On 19 July HEFCE held a webinar providing updates on REF 2021 policy developments related to the submission of staff and output portability. You can read two blogs (links provided below) which contain full details of the developments. Here are the main points:
UK funding bodies
- Accept Stern’s view that all academic staff who have any significant responsibility to undertake research should be returned to the REF and intend to take an inclusive approach
- But also recognise that there is no clear alternative to easily identify staff with a significant responsibility to undertake research
Based on the above, HEIs are given two options in relation to staff submission:
- 100% of staff submission – straightforward, no burden associated with staff selectivity
- Institutional identification of staff who are not required to carry out research and hence not submitting those staff members – high burden in terms of high selectivity and documentation. an auditable evidence will need to be provided where there is no expectation to undertake research (e.g. career pathway or workload model)
Portability or non-portability of research
Funding bodies are putting forward the following models:
- Both, ‘old’ and ‘new’ institutions would have credit for an output, i.e. the institution where the research output was demonstrably generated and at which the member of staff was employed would be able to retain full credit. However, the credit would also go to the new institution.
- Hybrid model, limited non-portability from a set point in time. This is complicated(!): a date will be set from which new rules will apply. This means there will be 2 rules in operation depending on whether the academic moved before or after the set date.
– If they move before the set date, they can take their outputs with them and only the new institution can claim these outputs (full portability, as in REF 2014).
– If they move after the set date they will be able to take a limited number of outputs (probably max of 2, tbc).
– Any other outputs could be submitted by the institution where an academic was employed when the output was first publicly made available.
- The proposals concerning both staff selectivity and the portability of outputs remain loose and require clarity and precision
- HEFCE will initiate a period of discussion with institutions about the precise wording of the broad proposals provided above
- Initial decisions on these issues will come out in autumn
Please visit the following blogs for the full details:
It does not matter how good your research article is, if it is not Open Access, it is not eligible for REF!
Open Access is the free, unrestricted online access to research, and is now a national requirement for the next Research Excellence Framework (REF).
The key points:
Journal articles must be uploaded to UCA Research Online within 3 months of their acceptance date (not the publication date) in order to be eligible for REF. This version must be your accepted manuscript (not the publisher’s PDF).
All other research outputs should be uploaded to UCA Research Online (such as book chapters you have authored, exhibitions of your work) as UCA may get extra credit at REF for providing Open Access to all types of research outputs.
Making your work Open Access will also benefit you as a researcher – it helps to raise your research profile, with studies showing increased citation rates.
As soon as you are notified that an article has been accepted for publication, upload it to UCA Research Online.
How can I add my research outputs?
Login with your UCA username/password at research.uca.ac.uk
There is a how-to video at research.uca.ac.uk/help/deposit.html
Contact us at email@example.com
Staff in Library & Student Services can help you on uploading your research, adhering to the policy and any rules from publishers.
To view the REF Open Access policy in full, see: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2016/201635/
Last week we published an initial analysis of all the evidence that we have compiled to date about good practice in research commercialisation, and invited university experts to provide us with additional views, weblinks and papers as responses to a survey. This evidence will inform the work of the HEFCE-universities Knowledge Exchange Framework programme. We…
via Good practice in research and development partnering — HEFCE blog
As an arts based institution, UCA has a different research output profile from larger multi-discipline universities. These tend to have a high percentage of published outputs, including authored books, edited books, chapters in books and journal articles. (see table below)
UCA’s profile is somewhat different, with the highest number of outputs including digital or visual media, exhibition, artefacts, design, and performance.
Last week we had a look at artefacts as research outputs. In this post we are going to look at Exhibition and Performance as research outputs. Both require the title, description, venue, date, and url (if one is available) for submission to REF.
A research output under exhibition includes:
• curating an exhibition
• solo exhibitions
• significant contributions to exhibitions by a group or a number of individuals.
A research output under performance includes solo performances, and significant contributions to performances made by a group or a number of individuals.
• Concerts and recitals
• Dance choreography including score, notations and objects
• Directing and/or producing performances
• Improvised performance
• Radio or other sound recordings or audio-visual recordings made for public access, including CDs and DVDs
• Theatre productions (drama, dance, opera, music theatre)
Listed below are examples of the exhibition and performance research outputs from UCA REF 2014.
You can click on the link to find out more about the research that led to these outputs.
|A Sort of Night to the Mind, A Kind of Night for our Thoughts:
|At a Time of Crisis (AUDI Art Award artworks), exhibitions
|Bread and Roses, co-directed & co-curated multi-strand arts
|Cloth & Culture Now, curated exhibition, authored website, education
|Cloth & Memory 2, curated exhibition, authored website, education
|Cultex: textile as a cross cultural language, curated exhibition
|David Colwell: making chairs; Fred Baier: the right angle; Richard La Trobe-Bateman: making triangles
|Fairytale for Sale, exhibition, mongraph, catalogues
|‘Garden Ruin’ and ‘Face Yourself’, solo exhibitions
|Insight into Beauty – Contemporary Craft Inspired by Japan
|Le Temps Spectaculaire, exhibitions, on-line article
|Lost in Lace, curated exhibition, edited catalogue with essay
|Manufactory and The Altogether, exhibition
|Married Man, exhibition, colour photographs, looped audio
|Pictures of Linda, exhibiton of colour photographs with accompanying
|Resort 1, exhibition of 22 large scale colour photographs
|Ritual and Setting, site-specific ceramics, exhibition, catalogue
|‘The Market’: Hybrid spatial practices in contemporary art, exhibitions
|Utopias, solo exhibition, catalogue
Webinar – Friday, Jul 14 2017 @ 10:00am – 11:00am
What does 4* impact evidence look like?
Vertigo Ventures are running a one-hour intensive session is aimed at supporting those who are developing impact cases for the next REF. Using our experience of working with universities to write impact case studies and analyzing cases for good practice this session will utilize these reflections and learnings to share insight for those currently grappling with impact evidence collection.
To sign up click here
Who should attend?
- Researchers looking to submit impact case studies
- REF Managers, Impact Officers, Research Support Officers
- Heads of academic departments seeking to understand and develop the impact in their departments
The webinar will answer the following questions:
- What does impact evidence in 4* case studies look like?
- How is this evidence used effectively?
- What they difference between panel or impact types?
- What should researchers and research managers be doing to develop good practice?
Delivered in a convenient and concise format, the presentation will leave you better equipped to identify support evidencing of case studies.