Research Funding and Assessment;

1

• Research Funding and Assessment
• The Future
• Assessment, selectivity and excellence
• Getting the balance right
• Michael Arthur
• Vice-Chancellor, University of Leeds
• Chair of the Russell Group

2
Evidence for International Excellence

• We are 2nd in the world to the USA for Higher
  Education
• 1 of worlds population, but gt5 of publications
  and 13 of citations
• Citation impact UK is ahead of US in health,
  biology, environment and physical sciences

3
We are effective and efficient

• Publications per 1m invested in research

UK 16.6
US 9.9
Japan 3.6
4
The importance of dual funding

• Dual funding allows investment in new
  developments and to build on existing strengths
• This funding environment fosters research
  creativity
• Ability to foster interdisciplinary research
  initiatives of major societal importance
• Creating new knowledge of relevance to business
  and industry that fuels innovation

5
Importance of Research Selectivity

• Successive RAEs have concentrated research
  funding over the last 20 years in the
  universities with the highest quality and
  concentration of research
• UK research performance has improved dramatically
  over this period
• China, S.Korea, Australia, Germany and France are
  investing heavily in their best research
  intensive universities, in part because of our
  achievements

6
Outcome of RAE 2008

• Research assessment exercise (RAE) 2008 reversed
  this trend, with no recognition of critical mass
  nor concentration of research excellence
• Research funding (QR) is now spread significantly
  more thinly
• Funding research excellence wherever it is
  found comes at a price
• This direction of travel is questionable,
  particularly in the current fiscal environment

7
Some tough policy questions

• How many well funded research universities do we
  need, or can we afford to have, in the UK?
• Was the ramp of selectivity of RAE 2001 about
  right or should it be even greater?
• Should we grow research volume primarily or
  quality?
• Have we created an incentive to grow volume of a
  certain quality rather than quality per se?

8
How many well funded research universities do we
need?

• Enough to maintain our international excellence
• Enough to support research training and career
  development and mobility of researchers and
  academic staff
• Enough to support regional economies as well as
  our national economy
• Enough volume of high quality research to
  generate breakthrough observations

9
How many well funded research universities do we
need?

• It is not 169
• It is not just 5, or even 10
• It is somewhere between 25 and 30 discuss!
• Within this latter group, research funding must
  remain differentially ramped

10
Research selectivity some thought-provoking
numbers
Number of universities Actual of total QR received post RAE 2008 Suggested total of QR received post REF
Top 5 32.5 35
Top 10 48.7 52.5
Top 20 69.3 75
Top 30 79.9 90
11
Research selectivity some controversial ideas

• Research training concentrated in the top 25-30
  group
• Position and funding determined by successive
  REFs at 7-10 year intervals
• Mobility in and out of top 25-30 QR group
  essential over time
• Mobility within top 25-30 group also essential

12
What else needs to happen with such research
selectivity?

• We must support the diversity of mission across
  our HE sector
• We should think seriously about creating a
  sustainable HE system
• We must find a long term solution for how best to
  fund all aspects of higher education

13
The importance of basic or blue skies research

• Russell Group study of 123 cases of significant
• Innovation from 16 member universities.
• 53 resulted from basic research, 47 from
  applied.
• We must protect science funding, basic and
  applied.

14
The importance of basic or blue skies research

• Physics behind the electron microscope
• Structure of DNA
• Physics behind the MRI scanner
• Genetic fingerprinting
• Lasers and their applications
• Monoclonal Antibodies
• All basic research first, many with impact 15-30
  years
• later

15
The REF and Impact

• REF consultation suggests Impact is 25 of
  assessment ( 400M pa)
• Impact must relate to original primary research
  in the institution
• Time lag and discipline specific issues
• Reproducibility of impact assessments for each
  UoA?
• Potential for significant volatility in research
  funding post REF

16
The future of research excellence

• This will be best served by
• Concentrating research funds appropriately via an
  accurate and balanced REF that focuses primarily
  on research quality
• Supporting institutional creativity through
  continued dual funding of research

17
The consequences of getting it wrong

• Loss of international excellence
• Negative impact on the economy and slow recovery
  from recession
• May be very difficult to recover our
  international pre-eminence