The Future Research Assessment Programme’s initial decision to raise the weighting of the research environment portion of the forthcoming REF in 2028 from 15 per cent to 25 per cent has been welcomed by some, while more cautiously received by others.
When it comes to assessing this now broader category (which will also be renamed People, Culture and Environment), the fact remains that the written statements presenting an institution’s research culture will probably only constitute around 20 per cent of the subscore for the 25 per cent weighting. This means most of the assessment will, as in 2021, be based upon indicators drawn from metrics, institutional awards and statistical data, collected in the form of a questionnaire yet to be devised.
While using a questionnaire-style template to collect evidence could simplify the assessment exercise for universities and REF assessment panels, it comes with drawbacks. Larger institutions who can employ more staff to collect and crunch data will have an advantage over smaller institutions who cannot, while the nagging observation remains that picking a few indicators to evidence something as complex as research culture does not do the latter justice.
In fact, a reliance on metrics might hinder the development of a positive research culture. There is an impression among some researchers that the sector’s overreliance on metrics is, in fact, one of the things that’s wrong with research culture right now. In a survey conducted in 2020, for example, the Wellcome Trust discovered that only 14 per cent of researchers surveyed believed current metrics improved research culture, while a further 43 per cent believed that metrics were held to be more important than research quality itself.
