Today, many academics feel stuck between a rock and a hard place. They’re under huge pressure to write and publish but an ever-growing mountain of teaching and admin is stopping them doing just that. Our research finds that whilst nobody is immune to these pressures, some academics cope better than others – and that’s because over the years, they’ve developed personal “systems” to help them write. We recently carried out in-depth interviews with 23 scholars across the UK, Europe and the US. We deliberately chose a diverse group so as to not make any assumptions based on age, seniority, or research background. Academic experience ranged from six months to 27 years and subject fields ranged from social sciences, economics, business, and arts. We did this as part of our user research to inform the development of Prolifiko – a digital coaching tool for writers. Whilst every academic had developed a writing productivity system personal to them, we found there were six common “habits” that the most prolific (and generally least stressed) academics tended to use. 1. They “time-block” their writing in advance Scheduling – booking in time to write in advance – was the single most common habit of our writers. It didn’t appear to matter what type of time-blocking method a scholar chose to use or how lengthy a writing session was. Some blocked out long periods of time on sabbatical, whilst others preferred to block out short, regular times throughout the day or across a week. What seemed to matter far more was the act of planning, as this mentally prepared the individual for writing – and so made the process easier and less stressful. “When I need to write I block out time. I’m lucky in that I can work from home – I block out a couple of straight days to do the writing and I plan it in beforehand. I couldn’t really write in any other way than blocking out that time.” According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: After interviewing 23 scholars, how does the author probably feel about the pressures of academics? Options: - They feel lucky they can work from home - not enough information - Nobody is immune to the pressures and wants to help find ways to help those - They feel generally least stresses
Nobody is immune to the pressures and wants to help find ways to help those

Years back, following a transition inside a large company where many people got fired and moved around, the decision was made to give the remaining people more work. Now, let me pause here, when I say, “more work” did not mean more of the existing work they already did. “More work” did not mean work of what they already knew, or signed up for when they were hired. More work meant incorporating a completely different role. For me, I’m a programmer. And “management” decided they wanted programmers to also do BA work. Now, mind you, nowhere on my employment contract does it state I’d have to take a BA role. And nowhere on my employment contract did it state taking a BA role would also require me doing all of my programming work. So, after being pushed a few times to attend BA meetings, I got fed up. So I pulled my manager into a meeting and explained this to him. I said, you have two choices: I do two roles, BA and programmer, and I get a new salary to account for the role. When he asked how much, I said, take my salary and multiply by 1.6. Option 2, I go back to programming, and you never pull me into a meeting again on BA work. It’s not what you hired me for, and it’s not what you pay me for. When my boss replied, “Our company is not in the position to pay for two roles”, I told him, then it sounds like Option 2. And by the way, I don’t ever want to have this discussion again. If you want Superman performance, you cannot pay Clark Kent wages. 1 year passed and I was never bothered again about BA roles. Takeaways: Middle managers are one step above one-celled organisms. They can, and will try to get you to do non-role work, with no intention of ever paying you more. They key is to cut it off at the pass. According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: How long did the meeting with a manager probably lasted? Options: - not enough information - About five minutes - Multi-day offsite retreats - About an hour
About an hour

At an early meeting of the British Sociological Association’s “Activism in Sociology Forum” members met to discuss how we might play a more campaigning role in the world outside the academy. Pragmatically, academics tend to work long hours. We are faced with multiple and competing demands: teaching, administration, publishing, marketing, research, grant-bidding, and so on. The REF has ramped up the requirement to demonstrate the efficacy of our research in “the real world” (our impact upon society, economy, and culture rather than upon knowledge per se, or upon the academic discipline). Maybe here – I suggested, as my contribution to the meeting – was a chance for those of us interested in progressing social justice to lever officially sanctioned space, in our busy day-to-day lives, to do more of this sort of work? Maybe we should welcome the REF impact agenda? I learned afterwards that eminent British sociologists, whom I respect enormously, regarded such a viewpoint as “naïve” and “embarrassing”. Indeed, critics interpret REF as just one mode of the heightened, neoliberal, managerial control that is degrading academic life and infesting universities. So, how should we think about the REF impact agenda? Because of its obvious connections with social improvement and reform through policy action, social policy is regarded as one disciplinary area that is well-placed to meet and benefit from the impact agenda. Yet there has been surprisingly little concerted discussion amongst scholars about REF and impact. This is despite the fact that many millions of pounds of public funding accrue to the proposed or claimed impact of research (with monies channelled through research councils to individual projects or via regular, six-yearly centralised assessments of the quality of research in university departments). In addition, there is substantial funding directed toward the “impact industry”; the consultants, think tanks, PR firms, funding schemes, new software programmes, impact managers, specialist impact case study... According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: Who thought the narrator's viewpoint was naive? Options: - British sociologists - not enough information - her professor - her friends
