Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #REF2021
Most recents (8)
I've been playing with the #REF2021 data - the massive, funding-defining, UK research assessment exercise which provides a (faulty-metric defined) glimpse of structure, size and inequality in UK University research system.
The data is open results2021.ref.ac.uk
The data is open results2021.ref.ac.uk
To visualise each institution's research make a square for each discipline/department they submitted ("UoAs"), scaled by the staff in that UoA, and coloured by the GPA that unit received for their research ("hot" colourmap - more white/yellow is numbers closer to 4, the maximum)
Here's the visualisation for University of Oxford, 3404 staff FTE, the largest in the #REF2021 
1. The impact case study (with .@MartinNeil9) on our #Bayesian network applications that was chosen as part of the .@QMUL #REF2021 submission achieved the highest possible rating 4*. Normally it’s not possible to know the rating for individual submissions...
2. Reason we know is because the QM Computer Science impact results were ranked joint top in the country – with 100% 4* ratings (so all 6 CS submissions were rated 4*). Here's a public summary of our case study from QM Press Office (apologies for typos!) eecs.qmul.ac.uk/research/featu…
3. The full submission included testimonies about critical applications with international organizations that cannot be made public because of confidentiality. The #Bayesian network software referred to is .@AgenaRisk agenarisk.com
A thread of the 'top' universities in #REF2021 ranked by their #GenderPayGap and #EthnicityPayGap. The UK university median gender pay gap is 14.7%; the UK university median ethnicity pay gap is 9%.
#REFresults #REF
#REFresults #REF
1. Loughborough University. This university has a median gender pay gap of 31.3% and a median ethnicity pay gap of 11.1%.
2. University of Exeter. This university has a median gender pay gap of 21.7% and a median ethnicity pay gap of 12%.
#REFresults #REF2021
2. University of Exeter. This university has a median gender pay gap of 21.7% and a median ethnicity pay gap of 12%.
#REFresults #REF2021
3. University of Lancaster. This university has a median gender pay gap of 21.6% and doesn't report its median ethnicity pay gap.
4. University of East Anglia. This university has a median gender pay gap of 21.6% and doesn't report its median ethnicity pay gap data.
#REFresults
4. University of East Anglia. This university has a median gender pay gap of 21.6% and doesn't report its median ethnicity pay gap data.
#REFresults
New #evaluation protocol for academic research published in the Netherlands: #StrategyEvaluationProtocol #SEP 2021-2027 by @deVSNU @NWONews and @_KNAW. Something old, something new. A thread. vsnu.nl/files/document…
The goal of #SEP remains to maintain and improve quality and societal relevance of research. A unit is assessed in light of its own aims and strategy; and aim and strategy depend on institutional context, research field, nature of unit etc. Nothing really new.
A #SEP evaluation doesn’t stand alone; it is a six-yearly event in the ongoing quality assurance cycle. Not really new, but SEP evaluations are far more explicitly positioned as part of a continuous quality assurance process.
.@AnnetteBoaz and @oliver_kathryn introduce #transformure: UK not as good as we think we are at evidence-informed policy; lots of current research, policy and practice interest; need to think beyond barriers and facilitators to evidence use.
Huw Davies tracks the history of evidence-informed policy in the UK from 'what counts is what works' forward. A field that has initiated interesting debate, but (ironically) tended through time towards introspection? #transformure
A plug from Huw for forthcoming update to the classic 'What works?' - to be released by Policy Press early 2019. A critical but supportive reflection on how evidence can inform policy, inc chapter by me & @OliWilliamsPhD on evidence-informed public service delivery. #transformure
Those involved in #ref2021 planning might be interested in this. In fact, I'm surprised I'm the 1st person who's done it. Relative value of 1output v 1 impact case study v 100 words of environment statement in determining final score, based on draft guidance on submissions. [1/2]
The headline: with the move to 25% of profiles being determined by impact (plus the impact statement being incorporated into the environment statement), one impact case study is now worth between five and 21 times one output (for FTEs of 10 and 200 respectively). #ref2021 [2/2]
Another interesting thing is that even with v large submissions, one case study can account for >2% of final score. That's a lot. Last time, institutions 'massaged' their FTEs according to the number of viable case studies they had. This time they won't be able to. #ref2021 [3/2]
In a massive shock to literally no-one, the #REF2021 draft impact case study template is almost exactly the same as in 2014, with the exception of a few additional boxes at the outset and *drum roll* it can be 5 pages in length.
So.. for everyone who decided to create their own REF2021 planning template rather than adapting the 2014 one, a large 👎
Also a very narrow definition of a 'continued' case study in the #REF2021 guidance. My feeling is that many social science cases we assumed would be continuations are nothing of the sort under these rules.
Just finished reading @GemmaDerrick's great new book about how impact was assessed in #REF2014: springer.com/gb/book/978331…
She's blogging soon for @fasttrackimpact but in the meantime here are my takeaways 👇
She's blogging soon for @fasttrackimpact but in the meantime here are my takeaways 👇
Lack of time for deliberation over conceptions of impact created a risk of group think in sub-panels that may have biased some #REF2014 outcomes (1/11)
Panelists talked about how "...over time there was a coming together", a "gut feeling of how this thing is going" as they "kind of worked out that we knew what we were measuring against." They "gained something of a common mindset" (2/11)
