Research reviews

Review of research

Over recent years, a great deal of attention has been focused on the provision of research degree programmes (RDP) in higher education. Much of this attention can be traced back to the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) 'Review of Research' consultation (March 2001) and related reports.

• Royal Society report 'A higher degree of concern' (January 2008)
  
• Inquiry into the sustainability of the Higher Education Sector (November 2006)
  
• Review of Research: England (March 2001)
  
• Research and Knowledge Age: Scotland (2000)
  
• Review of Research: Wales (2000)

Royal Society report: 'A higher degree of concern' (January 2008)

This report from the Royal Society is the second and final phase of a project examining science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) higher education in the UK. It focuses on postgraduate degrees and also draws upon the findings of both the reports to make recommendations regarding how UK STEM higher education can remain fit for purpose into the middle of the next decade and beyond.

It covers the recent trends in postgraduate STEM courses, including the growth in non-UK students who choose to come to the UK to study and the relative decline in UK-domiciled doctoral graduates in science subjects (down from 65% to 57% of all doctorates awarded to UK researchers).

The key recommendations are:

• courses in core STEM subjects need to be sustained at all levels of HE
• the UK should move to a (properly funded) 'Bologna-aligned' eight years for HE. Within this there should be flexibility of timescales and mode of study to suit students and the subject matter
• the UK should be defended as a destination of choice for higher education studies.
• Further Information and a copy of the report

Back to top

 

Inquiry into the sustainability of the higher education sector (November 2006)

In 2006, the House of Commons Education and Skills Committee undertook two inquiries into the higher education sector:

• the implications of the Bologna Process for the UK HE sector
• the future sustainability of the HE sector

The inquiry on the Bologna Process examined the advantages and disadvantages of the Process for the UK and helped to clarify the UK's position ahead of the May 2007 Ministerial Summit. It will also look at the broader impact of the Bologna Process across Europe.

The inquiry into the future sustainability of the higher education sector looked at the role of universities over the next 5 - 10 years: what do students, employers, society want from HE, how should HE be funded, and what is the best structure?

• Full report volume 1
  
• Full report volume 2

Back to top

Review of Research: England (March 2001)

The HEFCE Review of Research made four recommendations concerning the training of research students.

1. Research training should be the subject of a separate, but linked, assessment process to the RAE.
   
2. Funding provided by the HEFCE for the training of postgraduate researchers should be calculated and allocated separately from the funding provided for research.
   
3. The HEFCE, together with the Research Councils and other stakeholders such as industry and charities, should develop minimum requirements which departments would need to satisfy in order to be eligible for HEFCE funding for postgraduate researcher training. The research assessment process should be extended to establish whether departments comply with these minimum standards.
   
4. Collaborative arrangements should be established to enable units to meet all aspects of the postgraduate research training requirements, where they might not be able to do so alone. The HEFCE should separately work up the practical arrangements to implement this recommendation.

The three sub-groups for this review all highlighted the importance of research degree programmes.

Sub-group 1: Sub-group to consider the role of quality assurance and evaluation

Chaired by Professor Sir Gareth Roberts, then Vice Chancellor, University of Sheffield

"One of the principal outputs of the research base is a supply of trained researchers. These individuals may go on to pursue academic careers, but increasingly they are required by society generally, and industry in particular. However, the supply and development of such individuals, including postgraduate and postdoctoral researchers, is not currently addressed either by the current Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) or by Teaching Quality Assessment (TQA). Research training is a key indicator of sustainability and therefore warrants more explicit recognition in the assessment process. We therefore recommend that research training and career development be the subject of a separate, but linked, assessment process."

Sub-group 2: Sub-group to consider the interaction between teaching, research and other activities of HEIs

Chaired by Professor Howard Newby, then Vice-Chancellor, University of Southampton

"We are concerned that the rapid expansion of postgraduate research activity in the sector, coupled with the determination of many institutions to develop their research profile, in some cases from a very low base, has resulted in an inappropriate dispersal of postgraduate research trainees. As a result some of these trainees are isolated, lack physical and intellectual support, and do not receive a level of training that prepares them either for career in academe or outside it. Responses to the call for evidence shared our concerns and showed widespread support for a move towards greater concentration of research training. Our concern is to balance the legitimate aspiration of institutions to develop their research capability with the rights of students to receive an appropriate research training."

The issues would seem to us to be as follows:

• increasingly the range of research skills and experiences students require cannot be supplied by a single thesis supervisor; this holds just as much in the arts and humanities as in the sciences
• there are significant economies of scale in the delivery of research training, particularly the generic skills acquired early in the training experience
• increasingly, globalisation requires that students' training experiences expose them to world class facilities and world class researchers
• there is an increasing need to teach supervisory skills and this may be facilitated by collaboration

Sub-group 3: Sub-group to consider the role of selectivity and the characteristics of excellence

Chaired by Professor Sir Martin Harris, then Vice-Chancellor, University of Manchester

"The output of trained people is also a characteristic of excellence, and this may not be sufficiently well recognised in the current approach. Therefore, we recommend that greater attention be given to the assessment and funding of the research training environment to acknowledge the significance of the production of trained people as a characteristic of excellence. We were struck by the level of support in the consultation conducted as part of this review for some concentration of postgraduate research training. We believe that this suggestion should be explored further, but recognise there would be dangers in over-concentrating research students."

Back to top

Research and Knowledge Age: Scotland (2000)

In Scotland the review ‘Research and Knowledge Age' and subsequent consultations shared the view that much still needed to be done to improve the quality of research training. They concluded that there may be merit in strengthening the training of postgraduate researchers by establishing national criteria for the standards of training and supervision, including the facilities and environment in which postgraduate researchers undertake their research.

• Access the report and consultations

Back to top

Review of Research: Wales (2000)

In the Welsh Review of Research, research training was recognised as one of the most important functions of the research base and trained researchers arguably as its most significant output. There was strong support for recognising the centrality of postgraduate researchers (PGR) to the wider research environment by merging existing channels of funding. The Council affirmed its intention to join discussions at UK level on the development of minimum requirements that will need to be satisfied in order to be eligible for PGR funding.

Copies of the reports available from HEFCW:

• W00/8HE Review of Research Policy (pdf)
  
• W00/76HE subsequent consultation: Review of Research Policy and Funding Method (pdf)
  

 Back to top