Informatics Approach to RAE-2008 Preparations
In order to minimise the amount of busy-work and time-wasting
associated with RAE 2008 preparations, we need to see it as an
opportunity, not a burden. For instance,
- Rather than invent new, one-off mechanisms, solely for RAE
purposes, we should reuse and extend existing mechanisms, or, if
there are no suitable existing mechanisms, we should invent new
mechanisms that will be of long-term benefit.
- Where important, but non-urgent, tasks are being neglected
to our detriment, we should use the RAE to raise their priority.
Here are some examples.
- Our School database is a valuable resource that contains a
lot of the information required for our RAE 2008 submission. Some
of the information that it does not yet contain, e.g. uptodate
information on our grant portfolio, would be a useful addition,
for instance, it would enable summary information on grant
income, distribution, etc to be displayed for those in a research
leadership role. I intend to use the School Database as the main
repository for collecting RAE relevant information. Ken Dawson
and Rosemary Soutar are adapting it to allow additional
information to be stored and are providing a variety of ways to
view this information. Jean Bunten will be inputting RAE specific
data to it.
- It is important to the academic health of our staff that we
regularly appraise them, but this is a non-urgent task that is
indefinitely postponed. By using the appraisal mechanism in our
RAE preparations, we can raise its priority. I intend to use
appraisal to identify RAE borderline cases and provide advice on
improving their performance. This will be of benefit both to the
career of the individual and to our RAE preparations.
- The online availability of our publications is patchy and
non-uniform. We have a technical report series, but it is seen as
unwieldy and is dramatically underused. By simplifying the use of
the technical report series and using it to record our RAE 2008
submissions, we avoid inventing a new device to add to the
confusion and encourage people to use the technical report
series. It is likely that there will soon be a requirement to
make all publications arising from research council grants freely
available online. The technical report series could adapt to
address this requirement by providing a uniform portal to
all our publications. This would simplify access to our
publications and present a much better image to the rest of the
world.
- College ran a mini-RAE exercise over Summer 2004. This
required all AT staff to fill in a pro-forma giving a large
amount of RAE-relevant information. Informatics successfully
resisted taking part in this exercise on the grounds that we
planned something less onerous to staff but more useful for our
RAE preparations. Our alternative plan is now underway. Forms
similar to the College ones are automatically generated from
the School Database. Much of the information required on this
form is already in the Database and most of what isn't yet there
will be input by support staff. There will remain a residue of
material that must be provided by individuals -- mainly
publication and esteem indicator information. This will enable
those preparing for RAE 2008 to get snapshots of the situation,
for a varying pool of potential Cat A candidates, whenever they
want. If we had taken part in the College exercise, some of the
incentive to do this information gathering properly and some of
the goodwill of School staff would have been squandered.
If anyone has ideas of how we can exploit additional win-win
examples of this kind, I would be happy to hear about them.
For a variety of pragmatic reasons, having a few large
research groups is optimal in an RAE submission. Panels will
tolerate quite loose groupings, as long as there is some reality
to them. Our six research institutes provide exactly the right
level of granularity and community, so we will use them as the
basis of our 2008 submission.
However, it is appropriate to have some sub-group structure
beneath the institute level. For many kinds of information
gathering, it is the research sub-group that is the most
appropriate source. I am identifying leaders of Informatics
research sub-groups within each of our research institutes, and
intend to ask for their help in the RAE 2008 preparations. Here
are some of the areas I intend to ask them to help me with.
- Eligible Staff: We need to identify the
staff who might be eligible for submission to RAE 2008. We can
then start to monitor those staff to identify those on the
borderlines who might benefit from some mentoring. The DoIs and
sub-group leaders will both be consulted to identify borderline
cases. We can then alert the appraisers of the identified staff
to hold an appraisal as a matter of urgency. The RAE webpage for
the appraisee would be one of the inputs to that appraisal. A
joint action on appraiser and appraisee would be to estimate the
current and the target RAE star grade for the appraisee. The
appraisal report should contain a plan for moving from the
current to the target grade. To assist with this process, I have
developed a discussion document on
what the star rankings might mean. Human
Resources have confirmed that this is an appropriate use of the
appraisal mechanism.
- Impact Indicators: In 2001, the RAE 5(a)
played a central role in describing the research of each
department. A common mistake was merely to list the research
interests of each group. The RAE panels were much more interested
in the impact of the research. The Edinburgh 2001
submission was focussed around our research impact and
will provide an exemplar for 2008. To ensure that we follow this
lead, I intend to collect a few key impact indicators from each
of our sub-groups and construct the 2008 RAE 5(a) equivalent
around these. I will be asking sub-group leaders to identify the
impact of their sub-groups. To this end, I am drawing up a list
of impact indicator exemplars.
- Publication Outlets: Appraisers, sub-group
leaders, PIs and DoIs will want to advise their mentees on
publication outlets. It is important for both the RAE and the
individual's career development that papers should be published in
outlets with the strongest reputation possible for that
paper. Coming to a collective view on the relative merits of the
outlets in each field will be a useful resource in this
process. Sub-groups probably define research fields that are
sufficiently small and coherent for this exercise to be carried
out. In some sub-groups the situation will already be so clear
that the exercise is trivial; in others, it may require more work.
I welcome suggestions for improving our RAE preparations and
for using RAE 2008 as an opportunity rather than a burden.
Alan Bundy
Last modified: Fri Nov 26 14:23:00 GMT 2004