23 November 2009
By Tennie Videler
There are already several REF (Research Excellence Framework) related posts on this blog:
Impact in the REF- Why I won’t sign the UCU petition
Data on researcher submissions in the RAE
Now I am asking you to help inform Vitae's response to HEFCE's consultation on the REF. It would be great to hear if there are any points you would like to be considered for inclusion in the Vitae response. Please reply here or send them to me (tennie.videler@vitae.ac.uk). Comments on any aspects of the proposals are invited, but your views on how the proposed REF will assess submissions with respect to research capacity building /developing researchers and research skills would be particularly welcome.
The proposals for the REF are available to download here
thanks!
Simon Smith24 November 2009 at 04:48 PM
permalinkreport this comment
As I argued in my post about Impact in the REF (see Tennie's link above), I support the way that impact has been dealt with by the introduction of the separate impact 'domain', but at the same time I have some reservations about the infiltration of impact considerations into the main research quality domain. Paragaph 38 picks up on the chosen definition of research as a process that includes the 'effective sharing' of knowledge, and asserts that all submitted work should therefore present its insights in a form that meets the needs of its potential audience "both within and beyond the academic community". This could be read as being detrimental to the status of basic, curiosity-driven research, because it applies to each individual submitted research output (whereas the impact domain applies to research units at an aggregate level). I would urge clarification in the form of a clear statement that at the level of outputs, 'effectively shared knowledge' can mean either academic influence or wider social and economic benefits, because the present formulation implies that all top-quality research has to do both of these. I'd like to believe that is not the intention, but it reads that way.
Simon Smith26 November 2009 at 05:18 PM
permalinkreport this comment
Noting your concerns about the under-valuation of the Environment domain, I see that Universities UK is recommending Impact and Environment be given equal 20% weighting in the REF (instead of the proposed 25% Impact, 15% Environment). Reported in today's ResearchResearch bulletin.