input with options: As academic work is becoming arguably more precarious and competitive, shorter contracts are becoming the norm, and the number of people completing PhDs in the UK is increasing, the risks associated with researching academia are high. This post discusses and explores my experiences of being a PhD student researching women’s lived experiences of research evaluation in the UK, and my thoughts on and experiences of interviewing very senior and esteemed academics as a junior researcher. My PhD study explored research evaluation in the form of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) – a weighty force in UK academia – the outcomes of which, I argue, hold the potential to alter the course of an academic career considerably, as well as playing a role in the type of work that some academics do, particularly given the REF impact agenda. There is currently an international trend towards research evaluation with programmes such as the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA), the Performance-Based Research fund in New Zealand (PBRF), and equivalents in countries including Denmark, Switzerland and the Netherlands. What is clear is that there is not enough qualitative, exploratory research into the effects of research evaluation on academic careers, especially for women, and so my PhD study was born. My findings suggest that research evaluation in the UK actively contributes to the continuance of gender inequality regimes in the academy, and that the ability to negotiate managerial control and be politically savvy is increasingly important in the academic world. Before embarking on my PhD, I was acutely aware of the sensitivity of my research, as well as my own positionality with regards to my participants. Reflection is and was an important element in the research process for me, as it allowed me to reflect on the effects of the self on the research process and, ultimately, also on the data, as well as the various power dynamics discernible during interviews for my study. I was continually taken aback by participants’... According to the above context, answer the following question. What does the author likely believe?
output: That women deserve equal treatment.

input with options: I end this small run of blog posts with the question posed by Professor Brian Boyd at the beginning of our evening: Do we want to close the achievement gap? We know we can close the gap. It’s been done or almost been done before in Scottish education, but the answers have been ignored as they pass us by. The simple clue is this: poverty is single biggest predictor of achievement, and according to research (Hammonds sic, reference required), aged 10, a child living in poverty is 60% less likely to get to university. Boyd borrowed from his own mother’s report card to ask us what kind of education we desire. Is it the academic success at all costs route, or is there another option we need to value as much, if not more? His mother’s report card, one that prevented her from becoming a secondary school pupil in Glasgow, is filled with G and FG, until the last point: Character and conduct - excellent. What kind of pupils do we want to develop in Scotland? What do we value in our assessment system? Opening up opportunity for all is a tough game to play when the examination system rewards only certain types of behaviour, few of them related to what the Curriculum for Excellence says we stand for. In his own small community in East Kilbride, three secondary schools enter a period of meltdown as the local rag sets about creating its own local league table of performance, with those three ‘teams’ in competition for the top spot (or at least not the bottom one). Therefore, we must stop basing “the gap” largely on attainment. First of all, Boyd would like us to remove the traditional, and non-sensical academic/vocational divide. Is the law or medicine degree we value not vocational? (Are all General Practitioners not Plumbers, as Dr Murray on the panel suggests?) According to the above context, answer the following question. In whose own small community in East Kilbride is the writer referring to?
output: Professor Brian Boyd

input with options: SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA — U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear agreement is not expected to derail diplomatic momentum to reach a deal to end North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, but it could complicate the negotiation process, analysts say. Trump on Tuesday announced that the United States is ending its participation in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that lifted sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran limiting its nuclear program, and would re-impose U.S. economic sanctions on Iran. The agreement was negotiated by the administration of Trump’s predecessor, President Barack Obama, and involved five other world powers; Great Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia. Trump’s National Security Adviser John Bolton said the U.S. decision to re-impose sanctions on Iran will set a higher standard for North Korea nuclear talks by sending, “a very clear signal that the United States will not accept inadequate deals.” The U.S. policy reversal on Iran should not seriously impede diplomatic progress underway with North Korea, said Victor Cha, a noted Korea scholar with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “In terms of how the North Koreans would take it, I don’t think they’d take it one way or the other. I don’t think they’d see it as negative or positive because they think they’re different from anybody else anyway. They think they’re a very special case,” Cha said at a CSIS conference this week. While the Iran deal limited that country’s efforts to develop a nuclear bomb, North Korea already possesses 20 to 60 nuclear warheads, according assessments by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency, and between 40 to 100 nuclear development facilities, according a report from the RAND Corporation security research organization. But apprehension over whether future U.S. presidents would uphold a nuclear deal reached by Trump could reinforce the North Korean demand for early concessions. John Delury, a North... According to the above context, answer the following question. What job does John Bolton have?
output: National Security Advisor

input with options: I have been the brunt of cruelty from a doctor a number of times but I will relate one that has always stayed with me since I was a child. I was approximately 8 years and it happened to be summer. Baseball was a true love and my brothers and friends played daily. In the summer, all we wore were cut off jeans and nothing else. I had stepped on a rusty nail and it became infected. Time for a Tetanus shot! This was a typical occurrence for us during the summer. There was only one doctor within a one hundred square mile area and his name was Doctor Brandenbury. He was a very unpleasant, elderly man that my brothers and I did not care for since he was just a mean, old bastard. So I am shuffled off to his office and of course after hearing what had a occurred and examining my foot agreed I needed the Tetanus shot. I make a very innocent request as he is about to give me the shot. Since I knew the shot would stiffen my arm and essentially cause pain I would take it in my left arm so my throwing arm would not be affected. I tried to request this from the doctor but he did not wish to hear anything from me. He said "I don't give a fuck what arm you get it in." He grabbed me roughly by the right arm and used the needle like a dart and just slammed it into my arm. I had never had a problem with shots before but that REALLY hurt. I started crying. He instructed my mother "To get me the Hell out of his office." Needless to say my mother never took any of us to see this old, miserable bastard again. She found another doctor that actually treated us like we were human. According to the above context, answer the following question. where the boy go with his mom?
output:
Doctor Brandenbury's office