Research Committee
Minutes of meeting of 9 February 2012
Date of meeting
Thursday 9 February 2012
Attendees
Lynn Abrams, Iain Anderson, Thomas Clancy (chair), Steve
Driscoll; Matthew Fox, Adam Rieger (on behalf of Fiona
MacPherson)
1.
Apologies
Fiona MacPherson
2.
Minutes of meeting 15.11.11
Minutes accepted
3.
Matters Arising
a)
Composition
Clarification sought on those who should be invited to attend. Dauvit Broun would be a coopted member as Head of the Centre for Scottish and Celtic Studies. Graeme Small & Peter
van Dommelen as REF champions, were happy not to attend as subject already represented
on Committee but would be copied in on all future correspondence. TC gave his apologies
for not including them in the documentation circulated for this meeting.
Action : CLR
b) Applications (item 4)
With regards to SRAs, research leave applications and Committee involvement. TC had
relayed SoH Committee’s anxieties to the College Research. Changes in research admin at
College should lead to improvements in communication. There had only been one
Leverhulme application but more to Kelvin Smith of which 2 SoH applications had been
shortlisted.
c) Talks for PIs / Arts Lab
FMcP had asked for seminars/talks for PIs on financial management of projects. This was
being offered as one of the strands in the Arts Lab seminar series in Semester 2. Ashley
Theunissen reported that there was a low take up so far. Committee to encourage those
who would benefit to sign up.
Action: ALL
d) Conference Budget
Suggestion of Conference allocation being committed within Budgets. School Management
Group has initially seemed in favour at the Christmas meeting, but at the meeting three
weeks ago the mood had changed. May be due to the suggestion of centralization of funds
and budget announcements. Heads of Subjects favoured maximum autonomy and no top
slicing. Head of School seemed keen to keep the idea on the back burner until after the new
arrangements being devised for distribution of budgets had been agreed and set.
4. REF Updates
a) Update to Regulations - HEFCE have now published guidance and this can be found at
https://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/pubs/2012/01_12/
MF wished to make a vigorous protest as to why the University had not emailed this
information. TC apologised that he may have been supposed to have been the postman. Ashley
& Adrienne Scullion will produce an Arts-directed version.
Main changes relate to rules on multiple submissions; co-authored outputs. This was especially
important for Archaeology & HATII. TC to check percentage of input. Double-weightings of
outputs also some changes of rules TC to produce guidance as to what might be double
weighted.
Action: TC
b) Where we are at: key dates - TC highlighted the key dates of the REF process. Different
census dates for External & Internal deadlines . Now is the time for Committee members to
start alerting & applying.
TC pointed out the internal date of 27th April 2012 for the Code of Practice.
c) Selection procedures – LA enquired as to the constitution of the College Assessment Panel.
CAP will be comprised of research convenors of Schools & former RAE sub panellists. From
College of Arts, Thomas Clancy, Graham Caie, Simon Newman & Alan Weir. TC discussed Steve
Beaumont’s REF briefing at Senate., and the rationale behind 2.5 grade point average over the 4
items submitted. HEFCE are allowing Institutions to set their own thresholds. UoA can set
higher thresholds if so desired. Champions need to be looking at any blanks that were
submitted in the Mini REF or if they have items that need to be replaced.
Training is being provided for anyone involved in the selection process.
All should encourage that proposed outputs go through informal peer review & assessment so
that they can use this as reasoning for CAP scores. This could include outside opinions in areas
where you don’t have other experts for peer review.
MF asked if de-selection would be used in career prospect. Steve Beaumont had given the
impression that this would not automatically be the case, but clearly also desire not to disincentivise.
d) UoA “homework” – Best way to prepare. Get sense for each UoA of 4 items 4* 3* 2* for
each member of staff. Still time to change the dynamics of the process. Flag to TC if you
think that publications that were expected to come through will not or staff that will not be
submitted.
Action: ALL
As most members of the Committee had to leave for other commitments there was a brief coverage
of remaining items.
5.
Research Management Review – TC will alert Committee nearer the time.
6 & 7. Communication & Research Leave Plans / Processes - To resolve Leave Plans and
communication for Heads of Subject, there was to be a School wide centralised pool of data.
Christelle currently working on this.
8.
Centres – TC reported there had been three notes of interest; War Studies, Gender History &
American Studies. Meeting will be arranged to discuss further with Michael Murray.
9.
A.O.C.B – No matters raised. TC thanks all for attending.
10.
Date of Next meeting – TC asked if the Committee wished to meet again before Easter or
would they prefer individual UoA meetings. UoA meetings asked for.