1. GSOE Impact Workshop Impact and the REF 19 th May 2010 Lesley Dinsdale

2. Key features of the REF Hefce announcement on initial decisions 25 th March 2010: Essentially a similar overall exercise as the RAE: Peer review is fundamental Institutional selection of staff and best four outputs to continue Institutional submission policies Codes of Practice: selection criteria, allowances for individual circumstances But assessment of esteem has been replaced by assessment of the impact of research

3. REF Structure of submissions OutputsEnvironment Impact Element: Assessed by: Expert review, possibly informed by bibliometrics in some sub panels RA5 type narrative Supported by indicators: income, students Narrative, case study approach giving exemplars Supported by indicators Profile against criteria: originality, significance, rigour Reported as: Profile. Criteria relating to outputs and impact Profile against criteria: reach and significance Individual, of staff submitted The UOA Weightings %?60/70?15/20?10/20?

4. Assessment of Impact: Proposals Assessed at the unit level, not individual Definition of impact for REF is wide but does not include academic impact Majority of assessment by case studies (1 per 10 FTE?) Supported by overarching impact statement

5. Assessment of Impact: Proposals Criteria: Impact occurred during survey period (Jan 2008 – survey date) Must relate to underpinning research (from date?) of a sufficient standard of rigour and originality Research may be a specific piece or a body of work Contribution by the institution to both the underpinning research and impact Impacts must be evidenced, including indicators where appropriate: potentially auditable Assessment criteria: reach and significance (breadth and depth)

6. Impact: Hefce pilot To test Hefce proposals for methodology – submissions and assessment criteria 29 universities, 5 UOAs including Social Policy and Social Work (UOA40) Mock impact submissions – case studies and impact statement, March 2010 Pilot assessment panels – 50/50 academic/users of research. Govt Chief Social Scientist Chair of UOA40 Panels to provide detailed report in Autumn 2010

7. Impact: UOB pilot experience and issues High (but not universal) buy-in from academic participants Submissions led by UOA Academic Coordinators with a small team – their detailed local knowledge and energy/enthusiasm was vital Identification of case studies (12 submitted in total) was local – no systematic corporate sources

8. Impact: UOB pilot experience and issues Evidencing impact: Can we demonstrate that peoples lives have been changed in some way? Some of the Hefce proposed indicators of impact are activities rather than impacts......new concept of intermediate impact Hefce do not intend to make this an impossible exercise!

9. Impact: UOB pilot experience and issues Many highly subject-specific issues : Particularly in the social sciences, there is not a linear progression from research to impact Govt commissioned work sometimes not published in a peer reviewed form? What about high-quality research findings that are rejected by policy makers for political reasons? What about negative research findings?