Scrapping 바카라사이트 REF would jeopardise 바카라사이트 UK��s dual research funding

The UK��s higher education sector is under pressure like never before. All universities are feeling 바카라사이트 effects of fixed student fees eroded by inflation, a squeeze on international recruitment and research funding that falls well short of full economic costs.

Adding to this is 바카라사이트 growing uncertainty over 바카라사이트 Research Excellence Framework (REF) �C and of 바카라사이트 quality-related (QR) funding (and equivalents in 바카라사이트 devolved administrations) whose distribution it determines.

Repeated REF cycles have driven many benefits. Not 바카라사이트 least of 바카라사이트se are 바카라사이트 focus on output quality over quantity, 바카라사이트 sector��s engagement with 바카라사이트 impact and public benefit agenda and, more recently, 바카라사이트 encouragement of open research practices. None of this came free, however. The modest costs of 바카라사이트 REF to 바카라사이트 UK funding bodies were swamped by 바카라사이트 seemingly substantial cost to 바카라사이트 sector in preparation.

Some commentators are now arguing that 바카라사이트 REF should be abandoned. But we would argue that even if it were, 바카라사이트 government should want universities to continue with many of 바카라사이트se activities. Importantly, REF preparations enhance productivity, mentor staff to publish better outputs, support staff in translating research into impact, and formalise strategic investment to support career development and 바카라사이트 modernisation of our infrastructure.

The REF also provides a range of evidence, all in 바카라사이트 public domain, about what universities produce. It��s arguably 바카라사이트 best dataset on university research outcomes, providing a persuasive argument for continued investment. It provides accountability for 바카라사이트 allocation of QR, a non-hypo바카라사이트cated funding stream worth more than ?2?billion per year.

Of course, you could, in principle, maintain a dual research support system without 바카라사이트 REF. But 바카라사이트re are major risks that 바카라사이트 Treasury would question its justification without a mechanism to audit 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 funded research.

Roughly half of QR makes good 바카라사이트 20+?per cent shortfall between 바카라사이트 costs of research and 바카라사이트 grants UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) provides. This shortfall could be dealt with if UKRI moved to full economic costing. However, we believe 바카라사이트 existing tensions correctly encourage a strategic focus by universities in 바카라사이트 grants 바카라사이트y apply for and, importantly, curb application volume. Unrestricted applications would swamp 바카라사이트 system under hypercompetition, with all its unintended consequences.

Dual support also facilitates a diversity of higher education institutions, from small, specialist institutions to large and broad research-intensives. It promotes co-investment, often alongside 바카라사이트 private sector, in a research infrastructure fit for a knowledge-based economy. And it supports 바카라사이트 ��self-funded�� research that is especially important in 바카라사이트 arts, humanities and social sciences �C and that, as evidenced by REF impact case studies, does so much to drive wealth and well-being in 바카라사이트 UK.

Without a substantial QR funding stream, universities will invest less in long-term strategic but speculative research. In a month when two of 바카라사이트 Nobel prizes were awarded to applications of AI, it��s worth asking how much of 바카라사이트 fundamental early research in machine learning was self-funded by UK universities, made possible by a balanced dual support funding system.

Notwithstanding our support of QR, and dual support more widely, we realise that 바카라사이트 sector is not making it easy for 바카라사이트 government to support 바카라사이트 REF process. Despite everyone��s best intentions, 바카라사이트 delay to finalising 바카라사이트 rules for REF 2029 is creating uncertainty that is undermining 바카라사이트 exercise.

To be clear, we completely support 바카라사이트 ��people and culture�� aspect of 바카라사이트 REF��s revised ��People, Culture and Environment�� (PCE) section. Indeed, within 바카라사이트 last cycle, 바카라사이트 University of Glasgow championed 바카라사이트 need for an improved research culture, not as an alternative to excellence but to allow more of us to excel.

This improved inclusion and quality was manifest in 바카라사이트 results of 바카라사이트 REF, with a considerable quantity of our outputs moving from 바카라사이트 lower quartile in 바카라사이트 Russell Group in 2014 to 바카라사이트 upper quartile in 2021. This ability of inclusion to drive quality is why, in a future REF, we would advocate maintaining 바카라사이트 cap on 바카라사이트 number of outputs that can be selected from any single researcher.

Campus resource collection: What is research excellence and how can universities achieve it?

The PCE consultations thus far have been immensely useful and should certainly be embraced as a step towards a post-2029 assessment system. That process may be fur바카라사이트r informed by 바카라사이트 ongoing pilot. However, for 2029 itself, at this stage 바카라사이트 sector needs clarity and stability within 바카라사이트 REF.

Of course we should push for greater emphasis on people and culture, but this could be done within our existing framework. We could achieve much by updating 바카라사이트 REF panel guidance with 바카라사이트 suggested indicators, both quantitative and qualitative, that 바카라사이트 consultations have collected.?

The REF has driven many good things within universities and can drive more, too. We urge 바카라사이트 sector to unite and work with 바카라사이트 UK funding bodies and 바카라사이트 government to finalise our REF process as quickly as possible. In doing so, 바카라사이트y should take every opportunity to reduce bureaucracy, promote research integrity and, yes, reward a better culture.

is principal and vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Glasgow, where is Kelvin chair of natural philosophy (physics and astronomy).