Written by Sian Vaughan, CHEAD Co-opted Trustee (RIKE Alliance) and Director of Research for Art, Architecture and Design, Birmingham City University.
We had a lively discussion at our online REF Forum meeting on 3rd November, at which 40+ Forum members were joined by Anne Boddington, REF029 UoA32 sub-panel Chair. With REF development still in the pause, there were of course topics on which Anne could not comment on at this time.
We acknowledged as a community that it was an unsettling time, with the various reports of street myths and what one member termed “false REF-ology” circulating during the pause. Anne’s message to the Forum was to “carry on carrying-on”, with an emphasis on supporting good research and authentic research environments.
We discussed the importance of developing mechanisms for internal review of outputs, as a developmental measure to support widening understanding of research quality. We also discussed double-weighting of outputs, with increasing double-weighting being a theme that had come through strongly in the REF2021 sub-panel report.
Whilst REF itself may not have yet decided on permutations of double or other forms of multiple weighting, we discussed the benefits for our institutions and the need to emphasise the significance and scale of practice outputs as well as having confidence in our sector.
Key takeaways from the discussions are:
Try to ignore “false REF-ology”, wait to see the decisions as published
Remember that REF is a process of peer review, trust colleagues to recognise the challenges in the sector
The need to involve ourselves in our institutions Code of Practice discussions once REF is un-paused
Sharing models of internal and local output review (possibly a theme for a next Forum meeting)
Have confidence around double-weighting and advocating for the scale and significance of our of work