The Higher Education Academy - May 2004

							The Higher Education Academy – May 2004


Response to the consultation on RAE2008 Panel Configuration and Recruitment

Introduction
1. We welcome the opportunity to comment on panel configuration and recruitment for
   the RAE 2008. In particular, we welcome the recognition given to the need to find
   appropriate ways of assessing the pedagogy of higher education in the 2008
   exercise.

The nature of HE- related research
2. We propose that the definition of HE research be broadened from pedagogy to
   include research on teaching, learning and the student experience. This would
   provide a larger pool of high quality research output to assess. It would also enable
   increasingly significant aspects of research in higher education associated with the
   economic and social context of student learning to be included.
3. We consider it important to distinguish between two categories of HE research: (i)
   generic research on HE teaching, learning and the student experience, and (ii)
   discipline-specific research on HE teaching, learning and the student experience.
   For the purposes of this response, we term these as generic HE research and
   discipline-specific HE research respectively.

4. In view of the importance of grounding HE practice and policy in a sound evidence
   base and conceptual framework, we believe that a broad view should be adopted of
   the scope and nature of both generic and discipline-specific HE research. Since the
   target of such research is the HE sector, it is both appropriate and important for HE
   related research to be assessed in an effective manner. Moreover, it is important to
   address the development of the potential of such research in HE as research
   opportunities increase as a result of the increased funding of learning and teaching
   development activities, and interest in the policy and practice changes affecting HE
   and the student experience.

5. We believe that the two areas of HE research activity should be seen as distinct for
   the purposes of the configuration of RAE panels and assessment, for the reasons
   below.

Panel configuration
6. Generic HE research. We understand that it has been proposed elsewhere that the
   area of Education might be treated as a main panel rather than as a sub-panel. We
   support this proposal because it would:
      a. Enable the creation of a sub-panel to cover distinct generic HE research.
      b. Ensure strong connections with research in other educational sectors, under
         a single Education main panel.
7. However, if Education remains as a sub-panel, we recommend that generic HE
   research should be treated as a separate sub-panel. This will ensure that its
   distinctiveness is recognised and that its range and potential volume can be
   appropriately managed.
8. Discipline-specific HE research. There is a strong argument for a discipline-specific
   component to the assessment of HE research. Discipline-specific HE research,
   which is often conducted by individuals also active in mainstream discipline
   research, is naturally focussed around issues specific to the discipline which may
   be best understood by those with both discipline and pedagogic expertise. The
   credibility, legitimacy and status of discipline-specific HE research are all likely to
   be enhanced when the research itself, its publication and assessment are seen to
   be located within the discipline. It is also important to promote and build on
   synergies amongst discipline-specific HE research and wider discipline research.
   Moreover, there is the practical matter of avoiding the problem of individuals having
   to submit responses to more than one panel.
9. However, we recognise the complexities of developing a mechanism for assessing
   discipline-specific HE research in all 66 sub-panels, and for ensuring that an
   appropriate level of expertise is represented in all of these sub-panels. Even were
   such a mechanism feasible, the problem of ensuring some kind of equality of
   treatment of discipline-specific HE research across all 66 panels would remain.
10. The idea of a “virtual college” of discipline-specific experts in HE research has also
    been raised. We do not feel that such a group would fully meet the
    discipline-specific concerns of discipline knowledge, credibility and legitimacy
    amongst the sub-panels; in addition such a group would be unwieldy were all
    discipline areas to be represented.
11. A mechanism to manage the important disciplinary dimension is required.
    Therefore, we propose a solution in which some degree of discipline specificity is
    retained whilst addressing the practical concerns for effective and efficient
    assessment. This would be to cluster disciplines into larger „faculty‟ sub panels of
    cognate disciplines, such as Medical and Biological Sciences (main panels A to D),
    or Physical Science and Engineering (main panels E to G). Perhaps four or five
    “faculties” would be required. We believe that these faculty sub-panels should
    report to each of the main panels covered by the „faculty‟ in relation to the discipline
    focus of the research. Submitting departments would need to identify by which
    sub-panel they wish each output to be assessed.
12. We recognise that this solution to the discipline-specific dimension adds complexity
    to the exercise and there may be operational resistance to it. Therefore, if
    discipline-specific HE research cannot be managed in the way proposed here we
    believe that a separate HE research sub-panel would be a first and important step
    to recognising this research.
13. In this case, submitting departments could submit discipline-specific HE research
    to their appropriate discipline sub-panel identifying which research outputs would
    need to be passed to the HE research sub-panel for assessment. This would
    ensure that the assessment is made by HE specialists but reported back to the
    appropriate discipline sub-panel, thus ensuring recognition of this research by the
    discipline.

Panel selection
14. Whatever model is finally adopted for the assessment of generic and
    discipline-specific HE research, it is essential that there are mechanisms for
    appointing appropriate members with both discipline-specific and generic HE
    research expertise to the relevant panels. If the decision is to base assessment
    within the discipline sub-panels then it is essential that the mechanisms for member
    selection minimise the risk that discipline-specific HE research is sidelined by the
    more numerous mainstream discipline research submissions. Such mechanisms
    should include both specialists of discipline-specific HE research within the
    sub-panels and procedures which ensure that submissions relating to HE research
    are considered equitably alongside discipline research.
15. Currently, the draft list of nominating bodies includes Learning and Teaching
    Support Network and Institute of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education.
    These two entries should be replaced by Higher Education Academy.
16. The Higher Education Academy is in a particularly strong position to advise on
    panel membership relating to generic and discipline-specific HE research. This
    results from its access to a diversity of knowledge of discipline-specific practice
    through the Subject Centre networks and to its wide experience of generic HE
    development, research and policy through its accreditation activities, its generic
    work and the leadership and research expertise of its CEO, Professor Paul
    Ramsden.


Summary
      There should be an Education main panel with a HE research sub-panel to
       assess generic HE research.
      The assessment of discipline-specific HE research should be undertaken by
       four or five „faculty‟ sub-panels that report to each of the main panels covered by
       the „faculty‟ in relation to the discipline focus of the HE research.
      If Education remains as a sub-panel, we recommend that generic HE research
       should be treated as a separate sub-panel.
      If discipline-specific HE research cannot be managed in the way we propose, a
       separate HE research sub-panel should assess this research and therefore
       include discipline-based specialists in its membership.
      The Higher Education Academy should be a nominating body for panel
       membership.