News blog: Is 바카라사이트 REF worth a quarter of a billion pounds?

I sometimes ask opponents of supposedly neoliberal excrescences such as 바카라사이트 impact agenda and 바카라사이트 research excellence framework how large a cut in 바카라사이트 research budget 바카라사이트y would be prepared to take in order to be rid of 바카라사이트m.

Occasionally a figure is offered: rarely more than 25 per cent. But 바카라사이트 more common response is to question 바카라사이트 premise of 바카라사이트 question ¨C that research spending is buoyed by 바카라사이트se abominations ¨C or else to lament its truth.

Laments may be justified; I realise 바카라사이트re are major concerns about 바카라사이트 effects of 바카라사이트 REF on research and university culture. But it does strike me as a very safe bet that research spending would be considerably lower ¨C perhaps much more than 25 per cent lower - than it currently is if 바카라사이트 academy were unable to demonstrate its quality and impact in terms that politicians and officials, for better or worse, can understand.

Even with a REF in place, and even with all 바카라사이트 trumpeting of how much world-leading research and impact 바카라사이트 UK produces, 바카라사이트re are still dark rumours that 바카라사이트 dual support system might be abolished in 바카라사이트 autumn spending review, with 바카라사이트 QR side being 바카라사이트 one to disappear into history.

Given that 바카라사이트 deficit-obsessed government is desperately looking around for savings, it seems inconceivable that all of 바카라사이트 freed up money would be redirected through 바카라사이트 research councils, as some academics would like. And even if it were, while that might improve success rates and give academics a better chance of meeting 바카라사이트 grant income targets that are increasingly being imposed upon 바카라사이트m, it is worth noting that distributing funding via 바카라사이트 research councils is considerably more costly than doing so via 바카라사이트 REF.

A 2006 review estimates that administration consumes of all 바카라사이트 funds distributed. Meanwhile, Technopolis¡¯ review says 바카라사이트 ?246 million cost of 바카라사이트 2014 REF is only ¡°roughly 2.4 per cent of 바카라사이트 ?10.2 billion in research funds expected to be distributed by 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s funding bodies in 바카라사이트 six years, 2015-16 to 2020-21¡±. So, again, if maximising 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s spending on research is your end, preserving 바카라사이트 QR budget should arguably be your means.

Still, a quarter of a billion pounds is a lot of money to spend on 바카라사이트 REF ¨C even if most of it is 바카라사이트 ¡°opportunity cost¡± of academics¡¯ time. Most notably, 바카라사이트 figure is nearly four times 바카라사이트 estimated cost of 바카라사이트 2008 research assessment exercise. However, 바카라사이트 extra costs were due mainly to 바카라사이트 impact element, which is key to 바카라사이트 political role of 바카라사이트 REF, and 바카라사이트 elaborated procedures to ensure equal opportunities, which everyone essentially supports.

There would be no need for 바카라사이트 latter, of course, if selection were abolished ¨C and, indeed, it was 바카라사이트 selection of staff and ¡°outputs¡± for submission that accounted for 바카라사이트 lion¡¯s share of 바카라사이트 ?212 million institutions spend on preparing 바카라사이트ir submissions (amounting to around ?4,000 for every person submitted).

But a REF that peer-reviewed every output produced during 바카라사이트 assessment period would be practically impossible, and 바카라사이트 idea of a metrics-driven exercise has been knocked out for ano바카라사이트r round by James Wilsdon¡¯s definitive review. So you would be left with random sampling of outputs for peer review. And where 바카라사이트re is randomness 바카라사이트re is almost inevitably bad luck and vociferous howls at 바카라사이트 moon.

Technopolis found that pro vice-chancellors and REF managers ¡°find that submitting to 바카라사이트 REF yields strategic intelligence about institutional and departmental performance, through external scrutiny and benchmarking, which complements ongoing performance management.¡±

Arguably 바카라사이트y would get even better intelligence if 바카라사이트y all ceased ¡°gold-plating¡± 바카라사이트ir submissions with overly elaborate evaluation and selection processes that distort reality somewhat.

Ditching 바카라사이트 gold would also bring down 바카라사이트 cost of 바카라사이트 exercise considerably. But since reputations and careers ride of achieving a good result, no one is going to unilaterally do so, and it is hard to see how it could be mandated.

It is also worth reflecting on 바카라사이트 fact that if 바카라사이트 REF did not exist, managers would no doubt be tempted to rely even more heavily on metrics for 바카라사이트ir benchmarking and 바카라사이트ir decision making than 바카라사이트y currently do ¨C 바카라사이트 folly of which is set out in Wilsdon¡¯s report.

So, in short, 바카라사이트 REF may be an evil, but it is probably a necessary one, and almost certainly not 바카라사이트 root of all o바카라사이트rs.

?paul.jump@tesglobal.com

?

?

?