Assessing pedagogic research: conclusions and advice
The following advice is the result of a workshop held in June 2006, and attended by
around 25 RAE 2008 panel members from a wide range of disciplines, to discuss the
assessment of pedagogic research.
It was developed in the light of previously published RAE documentation, in particular the
panel criteria and working methods for each of the main and sub-panels. The aim is not
to supersede these criteria, but to help elaborate some consistent messages which apply
across all subject areas where pedagogic research might be submitted.
1.
Overall approach:

in less mature subject areas, take account that the intellectual infrastructure of
the discipline may still be being built

do not approach the assessment of pedagogic research with preconceptions –
be open to different methods and be prepared to look at a wide range of forms
of evidence

be responsive to different disciplines and intellectual traditions. For example,
some pedagogic research may be philosophical in character, which may be
rather different to the type of outputs some panels may be accustomed to
receiving.
2.
Identifying quality:

outputs submitted should present substantive empirical findings and/or contribute to
the building of theory. Empirical studies and theoretical contributions should be built
upon sound foundations in previous research








research questions posed in an output should be wider than those concerned
only with innovation in teaching. They should address topics such as
educational theory and policy theory, demonstrate a depth of understanding of
the teaching and learning process, and if possible involve a wider range of
stakeholders (ie, constitute more than ’what we do in our department’). The
innovation should be theoretically-based and research-based and the
implementation should be researched
work considered to be 4* needs to be benchmarked against the best in the field.
If the work submitted is comparable in quality to the best available in the world,
then it should be able to attain the highest quality level
pedagogic research that has an 'edge' – eg, critical edge, cutting edge,
excitement, risk, power, emotion – should not be underrated simply because it
does not exhibit traditional characteristics of quality in a conventional way
outputs need to include an explicit exposition of the theoretical foundations of
the work
research questions addressed in submitted outputs should include issues about
discussion, problems, and the objectives of the research
research methods employed should be systematic and rigorous
outputs should identify the implications for teaching and practice
the scholarship of the subject has to be evident (ie taking account of what
constitutes theory in different fields)





3.
journal articles are not the only form of evidence to demonstrate research
excellence
look for evidence that the submitted output is situated in the context of similar
work even if it rejects it
there should be evidence that the submission is working in a scholarly
infrastructure which it draws from, and adds to understanding in the field
the contribution does not have to be just about new knowledge, it can contribute
to understanding and scholarly infrastructure
submissions should explain how the outputs contribute to a better
understanding (through appropriate use of the RA5a form and the ’Other
relevant details’ field).
Practical issues:

assessment will be made against the criteria of the sub-panel to which the work
was originally submitted, not those of UOA 45 Education (even if it is crossreferred to UOA 45)

HEIs should make full use of the 'Other relevant details’ field in connection with
outputs around pedagogic research

wherever possible, panels should feel empowered to grade the educationally
based outputs themselves using their usual criteria.