Page 67 - Through the gate of the neoliberal academy • Herschberg

SELECTING EARLY-CAREER RESEARCHERS 65
The quote reveals the main argument expressed by most committee members in support of postdoc experience abroad: “You just learn more when you work in different places,” (which refers here to different countries). In the quote, respondent D questions if: “a foreign country is essential” in acquiring postdoc experience. Yet, respondent A legitimises the requirement by emphasising the “international field”, in which they operate. The interview data confirm that, overall, experience acquired in an institution abroad is considered superior to experience obtained in the home country. Most respondents took the criterion of international postdoc experience for granted, and did not question its relevance, thus consenting with macro- and meso- level criteria.
The analysis shows that the criterion of international postdoc experience demands mobility across country borders, which assumes that candidates are physically, psychologically, socially, and financially able to travel. This requirement can be exclusionary to early-career researchers who face restrictions to their international mobility and, thus, create inequality among candidates. Furthermore, the excerpt from the focus group reveals intergenerational inequality (Özbilgin, 2009) inherent in the selection process for assistant professors, showing that committee members hold applicants to standards that they “would not have met had they been held to them when they were junior scholars” (Özbilgin, 2009, p. 115). This implies that selection criteria have become increasingly demanding for early-career researchers.
Focus group respondents briefly discussed alternative forms of gaining international experience besides a postdoc abroad, such as short-term research visits, conference visits and international project cooperation. However, respondent D argued that the Institute’s director and Faculty Board do not value such alternatives. The respondent illustrated that the organisational culture, nourished by the dean and the director, imposes the criterion of international postdoc experience upon assistant professors. Not meeting this criterion has a derogatory connotation of being “provincial” (i.e. narrow-minded), which also implies lower quality. Respondent D expressed that he has difficulty with this connotation, as he thinks someone in his field without international work experience can be a good scientist. In contradiction to his colleagues, and to the findings at meso-level, he decouples internationalisation and quality. However, the respondent argued that committee members anticipate disapproval of the dean when nominating a candidate without international postdoc experience and, therefore, he complies with the departmental selection criterion. This is one of the few examples of compliance.
Further, the data reveal that some committee members restrict what counts as international experience. These committee members argued that international
3