APPENDIX 11
Memorandum submitted by the University
of Hertfordshire
THE UNIVERSITY
OF HERTFORDSHIRE
1. This institution is one that has clearly
and demonstrably benefited from participation in the RAE and from
the associated separate streams of research funding. In a consultation
exercise conducted in 1998, and in the 1999 Fundamental review
of Research Policy and Funding (both conducted by HEFCE) we broadly
affirmed our confidence in the RAE, and in the current mechanisms
for allocating research funds. Here we repeat that affirmation:
"The University of Hertfordshire believes
that the funding bodies should continue to use a form of research
assessment exercise for allocating research funding . . . since
we consider the present RAE system a fair method for evaluating
research quality".
In both those exercises, according to HEFCE
"Consultation with the sector produced overwhelming support
for the RAE as the best way to assess research quality".
CONTEXT
2. Unlike pre-1992 universities, post-1992
universities had no core funding for research prior to 1993, though
opportunities were available to bid for PCFC research funding.
Hence prior to 1993, Hatfield Polytechnic, like other new universities,
supported research selectively, mainly in science and technology
(particularly Engineering, Physics, Biosciences and Computer Science),
and in Nursing and other health-related disciplines. Institutional
research strategy was thematic, focused on "Interdisciplinary
research in science and engineering with particular application
to healthcare". Our research emphasis therefore conformed
exactly to national priorities, as defined in the Roith report,
and as subsequently identified in Technology Foresight.
RAE 1992
3. However as a New University with a selective
and prioritised emphasis on research in science and technology,
entering the RAE for the first time in 1992, we found ourselves
disadvantaged: firstly by inexperience of the RAE process, and
secondly by virtue precisely of our traditional concentration
on strategic and applied research, and on collaboration with industry,
neither of which activities received due credit in RAE evaluations.
Those research areas in which we had invested most heavily, and
which were our most successful in terms of external grants and
contracts, fared relatively badly in RAE 1992. On the other hand
research spanning the curriculum, in Psychology, Business and
Management, Humanities and Education were recognised by RAE ratings,
together with Computer Science (rated 4 in RAE 1992). The map
of Hertfordshire research drawn by the 1992 RAE failed to conform
either to the University's own sense of its traditional research
strengths, or to the priorities of institutional research strategy:
but on the other hand assisted us in determining areas of research
achievement and potentiality, and in identifying sites of developmental
research which included existing areas of established research
strength and clear research promise, and new areas of research
where these showed the potential for rapid development and compatibility
with the overall strategy.
RESEARCH STRATEGY
1993-96
4. From 1993-96 we responded by developing
a new "Research Quality" strategy, based on the selective
use of QR funding to support the units in receipt of RAE ratings,
with the highest-rated units receiving proportionately higher
funding; coupled with a "Research Development" strategy
focusing the application of DevR funding on continuing support
for science, engineering and healthcare research, and on "pump-priming"
support for other research areas requiring enhancement (some 35
per cent of the funding was allocated to QR-rated UOAs, and the
other 65 per cent to science and technology and to new research
areas). These strategies were framed by the exigencies of the
RAE, and enabled by the influx of a substantial and discrete stream
of research funding, all of which was deployed strategically in
support of particular research objectives.
RAE 1996
5. These strategies were proven successful
in the 1996 RAE, where science and technology, with the best of
our interdisciplinary engineering research submitted under both
Computing and Physics (both rated four in 1996 RAE), together
with excellent applied work in Psychology (3a), re-emerged as
the University's principal research strengths. New research areas
receiving recognition included healthcare disciplines such as
Nursing, Arts Therapies, Radiography and Physiotherapy. Meanwhile
the span of viable research across the curriculum was increased
to include Art and Design, Art History, Music, as well as the
Business, Education and Humanities areas that fared well in 1992.
The 1996 RAE submission increased the numbers of research-active
staff from 93.8 FTE in 1992, to 201.1 FTE (28 per cent of total
academic staff). The highest-rated areas generally increased staff
volume substantially between 1992 and 1996:
— Physics (4) 75 per cent
— Computing (4) 43 per cent
— Psychology (3a) 12.5 per cent.
RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENT
1993-96
6. Hence through exploitation of the RAE
exercise, and by the strategic application of research funding
to very closely-defined objectives, this university succeeded
over a period of three years (1993-96) in reconfirming its traditional
mission as a specialist institution focused on science and engineering
research, by
— Producing research of international
excellence in Physics and Computing.
— Producing research of national excellence
in specific areas of science and engineering (Environmental Sciences,
Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering).
At the same time we succeeded, through targeted
investment, in developing the healthcare research identified in
the late 1980s as an institutional priority, by
— Producing research of national/international
excellence in health-related areas such as Psychology.
— Developing research of national excellence
in health-related disciplines such as Nursing, Pharmacology, Arts
Therapies, Radiography and Physiotherapy.
In addition we continued to maintain and develop,
still selectively and strategically, the broad range of research
appropriate to a university, by
— Maintaining research of national
excellence widely across the curriculum in Business and Management,
Education, Humanities.
— Developing research of national excellence
in new areas such as Art and Design, and Music.
RAE 2001
9. It was recognised from the experience
of the 1992 RAE that the applied and commercial research activities
that had been the specialism of Hatfield Polytechnic could not
automatically be presented as academic research of international
and national excellence; and that the development of health-related
research would require a longer period of development. Our submission
strategy for RAE 2001 was focused on the same broad objectives
as those pursued since 1992, with the general aim of improving
ratings where possible, consolidating research in areas of national
excellence, and bringing further new areas of research into the
RAE environment.
10. The results obtained from RAE 2001 fully
endorse the correctness of these strategies. Grades of 4 for Nursing
and Psychology, together with evidence of some national excellence
in Physiology and Pharmacology, demonstrate the growth of our
health-related research. Our Nursing now ranks first by grade
and volume, and our Psychology second, among new universities.
Nursing has the same grade as King's and Leeds. Our Psychology
is larger than 4-rated departments at City, Keele, Kent, Loughborough.
We have held our 4 grades in Physics and Computer Science with
increased staff volume (in Physics from 12.25 to 22 FTE, in Computer
Science from 19.7 to 34.2FTE). Our Physics is the highest-ranking
new university by grade and volume; among all universities graded
4, stands equal third with the University of York; and is larger
than 4-rated departments at King's, Loughborough, Newcastle and
Reading. Our Computer Science ranks second by grade and volume
among new universities, and is larger than 4-rated departments
at Bath, City, Kent, King's, UMIST, QMW, and Reading.
11. Notable successes have also been achieved
by new universities in Humanities research, where funding inequities
between pre- and post-1992 universities have less significance
than in Science and Technology. UH now shares for History an RAE
grade of 5 with Oxford. At 4 our Philosophy ranks second among
new universities, and shares a grade with Birmingham, Hull, Kent,
Liverpool, Manchester, Southampton and Glasgow.
11. The Select Committee will of course
wish to consider whether the RAE 2001 results represent a real
improvement. By the criterion of publication in international
journals, there is no evidence that performance for any grade
in 2001 is lower than for the same grade in 1996. If anything
the standards are higher in 2001. All 5 and 5* submissions, and
some 4s, were validated by international experts. Although many
departments improved, many also stayed at the high ratings of
4 or 5, and some 5* departments declined. These departments provide
a benchmark for the Departments that did improve.
11. The success is real, and the UK should
invest in its successes. New universities are acknowledged as
pioneers in widening access, yet have also delivered selectively
on research quality. Government initiatives to improve participation
in HE are strengthened, not hampered, by the presence within such
institutions of excellent research, which can thus be cascaded
to students from less advantaged backgrounds.
RAE AND INSTITUTIONAL
MISSION
12. The combined benefits of RAE evaluation,
and related HEFCE research funding, have assisted this institution
in
— pursuing research work in conformity
with national priorities;
— developing new areas of research;
— and disseminating a cross-institutional
research culture appropriate to a university.
Although we were certainly able to take advantage
of national priority funding under PCFC, the enhanced standing
of our best research as attested through RAE ratings has provided
competitive advantage both in terms of attracting research grants
from research councils and charities, and in terms of successful
commercial exploitation. HEFCE research funding has further enabled
the university to develop a research infrastructure better capable
of supporting such externally funded research.
13. It is apparent from the above that we
have consistently pursued research of national priority both by
exploiting the RAE system and by securing "partnership"
funding from research councils, charities and from commercial
sponsors. Further development of the levels of exploitable research
depend on access to capital and infrastructure funding such as
JIF (which has been notoriously concentrated in a few institutions),
or the more recent (very welcome) availability of HEFCE Research
Capital Project Funding and SRIF; and of course the levels of
HEFCE QR funding.
NEW UNIVERSITIES
AND RAE
14. New Universities performed relatively
well, even in the 1992 RAE, and strikingly well in RAE 2001, despite
having historically received much less financial support for research
than the traditional universities; despite the fact that units
of assessment were based on the classical subject-based departmental
structures rather than the interdisciplinarity characteristic
of new universities; and despite the low priority given to strategic
and applied research. Results improved again between 1992 and
1996, although the effective period of usable research funding
was no more than two years (1993-95). RAE 2001 confirmed this
trend with many new universities achieving 5 grades in a wide
range of discipline areas. Further increases in selectivity of
assessment and funding would hamper the capability of new universities
to identify areas of potential research excellence and develop
them to standards of national and international excellence.
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
15. The existing funding council policy
of discriminating research quality at the level of the unit of
assessment should continue. Research performance is, as the RAE
results show, very unevenly distributed across many institutions.
Good research should be funded wherever it is found. There is
no case for distinguishing research quality purely at the institutional
level, either to allow or deny funding. Even small pockets of
research excellence in an otherwise largely teaching institution
should receive public funding, as a feature of institutional diversity.
RESEARCH AND
TEACHING
16. Hitherto new universities have submitted
a minority of academic staff (no more than 50 per cent) to the
RAE. Most decreased their staff volume in order to aim at higher
ratings (UH increased staff volume from 1996). We believe that
research and teaching are of mutual benefit, and that teaching
would suffer from any move to withdraw research funding from large
areas of the sector. The new universities have, with relatively
small investment, produced significant returns on research. New
universities have legitimate research aspirations, yet they also
fully subscribe to the principle that research and teaching are
the primary functions of any university. They are strong in the
belief that the deliverers of new knowledge and understanding
should have a stake in their production. Ministers must not be
persuaded by the current polemic asserting that the only objective
of the RAE should be to support "world class research".
World class research has many more opportunities available to
it to secure funding. If this view is used as an argument for
maintaining the present regime in which the bulk of research funding
goes to a small group of elite universities (for new universities
3-6 per cent research funding in the block grant, for old universities
30-60 per cent), the effect is to uncouple teaching from research
in most universities and to stifle the aspirations of new universities,
with a view to consigning them to a subordinate teaching-only
function. This view of the world needs to be vigorously contested
if all genuine research excellence is to be rewarded, and the
links between teaching and research appropriately supported.
CONCLUSION
17. In summary then, this institution, which
has attempted to retain the best aspects of Polytechnic culture,
while developing a research profile appropriate to a university,
has clearly derived advantage from RAE and from HEFCE research
funding. RAE ratings have helped the institution to define its
internal priorities for investment and development, and brought
appropriate external acknowledgement of research excellence from
which additional funding can be seen to flow. Research has increased
in greater proportion than in many universities, partly as a consequence
of our committing QR and DevR/NFF funding wholly to the purposes
of research. Excellent research has been produced in areas of
national priority, while the research base has spread by selective
investment across the whole curriculum, and new areas of research
have been identified and developed.
18. We have concentrated in this paper on
providing specific evidence from our own experience. However we
believe this performance to be exemplary of general truths about
research policy and funding. In particular we believe that this
history of productive development gives the lie to the arguments
that RAE and HEFCE research funding fail to deliver on government
priorities for science and technology. New universities are in
a strong position to deliver the government's policies for research.
Previous policies have tended to prioritise basic research, and
marginalise strategic and applied research. New universities are
well placed to assist the government in the objectives of initiatives
like Technology Foresight, since this is part of their natural
mission.
19. It is simply not the case, as the RAE
has proved, that all research of national and international excellence
is undertaken in a few institutions with very large research groups
requiring extremely high levels of funding. Transferring the relatively
marginal funding currently allocated to new universities to larger
departments in traditional universities would be unlikely to improve
their research, and would virtually kill the excellent research
being produced in the former new university sector.
20. At the same time, it should not be forgotten
that the RAE is about all university research, not just science
and technology. While funding excellent research in selected areas
that are capable of delivering on national priorities, HEFCE research
funding in new universities simultaneously develops in qualitative
terms the academic base that underpins the national and international
value and competitiveness of UK research, teaching and learning.
INDICATIVE STATISTICS
21. The following figures show the scale
of Hertfordshire's growth as a research university under the impact
of RAE 1992, 1996 and 2001, and with the assistance of RAE-related
HEFCE research funding:
| | 1993
| 1996 | 2000
|
| Research Grants and Contracts | £1,292k
| £2,885k | £3,373k
|
| Research Students | 75
| 229 | 421
|
| Research Active Staff (RAE) | 93.8 FTE
| 201.1 FTE | 252FTE
|
| Readers | 6
| - | 22
|
| Professors | 20
| - | 59
|
Professor Graham Holderness
Director of Research
January 2002
|
|
