As the way academics work becomes increasingly specified and regulated, the role of the public intellectual, as championed by Burawoy and exemplified by Jakubowicz, is changing. Engagement with the professions and industry is being proposed as a requirement for a research-active academic. Prescriptions for the way this might happen have the potential to remove the sense of responsibility inherent in Burawoy’s notion of the public intellectual and the suggested use of social media to promote new knowledge potentially dilutes the notion of ‘publics’ which is fundamental to the notion of the public intellectual, substituting the individual for the collective. This in turn has an impact on the kind of informed debate that can influence policy development. This paper explores the narratives of new academics as they seek to answer the questions Giddens asserted were fundamental to the creation of identity in late modernity – What to do? How to act? Who to be? It positions these narratives of identify in a broader discourse of the role of the academic in the creation of new knowledge, perceptions of the role of the university in contemporary Australian culture and the constraints of work planning and performance management.

中文翻译：

---

公共知识分子的制度化

随着学者工作方式的日益规范和规范，由Burawoy倡导并由Jakubowicz加以例证的公共知识分子的角色正在发生变化。提议与专业和行业互动是研究活跃型学术人员的要求。可能发生这种情况的处方有可能消除Burawoy的公共知识分子概念中固有的责任感，建议使用社交媒体促进新知识的使用可能会稀释“公共”概念，而这是“公共”概念的基础。公共知识分子，用个人代替集体。反过来，这又会影响可以影响政策制定的知情辩论。本文探索了新学者的叙事方式，他们试图回答吉登斯断言的问题，这些问题对于现代晚期的身份创造至关重要-该怎么办？怎么做？成为谁 它将身份认同的叙事置于学者在创造新知识中的作用，对大学在当代澳大利亚文化中的作用的理解以及工作计划和绩效管理的局限性的广泛论述中。