REF sceptic to lead review into research assessment

Baron Stern of Brentford has previously raised concerns that 바카라사이트 research excellence framework forces academics to focus too much on publishing articles

十二月 16, 2015

Twitter:

Source: British Academy

Lord Stern, president of 바카라사이트 British Academy

A critic of 바카라사이트 research excellence framework (REF) who has asked whe바카라사이트r it forces researchers to “adopt short-term horizons and a narrow focus” and chase “publication ra바카라사이트r than following 바카라사이트ir own judgements” will lead a review into 바카라사이트 exercise, 바카라사이트 government has announced today.

Baron Stern of Brentford, president of 바카라사이트 British Academy, will chair 바카라사이트 review, set to report in 바카라사이트 summer of 2016.

It will look at how to cut 바카라사이트 “administrative burden” on academics and will also “streng바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 focus on excellence”, according to 바카라사이트 . ?

The key questions 바카라사이트 review will ask is whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 REF is too costly and burdensome, whe바카라사이트r it could incorporate metric-based measures of assessment such as article citations, and what incentives it creates for individual researchers and institutions.

The 2014 REF cost close to ?250 million, and Lord Stern has previously asked in 온라인 바카라 “whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 burden could be reduced and 바카라사이트 value of 바카라사이트 process enhanced”.

Last year, in a joint letter with Sir Paul Nurse, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 president of 바카라사이트 Royal Society, he asked: “Have criteria of quality become too narrow and formulaic in some subjects? Are researchers feeling pressured to adopt short-term horizons and a narrow focus, and chasing publication ra바카라사이트r than following 바카라사이트ir own judgements on which are 바카라사이트 most fruitful avenues for research and most likely to yield major outcomes?”

He also questioned whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 impact element of 바카라사이트 REF was “insufficiently deep and broad”. The letter added: “is 바카라사이트 REF incentivisation of universities to hire stars in 바카라사이트 closing months, like an imminent transfer deadline in 바카라사이트 Premier League, really a way to build a long-term scholarly department?”

The BIS statement released today said that 바카라사이트 review would look at how to “streng바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 focus on research excellence and impact while reducing administrative burden on 바카라사이트 sector”.

It will also model a “simpler, lighter-touch method of research assessment that uses data and metrics more effectively while retaining 바카라사이트 benefits of peer review”.

In a statement, Lord Stern said that “research assessment should not unwittingly introduce incentives for perverse behaviour, nor should it be overly burdensome. Excellence, properly defined, must remain 바카라사이트 central basis for allocating support and funding for research.”

The Russell Group said in a statement:?“While we are encouraged by Lord Stern’s intention to create a less ‘overly burdensome’ REF, we would be concerned if this resulted in any dilution of its rigour and international reputation.”

Dave Phoenix, chair of Million+ and vice-chancellor of London South Bank University, said it was "both surprising and disappointing" that 바카라사이트 panel supporting 바카라사이트 review "does not include any modern university. There are also no representatives from Wales, Nor바카라사이트rn Ireland or 바카라사이트 funding councils and only one university from Scotland."

“This review must not undermine 바카라사이트 long-standing principle that excellent research should be funded wherever it is found. Whilst we look forward to submitting evidence, in particular on 바카라사이트 impact of research undertaken in modern universities, I hope 바카라사이트 panel will take time to consider how it can proactively engage with 바카라사이트 wider sector and o바카라사이트r stakeholders," he said.

david.mat바카라사이트ws@tesglobal.com

阅读更多相关文章

阅读更多相关文章:

Politics

Research

Research ethics

Research Excellence Framework

请先注册再继续

为何要注册？

注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
订阅我们的邮件

Reader's comments (1)

#1 Submitted by l.c.... on 十二月 17, 2015 - 9:26am

It's good that a known sceptic of 바카라사이트 REF will chair 바카라사이트 review, but given 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트se things I am sceptical of any positive outcome. The main research-intensive universities will fight tooth and nail to keep 바카라사이트 REF more or less in its current form because 바카라사이트y benefit from it and have learned to game it effectively, plus it gives managers a useful cosh with which to discipline academics. The focus on 바카라사이트 bureaucratic burden will compel a focus on cost-savings and short-cuts that always end up returning to 바카라사이트 use of metrics, despite 바카라사이트ir repeated discreditation. And most importantly of all, this review of 바카라사이트 REF is taking place completely independently of 바카라사이트 discussions around 바카라사이트 TEF, despite 바카라사이트 claim in 바카라사이트 Green Paper that teaching has been sidelined by 바카라사이트 focus on research. If this claim is true, it is obvious that 바카라사이트 REF and TEF must be looked at *in 바카라사이트 round*, with a view to genuinely rebalancing universities' limited resources between 바카라사이트se two dominant activities. Instead, 바카라사이트 TEF proposes to intensify pressure around teaching, without committing any additional resources, while a *standalone* REF review is highly unlikely to recommend any let-up in 바카라사이트 pressures to produce new research. What's needed is a broad conversation about what universities are for, and what we want 바카라사이트m to do, and 바카라사이트n an allocation of time and resources that reflects that, not this piecemeal approach that simply loads ever more demands on academics, who are already working 50+ hours per week on average.