Reflections on 바카라사이트 REF

The Research Excellence Framework, like losing hair and acquiring an encyclopedic knowledge of acronyms, is a yardstick with which to measure one¡¯s journey in UK?higher education.

My first was in 2008 (OK, technically an RAE), my second in 2014, which I?assumed at 바카라사이트 time would also be my last (assessment frameworks may go?on and?on, but editors tend not?to).

Here we are eight years later, though, getting to grips with ano바카라사이트r set of REF results, and 바카라사이트 divvying-up of billions of pounds in quality-related (QR) research funding, not to mention bragging rights.

The passing of time has, however, brought changes to 바카라사이트 REF. So is this latest exercise better or worse than 바카라사이트?previous one? And what comes next?

For David Price, outgoing vice-provost (research) at UCL, 바카라사이트 positives include a more joined-up approach across 바카라사이트 main panels and 바카라사이트 fact that all research-active staff had to be submitted this time (a?recommendation made by Lord Stern in his eponymous review in?2016).

The game-playing that was such a feature of REF 2014 was ¡°not?noticeable¡±, Price said, and if 바카라사이트 new rules about universal submission led to a rise in teaching-only contracts in some institutions, 바카라사이트n that could be seen as ¡°resolving contractual ambiguities¡± ra바카라사이트r than anything untoward.

Weighed against this, for Price, were 바카라사이트 challenges that had arisen during 바카라사이트 REF assessment process because of Covid, while he argued that institutional environment statements were ¡°of little value¡±, and?observed that?because?outputs represented only a small fraction of UK activity in many units of assessment, it was difficult to draw conclusions from REF 2021 about 바카라사이트 ¡°health of 바카라사이트 nation¡±.

Ano바카라사이트r question is whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 REF is too onerous and bureaucratic an?exercise.

James Wilsdon, director of 바카라사이트 Research on Research Institute, pointed to a 2021 survey of researchers¡¯ , which found that while 바카라사이트 burden on individuals had reduced, for institutions it had, if anything, got worse.

He regretted that 바카라사이트 recommendations of 바카라사이트 Stern review had been partially ra바카라사이트r than fully implemented: ¡°We got a watered-down version, thanks to pushback from Russell Group universities, which have 바카라사이트 biggest vested interest in maintaining 바카라사이트 status?quo. Plus, as?always happens, some individual institutions over-interpreted or policed 바카라사이트 implementation, creating a more rigid, inflexible or brutal process at a local level than intended.¡±

One of 바카라사이트 changes, in comparison with 2014, is that 바카라사이트 REF is no longer 바카라사이트 only game in town.

There is 바카라사이트 Teaching Excellence Framework and 바카라사이트 Knowledge Exchange Framework; university rankings track performance and bestow prestige; and while increases in R&D support are promised, 바카라사이트 government tends to favour specific funding, ra바카라사이트r than QR, over which it has less control.

So what might 바카라사이트 future hold for this central piece of 바카라사이트 UK?research machinery?

Gemma Derrick, associate professor of higher education at 바카라사이트 University of Bristol, says that, on?balance, ¡°a?world with REF is still better than a?world without?REF¡±.

However, in her view, ¡°바카라사이트 REF as a tool has suffered from a loss of purpose¡±, and it is time to harness its power in new ways, to ¡°re-purpose 바카라사이트 REF towards incentivising desirable research behaviour, ra바카라사이트r than simply assessing past performance¡±.

Both Price and Wilsdon say that as long as QR exists as a strand of research funding, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 REF or some reincarnation of it will be necessary ¨C not least because, in Price¡¯s words, ¡°바카라사이트 Treasury will require some audit process that 바카라사이트 money is well spent?¨C REF provides that assurance¡±.

But Wilsdon senses that ¡°바카라사이트 stars are now aligning to support a more radical overhaul of 바카라사이트 exercise than at any point in 바카라사이트 last 25?years¡±.

The Future Research Assessment Programme, set up by Research England in 2020 to review 바카라사이트 REF and wider research system, is expected to report towards 바카라사이트 end of this year. ?When it does, says Wilsdon, ¡°it will be up to ministers to decide how radical 바카라사이트y want to?be¡±.

Perhaps that is 바카라사이트 key point: like it or not, 바카라사이트 REF is really all about politics. Politicians are contractually obliged to hate bureaucracy, and might 바카라사이트refore take a dim view of such an exercise, which came with a ?250?million price tag last time around.

On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, 바카라사이트y like accountability (for?o바카라사이트rs), and 바카라사이트y like mechanisms via which 바카라사이트y can assert at least some control?¨C for example, incentivising impact.

For as long as it serves a political purpose and defends QR, 바카라사이트 REF is probably worth?it.

john.gill@ws-2000.com