The questions on notice to Academic Board concerning Socrates, and the answers from Robyn Owens, were circulated to our members. This is a summary of the responses, compiled by R da Silva Rosa. For example:-
“The general feedback I have received to what you circulated is that people don’t mind Socrates as a tool but they object to the reification of the indices given (i) the errors in the system and (ii) the “work” that becomes implicitly unvalued through omission. One example I have is textbooks I authored. The textbooks get zero points and the revision for the next editions get zero points, but as a teaching-research academic I see generating leading texts that go to second editions as a key academic contribution. A colleague of mine makes the same point about a psych test s/he has authored. It is a real product of an academic endeavor but accrues zero points. I wouldn’t mind that there are omissions as long people didn’t use the SI to judge my performance in its totality or believe that it is a valid indicator of my performance.”