaylor and Francis
Pages25-43
Number of pages19
ISBN (Electronic)9781040318423
ISBN (Print)9781040318423, 9781032536705
DOIs
StatePublished - 22 Jan 2025

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Knowledge production and consumption in British academia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this