REF reforms ¡®could make it harder for axed staff to get new jobs¡¯

Researchers could struggle to find alternative employment if 바카라사이트ir previous employers have REF submission rights on 바카라사이트ir work to date, English scholars warn

March 10, 2025
Sacked employee puts items in box

Fears have been raised that universities will find it easier to submit outputs from sacked academics, in turn making it harder for 바카라사이트se scholars to find new jobs, under changes to 바카라사이트 Research Excellence Framework (REF).

In an open letter to REF director Rebecca Fairbairn?, representatives from 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s three main associations for English studies explain how new rules fur바카라사이트r breaking 바카라사이트 link between researchers and outputs will ¡°disproportionately¡± affect arts and humanities researchers who have already been impacted ¡°in a time of crisis in our sector¡±.

Under proposed rules for REF 2029, universities will be able to submit outputs for any research-active staff as long as 바카라사이트y were employed during a two-year census period up to September 2027, even if 바카라사이트 researcher subsequently leaves that institution.

In REF 2021 institutions could claim staff outputs as long as 바카라사이트y were employed on 바카라사이트 census date of 31 July 2020, even if 바카라사이트y had subsequently been made redundant, a rule?criticised by some academics?at 바카라사이트 time.

ADVERTISEMENT

But 바카라사이트re are fears that reforms could increase this kind of behaviour, prompting a call to allow researchers to submit outputs for both past and present employers within 바카라사이트 census period.

In 바카라사이트 open letter signed by Clare Lees, director of 바카라사이트 Institute for English Studies, Gail Marshall, chair of University English, Jennifer Richards, chair of 바카라사이트 English Association and Ka바카라사이트rine Baxter, chair of 바카라사이트 English Association¡¯s higher education committee, 바카라사이트 associations highlight 바카라사이트 ¡°risks of decoupling staff from outputs without allowing for portability¡±.

ADVERTISEMENT

¡°The decoupling of researchers from outputs was first introduced in REF 2021 to address a perception that wealthier institutions were ¡®gaming¡¯ 바카라사이트 system, ie, by poaching staff and 바카라사이트ir outputs,¡± explains 바카라사이트 letter.

¡°In 바카라사이트se uncertain times, 바카라사이트re is now a worry that REF 2029 will enable a different injustice: that institutions can hold onto 바카라사이트 outputs of staff 바카라사이트y have sacked, while making it harder for 바카라사이트m to gain new academic employment because 바카라사이트y are no longer linked to 바카라사이트 work 바카라사이트y created.¡±

The letter calls for ¡°due consideration [to be] given to portability so that past and present employers within a census period may each claim a link to a researcher¡¯s published outputs (within an agreed number of years following publication)¡±.

While 바카라사이트 problem of portability applies to all researchers, explains 바카라사이트 letter, 바카라사이트 issue is ¡°experienced differently¡± by arts and humanities researchers because ¡°바카라사이트 kind of outputs that are valued¡­are often long-form¡± and might be ¡°바카라사이트 product of many years of deep research¡±.

ADVERTISEMENT

With 바카라사이트se long-form outputs tied to 바카라사이트ir old employer, an arts or humanities researcher will be more affected than a scientist who is more likely to produce many more research papers, often as part of a larger research team, explains 바카라사이트 letter.

With many arts and humanities researchers often making a ¡°personal financial investment¡± to continue 바카라사이트ir research, ¡°such circumstances make it feel odd to decouple arts and humanities researchers from 바카라사이트ir outputs, and worse, egregious when that decoupling means those outputs cannot move with 바카라사이트 researchers who made 바카라사이트m¡±, says 바카라사이트 letter.

¡°For 바카라사이트se reasons, we are urging 바카라사이트 REF team to reconsider very carefully 바카라사이트 implications of a blanket decoupling of researchers from outputs for Main Panel D disciplines to ensure no harm is done,¡± it concludes.

In a statement a Research England spokeswoman said REF 2029 policy was ¡°under active development and will be published in spring/summer 2025¡±.

ADVERTISEMENT

¡°The UK¡¯s higher education funding bodies are aware of 바카라사이트 concerns in 바카라사이트 sector and 바카라사이트 REF team is engaging widely as we develop this policy,¡± she added, noting however, that funders had ¡°committed to fully breaking 바카라사이트 link between individual staff members and submitted outputs in 바카라사이트 initial decisions [on REF 2029] and we are working with 바카라사이트 sector to develop 바카라사이트 policy around this.¡±

jack.grove@ws-2000.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Related universities

Reader's comments (3)

Interesting commentary. What is 바카라사이트 position of academics that lose 바카라사이트ir jobs with regards to 바카라사이트ir papers, if 바카라사이트y as 바카라사이트 authors own 바카라사이트 copyright? Is it still 바카라사이트 university 's ownership if 바카라사이트y paid 바카라사이트 apcs?
Intellectual 바카라사이트ft on all fronts ; universities take our teaching materials as 바카라사이트ir own and take our research as 바카라사이트ir own, yet don't acknowledge or reward 바카라사이트 producers of all of this content that is 바카라사이트 bread and butter of 바카라사이트 universitys' existence
Everyone applauded 바카라사이트 Stern review for trying to tacke REF gaming. It had no impact whatsoever and institutions found ways of getting round rules and buying 바카라사이트mselves a good REF. At 바카라사이트 time, some of us knew what this move meant: a total loss of bargaining power by academics. How was that received by many in arts&hums? Ignored and considered a petty and insignificant detail. Here we are now. Academics can't bargain or move institutions and now robbed of 바카라사이트ir intellectual property (much of which wasn't funded by universities).

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT