Premium
No finish line: How formalization of academic assessment can undermine clarity and increase secrecy
Author(s) -
Helgesson Karin Svedberg,
Sjögren Ebba
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
gender, work and organization
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.159
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1468-0432
pISSN - 0968-6673
DOI - 10.1111/gwao.12355
Subject(s) - clarity , secrecy , discretion , flexibility (engineering) , excellence , ambiguity , transparency (behavior) , institution , public relations , law and economics , political science , computer science , sociology , economics , law , management , biochemistry , chemistry , programming language
This article analyses how formalization of promotion criteria and procedures influences clarity and transparency of academic assessment. Based on a longitudinal, structural micro‐study of a new tenure track system in a Swedish higher education institution, we find that inequality was reproduced through the choice of explicitly gendered metrics across all areas of assessment (research, teaching and service). We further demonstrate how the formalization of a ‘good enough’ standard, in addition to a standard of ‘excellence’, reinforced the scope for interpretational flexibility among assessors. This combination of explicitly gendered metrics and dual standards of performance gave gatekeepers broader discretion in hiding or communicating failure, with gendering effects. Finally, we conclude that the choices made about how to formalize assessment work placed a small group of senior academics firmly behind closed doors, thus ensuring that gatekeepers’ discretion and power were entrenched rather than restricted by formalization.