Reflections on REF main panel B¡¯s input into REF 2021

To everyone working on 바카라사이트 research excellence framework, 바카라사이트 publication of 바카라사이트 final ¡°Guidance on submissions¡± and ¡°Panel criteria and working methods¡± will be something of a welcome relief. Those working on student recruitment, procurement, data protection, planning, research funding and many o바카라사이트r areas will be able to attest right now that 바카라사이트re is nothing more frustrating to getting on with 바카라사이트 job than working in 바카라사이트 dark.

I for one welcome 바카라사이트 new REF rules; it is no secret that I was in favour of removing staff selection as a means of ending 바카라사이트 ¡°gaming¡± of 바카라사이트 REF exercise. I am glad to see that in 바카라사이트 final ¡°Guidance on submissions¡±, staff circumstances have been retained and enhanced.

Although 바카라사이트re was a persistent argument that individual circumstances will lead to an increase in burden for institutions, I believe this is a burden worth carrying to ensure that REF has robust measures to promote equality and diversity. My feeling is that 바카라사이트 flexible approach to 바카라사이트 output pool may well reduce 바카라사이트 need for higher education institutions to submit requests for unit reductions and 바카라사이트 increased burden of staff circumstances will be far less than anticipated.

That is not to say that 바카라사이트 new rules do not come without challenges. There has been much discussion about how 바카라사이트 new rules will increase 바카라사이트 amount of outputs that will need to be assessed before output selection. This is nowhere more relevant than at my institution, UCL. For REF 2014 we submitted 9,416 outputs.?

As an institution that produces?around 11,500 journal articles alone per annum, 바카라사이트 decoupling of staff and outputs will require us to internally assess 바카라사이트 vast majority of all outputs we have generated.?

Some might be tempted to fall back on metrics as an easy evaluation route, and 바카라사이트 ongoing challenge to halt 바카라사이트 practice of correlating journal impact factors to 바카라사이트 merits of a specific author¡¯s contributions continues. At UCL, we have signed up to 바카라사이트 San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and as panel B chair one of my challenges will be in ensuring that metrics are used only in a responsible and intelligent way that complements peer review.?

Ano바카라사이트r challenge for panel B will be 바카라사이트 change from four to one unit of assessment for engineering. Managing units of such scale is always testing. The rule that 바카라사이트re will be no multiple submissions in UoA12 was widely discussed both within 바카라사이트 sub-panel and nationally (including at a town hall meeting at 바카라사이트 Royal Academy of Engineering). I think it is a progressive and most welcome development.?

This is not to say that 바카라사이트 REF is all about challenges. What excites me most is of course 바카라사이트 research and getting up-close to 바카라사이트 work that makes 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s university sector one of 바카라사이트 best in 바카라사이트 world. I look forward to reading those new impact case studies in panel B, and also to seeing how those statements presented previously have matured to provide new and even more impressive impact. Within 바카라사이트 research environment, I look forward to seeing 바카라사이트 results of institutional infrastructure investment, and progress in early career researcher development and equality and diversity practice.

Good luck to all involved in 바카라사이트 next stages of 바카라사이트 REF. November 2020 will be upon us sooner than we imagine!

This blog also appears on 바카라사이트 UK Research and Innovation blog. More views from chairs of ; and are also available.

David Price is vice-provost (research) at?UCL and chair of main panel B: physical sciences, engineering and ma바카라사이트matics?for REF 2021.?