Research Excellence Framework:
Equality and Diversity Training
Dr Tim Brooks and Jill Smit
Research, Development & Commercial Services
September/October 2012
Based on best practice materials developed by the Equality Challenge Unit (www.ecu.ac.uk)
What is the REF?
•
•
•
•
A method to assess the quality of research in UK
universities, examining outputs (65%), environment
(15%) and impact (20%).
Operated by the REF team, based at HEFCE, for the
four UK HE funding councils. Assessment through
‘expert review’ – academics, research users, etc.
HEIs select subject areas (units of assessment), staff
members and research outputs to submit.
Outcomes – a quality profile – used to benchmark
and to allocate quality-related research funding (QR)
Quiz
Individually or in your groups
•
•
Look at the statements
Are they true or false?
Outline of the session
•
•
•
•
•
Equality and diversity legislation and definition
Key changes from RAE 2008 to REF 2014 in terms of
equality and diversity
Key points of our Code of Practice on the selection
of staff
Handling and processing individual staff
circumstances
What this means for your role!
Context and aim of training
•
•
•
Equality Act 2010 has consolidated, strengthened
and harmonised previous equalities legislation.
Equality and diversity measures for REF 2014 have
been strengthened by comparison with RAE 2008.
Training on equality and diversity and the REF helps
us to ensure that:
– staff eligible for submission are treated fairly and
are not discriminated against;
– we fulfil our obligations under equalities and
employment law.
Defining equality and diversity
•
•
•
Diversity: recognising that everyone is different in a
variety of visible and non-visible ways, and that
those differences are to be recognised, respected
and valued (Equality Challenge Unit, 2012).
Equality: ‘a fundamental part of a fair society in
which everyone can have the best possible chance
to succeed in life’ (Discrimination Law Review, 2007).
Equality and diversity requirements are different to
considerations of eligibility, quality and fit as defined
in the REF Panel Criteria and by us (see Code of
Practice).
Lessons from RAE 2008
HEFCE analysis* of RAE 2008 staff selection showed:
•
•
•
•
Selection rate for staff with a declared disability was
lower than that for staff without a declared disability;
67% of male permanent academic staff were
selected, in comparison to 48% of women;
There was a particularly low rate of selection for
women aged 30-50;
The selection rate of black staff was lower than that
of staff from other ethnic groups.
* Source:
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce1/pubs/hefce/2009/0934/09_34.pdf
Lessons from RAE 2008
Analysis of our RAE 2008 staff selection shows:
•
•
56% of Category A staff submitted were male, 44%
female, while our academic population at the time*
was equally split by gender.
63% of Category A staff submitted were employed
full-time, 37% part-time, while our academic
population at the time* was split 80/20 in favour of
full-time.
* Nearest available staff demographic data, as at 01 September 2007.
Staff submitted to RAE 2008 were in post on 31 October 2007.
Key changes since RAE 2008:
Equality Act 2010
•
Nine ‘protected characteristics’ are defined: age;
disability; gender reassignment; marital or civil
partnership status; pregnancy and maternity; race;
religion and belief; sex; and sexual orientation.
Discrimination on any of these grounds is illegal.
•
Various types of ‘prohibited conduct’ are defined:
harassment; victimisation; direct discrimination; and
indirect discrimination. Discrimination can be by
association, by perception, or arising from a
disability. Positive discrimination is also banned.
Key Changes since RAE 2008
REF rules and regulations
•
‘Esteem’ has been removed as a distinct element of
the assessment.
•
A revised approach to data collection of ‘research
environment’ metrics has been introduced.
•
Means staff selection for REF is only determined by:
– volume of outputs, taking into account any
legitimate reduction;
– output eligibility, quality and fit.
•
No other factors need to be considered.
Key Changes since RAE 2008
REF rules and regulations
REF also recognises, in addition to the nine ‘protected
characteristics’ defined by the Equality Act 2010:
•
•
•
•
Paternity and adoption;
Part-time and fixed-term employment status;
Early career researchers;
Junior clinical academics (without CCT) (in UoAs 1-6
only).
Activity 1: Equalities terminology and
prohibited conduct
In your groups:
•
•
•
Look at the different terms;
Look at the definitions and examples cards;
Match them up!
Anglia Ruskin University and the REF
Highlights of the Code of Practice
•
•
•
•
Code of Practice covers process for selection of
staff for submission to REF 2014 and explains
individual and committee roles and responsibilities.
Code drafted and approved internally over summer
2012; presently with REF Equality and Diversity
Advisory Panel for approval.
Decisions on institutional submissions to be made
by the Vice Chancellor.
Role of all other designated staff to help identify
UoAs, create, test and refine submissions.
Anglia Ruskin University and the REF
Highlights of the Code of Practice
•
•
•
REF Strategy Group: Advises VC on overall direction
and coordination, identification of UoAs and
selection of staff. Decides on output volumes
required for complex circumstances. Confirms REF
rules followed. Reports to Research Committee.
REF Data Group: Supports UoA Convenors,
Directors of Research, Deans etc in collecting
relevant data, and advises on use of REF submission
software. Reports to REF Strategy Group.
REF UoA Convenors Group: Shares best practice,
peer reviews draft submissions, helps resolve any
issues.
Processes for handling clearly defined
and complex circumstances
•
All eligible staff will be asked to complete a form to
declare any circumstances that may have affected
their productivity (volume of output) over REF
period.
•
‘Clearly defined’ where period of absence is clear
e.g. maternity leave, part-time working, early career
researcher status.
•
‘Complex’ where period of absence is less clear-cut
e.g. ill-health disrupting research for a sporadic
period, combinations of ‘clearly defined’
circumstances.
Processes for handling clearly defined
and complex circumstances
•
For both ‘clear’ and ‘complex’ circumstances, an
appropriate reduction is calculated by determining
the period of absence and applying tariffs in the REF
guidance.
•
‘Clear’ circumstances will be handled by RDCS team,
using tool built into REF submission software.
•
‘Complex’ circumstances will be considered by REF
Strategy Group, which will arrive at a judgement
based on the case made.
•
Others welcome to discuss any issues but not to
give definitive judgements.
Activity 2: Identifying clearly defined
and complex circumstances
In your groups:
•
•
Look at the six brief case studies;
Decide which of these are ‘clearly defined’ and which
are ‘complex’;
•
For the ‘clearly defined’ examples, use the
information in the handout to calculate an
appropriate reduction in outputs;
•
For the ‘complex’ examples, what additional
information might be useful to help arrive at a
judgement?
Processes for handling clearly defined
and complex circumstances
•
RDCS team will deal with ‘clearly-defined’
circumstances via REF submission software.
•
RDCS team will anonymise ‘complex’ declarations
for consideration by REF Strategy Group.
•
•
Decisions on legitimate reductions in outputs will be
communicated to researcher, copied to UoA
Convenor, Directors of Research, Heads of
Department.
Reductions in outputs do not change decisions on
output, eligibility, quality and fit.
Processes for handling clearly defined
and complex circumstances
•
•
•
•
Information on individual circumstances is sensitive
(and) personal information protected under Data
Protection Act. RDCS team have taken online
Introduction to Data Protection module.
Disclosure forms are to be returned in hard copy
format to RDCS team and will be held securely.
RDCS team will handle data entry of circumstances
on to REF submission system; REF 1a/b sections
will be unavailable internally except to RDCS team.
REF 1a/b information will be seen by REF panel
members (defined in Code).
Implications for your role
•
•
•
•
Understanding and observing our Code of Practice.
Ensuring decisions on selection are made on the
basis of eligibility, quality and fit rather than because
of an individual’s personal characteristics.
Being aware of circumstances that may entitle staff
to a reduction in research outputs.
Considering equality and diversity provisions when
discussing REF submissions with staff, and
ensuring individual circumstances treated
appropriately in such (necessary) discussions.
Implications for your role
If discussing individual circumstances:
•
Information involved should not go beyond what is
normally required to:
– manage staff absence;
– make reasonable adjustments (including referral
to occupational health);
– ensure health & safety and staff wellbeing at work;
– manage extenuating personal circumstances.
•
Remember data protection expectations!
Activity 3: REF Scenarios
In your groups:
•
•
•
Consider the scenarios.
Do you have any concerns?
How do you advise the member of staff?
More information
•
•
•
•
REF Assessment Framework and Guidance on
Submissions (02/2011) and Panel Criteria and
Working Methods (01/2012) – available via
‘Publications’ at www.ref.ac.uk
Equality Challenge Unit REF materials http://www.ecu.ac.uk/documents/ref-materials - their
example ‘complex’ disclosures and judgements are
in your packs
Our Code of Practice – in your packs or online at
http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/rdcs/research/ref.phtml
Introduction to Data Protection e-module – contact
Jackie Barlow
Any Questions?
Dr Tim Brooks (REF Manager, RDCS)
tim.brooks@anglia.ac.uk / x4305
Professor Caroline Strange (Assistant Director, RDCS)
caroline.strange@anglia.ac.uk / x3125
Mrs Jill Smit (Research Support Coordinator, RDCS)
jill.smit@anglia.ac.uk / x4208