The significance of my output is not evident in the text of the output itself - what do I do? The Informatics sub-panel recognises that this might be the case, and welcomes the submission of a factual statement on the significance of the output where appropriate max words PCWM See Steve's advice on writing the words under Outputs in Informatics. Outputs in Informatics.
For outputs like software or standards documents, a statement of maximum words is required to describe the research process and content PCWM For reviews, the original research or new insights from the review may be reported in statement of maximum words PCWM Any and all additional statements on outputs need to be 'succinct, verifiable, and externally referenced where appropriate' PCWM You will be able to edit the words that accompany your nominations after the internal REF check deadline 24 April However, it is advised that you wait to receive feedback either from the word workshops on the Research Day 08 May or from the internal review panel before making changes to statements submitted in time for the deadline.
Once feedback is received, you can and should further edit your words. There will be a period of College and University-level review of output scores NB: output scores, not output content during which words cannot be edited. The exact timing of this will be communicated closer to the time, but is expected to be 28 June - end July College and around September University. You only need to address the rigour of your research if it is not evident in your paper. It is more likely that you will touch on rigour as part of describing the significance of your work, for example if your evaluation is the biggest or most thorough conducted to date.
The submissions and results of REF are available online. For examples of good supporting statements for outputs i. Nomination, review and final selection for REF submission all happens at the unit of assessment UoA level. For Informatics authors, this means all the work is done at School level. Work of extended scale and scope may be requested to be double-weighted, but the panel for Informatics does not expect many requests for double-weighting due to the pattern of publication in the field i.
Any potential request for double-weighted outputs must be accompanied by a statement outlining how the output satisfies the criteria for double-weighting. If successful, a double-weighted output will count as two attributed outputs to one staff member, unless it is attributed to two members of staff then counted as one output per one staff member GoS , Can I be submitted to more than one unit of assessment i.
You can only be returned to one unit of assessment UoA GoS If you have a high-scoring paper which is relevant to the Informatics unit UoA 11 , then you will be returned to this unit. You should nominate outputs that are relevant to Informatics research, and demonstrate excellence in Informatics research. If your contribution is minimal and relates e. The Policy requires certain outputs to be made open access if they are to be submitted to REF.
Outputs in scope of the REF Open Access Policy must meet the Open Access criteria in order to be eligible for submission: Outputs should be deposited, discoverable, and free to read, download and search within, by anyone with an internet connection.
Outputs not in scope of the Open Access Policy do not need to meet the Open Access criteria in order to be eligible for submission. The relevant date for determining whether or no an output was produced within the publication period, and hence is eligible for submission, will be the date at which the submitted output first became publicly available or, for confidential reports, was lodged with the relevant body.
Evidence of the date an output became publicly available - such as a letter from the publisher - may be required in cases where the date of publication is unclear, or where the date of imprint lies outside the publication period but the actual date of appearance is within the publication period. Outputs expected to be made publicly available between the submission date and the end of the publication period i. An output first published in its final form during the REF publication period that was 'pre-published' in the previous publication period - whether in full in a different form for example, as a preprint , or as a preliminary version or working paper - is eligible for submission to REF, provided that the 'pre-published' output was not submitted to REF Follow us on Twitter.
Contact us. Where available and appropriate, citation data will be considered as an indicator to inform judgements on output quality, for submissions to units of assessment, or for outputs likely to be cross-referred to units of assessment; where the sub-panels have confirmed that they will make use of citation data in their assessment This applies to all sub-panels within Main Panel A, the following sub-panels within Main Panel B: 7 — Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, 8 — Chemistry, 9 — Physics and 11 — Computer Science and Informatics and sub-panel 16 — Economics and Econometrics, within Main Panel C.
The REF assesses the quality of a unit submission as a whole and individual staff members are not assessed. No inferences will be drawn on the quality of individual staff from the final selection and attribution of outputs to staff and these will not be published by Research England or the College.
Therefore, and in accordance with guidance issued by Research England, there will be no appeals process on the selection of outputs, or the attribution of outputs to individual staff members within a submission. The College recognises that a range of individual circumstances may have had a material impact on the quantity of research outputs that staff have produced over the REF census period and does not expect every eligible staff member to contribute equally to the volume of outputs submitted.
All staff will be invited to self-select for consideration to be submitted to the REF the one output they have authored over the REF submission period which they consider to be the highest quality, and to optionally put forward any further outputs which they consider to be of high quality.
Although staff will be encouraged to provide more than the minimum of one output, and it is thought likely that many will choose to do so, there is no expectation for staff, regardless of their individual circumstances, to self-select for consideration to be submitted to the REF, more than the minimum of 1 output.
Staff will be given the opportunity to voluntarily and confidentially disclose any circumstances which they believe have constrained their ability to work productively throughout the REF census period, in particular if this means that, exceptionally, they have not authored any outputs over the REF census period.
Some staff may however prefer to keep this information confidential and the College respects absolutely, their right to privacy over personal information. For staff wishing to disclose circumstances, this will be via a confidential online or paper form Annex 8 regarding any circumstances for submission to the Deputy Director, Organisational Development and Inclusion.
The form is collected by the College for REF purposes only. Staff are in no way obliged to complete the form or disclose any circumstance if they do not wish to do so. In accordance with guidance issued by Research England, the following equality-related circumstances, in isolation or together, may significantly constrain the ability of staff to produce outputs or to work productively throughout the assessment period.
Straightforward circumstances. Absence from work due to secondments or career breaks outside the HE sector iii. Qualifying periods of family-related leave iv. Part-time working v. Junior clinical academics. These are defined as clinically qualified academics who are still completing their clinical training in medicine or dentistry and have not gained a Certificate of Completion of Training CCT or its equivalent prior to 31 July More complex circumstances with an equivalent effect to absence, that require a judgement: i.
Disability ii. Ill health, injury, or mental health conditions iii. Constraints relating to pregnancy, maternity, paternity, adoption or childcare that fall outside of those covered by 67a iv. Other caring responsibilities such as caring for an elderly or disabled family member v. Gender reassignment vi. Other circumstances relating to the protected characteristics listed in Annex 6 , or relating to activities protected by employment legislation.
In accordance with Research England guidance, the following criteria may mean that staff have been unable to produce any eligible outputs over the REF assessment period: a. The information on staff circumstances will be considered by the REF Equality Committee who will then advise the relevant Faculty and Department of the total reduction in outputs which could be applied for within a UoA submission, making use of the algorithms provided by Research England see Annex 7 for staff with straight-forward circumstances, and forming a judgement on more complex circumstances.
This will be considered alongside the total pool of outputs collected and a decision made over whether to seek approval from Research England of any reduction in the required number of outputs to be submitted in a unit.
The decision to seek reductions in the overall number of outputs submitted within a UoA will be subject to the final approval of the REF Strategy Group. Requests for reductions will generally only be considered where a unit has a critical mass of staff who have declared circumstances meaning that they have produced less than the average number of outputs required within a unit.
In accordance with Research England guidance, reference will also be made to the total number of eligible outputs that may be submitted within the Unit of Assessment.
0コメント