RAE 2009

Analysis done by the Times Higher Education suggests that the results of the 2008 RAE show no major changes to the overall research landscape, 'the biggest research-intensive-intensive universities are still clustered at the top of the table of excellence, followed by the smaller -research-intensive institutions'.

However, there were some significant ranking changes for individual institutions. Cardiff University dropped out of the top ten to 22nd place. THES reports that it may have sacrificed its quality rating my submitting a high volume of staff which may help when it comes to research funding allocation. Southampton fell from 11th to a tie at 14th while Hertfordshire rose from 93rd to 58th.

Research top 20: (Average research score on numbers - source The Guardian)

1. Cambridge 2,975
2. Oxford 2,959
3. London School of Economics 2,957
4. Imperial College 2,943
5. University College London 2,844
6. Manchester 2,823
7. Warwick 2,799
8. York 2,780
9. Essex 2,772
10. Edinburgh 2,747
11. Queen Mary and Westfield 2,726
12. St Andrews 2,724
13. Bristol 2,723
14. Durham 2,721
15. Southampton 2,715
16. Leeds 2,715
17. Sheffield 2,715
18. Bath 2,711
19. Lancaster 2,711
20. King's College London 2,693

The Guardian reports that 'some of the best universities have large numbers of low-performing researchers... About a third of research by the top six universities was rated two-star or one-star. Some 28% of Cambridge's researchers scored one and two stars, as did 34% of UCL's.' However, Cambridge has the highest proportion of outstanding research in the UK. Of the 2,040 staff whose work was submitted, 71% was deemed to be world-leading or internationally excellent.

Information about subsequent funding allocation will be released on 4 March 2009.

Read The Guardian article in full.

Read the THES article in full

Visit the official RAE site.

The Chosen Few

HEFCE has chosen 21 universities to test-drive the Research Excellence Framework. The institutions chosen are: Bath, Birmingham, Bournemouth, Cambridge, Durham, East Anglia, Glasgow, Leeds, Nottingham, Plymouth, Portsmouth, Southampton, Stirling, Sussex, as well as, Imperial College London, Institute of Cancer Research, London School of Tropical Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, The Robert Gordon University, the Royal Veterinary College and University College London.

These pilot institutions will provide Hefce with citations data for all staff eligible for inclusion in the 2008 RAE, regardless of whether the staff member was actually submitted. There are however, concerns that the institutions will treat the pilot as an opportunity to boost their standing.

Read the THES story in full

Evolution of REF continues

In response to the HEFCE consultation, two modifications are being made to the REF implementation plans:

1)The timetable for designing the new framework will be extended by 12 months.

2) The methodological differences between how science-based/non science-based subjects are assessed will be removed. All subjects will be assessed using a combination of metrics-based indicators (including bibliometrics) and input from expert panels.

The REF will be introduced after the 2008 RAE.

Biosciences Federation response to HEFCE consultation

Official statement on HEFCE website

REF: The verdict

The division in the way that science and humanities subjects are to be judged and the tight timescale in which the framework is to be implemented have emerged as the top concerns in the responses to the REF consultation.

Nick Dusic, director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering is quoted as saying, "The REF should retain an element of peer review to minimise any undesirable effects of metrics and to assess research outputs that cannot be quantified with a metric".

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=400608

REF to cause reshuffle?

Research undertaken by Cranfield University suggests that the new Research Excellence Framework could cause significant hierachial changes to the order currently generated from the Research Assessment Exercise.

The research council funded exercise took all research submissions for the 2001 RAE and determined citation counts using the methodologies laid out in the REF consultation. The study found that there is a good correlation in six out of 28 subjects, but 13 have a weak correlation and 9 showed no correlation at all. Individual universities' performance was examined in two science subjects (chemistry and a branch of engineering) and large differences were found.

In the in depth chemistry analysis, University of Surrey and Swansea University dropped dramatically, where as Northumbria University showed a great improvement.

HEFCE has dismissed the study and a spokesman is quoted by THES as saying, "It only takes into account only four publications per researcher; it makes no allowance for variation in citation between sub-disciplines; and it presents the outcomes as summary grades rather than quality profiles."

How to boost your ratings

THES has published an article outlining the ways in which a researcher could increase their research ratings by manipulating citation counts within the proposed REF. Several senior academics have suggested ways in which citation counts could be increased, including:

• Not citing anyone else's research
• Not publishing in low citation rate journals
• Not engaging in research which is in a field not covered by the Thomas Scientific database as the output will not be visible
• Not reporting negative results as they are unlikely to be cited
• Joining a citation club

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=400516