Peer review
Written evidence submitted by University Alliance (PR 65)
1.
University Alliance represents 23 major, business-focused universities that are driving economic growth through world-leading research, innovation and enterprise. Alliance universities educate over 26% of all UK students and achieve some of the highest graduate-level employment rates. Incorporating 6 of the UK’s 10 largest universities, Alliance universities offer a research-informed, academic learning environment and a culture of innovation and enterprise, empowering the next generation of graduates who will help deliver growth to the UK economy.
2.
Alliance universities are central to the UK’s innovation-driven economy, driving growth in new sectors and markets through their delivery of high-quality, graduates, science and research. Alliance universities maintain a revolving door with business to help ensure graduate employers get innovative and thoughtful, professionally accredited graduates with the right skills to help grow their businesses. They play a leading role in regional growth and regeneration, working with partners from local communities, the UK and internationally, to ensure that the benefits of higher education and more specifically their entrepreneurial approach have a direct economic impact.
3.
Through evidence-based policy and research, University Alliance and our member universities aim to improve policymaking in higher education to the benefit of the UK economy and society.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Peer Review
4.
University Alliance strongly supports expert peer review as the backbone of the assessment process. Peer review is an essential element of the research assessment process in the UK and is a key reason why RAE results have been recognised internationally as a reliable measure of quality.
5.
University Alliance firmly believes that excellent research should be funded wherever it exists. Funding quality on this basis will lead to a healthy and diverse research-base in the UK. Peer review plays a critical role in enabling public funding to be directed towards research of the highest quality as recognised as by the research community.
6.
Peer review is the most effective quality control mechanism and ensures the objectivity and quality of scientific outputs. This is the best possible guarantee for the public that their money is being spent on research that meets this standard.
7.
The most valuable guarantee of quality is employment of anonymous and ‘blind’ peer reviewing. This encourages robust criticism and works to mitigate any possible allegation of favouritism. The use of multiple reviewers ensures that individual biases cannot determine the results. Where the complete anonymity of both parties is not possible, editorial mechanisms ensure the impartiality and objectivity that are central to the value systems of science.
Value of Peer Review in Public Debate
8.
Peer review ensures that public debate is based on objective and valid research. This is important to maintain so that the integrity of UK research is maintained particularly when under scrutiny in the public sphere.
9.
The scientific community could do more to advance public understanding of the practice of peer review to ensure that it carries the weight that it deserves when drawn together with non-scientific sources, as it often is in public debate.
10.
Universities are being required to demonstrate engagement and the translation of research into practice. This is a very valuable move, but possibilities are limited by the lack of finance that can be given to this in a time of declining budgets. Research Councils will not typically provide sufficient funding for this activity within the grant.
11.
Citation measures have been found in research to be a poor basis for assessing either the quality of scientific research or its true impact. This is often seen as non-excellent articles can often have disproportionately high ‘impact’ in this way. This in turn has the effect of potentially skewing public debate away from evidence that has been rated as excellent through the peer-review process.
Alternatives to Peer Review
12.
There are as yet no effective alternatives to peer review that have been proposed. University Alliance sees it as a key aspect of UK research and one that demonstrates the excellence-driven, word-leading nature of our research base.
University Alliance
10 March 2011
|
