What we know and think we know about the next
Research Excellence Framework
Dr. Tim Brooks, Research Policy & REF Manager, RDCS
Anglia Ruskin REF Awayday, 28 October 2015

• A periodic national assessment of research activity which:
• Provides benchmarking information
• Ensures public accountability for investment in research and its benefit
• Enables the selective allocation of recurrent research grant (QR)

• A process of expert review which assesses research activity – outputs, impact, environment – over a period of c. 5 years
• Organised by discipline, into
36 ‘sub panels’ covering a
‘Unit of Assessment’, and four
‘Main Panels’ to ensure consistency
• Produces quality profiles rating research

• Institutions decide if to participate, and which UoA(s) to submit to.
• Academic staff in post on the census date the key building block of each submission
• Employment details
• Any relevant personal circumstances

• Outputs of research published during the
REF assessment period
• Selected on the basis of quality
• Up to four outputs for every staff member, reduced where personal circumstances justify it
• Worth 65% of the final mark

• Worth 20% of the final mark
• An impact template (20%) about enabling impact from research during the assessment period
•
Case studies (80%)
– examples of impacts realised during the assessment period, underpinned by
≥ 2* research, produced by the submitting unit in the previous
21 years
• Number of case studies determined by FTE of staff in the submission.

• Data about doctoral awards and research grant income
• Narrative statement describing the research environment, strategies and plans, structures and support.
• Worth 15% of the final score

• When? (or even if??)
• Rules and regulations not likely to appear before summer
2016, and more likely summer 2017.
• In most cases little or no change e.g. UoA organization, staff eligibility, output requirements, environment markers.

• Seen as a resounding success in REF 2014
• Worth 25% next time?
Or 40%?
• Abandon ‘impact template’ document and/or add into research environment requirements?
• Increase number of case studies required per FTE?

• Recent independent review of metrics in research assessment
• Confirms primacy of peer review but encourages increase in use of metrics where appropriate.
• Call to increase metrics used to assess environment e.g.
• total staff FTE
• doctoral students FTE

• Summer 2016 or 2017: first guidance published
• 31 July 2019: end of environment & impact assessment periods (impact of research from 1 January 1999)
• 31 October 2019: staff census date
• 29 November 2019: submission deadline
• 31 December 2019: last date for publications

Ian Walker, Research Support Librarian, University Library
Anglia Ruskin REF Awayday, 28 October 2015

• Green and Gold open access
• Policy environment
• Finer details of the policy – what do authors need to do to comply?
• Potential risks

Green open access:
• Delivered through repositories
• Author self archives their output
• “Free” route
• Access may be subject to a publisher embargo period
Gold open access:
• Immediate open access delivered through journals
• An APC (article process charge) usually applies
Anglia Ruskin Open Access Fund established to cover the costs of gold open access

• 2004 : House of Commons inquiry into publishing
– advocated green open access
• 2012 : Finch report recommends
“…UK embrace transition towards open access”
• 2013 : Revised RCUK policy on open access
•
2014 : HEFCE announce new policy on open access for post-
2014 REF

• Outputs submitted for post-
2014 REF must be made open access
• Requirement applies to journal articles and conference proceedings accepted for publication from 1 st April 2016

• Final peer-reviewed draft deposited in ARRO on acceptance
*
• Repository record discoverable
• Full text should be made discoverable ASAP (publisher embargoes respected)
* Within 3 months of publication until 1 st
April 2017

• All journal articles and conference proceedings
(with an ISSN)
• Extra credit to institutions providing OA to a wider range of outputs
• Final accepted peerreviewed text (also known as Author
Accepted Manuscript or
Post Print) must be deposited

 

• Panels A & B : 12 months
• Panels C & D : 24 months
• 96% of articles submitted to the
2014 REF compliant with this policy
• HEFCE understand that not all outputs may be able to meet requirements – limited exceptions permitted
• “Top 50” ARU journals all compliant
– but authors still need to be careful to choose a journal which meets
HEFCE’s requirements

• Within 3 months of acceptance, authors need to upload to ARRO
• Complete basic bibliographic metadata
• Upload the post-print
• Faculty Administrator / Library will validate the record

• Need to engage with OA to be eligible for REF. Current engagement with ARRO is poor – c.10% of papers deposited
• Deposit on acceptance means new workflows required
• Who? No extra money provided by HEFCE to support policy

Any questions?
Ian Walker, Research Support Librarian, University Library ian.walker@anglia.ac.uk
Dr. Tim Brooks, Research Policy & REF Manager, RDCS tim.brooks@anglia.ac.uk