The document provides an overview of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) process. It discusses the purpose and assessment framework of the REF, including the criteria for evaluating outputs, impact, and environment. It also outlines the key stages of the REF process, from developing submission guidelines to expert review by panels. Submissions will include staff details, up to 4 research outputs per person, impact templates and case studies, environment data and templates. The results will be published in December 2014 and help determine £2 billion in annual research funding.
Workshop by Pooja Takhar (Senior Manager: HEIs, Vitae) and Emma Gillaspy (Vitae NW Hub Manager) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Build Your NGO: Monitoring & Evaluation Allie Hoffman
The presentation attached is designed for grassroots NGOs wanting to learn more about monitoring and evaluation.
The presentation is a mini 'how to', in addition to providing an overview of strategic planning
To learn more or with any direct questions, please visit our website: www.thepariproject.com
Workshop by Pooja Takhar (Senior Manager: HEIs, Vitae) and Emma Gillaspy (Vitae NW Hub Manager) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Build Your NGO: Monitoring & Evaluation Allie Hoffman
The presentation attached is designed for grassroots NGOs wanting to learn more about monitoring and evaluation.
The presentation is a mini 'how to', in addition to providing an overview of strategic planning
To learn more or with any direct questions, please visit our website: www.thepariproject.com
OST to PST converter software. Solution to convert & restore corrupted OST data into PST file format. After conversion data will be easily accessible in MS Outlook. Know more @ http://www.emaildoctor.org/convert/ost- pst.html
Программа мероприятия «Дни Германии в Тюмени»hypercubestudio
Программа I Международного фестиваля «Дни Германии в Тюмени 2015» включает в себя подробное описание событий всех семи дней. Также она содержит информацию о партнёрах фестиваля.
Edición Septiembre
Magazine Pothook
Foro de dibujantes y escritores, ¿Quieres ser mangaka? ¿Escritor? ¿ilustrador? Únete y has grandes amistades. http://pothook.forosweb.net/forum
Innovative Pedagogies that Embrace Technologies #NET16confEmma Gillaspy
Debate session at NET conference 2016 looking at how we can use technologies effectively to enhance the student experience, empower students and modernise nursing education curricula.
Authors: Dr Jackie Leigh, Kyle Charnley, Lyn Rosen, Dr Michelle Howarth and Dr Emma Gillaspy
Jim Warren
National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland
(Friday, 3.00, General 3)
Provides background and overview of a Health IT Evaluation Framework that has been developed to support the National Health IT Plan and New Zealand health innovation generally. The framework recommends a pragmatic approach that includes use of both quantitative data (particularly data based on the transactional logs of operational IT systems), and qualitative data systematically gathered through stakeholder interviews. An Action Research orientation is recommended where the evaluators actively seek to understand barriers and find pointers to potential solutions. The investigation protocol is recommended to be iterative and flexible, and to involve dissemination of intermediate findings for feedback and broad dissemination of final results. Moreover, evaluation should be integrated with implementation, rather than a standalone post implementation activity. No single type of measurement should dominate the evaluation, which should employ a measurement framework including work and communication patterns, organisational culture, safety, effectiveness, system integrity and usability, as well as vendor factors, project management, participant experience and governance.
BEST PRACTICE: Identification, Documentation, and Confirmationzorengubalane
This material presents the process and basic guidelines in the identification, documentation, and confirmation of best practice as introduced by SEDIP.
OST to PST converter software. Solution to convert & restore corrupted OST data into PST file format. After conversion data will be easily accessible in MS Outlook. Know more @ http://www.emaildoctor.org/convert/ost- pst.html
Программа мероприятия «Дни Германии в Тюмени»hypercubestudio
Программа I Международного фестиваля «Дни Германии в Тюмени 2015» включает в себя подробное описание событий всех семи дней. Также она содержит информацию о партнёрах фестиваля.
Edición Septiembre
Magazine Pothook
Foro de dibujantes y escritores, ¿Quieres ser mangaka? ¿Escritor? ¿ilustrador? Únete y has grandes amistades. http://pothook.forosweb.net/forum
Innovative Pedagogies that Embrace Technologies #NET16confEmma Gillaspy
Debate session at NET conference 2016 looking at how we can use technologies effectively to enhance the student experience, empower students and modernise nursing education curricula.
Authors: Dr Jackie Leigh, Kyle Charnley, Lyn Rosen, Dr Michelle Howarth and Dr Emma Gillaspy
Jim Warren
National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland
(Friday, 3.00, General 3)
Provides background and overview of a Health IT Evaluation Framework that has been developed to support the National Health IT Plan and New Zealand health innovation generally. The framework recommends a pragmatic approach that includes use of both quantitative data (particularly data based on the transactional logs of operational IT systems), and qualitative data systematically gathered through stakeholder interviews. An Action Research orientation is recommended where the evaluators actively seek to understand barriers and find pointers to potential solutions. The investigation protocol is recommended to be iterative and flexible, and to involve dissemination of intermediate findings for feedback and broad dissemination of final results. Moreover, evaluation should be integrated with implementation, rather than a standalone post implementation activity. No single type of measurement should dominate the evaluation, which should employ a measurement framework including work and communication patterns, organisational culture, safety, effectiveness, system integrity and usability, as well as vendor factors, project management, participant experience and governance.
BEST PRACTICE: Identification, Documentation, and Confirmationzorengubalane
This material presents the process and basic guidelines in the identification, documentation, and confirmation of best practice as introduced by SEDIP.
Professional Ethics: An Introduction to the Revised Code of Professional ConductMcKonly & Asbury, LLP
This webinar was hosted by Mike Hoffner and Dan Sturm from McKonly & Asbury. This presentation introduced the audience to the structure and background of the new AICPA revised Code of Professional Conduct, provided information on how the AICPA derived the new format, and offered a roadmap of next steps expected from the AICPA on this topic.
Check out our Upcoming Events page for news and updates on our future seminars and webinars at http://www.macpas.com/events/
Developing well thought out, high leverage recommended actions, prioritizing, validating, and delegating them for implementation can result in fewer and more effective actions that can better help reduce the risk of recurrence and make care safer. During this module, the main steps in the development and management of recommended actions are discussed and applied to real life examples. Tools to support the process, like the hierarchy of effectiveness, heat map, tables, and the Larsen scale, will also be introduced.
Presented at the 2015 CGIAR Evaluation Community of Practice meeitng. CGIAR is moving towards a coordinated evaluation system to comprehensively cover the programs, insitutions, and activities. The presentation offers examples of decentralized evaluaitons as approached by other agencies, and aspects for CGIAR to consider.
Workshop at the Lancaster University Researcher Day on 26/09/2013 (http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/hr/development/courses/TeachingResearchRelated/Researcher-Day/index.html)
Plenary presentation at the Lancaster University Researcher Day on 26/09/2013 (http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/hr/development/courses/TeachingResearchRelated/Researcher-Day/index.html)
Presentation by Christine Nightingale (REF Equalities and Diversity Advisory Panel and Head of Equality and Diversity, De Montfort University) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Presentation by Geoff Rodgers (Pro Vice Chancellor for Research, Brunel University) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Creating a thriving research environmentEmma Gillaspy
Workshop by Justin Hutchence (Research Staff Development Manager, University of Reading) and Christos Petichakis (Educational Developer, University of Liverpool) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Presentation by Simon Kerridge (Director of Research Services at the University of Kent) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Informing the research environment with the Concordat for Units of AssessmentEmma Gillaspy
Workshop by Karen Clegg (Director of Researcher Development and Concordat Implementation Coordinator, University of York) and Rob Daley (Research Development Coordinator, Herriot Watt University) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
Presentation by Alison Mitchell (Deputy Director of Vitae) at the Vitae event 'Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Researcher development, the environment and future impact' on 11 July 2012 in Manchester www.vitae.ac.uk/preparingfortheref
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
Enhancing Performance with Globus and the Science DMZGlobus
ESnet has led the way in helping national facilities—and many other institutions in the research community—configure Science DMZs and troubleshoot network issues to maximize data transfer performance. In this talk we will present a summary of approaches and tips for getting the most out of your network infrastructure using Globus Connect Server.
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...UiPathCommunity
💥 Speed, accuracy, and scaling – discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Mining™:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing – with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs – GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
👨🏫 Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
👩🏫 Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
SAP Sapphire 2024 - ASUG301 building better apps with SAP Fiori.pdfPeter Spielvogel
Building better applications for business users with SAP Fiori.
• What is SAP Fiori and why it matters to you
• How a better user experience drives measurable business benefits
• How to get started with SAP Fiori today
• How SAP Fiori elements accelerates application development
• How SAP Build Code includes SAP Fiori tools and other generative artificial intelligence capabilities
• How SAP Fiori paves the way for using AI in SAP apps
Encryption in Microsoft 365 - ExpertsLive Netherlands 2024Albert Hoitingh
In this session I delve into the encryption technology used in Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Purview. Including the concepts of Customer Key and Double Key Encryption.
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
Essentials of Automations: The Art of Triggers and Actions in FMESafe Software
In this second installment of our Essentials of Automations webinar series, we’ll explore the landscape of triggers and actions, guiding you through the nuances of authoring and adapting workspaces for seamless automations. Gain an understanding of the full spectrum of triggers and actions available in FME, empowering you to enhance your workspaces for efficient automation.
We’ll kick things off by showcasing the most commonly used event-based triggers, introducing you to various automation workflows like manual triggers, schedules, directory watchers, and more. Plus, see how these elements play out in real scenarios.
Whether you’re tweaking your current setup or building from the ground up, this session will arm you with the tools and insights needed to transform your FME usage into a powerhouse of productivity. Join us to discover effective strategies that simplify complex processes, enhancing your productivity and transforming your data management practices with FME. Let’s turn complexity into clarity and make your workspaces work wonders!
Welcome to the first live UiPath Community Day Dubai! Join us for this unique occasion to meet our local and global UiPath Community and leaders. You will get a full view of the MEA region's automation landscape and the AI Powered automation technology capabilities of UiPath. Also, hosted by our local partners Marc Ellis, you will enjoy a half-day packed with industry insights and automation peers networking.
📕 Curious on our agenda? Wait no more!
10:00 Welcome note - UiPath Community in Dubai
Lovely Sinha, UiPath Community Chapter Leader, UiPath MVPx3, Hyper-automation Consultant, First Abu Dhabi Bank
10:20 A UiPath cross-region MEA overview
Ashraf El Zarka, VP and Managing Director MEA, UiPath
10:35: Customer Success Journey
Deepthi Deepak, Head of Intelligent Automation CoE, First Abu Dhabi Bank
11:15 The UiPath approach to GenAI with our three principles: improve accuracy, supercharge productivity, and automate more
Boris Krumrey, Global VP, Automation Innovation, UiPath
12:15 To discover how Marc Ellis leverages tech-driven solutions in recruitment and managed services.
Brendan Lingam, Director of Sales and Business Development, Marc Ellis
Removing Uninteresting Bytes in Software FuzzingAftab Hussain
Imagine a world where software fuzzing, the process of mutating bytes in test seeds to uncover hidden and erroneous program behaviors, becomes faster and more effective. A lot depends on the initial seeds, which can significantly dictate the trajectory of a fuzzing campaign, particularly in terms of how long it takes to uncover interesting behaviour in your code. We introduce DIAR, a technique designed to speedup fuzzing campaigns by pinpointing and eliminating those uninteresting bytes in the seeds. Picture this: instead of wasting valuable resources on meaningless mutations in large, bloated seeds, DIAR removes the unnecessary bytes, streamlining the entire process.
In this work, we equipped AFL, a popular fuzzer, with DIAR and examined two critical Linux libraries -- Libxml's xmllint, a tool for parsing xml documents, and Binutil's readelf, an essential debugging and security analysis command-line tool used to display detailed information about ELF (Executable and Linkable Format). Our preliminary results show that AFL+DIAR does not only discover new paths more quickly but also achieves higher coverage overall. This work thus showcases how starting with lean and optimized seeds can lead to faster, more comprehensive fuzzing campaigns -- and DIAR helps you find such seeds.
- These are slides of the talk given at IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation Workshop, ICSTW 2022.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
A tale of scale & speed: How the US Navy is enabling software delivery from l...sonjaschweigert1
Rapid and secure feature delivery is a goal across every application team and every branch of the DoD. The Navy’s DevSecOps platform, Party Barge, has achieved:
- Reduction in onboarding time from 5 weeks to 1 day
- Improved developer experience and productivity through actionable findings and reduction of false positives
- Maintenance of superior security standards and inherent policy enforcement with Authorization to Operate (ATO)
Development teams can ship efficiently and ensure applications are cyber ready for Navy Authorizing Officials (AOs). In this webinar, Sigma Defense and Anchore will give attendees a look behind the scenes and demo secure pipeline automation and security artifacts that speed up application ATO and time to production.
We will cover:
- How to remove silos in DevSecOps
- How to build efficient development pipeline roles and component templates
- How to deliver security artifacts that matter for ATO’s (SBOMs, vulnerability reports, and policy evidence)
- How to streamline operations with automated policy checks on container images
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
Why You Should Replace Windows 11 with Nitrux Linux 3.5.0 for enhanced perfor...SOFTTECHHUB
The choice of an operating system plays a pivotal role in shaping our computing experience. For decades, Microsoft's Windows has dominated the market, offering a familiar and widely adopted platform for personal and professional use. However, as technological advancements continue to push the boundaries of innovation, alternative operating systems have emerged, challenging the status quo and offering users a fresh perspective on computing.
One such alternative that has garnered significant attention and acclaim is Nitrux Linux 3.5.0, a sleek, powerful, and user-friendly Linux distribution that promises to redefine the way we interact with our devices. With its focus on performance, security, and customization, Nitrux Linux presents a compelling case for those seeking to break free from the constraints of proprietary software and embrace the freedom and flexibility of open-source computing.
Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey 2024 by 91mobiles.pdf91mobiles
91mobiles recently conducted a Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey in which we asked over 3,000 respondents about the TV they own, aspects they look at on a new TV, and their TV buying preferences.
3. Overview:
Purpose of the REF
• The REF is a process of expert review
• It replaces the RAE as the UK-wide framework for
assessing research in all disciplines
• Its purpose is:
- To inform research funding allocations by the four UK
HE funding bodies (approximately £2 billion per year)
- Provide accountability for public funding of research
and demonstrate its benefits
- To provide benchmarks and reputational yardsticks
4. Overview:
The assessment framework
Overall quality
Outputs Impact Environment
Maximum of 4 outputs Impact template and Environment data and
per researcher case studies template
65% 20% 15%
5. Overview:
The REF process
Criteria phase Submissions phase Assessment phase
2011 2012-13 2014
• Develop and publish • HEIs submit Codes of • Panels assess
Guidance on submissions practice submissions
(Jul)
• Launch the REF • Publish outcomes
• Develop, consult on and submissions system Dec 2014
publish Panel criteria
(Jan 2012) • Submission deadline
29 Nov 2013
6. Overview:
Guidance and criteria
Comprehensive information and guidance is set out in:
• Assessment framework and guidance on
submissions (July 2011):
- Sets out the information required in submissions and
the definitions used
• Panel criteria and working methods (Jan 2012):
- Sets out how panels will assess submissions
The above documents set out the official guidelines for the REF.
These slides provide a summary of key points but do not provide or
replace the official guidelines.
7. Overview:
Submissions
• Each HEI may submit in any or all of the 36 units of
assessment (UOAs)
• Each submission in a UOA provides evidence about the
activity and achievements of a ‘submitted unit’ including:
- Staff details (REF1a/b/c)
- Research outputs (REF2)
- Impact template and case studies (REF3a/b)
- Environment data (REF4a/b/c)
- Environment template (REF5)
• A submitted unit may, but need not, comprise staff who
work within a single ‘department’ or organisational unit
8. Overview:
Assessment
• Submissions will be assessed by 36 sub-panels
working under the guidance of 4 main panels
• Panels will carry out the assessment according to the
published criteria and working methods
Sub-panel responsibilities Main panel responsibilities
• Contributing to the panel • Developing the panel criteria
criteria and working methods and working methods
• Assessing submissions and • Ensuring adherence to the
recommending the outcomes criteria/procedures and
consistent application of the
overall assessment
standards
• Signing off the outcomes
10. Staff:
Staff selection and circumstances
• HEIs are responsible for selecting eligible staff whose
outputs are to be included in their REF submissions
• Each HEI is required to develop, document and apply a
code of practice on the fair selection of staff
• Number of outputs can be reduced without penalty
where an individual’s circumstances have constrained
their ability to work productively or produce four outputs
in the REF period
• We have sought to make these arrangements as clear
and consistent as possible with due regard to
confidentiality
11. Staff:
Individual staff circumstances
• Up to four outputs must be listed against each
individual
• The number of outputs can be reduced without penalty
where an individual’s circumstances have constrained
their ability to work productively or produce four outputs
in the REF period
• We have sought to make these arrangements as clear
and consistent as possible, with due regard to
confidentiality
13. Outputs:
Research outputs
• Panels will assess the quality of research outputs
through a process of expert review
• All forms of output that embody research will be
assessed on an equal footing
• Panels will assess the quality of outputs, not the
contribution of individual researchers
• A co-authored output may be listed against one or
more individuals that made a substantial research
contribution to it (no more than twice within the same
submission)
• Institutions may request ‘double-weighting’ for outputs
of extended scale and scope
14. Outputs:
Additional information
• Several sub-panels will make use of citation data as a
minor component to inform peer-review
• HEIs will be provided access to the Scopus citation data
(in the relevant UOAs) through the REF submission
system
• Several sub-panels invite additional information from the
HEI to inform judgements
• Panels will not use journal impact factors, rankings or
lists or the perceived standing of the publisher
15. Outputs:
Assessment criteria
The criteria for assessing the quality of outputs are
originality, significance and rigour*
Four star Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance
and rigour
Quality that is internationally excellent in terms of originality,
Three star significance and rigour but which falls short of the highest
standards of excellence
Two star Quality that is recognised internationally in terms of originality,
significance and rigour
One star Quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality,
significance and rigour
Quality that falls below the standard of nationally recognised
Unclassified work. Or work which does not meet the published definition of
research for the purposes of this assessment
* Each main panel provides descriptive account of the criteria
17. Impact:
Definition of impact
• Impact is defined broadly for the REF:
an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society,
culture, public policy or services, health, the
environment or quality of life, beyond academia
• Panels recognise that impacts can be manifest in a
wide variety of ways, may take many forms and occur
in a wide range of spheres, in any geographic location
• Panels provide examples of impact relevant to their
disciplines, intended to stimulate ideas - not as
exhaustive or prescriptive lists
18. Impact:
Some examples of impact
Enhanced professional
Improved health or standards, ethics, guidelines Improved risk
welfare outcomes or training management
Public debate has
been shaped or
Improved quality, More effective Improved business informed by research
accessibility or efficiency of a management or performance
public service workplace practices
A social enterprise
Research has enabled initiative has been
Changes to the Production costs have
stakeholders to challenge created
design or delivery of reduced
conventional wisdom
the school curriculum Improved forensic
Enhanced preservation, Improved access to methods or expert
Policy debate or decisions conservation or presentation justice, employment systems
have been influenced or of cultural heritage or education
shaped by research Improved management or
Research has informed conservation of natural
Organisations have Jobs have been public
created or protected resources
adapted to changing understanding, values, attitud
cultural values es or behaviours
Enhanced corporate The policies or activities of Changes to
Levels of waste have
social responsibility NGOs or charities have been legislation or
reduced
policies informed by research regulations
New forms of artistic Changes in Enhanced technical
A new product has
expression or changes to professional practice standards or
been commercialised
creative practice protocols
19. Impact:
Submission requirements
• Sets out the submitted unit’s general
Impact template approach to supporting impact from
(REF3a) its research:
• Approach to supporting impact during
20% of the the period 2008 to 2013
impact
sub-profile • Forward strategy and plans
• Specific examples of impacts already
achieved, that were underpinned by
Case studies
the submitted unit’s research:
(REF3b)
• 1 case study per 10 FTE staff
80% of the submitted (plus 1 extra)
impact • Impacts during 2008 to 2013;
sub-profile underpinned by research since 1993
20. Impact:
Case studies
• Each case study should:
- Clearly describe the underpinning research, who undertook
it and when
- Provide references to the research and evidence of quality
- Explain how the research led/contributed to the impact
- Clearly identify the beneficiaries and define the impact
- Provide evidence/indicators of the impact
- Provide independent sources of corroboration
• All the material required to make a judgement should be
included in the case study
• Submitted case studies need not be representative of
activity across the unit: pick the strongest examples
21. Impact:
Assessment criteria
The criteria for assessing impacts are reach and significance*
Four star Outstanding impacts in terms of their reach and significance
Three star Very considerable impacts in terms of their reach and
significance
Two star Considerable impacts in terms of their reach and significance
One star Recognised but modest impacts in terms of their reach and
significance
The impact is of little or no reach and significance; or the impact
Unclassified was not eligible; or the impact was not underpinned by excellent
research produced by the submitted unit
* Each main panel provides descriptive account of the criteria
23. Environment:
Environment template
• Each submission to include a completed template:
- Overview
- Research strategy
- People, including:
- staffing strategy and staff development
- research students
- Income, infrastructure and facilities
- Collaboration and contribution to the discipline or research
base
• The ‘panel criteria’ request specific types of evidence
under each heading, and indicate how much weight they
will attach to each component
24. Environment:
Environment data
• All submissions to include data on:
- Research doctoral degrees awarded (REF4a)
- Research income (REF4b)
- Research income in-kind (REF4c)
• Definitions are aligned with HESA returns; the data
relate to the ‘whole unit’ - not just submitted staff
• Some sub-panels request specific additional data, to
be included within the environment template (REF5)
• Data will be considered by panels alongside the
narrative information provided in the relevant section
of the environment template
25. Environment:
Assessment criteria
The criteria for assessing the environment are
vitality and sustainability*
Four star An environment that is conducive to producing research of
world-leading quality, in terms of its vitality and sustainability
An environment that is conducive to producing research of
Three star internationally excellent quality, in terms of its vitality and
sustainability
An environment that is conducive to producing research of
Two star internationally recognised quality, in terms of its vitality and
sustainability
An environment that is conducive to producing research of
One star nationally recognised quality, in terms of its vitality and
sustainability
Unclassified An environment that is not conducive to producing research of
nationally recognised quality
* Each main panel provides a descriptive account of the criteria
27. Pre-submission
• Codes of practice
Submission by Response from funding body by
27 April 2012 6 July 2012
31 July 2012 12 October 2012
• Requests for multiple submissions or case studies requiring
security clearance
Request by Response from REF team by
27 April 2012 8 June 2012
28 September 2012 9 November 2012
7 December 2012 18 January 2013
• Survey of submission intentions
Invitation and guidance Online survey open
July 2012 Early Oct – early Dec 2012
28. Overview:
The submission system
• All submissions must be made through the REF
submission system:
Pilot available to all HEIs: Sep 2012
Open for submissions: Jan–Nov 2013
• Each HEI to set up system users and user permissions
• All data may be entered onto the system and/or bulk
imported
• HEI contacts have seen a demonstration of the system
• User guidance and support will be provided
29. Access to REF4 data
• We will provide HESA data on research income and
doctoral degrees awarded in stages:
- May 2012: Data for 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11
- Apr 2013: Data for 2011-12
- Doctoral degrees data for 2012-13 will be available from
HESA when the student record is submitted
• Data on research income-in-kind will be provided by
the Research Councils and health research funders
• Institutions will need to allocate these data to the
appropriate UOAs; or use their own sources
• The submission system will validate submitted data
against the data we provided, at HEI level
• stem
30. Further information
www.ref.ac.uk
(includes all relevant documents)
Enquiries from staff at HEIs should be directed to
their nominated institutional contact
(see www.ref.ac.uk for a list)
Other enquiries to info@ref.ac.uk