rae criteria panel ereference rae 01/2006 (e) publication date january 2006 enquiries to ed hughes,...

Panel criteria and working methods

Panel EUOA 17 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences

UOA 18 Chemistry

UOA 19 Physics

January 2006

Ref RAE 01/2006 (E)

Contents

Executive summary 3

Section 1 Introduction 5

Section 2 Generic statement on criteria and 7working methods

Definitions 7

Content of submissions 8

Categories of research-active individual 8

Unit of assessment description 8

Assessment process 9

Joint submissions 9

Research outputs 9

Minimum proportions of work examined in detail 10

Staffing issues 11

Interdisciplinary research: arrangements for 13cross-referral and specialist advice

Assessment of applied research and 13practice-based research

Assessment of pedagogic research 14

Dealing with declarations of interest and confidentiality 14

Section 3 Statements of criteria and 17working methods

Main Panel E 17

UOA 17 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences 23

UOA 18 Chemistry 33

UOA 19 Physics 41

Annexes 49

Annex 1 Quality profiles and definitions of quality levels 49

Annex 2 Units of assessment and main panels 52

Annex 3 Definition of research for the RAE 54

Annex 4 Declarations of interest 55

Annex 5 Confidentiality arrangements 57

Annex 6 Word limits for RA5a, RA5b and RA5c 59and RA2 ‘Other relevant details’ field

Annex 7 Standard data analyses 62

RAE 01/2006 (E) 1

2 RAE 01/2006 (E)

RAE 2008 Assessment criteria and workingmethods: Main Panel E and UOAs 17-19

To Heads of HEFCE-funded higher educationinstitutions

Heads of HEFCW-funded higher educationinstitutions

Heads of SFC-funded higher educationinstitutions

Heads of universities in Northern Ireland

Of interest to those Research assessment, Research policy,responsible for Planning

Reference RAE 01/2006 (E)

Publication date January 2006

Enquiries to Ed Hughes, Davina Madden or Raegan Hiles tel 0117 931 7267e-mail [email protected]

Executive summary

Purpose

1. This document describes the criteria and working methods of thefollowing main panel and unit of assessment (UOA) sub-panels in the 2008Research Assessment Exercise (RAE2008):

• Main Panel E

• UOA 17 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences

• UOA 18 Chemistry

• UOA 19 Physics

Key points

2. These statements of criteria and working methods have been revised andfinalised following a public consultation on earlier draft versions which weconducted over summer 2005. They take account of views expressed throughthe consultation by higher education institutions and their staff, subjectassociations and other stakeholder bodies.

3. The main and sub-panel statements of criteria and working methodsshould be read alongside both the generic statement in Section 2 and theguidance on data requirements for the 2008 RAE (RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidanceon submissions’).

Action required

4. This document is for information and guidance. No action is required.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 3

4 RAE 01/2006 (E)

5. Panels met to draft criteria and workingmethods in spring 2005. The UK highereducation (HE) funding bodies invited commentson these drafts via a web-based consultation insummer 2005. The focus of the consultation wason aspects of the panels’ criteria and workingmethods that the panels themselves could change,rather than on matters that had been fixed andpublished in other documents about the 2008RAE (for example RAE 01/2004 ‘Initial decisionsby the UK funding bodies’, and RAE 01/2005‘Guidance to panels’).

6. In autumn 2005, panels met to considerresponses to the consultation and to finalise theircriteria. A quantitative analysis of responses to theconsultation and a summary of the generic issuesthat respondents raised is available on the RAEweb-site at www.rae.ac.uk/pubs/

7. The purpose of publishing statements ofcriteria and working methods is to give highereducation institutions (HEIs) information abouthow submissions will be assessed, in good time toassist with their planning. As with previous RAEs,the assessment process is based on expert review:each panel will use its professional judgement toform a view about the overall quality of theresearch activity described in each submission,taking account of all the evidence presented,against its published criteria and in line with itspublished working methods. Results for eachsubmission will be published in the form of aquality profile, which is described in Annex 1.

8. Section 2 of this document contains a genericstatement on the criteria and working methods(hereafter referred to as ‘the generic statement’)that all panels will adopt. Section 3 contains thespecific criteria and working methods of one mainpanel and the sub-panels for the units ofassessment (UOAs) that it covers. Main and sub-panel criteria and working methods must be readalongside the generic statement in Section 2.

9. Panels’ criteria and working methods shouldbe read in conjunction with the guidance to HEIson the data requirements for the 2008 RAE (seeRAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance on submissions’). Thelatter explains the purpose of the RAE and theprinciples underpinning it, the role of main and

sub-panels, and the data they will use to makeassessments, and gives other details on the contextin which the panels’ criteria and working methodsmay be understood.

10. In this document, ‘panels’ is used to meanboth main panels and sub-panels. Where we referexclusively to main panels or to sub-panels, weidentify them as such.

Enquiries 11. Enquiries should be addressed to the RAEteam ([email protected] or tel 0117 931 7267) andshould be routed wherever possible through eachHEI’s designated RAE contact.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 5

Section 1: Introduction

6 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Definitions12. For the purposes of the RAE, andthroughout the panels’ criteria and workingmethods, the following definitions apply:

a. Assessment period means the period from 1 January 2001 to 31 July 2007. Theresearch described in submissions, includingdata about research students and researchincome and the textual commentary, mustrelate to this period.

b. Census date means the date determining theaffiliation of research-active staff to aparticular institution. Staff may be submittedin the RAE by the institution that employsthem on this date (or, in the case of CategoryC staff, by the institution that is the focus oftheir research), regardless of previous orforthcoming changes in their employmentstatus. The census date is 31 October 2007.

c. Department means the staff included in asubmission to one of the 67 UOAsrecognised by the RAE, and, by extension,their work and the structures which supportit. RAE departments are often not identifiedwith a single administrative unit within anHEI, or in the case of joint submissions,across HEIs.

d. Early career researchers. These areindividuals of any age who first entered theacademic profession on employment termsthat qualified them for submission toRAE2008 as Category A staff on or after 1 August 2003.

e. FTE means full-time equivalent:

i. For staff, it refers to the extent of a member of staff ’s contracted duties as compared to those of a typical full-time member of staff in the same category. The length of time in the year for whichthe individual was employed and therelative proportion of total contractedtime spent on research are irrelevant inreporting staff FTEs. The minimumcontracted FTE that may be reported forCategory A staff is 0.2.

ii. For students, it refers to the amount of study undertaken in the year of programme of study, compared to a full-time student with the same qualification aim studying for a full year.

FTEs should be expressed to two decimalplaces, as for example 0.67.

f. Publication period means the period duringwhich research outputs must be placed in thepublic domain (or in the case of confidentialoutputs, lodged with the sponsor) if they areto qualify for assessment in RAE2008. Thepublication period runs from 1 January 2001to 31 December 2007 for all UOAs.

g. Returned refers to any data included in anyof the RAE submission forms RA0 to RA5c.

h. Selected staff refers to the named staffincluded in RAE submissions by HEIs, inaccordance with their own internal code ofpractice on preparing submissions andselecting staff for inclusion. Other staff maybe eligible for inclusion (that is, they maysatisfy the data definitions and requirements),but HEIs are not required to include all theireligible staff. Further information, andguidance from the Equality Challenge Uniton preparing a code of practice, is given inAnnex G of RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance onsubmissions’.

i. Submission means a complete set of formsRA0 to RA5c returned by an HEI in any ofthe 67 UOAs.

j. UOA means one of the 67 subject units ofassessment defined for the 2008 RAE, whichare listed in Annex 2.

13. The definition of research for the 2008 RAEis at Annex 3. Research outputs and researchincome may be included in submissions, providedthat the work they embody or fund meets thisdefinition. Consultancy income and researchoutputs arising from consultancy contracts shouldnormally be excluded, since consultancy is usuallyconcerned with applying existing knowledge.However, they may be included if the workundertaken or published as a result meets the

RAE 01/2006 (E) 7

Section 2: Generic statement on criteria and working methods

RAE definition of research, irrespective of thenature of the contract or invoicing arrangement.

Content of submissions14. Each submission will contain the core datadetailed in sub-paragraphs 14a to 14i below. (TheRA code in brackets refers to the researchassessment form through which the data will becollected.) For detailed definitions of the datarequired in each RA form, see RAE 03/2005‘Guidance on submissions’.

a. Overall staff summary (RA0): summaryinformation on research-active staff selected(FTE and headcount) and related academicsupport staff (FTE) in the unit of assessment.The data collection software will populatesome of RA0 using the data that HEIs enterin RA1.

b. Research-active individuals (RA1): detailedinformation on individuals selected by theinstitution for inclusion as research active.

c. Research output (RA2): up to four items (orfewer if designated for particular reasons inUOA criteria) of research output producedduring the publication period (1 January2001 to 31 December 2007) by eachindividual named as research active and inpost on the census date (31 October 2007).

d. Research students (RA3a): numbers of full-time and part-time postgraduate researchstudents and degrees awarded.

e. Research studentships (RA3b): numbers ofpostgraduate research studentships and thesource of funding for them.

f. External research income (RA4): amountsand sources of external funding.

g. Textual description (RA5a): includinginformation about the research environmentand indicators of esteem.

h. Individual staff circumstances (RA5b).

i. Category C staff circumstances (RA5c).

15. In line with recommendations from theRoberts’ Review of research assessment, somepanels request that HEIs detail in RA5a further

specific, quantitative information that willcontribute to the assessment of the researchenvironment. Such additional informationrequirements are specified in the relevant panels’criteria statements.

16. The word limits for RA5a, RA5b and RA5care given in Annex 6.

Categories of research-activeindividual 17. The definitions of staff Categories A to D are:

a. Category A. Academic staff in post and onthe payroll of the submitting institution onthe census date. Eligible Category Aacademic staff must be employed under acontract of employment with the HEI on thecensus date. Their contract must list researchand/or teaching as their primary function.

b. Category B. Academic staff who held acontract with the institution after 1 January2001 and who left the institution (ortransferred into a department returned to adifferent UOA) after that date and before thecensus date, and who otherwise would havebeen eligible for inclusion as Category A.

c. Category C. Independent investigators activein research who do not meet the definitionfor Category A staff, but whose research onthe census date is clearly and demonstrablyfocused in the department that returns them.

d. Category D. Independent investigators whomet the definition for Category C staffduring the period 1 January 2001 to 31 October 2007 but not on the census date.

For detailed definitions, please refer to Part 3,Section 1 of RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance onsubmissions’.

Unit of assessment description18. Each of the sub-panels’ criteria statementscontains a description of the UOA and of itsboundaries with other UOAs. The descriptionindicates the main areas covered by the UOA andis not intended to give an exhaustive account ofthe sub-disciplinary coverage. HEIs should refer

8 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Generic statement

to the UOA descriptions when deciding in whichUOAs to make submissions.

Assessment process19. This is an expert review exercise. Sub-panelmembers will exercise their knowledge, judgementand expertise to reach a collective view on thequality profile of research described in eachsubmission, that is the proportion of work in eachsubmission that is judged to reach each of fivequality levels from 4* to Unclassified (see Annex 1).The definition of each level relies on a conceptionof quality (world-leading) which is the absolutestandard of quality in each UOA. Each submissionwill be assessed against absolute standards and willnot be ranked against other submissions.

20. The five quality levels from 4* to Unclassifiedapply to all UOAs. Some panel criteria statementsinclude a descriptive account of the quality leveldefinitions, to inform their subject communitieson how they will apply each level in judgingquality. These descriptive accounts should be readalongside, but do not replace, the standarddefinitions.

21. In reaching a view on quality profiles, sub-panels will take account of all components of asubmission: research output, research studentsand studentships, research income, and researchenvironment and esteem indicators. Anunderpinning principle is that sub-panels shouldassess each submission in the round: they will notmake collective judgements about thecontributions of individual researchers, but abouta range of indicators relating to the unit, researchgroup or department that is put forward forassessment.

22. Each sub-panel will recommend provisionalquality profiles for debate and endorsement by itsmain panel. Sub-panels must be able todemonstrate in all cases how their qualityjudgements relate to all the evidence before themand to their published criteria. The quality profilethey recommend for any submission must reflectthe sub-panel’s expert and informed view of thecharacteristics of that submission as a whole.

23. In all cases, submissions will be assessedagainst the criteria for the UOA in which thesubmission was originally made. Responsibilityfor recommending a quality profile lies with thesub-panel for that UOA, regardless of whether thesub-panel sought advice on aspects of thesubmission from specialist advisers or other sub-panels (see paragraphs 52-55 below).

24. Although they reflect a common framework,the assessment criteria and working methods ofeach main panel and each sub-panel differ invarying degrees across the different UOAs.However, in general, sub-panels grouped underthe same main panel have developed criteria thatreflect broadly similar approaches to research.Aspects of significant variation, for example whereresearch approaches vary substantially betweensubjects, are described in the relevant main panelcriteria statement.

Joint submissions 25. Joint submissions to one UOA by two ormore UK HEIs, of research they have developedor undertaken collaboratively, are encouragedwhere this is the most appropriate way ofdescribing the research. For further details onjoint submissions, please refer to paragraphs 52-56 of RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance on submissions’.Panels will receive joint submissions as a unifiedentity, and will assess them in the same way assubmissions from single institutions.

Research outputs 26. Submissions should list up to four items ofresearch output by each submitted researcher, butthere is no automatic disadvantage in failing tocite four items. Sub-panels will look at each case.The criteria statements offer further guidance ontheir respective approaches in cases where fewerthan four items are listed. Staff citing no researchoutputs would not usually be considered asresearch active and should not be submitted tothe exercise.

27. HEIs are allowed to list the maximum offour outputs against any researcher, irrespective oftheir status or the length of time they have had toconduct research. So, for example, four outputs

RAE 01/2006 (E) 9

Generic statement

may be listed against part-time researchers oragainst individuals whose time for research hasbeen constrained by their ill health – even if thepanel’s criteria indicate that the panel would notnecessarily expect to see four items listed.

28. We have deliberately defined research outputbroadly: any form of publicly available, assessableoutput embodying research as defined for theRAE may be submitted, as may confidentialoutputs that are not publicly available. Where anoutput is published as a single coherent work itshould be submitted as such and not subdividedfor submission as two or more separate items.

29. Where a cited research output includessignificant material that was previously publishedseparately (for example, an article reissued as achapter in a book):

a. If both outputs were published within thepublication period and both are cited, thepanel may judge that these should be treatedas a single output.

b. If the earlier output was first publishedoutside the publication period, the panel maytake the view that not all of the workreported in the later output should beconsidered as having been issued within thepublication period.

c. In either of the above cases, the publicationhistory should be appropriately noted in the‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2,explaining where necessary how far any workpublished earlier may have been revised toincorporate new findings.

30. In the case of confidential outputs, HEIsmust have the prior permission of the person(s) ororganisation(s) to whom the work is confidentialfor the output to be made available for assessment(see paragraph 33).

31. Panels’ criteria for judging the quality ofresearch outputs are intended to be sufficientlybroad to enable them to recognise high qualityresearch outcomes in all forms of research –whether basic, strategic, applied, practice-based orinterdisciplinary. In addition to printed academicwork, research outputs may include, but are not

limited to: new materials, devices, images,products and buildings; intellectual property,whether in patents or other forms; performances,exhibits or events; work published in non-printmedia. Each sub-panel’s criteria statement givesfurther guidance. In some cases, sub-panels mayask for brief supplementary material describingthe research content and significance of certainworks, particularly where research outputs do notexist in a conventional form.

32. Panels’ criteria statements reflect anunderpinning principle of the RAE that all formsof research output will be assessed on a fair andequal basis. Sub-panels will neither rank outputs,nor regard any particular form of output as ofgreater or lesser quality than another per se. Somepanels may specify in their criteria that wherethey do not examine an output in detail, theymay use, as one measure of quality, evidence thatthe output has already been reviewed or refereedby experts (who may include users of theresearch), and has been judged to embodyresearch of high quality. No panel will use journalimpact factors as a proxy measure for assessingquality.

33. So that panels can take full account ofresearch that is of relevance to non-academicusers, including industry and public bodies, theRAE team has made provision for confidentialresearch outputs that are not publicly available tobe submitted for assessment. These could includecommercially sensitive research reports forcompanies, and reports for governmentdepartments or agencies which are not in thepublic domain. Where a confidential output islisted in a submission, the HEI will be responsiblefor securing permission from the sponsor, andmaking the output available on request for panelsto examine. Please refer to paragraph 98 of RAE03/2005 ‘Guidance on submissions’ for furtherinformation.

Minimum proportions of workexamined in detail 34. It is not expected that sub-panels willexamine in detail all the research outputs cited.Each sub-panel must, however, examine in detail

10 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Generic statement

a proportion which, in its opinion, is sufficient tomake an informed judgement on the qualityprofile of the work presented. Sub-panels indicatein their criteria statements how they will decidewhat work to examine in detail, and theirapproach to assessing work that is not examinedin detail.

35. Each sub-panel indicates the minimumproportion of research outputs which it willexamine in detail. This is a collectiveresponsibility, not a requirement for each sub-panel member. The phrase ‘examine in detail’indicates reading in full, reading substantiallyfrom or sufficiently to make an informedassessment, or (for outputs which by their naturecannot be read) an equivalent level of scrutiny.Sub-panel members are not required to re-examine work which they have already examinedin detail outside the RAE process as part of theirnormal academic work. They may include suchwork in the minimum proportion that they reportas having examined in detail. Where ‘virtually all’is the phrase used to describe the proportion to beexamined in detail, this means 90% or more.Where a sub-panel indicates that it intends toexamine in detail all the submitted outputs, theonly constraints on fulfilling this intention wouldbe those outside the sub-panel’s control, forexample, if a fire were to destroy, before the sub-panel was able to assess it, an original artefactlisted as an output.

36. Where a sub-panel does not examine aresearch output in detail, it may use informationcontained in RA2 in assessing it. Therefore, it isessential that HEIs adhere strictly to thespecification that some sub-panels have suppliedin their criteria statement for the field in RA2entitled ‘Other relevant details’.

37. For research outputs produced in languagesother than English or Welsh, a 300 word abstractin English is required describing the content andnature of the work. A separate field for eachoutput in RA2 will be available for this. Panelswill use this abstract to identify appropriatespecialist advisers to whom the work may bereferred. The abstracts themselves will not formthe basis for assessment. This requirement is

waived for outputs submitted in any of UOAs 51to 57 if the output is produced in any of thelanguages in the remit of that UOA.

Staffing issues38. HEIs are invited to use RA5b to describe,confidentially, any circumstances of individualstaff that have significantly adversely affected theircontribution to the submission. Main and sub-panels’ statements describe how they will applytheir criteria in assessing the contribution of suchstaff to submissions. HEIs need not describecircumstances (for example, a disability) that havehad no adverse effect on an individual’s capacityto undertake research, as reflected by theircontribution to the submission.

39. Panels will consider the following individualcircumstances to the extent that they are stated tohave had a material impact on the individual’sability to produce the expected volume of researchoutputs in the assessment period:

a. Family and domestic matters, including:

i. Absence on maternity, paternity, parental or adoption leave and arrangements on return to work following these periods of leave.

ii. Part-time working or other flexible working arrangements.

iii. Time spent acting as a carer or other domestic commitments.

b. Disability, ill-health and injury, including:

i. Any disability to which the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 applies, including both permanent disabilities andany temporary disability with a duration of 12 months or more.

ii. Absence from work on the advice of a registered medical practitioner.

c. Engagement on long-term projects ofsignificant scale and scope.

d. Status as an early career researcher. These areindividuals of any age who first entered theacademic profession on employment termsthat qualified them for submission to

RAE 01/2006 (E) 11

Generic statement

RAE2008 as Category A staff on or after 1 August 2003.

e. Prolonged absences (absences for more thansix months consecutively in the assessmentperiod) which were agreed by the individualwith the institution but which do not fallinto one of the categories above. Theyinclude:

i. Secondment to non-academic positions outside the higher education sector.

ii. Career breaks for purposes unconnected with research, teaching or other academicduties.

f. Other absences which the institution islegally obliged to permit, such as absences forreligious observance or absence arising out ofinvolvement as a representative of theworkforce.

g. Any other personal circumstances which areconsidered to have had a significant impacton an individual’s ability to produce theexpected volume of research outputs in theassessment period.

40. Other circumstances comparable with theexamples in paragraph 39 will be considered, aslong as an explanation is provided as to the wayin which they are said to have impacted on theindividual’s ability to produce the expectedvolume of research outputs.

41. Panels will review the information providedregarding individual circumstances. They willdetermine whether those circumstances canreasonably be considered to have affected theindividual’s ability to produce the expectedvolume of research outputs and, if so, whetherand to what extent they will reduce the volumerequirement in respect of that individual.

42. While guidance is given below on theinformation to be provided by HEIs in respect ofindividual circumstances, it is for the panel todecide the extent of any reduction in the volumerequirement.

43. Information about individual circumstancesof Category A or C staff should be submitted inRA5b. HEIs must provide the panel withsufficient information regarding the individual

circumstances to enable them to assess the extentof the impact of those circumstances on theindividual’s research capability. This will normallyinclude:

a. A broad description of the nature of thecircumstances (eg, ill-health, maternity leave).

b. The timing of circumstances, ie, when theyoccurred.

c. The duration of the circumstances.

d. The extent of the impact of thecircumstances on the individual’s ability tocarry out research activities (eg, impossible tocarry out research at all, roughly 50%reduction in time available).

44. As indicated above, an outline description ofthe nature of the circumstances must be given.This is required so that the panel can ensure thatit treats similar situations in a consistent manner.However, personal details such as the precisediagnosis of medical problems need not be given,as long as the HEI explains clearly the nature ofthe impact on the individual’s research capability.It is for the HEI to satisfy itself that the relevantcircumstances exist or have existed and that theimpact is as described. The panel will seek furtherinformation about individual circumstances whereit feels unable to make a decision on the basis ofthe information provided.

45. All information submitted in RA5b will bekept confidential by the RAE team and by thepanel members, who are subject to confidentialityundertakings in respect of all informationcontained in submissions. It will be used only forthe purposes of assessing the RAE submission inwhich it is contained, will not be published at anytime and will be destroyed on completion of theRAE.

46. It is the responsibility of the HEI to ensurethat the information in RA5b is submitted incompliance with the Data Protection Act 1998and all other legal obligations.

47. Panels will use the information suppliedconfidentially in RA5b in assessing submissionsagainst their published criteria. Panels will nottake account of circumstances that may be knownto them, but which are not referenced insubmissions.

12 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Generic statement

48. In the case of part-time working, HEIs mustinclude an entry in RA5b if they wish a sub-panelto consider this as a mitigating factor for aresearcher citing fewer than four outputs.

49. Academic and academic-related duties whichmight be expected for any staff member workingin a UK HEI, including teaching andadministration, are not regarded as an explanationin themselves for listing fewer than four items ofresearch output against an individual.

50. The work of Category C staff will not begiven less weight purely because the basis of theirrelationship with the institution is different fromthat of Category A staff. However, panels mayreasonably form a view as to the extent and valueof the contribution made by individuals listed inCategory C in the light of evidence available.

51. For each individual returned as Category C,HEIs must provide information in RA5cdemonstrating that their research is clearly anddemonstrably focused in the department thatreturns them. Sub-panels’ criteria statements giveexamples of the types of evidence to be suppliedin each case. If a sub-panel is not convinced bythe evidence provided for a Category C staffindividual, it may take account of this in assessingthat individual’s contribution to the research ofthe department.

Interdisciplinary research:arrangements for cross-referral andspecialist advice52. In view of concerns that the assessment ofinterdisciplinary research has presented challengesin previous RAEs (see paragraph 12 of RAE01/2004 ‘Initial decisions by the UK fundingbodies’), panels will continue to have access tomechanisms for cross-referring parts ofsubmissions. There will also be enhancedarrangements for using specialist advisers toensure that interdisciplinary research is assessed bythose competent to do so.

53. An HEI may request that parts ofsubmissions it makes to one UOA are cross-referred to other relevant sub-panels. The RAEteam will consider all such requests but will notbe bound by them. ‘Parts of submissions’ mayrange from all the research output listed against asubmitted researcher, to all the research outputand textual commentary relating to one or moreresearch groups. HEIs may not request cross-referral of either entire submissions, or singleoutputs, although sub-panels may refer singleoutputs to specialist advisers (see paragraph 55).

54. Sub-panels may also request cross-referral ofparts of submissions on the same grounds, evenwhere submitting HEIs have not done so. In allcases, whether requested by a sub-panel or anHEI, the RAE manager will consider the request,and take advice from the relevant main and sub-panel chairs. Where it is thought that cross-referral will enhance the assessment process, therelevant parts will be cross-referred to all the sub-panels concerned. Although advice will be soughtonly on the quality of the cross-referred parts, theentire submission will be made available to thereceiving panel so that it can judge the cross-referred part in context. Advice from other sub-panels on cross-referred parts will be sought andgiven on the basis of the assessment criteria forthe UOA to which the work was originallysubmitted. The sub-panel for the UOA to whichthe work was originally submitted will retainresponsibility for recommending the qualityprofile awarded.

55. Sub-panels may request that parts ofsubmissions, including but not limited tointerdisciplinary research, are referred to specialistadvisers where they believe this will enhance theassessment process. This includes where HEIsidentify single or multiple research outputs asbeing outcomes of interdisciplinary research. TheRAE team has a database of individuals who werenominated as specialist advisers through theprocess described in RAE 03/2004 ‘Units ofassessment and recruitment of panel members’.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 13

Generic statement

Assessment of applied research andpractice-based research 56. As we indicated in RAE 01/2004 ‘Initialdecisions by the UK funding bodies’, we havestriven to ensure that the panel membershipcomprises individuals who have experience inconducting, managing and assessing high qualityresearch; as well as experts who are well equippedto participate in the assessment of appliedresearch and practice-based research from apractitioner, business or other user perspective.

57. Panels will treat on an equal footingexcellence in research across the spectrum ofapplied research, practice-based and basic/strategicresearch, wherever that research is conducted.Panel criteria encompass a range of indicators ofexcellence that are sufficiently broad to enablethem to recognise the distinctive characteristics ofapplied research and practice-based research, andto ensure that they apply their quality benchmarksequitably. The panel criteria statements detail howthey will assess a broad range of research,including applied research relevant to users inindustry, commerce and the public sector. Certainmain panels could reasonably expect submissionsto cite evidence of applied research or practice-based research, and these panels have defined intheir criteria statements a brief typology andappropriate criteria by which the sub-panels willassess such research.

Assessment of pedagogic research58. Submission of pedagogic research isencouraged where it meets the definition ofresearch for the RAE at Annex 3. Pedagogicresearch pertaining to sectors other than highereducation (for example, pre-school, compulsoryeducation, or lifelong learning) falls squarelywithin the remit of UOA 45 (Education). Weanticipate that submissions substantiallycomprising research on pedagogy in these sectorswould normally be submitted to UOA 45, but seealso paragraph 61 below. Higher educationpedagogic research is also within the remit ofUOA 45. However, in view of the arrangementsdescribed in paragraph 61, HEIs need notartificially disaggregate relatively small bodies of

subject-specific higher education pedagogicresearch from their submissions to other UOAs.

59. The RAE team has consulted the HigherEducation Academy to provide a more descriptiveaccount of higher education pedagogic researchthat HEIs may find helpful in preparingsubmissions (see paragraph 60).

60. Pedagogic research in HE will be assessedwhere it meets the definition of research for theRAE. It is research which enhances theoreticaland/or conceptual understanding of:

• teaching and learning processes in HE

• teacher and learner experiences in HE

• the environment or contexts in whichteaching and learning in HE take place

• teaching and learning outcomes in HE

• the relationships between these processes,outcomes and contexts.

Reports of studies providing descriptive andanecdotal accounts of teaching developments andevaluations do not constitute pedagogic research.Pedagogic research is firmly situated in its relevantliterature, and high quality pedagogic researchmakes a substantial contribution to that literature.

61. In all cases pedagogic research will be assessedby experienced and expert reviewers. Some panelshave appointed as panel members one or moreexperts in higher education pedagogy; othersconsider research in higher education pedagogy tobe within the collective expertise of theirmembership. In some main panel areas, forexample engineering (Main Panel G) and in themedical and related panels (Main Panels A andB), pedagogic research will be cross-referred to aspecific member or members of one of the sub-panels. However, as with any other body ofresearch where it considers that seeking externaladvice will enhance the assessment process, a sub-panel may also refer some pedagogic material tospecialist advisers or to the Education sub-panelfor advice. We expect that panel members andspecialist advisers involved in the assessment ofpedagogic research will co-ordinate their activityto ensure consistency of approach in its treatment.

14 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Generic statement

Dealing with declarations ofinterest and confidentiality62. All main and sub-panel members, panelsecretaries, and specialist advisers have declaredany major interests they have in HEIs eligible toparticipate in the RAE. A ‘major interest’ is onethat could be deemed material to theirparticipation in assessing the submission fromthat HEI. They will not participate in assessing asubmission from any HEI in which they havedeclared such an interest, and will be required towithdraw from any panel meeting duringdiscussion of that submission. Major interests willbe continually updated and a register of interestswill be maintained by the RAE manager.

63. The guidance to panels on declaring anddealing with major interests is at Annex 4. Howeach panel will implement this guidance isdescribed in its criteria statement. Minor interests(for example supervision of doctoral studentsregistered at, or co-holding of grants held at,submitting institutions) will not be kept on theregister, but panels will declare, minute andhandle them on a case-by-case basis.

64. All main and sub-panel members, panelsecretaries, and specialist advisers are bound by aduty of confidentiality governing informationcontained in RAE submissions and paneldiscussions. Details are at Annex 5.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 15

Generic statement

16 RAE 01/2006 (E)

RAE 01/2006 (E) 17

Absences of chair and declaration of interests 1. A deputy chair has been elected from the outset, to cover anyplanned or unforeseen absences of the chair of Main Panel E. Theboundaries of the deputy chair’s role are to replace the main panel chairin the event of their absence from the main panel, and to assume thechair during a meeting where the main panel chair is asked to withdrawdue to a conflict of interest.

2. Where the chair and any members of the main panel declare a currentor recent major interest in an institution, they will withdraw fromdiscussions. The formal note of discussion provided by the secretary shallbe the only part of those discussions to which they are party.

3. The main panel will declare minor interests, to the secretariat, inline with guidance provided in Annex 4, and the chair will determineappropriate methods for handling any conflicts of interest arising.

How the main panel will work with its sub-panels4. The main panel expects a collaborative working relationship withand between its sub-panels to facilitate an iterative process. The mainpanel will:

a. Provide leadership and guidance to its sub-panels on theirapproaches to the assessment process and establishment of theircriteria and working methods.

b. Ensure that assessment is completed within given timescales and inaccordance with the funding bodies’ policy and operational framework.

c. Work with sub-panels during the criteria-setting and assessmentphases to ensure consistency, and adherence to, equal opportunitiesguidance.

d. Endorse the criteria for assessment and working methods of sub-panels, and ensure that sub-panels complete their assessments inaccordance with their published criteria and working methods.

e. Based on the work of the sub-panels, endorse quality profiles for allsubmissions.

Section 3: Criteria and working methods

Main Panel ECovers the following UOAs:

Page

• 17 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences 23

• 18 Chemistry 33

• 19 Physics 41

5. Where sub-panels raise questions or issues ofgeneral interest to the subjects within Main Panel Eor more widely, these will be communicated to thechairs of the other sub-panels (and to other mainpanels where appropriate). The main panel willoversee the handling of any such common issues.

6. The main panel will receive the minutes of allsub-panel meetings. Sub-panels will receivereports on the meetings of the main panel.

7. The chair of the main panel may attend somemeetings of Sub-panels 17, 18 and 19 during theassessment phase.

Consistency of quality levels 8. Consistency between the sub-panels inapplying quality levels will be assured by dialogueat main panel level at appropriate timesthroughout the RAE2008 process.

9. The following differential weightings of thecomponents of the assessment will be applied bythe sub-panels under Main Panel E:

Sub-panel 17:

• research outputs 65%

• research environment 20%

• esteem indicators 15%.

Sub-panels 18 and 19:

• research outputs 60%

• research environment 20%

• esteem indicators 20%.

10. Taking prescribed minimum weightings intoaccount and given the primacy of expert review inthe process, a significant weighting for researchoutputs is deemed appropriate by the main panel,while giving reasonable weighting to environmentand esteem so as not to be overly retrospective.UOA 17 has significant common ground withUOA 32 (Geography and Environmental Studies)and Main Panel E has agreed that the weightingsfor the three components of the assessmentshould also reflect the interactions between thesetwo UOAs.

Research environment11. Data on research students, studentships andresearch income will be assessed under thecomponent of research environment, and this willbe applied consistently across the disciplines ofEarth Systems and Environmental Sciences,Chemistry and Physics. Research income (as perthe definition of research income in RAE03/2005 ‘Guidance on submissions’) will beregarded as a measure of peer judgement inrelation to previous achievements and promise.The use of funds to improve physicalinfrastructure and facilities (eg, the JointInfrastructure Fund, Science Research InvestmentFund) will also be considered by sub-panels.

12. Sub-panels specify the measures of quality ofthe environment in their criteria and workingmethods. Sub-panels expect submissions toinclude information on structures which arecoherent for their discipline.

Research esteem13. The research esteem component of thequality profile will be used by sub-panels to assessthe esteem of individuals submitted, particularlytaking account of the relative career stage of staffsubmitted. The esteem of a department will beassessed under the environment component of theprofile. Sub-panels specify in their criteria andworking methods the measures of esteemappropriate to their discipline.

Elements of variation in thecriteria statements 14. The development of the criteria and workingmethods of the sub-panels has been undertaken inconsultation with the main panel. The main panelexpects that the criteria adopted by its sub-panelswill reflect broadly the degree of similarity in theirapproaches to research. Any variations in the criteriastatements and working methods of sub-panels havebeen considered by the main panel to ensure thatthey are in keeping with the extent to whichresearch approaches and methods vary between the

18 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Main Panel E

disciplines covered. The key elements of variation inthe criteria statements are:

a. The extent to which external advice will beused, according to the breadth of thediscipline and the ability of the sub-panel toassess appropriately all outputs submitted to it.

b. The weighting given to research outputs andesteem indicators, as specified at paragraph 9.

c. The assessment of outputs and esteem byresearch group (Physics) or by individual(Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences,Chemistry), as the most appropriatemethodology in line with institutionalstructures of research.

d. The working methods for agreeing a qualityprofile for outputs, and the use to be made ofthe ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2.

e. The acceptability of co-authored or multi-authored outputs from the same department,in line with the extent to which such outputsare common within the discipline.

f. The structure by which departments shouldsubmit their measures of esteem.

g. The indicators for esteem and environmentwhich will be taken into account, in line withthe specifics of the different disciplines.

Methods for ensuring consistency 15. The main panel expects sub-panels to setcriteria and working methods with the principlesof equity and consistency uppermost in mind.Sub-panels will have a common conception of thestandard defined by each quality level (as set outbelow at paragraphs 20-24), and their methodswill take account of all the components of asubmission and a range of indicators.

16. Where sub-panels have generic issues, these willbe communicated to the chairs of the other sub-panels under Main Panel E (and those under othermain panels if appropriate). The main panel willoversee the handling of any such common issues.

17. The main panel will convene prior to theconsideration of submissions in 2008 to ensurecorrect interpretation of criteria that are commonacross sub-disciplines, thereby avoiding unduevariation. The chair of the main panel may

request that the sub-panels under Main Panel Ediscuss, at the start of the assessment phase, themethodology for consideration of outputs whichare to be cross-referred, with appropriate membersof sub-panels handling cognate disciplines. This isto ensure common practices are adopted.

18. The main panel will receive the minutes ofall meetings of its sub-panels.

Range of indicators of excellence19. The assessment of the quality of research willbe based upon the main panel and its sub-panels’professionally formed judgement, expertise andknowledge of the associated subject areas, andinformed by all the information presented in eachsubmission. In determining the range of indicatorsof excellence to be used by sub-panels in makingassessments, the quality of research is to be used asthe primary criterion. Sub-panels will consider:

a. The quality of research as judged by researchoutputs, with no discrimination betweenforms of output.

b. The extent of research and its quality, asindicated by the activity of research students,research assistants, post-doctoral workers,visiting academic and industrial researchers,and others who are deemed to add value tothe research output.

c. Evidence of support from external funders, asindicated by research income from ResearchCouncils, industry, charities, internationalagencies and other funding sources.

d. Evidence of the vitality of a school ordepartment, as demonstrated by its researchstrategy, supporting environment, andachievements over the assessment period.

e. Evidence of national and international peerrecognition.

Research outputs

20. In assessing work as being 4*, ie, ‘world-leading in terms of originality, significance andrigour’, the sub-panels will expect to see evidenceof some of the following characteristics:

• agenda setting

• research that is leading or at the forefront ofthe research area

RAE 01/2006 (E) 19

Main Panel E

• great novelty in developing new thinking,new techniques or novel results

• major influence on a research theme or field

• developing new paradigms or new conceptsfor research

• major changes in policy or practice withrespect to applied research.

21. In assessing research as being 3* the sub-panels will expect to see evidence of some of thefollowing characteristics:

• makes important contributions to the field atan international level

• contributes important knowledge, ideas andtechniques which are likely to have a lastingimpact, but are not developing newparadigms or leading to fundamental newconcepts

• for applied work, a contribution is judged tohave led to significant change to policies orpractices.


• provides useful knowledge to the field, butlacks the potential for lasting impact

• involves incremental advances which mightinclude new knowledge or modelcalculations, using established techniques orapproaches, which conform with existingideas and paradigms

• has influence outside the UK

• for applied work, has influenced policy orpractice.


• useful but unlikely to have more than aminor impact in the field

• influential at a national level

• minor influence on policy or practice.

24. Research will be assessed as Unclassified if itis considered to fall below the quality levelsdescribed above or does not meet the definition ofresearch used for the RAE.

25. Sub-panels will state which types of researchoutputs they anticipate receiving (this should notbe regarded as an exhaustive list), and will make itclear that all forms are assessed on an equal basis.All sub-panels will expect to receive a maximumof four outputs per individual. However as theRAE concerns quality not volume, and takes intoaccount equal opportunities legislation, it isaccepted that the maximum and normalexpectation of four outputs may not be possiblein all circumstances. Sub-panels will state howthey will assess research outputs and whatproportion will be considered in detail. It isanticipated that this will vary across disciplines.

26. Sub-panels will provide guidance todepartments on how they might use the ‘Otherrelevant details’ field in RA2 to provide useful,additional information on outputs. The criteria ofsub-panels will not ask for citation data or journalimpact factors to be provided for all submittedoutputs.

27. Sub-panels will specify whether theygenerally expect to receive different items ofresearch output for each researcher submitted.

28. Sub-panels will specify how they will judgethe contribution of new entrants to highereducation research and early career researchers.Submissions containing new entrants and earlycareer researchers will not be disadvantaged, andtheir presence should be highlighted bydepartments.

29. All sub-panels wish to be informed bydepartments of other UOAs to which they havesubmitted.

Research environment

30. Sub-panels will request forward-lookingstrategies for a six-year period from 2008.

Research esteem

31. Measures of esteem will be considered asappropriate to an individual’s career stage.

20 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Main Panel E

Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinaryresearch

32. The main panel recognises the diverse natureof the disciplines it covers, and regards manyaspects of research in those areas as naturallyinterdisciplinary or multidisciplinary. The mainpanel and sub-panels welcome interdisciplinaryand multidisciplinary submissions.

33. Sub-panels may seek specialist advice orcross-refer research to other UOAs as appropriateto assess interdisciplinary or multidisciplinaryresearch at the boundaries of their UOA, or wherethey need to supplement their expertise.Departments may also request cross-referralwithin the terms laid down in RAE 03/2005‘Guidance on submissions’.

34. The general standards of excellence definedfor the RAE by the quality levels will be expectedto be applied equally to research in newinterdisciplinary areas and established disciplines.

Applied research and practice-based research35. In the assessment of applied research, themain panel expects sub-panels to requestdepartments to provide an explanation in the‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2 of significantuse or application of the research submitted forassessment.

36. In the assessment of esteem andenvironment, sub-panels will consider the extentto which staff interact with bodies external to theHE sector.

37. Research on the teaching of any of thedisciplines covered by Main Panel E will beconsidered initially by the relevant sub-panel thencross-referred to UOA 45 (Education) wherenecessary, with a request for a judgement to bereturned to the relevant sub-panel. The finalassessment will lie with the sub-panel whichoriginally received the submission.

38. All sub-panels will augment their expertise byconsulting with external specialist advisers whereappropriate. In UOA 17, Earth Systems andEnvironmental Sciences, this will be in themajority of areas. In all cases, the advisers’

judgements will inform the sub-panel’s overallassessment of research outputs.

Individual staff circumstances39. In assessing submissions, the main and sub-panels will normally expect the number ofoutputs listed for staff to be proportionate to thetime they have had available for research. Whilethe panels will consider each case on its ownterms, they will normally accept a reduction inthe number of submitted outputs to take accountof the circumstances described in paragraph 39 ofthe generic statement.

40. In addition to the circumstances described inthe generic statement, the main and sub-panelswould also wish to take account of the followingcircumstances:

a. Difficulties in undertaking field work due toparticular circumstances (UOA 17).

b. Limitations on travel or other such factors,due to personal circumstances (UOAs 18 and 19).

c. As described above, all specific circumstanceswill be considered on a case by case basis, but the panels note that given publicationpatterns in these disciplines it is anticipatedthat the vast majority of early career staff will be able to submit four outputs forassessment.

41. Sub-panels’ criteria and working methodsprovide information on how submitted staff whohave faced or are facing such circumstancesduring the assessment period will be handled. Inall cases, sub-panel processes take appropriateaccount of the work of researchers whose volumeof research output may have been limited forreasons covered by equal opportunities legislationand other personal circumstances. Sub-panels willtake account of requirements for laboratory-basedresearch where health and safety restrictions areimposed on pregnant and nursing women whichmay have prevented them from undertaking sometypes of research during the assessment period.

42. Departments are encouraged to use sectionRA5b (which will be treated confidentially) toprovide supporting information on the impact of

RAE 01/2006 (E) 21

Main Panel E

specific circumstances on an individual’s research.Detailed personal histories will not be required bysub-panels, but commentary on the recovery ofscientific momentum, and information on theapproach taken by the department in suchcircumstances, will be considered by sub-panels inthe assessment of research environment.

43. In making assessments, sub-panels willconsider only the information provided to themin the submissions they receive.

Panel observers 44. Research Councils UK (RCUK) observerswill attend main panel meetings, and may beinvited to attend meetings of sub-panels on theagreement of the main panel chair and theappropriate sub-panel chair. RCUK will berepresented by named individuals from theEngineering & Physical Sciences ResearchCouncil and the Natural Environment ResearchCouncil; requests for input from other ResearchCouncils will be sent, via the main panel chair, tothe RAE team. The main panel may ask observersto provide advice on matters such as the dual-support system of funding. The role of anobserver will be passive and distinct from that of apanel member.

22 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Main Panel E

Absences of chair and declaration of interests1. A deputy chair has been elected to cover anyplanned or unforeseen absences of the sub-panelchair. The responsibilities of the deputy chair areto replace the sub-panel chair in the event of theirabsence from both the main panel and sub-panel,to take over the sub-panel chair’s duties in theevent of illness, and to replace them on the sub-panel where they have a conflict of interest.Where the sub-panel chair or members declare acurrent or recent major interest in an institution,they will be asked to withdraw. The formal noteof discussion provided by the secretary shall bethe only part of that discussion to which memberswho have been asked to withdraw are party. Thesub-panel will declare minor interests to the sub-panel secretariat, in line with guidance providedin Annex 4, and the chair will determineappropriate methods for handling any conflicts ofinterest arising. Members will not necessarilywithdraw from the meetings in such cases, butwill not be asked to lead the discussion.

UOA descriptor 2. The UOA encompasses earth, environmentaland planetary sciences, including: geophysics;geochemistry; palaeontology; geology; mineralphysics; planetology; cosmochemistry; earthsurface processes; the physics, chemistry andbiology of the environment including ecology;atmospheric, oceanic and freshwater sciences;global change; natural resources; and scientificaspects of environmental management, includingpollution and conservation.

UOA boundaries 3. The sub-panel is structured to judge coherentlythe quality of submissions under the umbrella ofearth systems and environmental sciences. The sub-panel will augment its own expertise by consultingwith external specialist advisers, who will beappointed on the basis of appropriate expertise.The advisers’ judgements will form part of the sub-panel’s overall assessment of research outputs. Inaddition, the sub-panel may consult, via the RAEteam, a further number of external specialist

advisers if the subject profile of an institutionalsubmission requires such consultation, or the sub-panel may choose to refer elements of thesubmission to appropriate UOAs. The sub-panelexpects that where a submission’s main researchemphasis lies elsewhere, it will be submitted to analternative, more appropriate UOA. The sub-panelexpects to refer work at its boundaries to those sub-panels covering Epidemiology and Public Health(UOA 6), Biological Sciences (UOA 14),Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science (UOA16), Chemistry (UOA 18), Physics (UOA 19),Mathematics (UOAs 20-23), Engineering (UOAs24-29), Town and Country Planning (UOA 31),Geography and Environmental Studies (UOA 32),Archaeology (UOA 33), Law (UOA 38), Sociology(UOA 41) and others as appropriate. The sub-panel asks departments to inform it of other UOAsto which they have submitted. Paragraph 62 setsout how the sub-panel will deal with cross-referrals.

4. The sub-panel will request that other sub-panels assess referred work using the criteria andmethodology of Sub-panel 17. The weightings ofSub-panel 17 will be applied to cross-referredassessments provided by other sub-panels.

5. Institutions should read carefully the sub-panel’s description of the subjects within its remit.Institutions should not feel that they have to splita cohesive unit across UOAs, but are encouragedto indicate elements of a submission that shouldbe referred to other UOAs.

6. External assessments of esteem andenvironment may also be obtained when it isjudged that appropriate expertise is not on thesub-panel. External specialist advisers will be givenexplicit guidance on the assessment criteria andworking methods of the sub-panel. Experts fromthe user community may be consulted on appliedwork. Final responsibility for the assessment of allcomponents of a submission will lie with the sub-panel that originally received the submission.

Research staff7. The contribution of Category A staff will beassessed with regard to their research outputs,their esteem and their contribution to the researchenvironment.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 23

UOA 17, Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences

This statement should be read alongside the statement for Main Panel E and the generic statement.

Panel E

8. The contribution of staff in Categories B andD to the research environment at the census datewill be considered. However, such staff will notcount towards the quality profiles for outputs andesteem. The date of leaving will be aconsideration for assessing the influence of suchstaff. Institutions may wish to make a case for theongoing impact of such staff on the researchenvironment. Departments are asked to describehow such staff have been replaced.

9. The contribution of Category C staff will beassessed with respect to their esteem andcontribution to the research environment andresearch outputs. Submissions should demonstratethat Category C staff are closely embedded indepartments and have a close and long-standingconnection to the Category A staff included in thesubmission. Evidence of such a long-standingconnection should be provided in RA5c and mightinclude, eg, joint research grants with establishedCategory A staff, co-authorship of publications andco-supervision of research students. If the sub-panelis not convinced by the evidence provided about aCategory C staff individual, it may take account ofthis in assessing that individual’s contribution tothe research of the department. Information inRA5c will not be confidential.

10. The sub-panel requests departments to bringto its attention, in RA5b, specific staffcircumstances (eg, sick leave, maternity leave,career breaks/delays) which have had a significantimpact on the research programme. These are tobe treated confidentially. Where staff have beeninvolved on long-term projects with limitedpublication opportunities, textual informationshould be provided in RA5b.

11. Early career researchers are individuals whoentered the academic profession on employmentterms that qualified them for submission to theRAE2008 as Category A staff on or after 1 August2003. Departments submitting early careerresearchers as Category A staff will not bedisadvantaged, and their presence should behighlighted. The sub-panel wishes institutions toindicate how they have encouraged thedevelopment of the potential of early careerresearchers and other new entrants; and to giveany evidence of national and, if applicable,

international esteem, so that full account can betaken of their contribution to the researchprogramme and long-term development of thedepartment. The sub-panel will recognise thepresence of early career researchers as anindication of vitality when considering theresearch environment, together with the supportprovided to staff that have experienced breaks intheir careers during the assessment period.

12. The career stage of the individual andexpected performance in relation to theappropriate peer group will be considered whenevaluating research esteem.

Research outputs 13. Research outputs will be weighted at 65% ofthe overall quality profile. The sub-panel willconsider any form of output. Irrespective of theform and type of output, the sub-panel will seek,above all, to consider the intrinsic research qualityof items submitted. The sub-panel will neitherrank nor regard any particular form of output asinherently of greater or lesser quality thananother. Outputs related to basic research andthose relating to practical applications, includingintellectual property such as patents, and workpublished in non-print media, will be equallyacceptable. Although refereeing and editorialstandards may be used to indicate high quality,the sub-panel will not use a ranked list of journalsin its assessment process. The context of theoutput and its contribution to the research field,particularly the impact on the wider field ofscience, will be considered in relation to thesignificance of a particular output.

14. The judgement of research outputs will beagainst the absolute grading criteria. In the case ofapplied work, impacts on products, processes,management, user uptake and policy developmentwill form part of the assessment.

15. In assessing work as being 4* (ie, ‘world-leading in terms of originality, significance andrigour’), the sub-panel will expect to see evidenceof some of the following characteristics:

• agenda setting


24 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E






16. In assessing research as being 3* the sub-panel will expect to see evidence of some of thefollowing characteristics:








• applied work, which has influenced policy orpractice.





19. Research will be assessed as Unclassified if itis considered to fall below the quality levels

described above or does not meet the definition ofresearch used for the RAE.

20. Individuals are normally expected to submitthe maximum of four research outputs. The sub-panel recognises that there may be valid reasonsfor individuals submitting fewer than themaximum number of outputs, and submissionsmust include explanations for this in RA5b.Paragraphs 55-57 below describe how the sub-panel will handle such cases.

21. The sub-panel recognises that much of theresearch within its remit is collaborative andnaturally leads to multi-authored researchpublications. The list of authors may include co-authors from different UOAs within the sameinstitution, or from different institutions, or fromother UK or overseas institutions. In theassessment of outputs, author order will not be aconsideration.

22. The sub-panel recognises the importance ofmultidisciplinary research. Comments are invitedon the value added by the multidisciplinaryaspects of such research outputs in the ‘Otherrelevant details’ field of RA2 (maximum length 50words).

23. The sub-panel expects that each output willnormally only be submitted in respect of oneindividual within a submission, unless two ormore individuals have made clear and distinctivecontributions to the output and justified this inthe ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2. Eachoutput submitted will generally be counted onlyonce in the calculation of the quality profile.Where a significant piece of work is classed as ofexceptional scale and scope, the contribution tothe quality profile will be scaled as appropriate.

24. The same output(s) may be cited insubmissions to the UOA from differentinstitutions, but joint submissions from two ormore institutions will be treated in the same wayas submissions from single institutions.Departments are encouraged to provideinformation in RA2 on the role of individuals andthe department in multi-authored and multi-institutional outputs and joint submissions, wherethe authors are not wholly contained within thesame submission. In such cases the contribution

RAE 01/2006 (E) 25

Panel E


of the individual or the department should besignificant. Institutions should describe briefly inRA5a the nature and extent of the collaborationsleading to the joint submission.

25. The sub-panel will collectively review allresearch outputs cited in submissions. The sub-panel aims to assess in detail all outputs. Eachoutput will be assessed in detail by at least oneperson, either a member of the sub-panel or aspecialist external adviser. The sub-panel willallocate outputs for assessment using itsprofessional judgement and knowledge. The sub-panel will expect to see evidence in the textualpart of RA2 where practical applications areconsidered to be important.

26. The textual part of RA2 should not be usedto offer opinions on the quality of outputs, andany such information will not be used by the sub-panel.

27. While the sub-panel does not expect toreceive citation data, departments might wish toindicate details of the exceptional citationperformance of an output in RA5a as evidence ofesteem.

28. Outputs resulting from pedagogic researchwill be considered initially by the sub-panel and, if appropriate, referred to UOA 45(Education) for advice. Final responsibility for the assessment of such research will lie with Sub-panel 17.

Research environment 29. Research environment will be weighted at20% of the overall quality profile.

Research students and researchstudentships

30. The sub-panel will use data on researchstudents and research studentships in judging thequality of the research environment component ofthe overall quality profile. The sub-panel will baseits judgements on the following standard analyses:

• the number of research degrees completed andthe number of research studentships registeredby each year of the assessment period

• the average number of research students perstaff FTE

• the average number of research mastersawarded per staff FTE

• the number of postgraduate researchassistants, as defined in RA1, per staff FTE.

The sub-panel wishes to receive non-standardanalyses of doctoral degrees awarded per staffheadcount. This will form part of theconsideration of the research environment.

31. Sources of funding for research studentshipswill be regarded equally. Departments are asked todescribe how research masters students contributeto the research environment.

Research income

32. The sub-panel will use data on researchincome (as per the definition of research incomein RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance on submissions’) asone criterion to judge the quality of the researchenvironment.

33. The sub-panel will base its judgements onthe following measures:

• the volume of research income, with dueregard to the relative cost of undertakingresearch in a particular subject area

• the average level of research income per staffFTE

• sources of research income, including incomein kind.

34. The sub-panel will take account of the origin,nature and balance of funding but will not apply arigid scale of merit. Research income gainedcompetitively or after a rigorous peer review processwill carry greatest weight. In the case of appliedwork, research income may also be used as evidenceof the potential practical importance of such work.

35. Departments may wish to use RA5a toprovide additional information about the natureof the submitted research income.

Research structure

36. Institutions should note that the sub-panelwill be assessing the contribution of individual

26 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E


researchers under esteem, and departmentalresearch attributes under environment. RA5ashould be arranged to give the details of thefollowing research environment issues:

a. Mechanisms and practices for promotingresearch and sustaining and developing anactive and vital research culture.

b. The nature and quality of the researchinfrastructure, including significant space,quality of buildings, equipment and facilities;library facilities, IT/computing support,including those for research students; andpromotion of, attendance at, andparticipation in conferences.

c. Research groups or themes: membership andcriteria for membership, rationale, aims,prime activities, how they operate (includingin relation to the non-research activities ofthe unit), and their main achievements.Emphasis should be placed on specificachievements, which can be verified,including, eg, creation of new researchthemes, funding streams, research centres,policy initiatives and technologydevelopments which have demonstrablyenhanced research quality and/or haveadvanced economic and social developmentor new environmental regulation.

d. Where applicable, arrangements forsupporting interdisciplinary or collaborativeresearch at national and international level.

e. Where applicable, relationships with researchusers (including industry and commerce),and to the legislative requirements, policyinitiatives and objectives of government.

f. Arrangements for developing and supportingstaff in their research, including those new toresearch.

g. The organisation and training of researchstudents.

h. The organisation and training of postdoctoralfellows and research assistants.

i. Interactions and collaborations betweenacademic and postdoctoral staff and researchstudents.

j. The nature of technical support for research.

k. The provision and policy for sabbatical leave.

l. Support for visitors and seminarprogrammes.

m. Institutional support, at central or facultylevel, including financial support, facilities,studentships, academic posts.

n. Additional information on particularcircumstances that are unique to thedepartment.

37. The sub-panel will look for evidence ofresearch vitality and a vibrant research culturewhen considering RA5a. Institutions areencouraged to draw the sub-panel’s attention tothe full range of research activities covered byresearch themes, as evidence of a well planned andcohesive research programme. However, there isno penalty for identifying researchers who workalone or in effective collaboration with colleaguesin other institutions in the UK or overseas. Therewill be no advantage in artificially grouping staffin delineated research areas if there is little or noevidence of a common intellectual basis in thatgroup. Size of submission is not an issue ofrelevance to the sub-panel.

38. Departments should inform the sub-panel ofany other UOAs to which they have submitted.

39. The sub-panel wishes institutions to indicatehow they have encouraged the development of thepotential of early career researchers and other newentrants, so that full account can be taken of theircontribution to the research programme and long-term development of the department. The sub-panel will use the presence of early careerresearchers as an indication of vitality.

40. Investment in the infrastructure of adepartment (including from initiatives such as theScience Research Investment Fund, SRIF), and itsuse to support a department’s research strategy,will be assessed in the sub-panel’s judgement ofresearch environment.

41. As a UOA which covers a broad range ofsubjects both within and between earth systems andenvironmental sciences, the sub-panel is structuredto optimise the assessment of multidisciplinary and

RAE 01/2006 (E) 27

Panel E


interdisciplinary research. The sub-panel affirms thatmultidisciplinary and interdisciplinary submissionswill be given the same weight as single-disciplinesubmissions, and that subjects which, by nature, arenot interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary will not beclassed as intrinsically inferior. The sub-panel expectsto use the expertise of other sub-panels and externalspecialist assessors to judge multidisciplinary andinterdisciplinary research as appropriate.

42. The sub-panel will give full recognition toapplied research which is of direct relevance to theneeds of commerce, industry and public bodies(eg, government departments). While much of thiswork will eventually be published in academicjournals, the sub-panel accepts that there may be atime delay, and a significant proportion of suchwork may initially be disseminated through othermedia (eg, patents and government reports).Research which is neither innovative nor originalwill not receive special consideration simplybecause it is relevant to some practical problem.The sub-panel will also recognise that there can beoutstanding innovation and originality in solvingpractical problems. Departments are encouragedto provide information on the purpose andapplication of research in the ‘Other relevantdetails’ field in RA2.

Staffing policy

43. The sub-panel will consider information on adepartment’s arrangements for developing andsupporting staff in their research, including howthis fits with their non-research duties. It wishesto receive information on how staff new toresearch or at the early stages of a research careerare supported and developed, and integrated intoa wider research culture.

44. Information on how staff in Categories Band D have affected the strength, coherence andresearch culture of the department at the censusdate is also welcomed. The role of Category Cstaff should also be described (see paragraph 9above). The sub-panel will be looking for clearevidence that Category C staff are an integral partof a department; this should be provided inRA5c. Such evidence could include affiliationsgiven in publications, co-authorship of

publications, jointly held research grants and jointsupervision of research students.

Research strategy

45. The sub-panel will judge research strategywithin the research environment component ofthe overall quality profile. The sub-panelencourages departments to provide a statement onits main research objectives and activities over thesix years from the submission date, including anyongoing work that is not producing immediatelyvisible outcomes. This strategy statement shouldinclude:

a. Analysis of future drivers for research withinthe department (scientific, technological,policy, legislative, environmental, social).

b. Analysis of departmental strengths andweaknesses.

c. Identification of priority developmental areasfor the department.

d. A plan of action for developing researchthemes, including research topics, fundingstreams, facilities, staffing, administrationand management.

e. A plan for optimisation of the benefits ofresearch findings, through dissemination andknowledge transfer.

f. Contingency plans to address possibleobstacles.

g. Identified measures of success.

46. Departments are asked to provideinformation on the level of continuity in theresearch plans from those submitted in RAE2001,and how the aspirations of RAE2001 have beenachieved, if appropriate. The sub-panel recognisesthat some units may have changed substantiallysince RAE2001 and therefore reference toRAE2001 may not always be appropriate.Departments should also provide a brief statementof self-assessment. Information provided should berobust and measurable, and may include:

a. An estimate of the number of actions inRAE2001 plans which departments believehave been delivered.

28 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E


b. A summary of the internal mechanisms bywhich departments review and update theirresearch strategy.

c. Factors which impacted on the plan.

d. Any contingency actions taken where theRAE2001 plan could not be implemented.

e. Reasons for significant divergence from theRAE2001 plan.

Esteem indicators 47. Esteem will be weighted at 15% of theoverall quality profile. Departments should list inRA5a indicators of peer esteem and national andinternational recognition. Esteem indicatorsshould relate to the staff submitted and have beenawarded or held within the assessment period.These indicators are required for all staffsubmitted, including Category C staff. The sub-panel will consider indicators of esteemappropriate to the career stage of the staffconcerned. Departments should therefore includethose esteem indicators most appropriate to thecareer stage of each member of staff.

48. Information on esteem measures is requiredfor each member of staff, to allow judgements to bemade based on the career stage of the individual.Information on esteem measures is restricted to amaximum of 100 words for each individual.

49. Measures of esteem may include both nationaland international activities, but the importance ofinternational quality indicators is emphasised.Examples of evidence of esteem may include itemsfrom the list below. Items marked with an asteriskare especially relevant to early career researchers.

a. Conference organisation and significantpresentations:

• organisation of major conferences

• key-note speakers and plenary lectures atconferences

• organisation of special symposia atconferences (especially where these arecompetitive)*.

b. Editorial activities:

• journal and guest editorships

• editorial board membership*

• significant editorial work, eg, majorbooks or review volumes.

c. Peer review and contributions to thescientific community:

• contributions to the work of national andinternational committees and workinggroups

• membership of national or internationalresearch committees such as the sub-panels or boards of Research Councils

• service on peer review committees

• leading role in scientific societies

• hosting distinguished scientists orrotating offices for internationalprogrammes

• journal peer review*

• peer review of research grant applications.

d. Awards, prizes and honours:

• fellowships awarded competitively (eg,Royal Society University ResearchFellowship, Research Council, MarieCurie*; or Leverhulme Trust fellowships)

• election to fellowship or membership ofprestigious learned societies andacademies

• conferment of medals and other honours

• honorary professorships, honorarydegrees, visiting professorships

• best paper awards

• awards specifically aimed at early careerscientists*.

e. Service to government, industry and non-governmental bodies:

• work on scientific advisory panels toindustry or government or governmentagencies (including non-departmentalpublic bodies)

• contribution to boards for industry

• joint or sponsored appointments orsecondments with industry or commerce

RAE 01/2006 (E) 29

Panel E


• exceptional knowledge transfer or spin-out company activities

• collaborative research with industry –please provide details of funding and thenature and timescale of the relationship

• work on advisory or trustee boards forrelevant non-governmental organisations.

f. Others:

• exceptional citation rates

• exceptional or significant communicationof science to the public

• any other measures of individual esteem not included in this list and deemed relevant.

50. Esteem measures that may apply to thedepartment as a whole will be considered in theassessment of the research environment.

Applied research and practice-based research51. In the assessment of applied research, thesub-panel will request departments to provide anexplanation in the ‘Other relevant details’ field inRA2 of significant use or application of theresearch submitted for assessment.

52. In the assessment of esteem andenvironment, sub-panels will consider the extentto which staff interact with bodies external to thehigher education sector.

53. Research on the teaching of any of thedisciplines covered by Main Panel E will beconsidered initially by the relevant sub-panel andthen cross-referred to UOA 45 (Education) wherenecessary, with a request for a judgement to bereturned to the relevant sub-panel. The finalassessment will be made by the sub-panel whichoriginally received the submission.

54. The sub-panel will augment its expertise byconsulting with external specialist advisers whereappropriate. For this UOA, this will be in themajority of areas. In all cases, the advisers’judgements will inform the sub-panel’s overallassessment of research outputs.

Individual staff circumstances55. In assessing submissions, the sub-panel willtake account of individual staff circumstanceswhich have significantly affected theircontribution to the submission. The sub-panelwill normally expect the number of outputs listedfor staff to be proportionate to the time they havehad available for research. While the sub-panelwill consider each case on its own terms, it willnormally accept a reduction in the number ofsubmitted outputs to take account of thecircumstances described in paragraph 39 of thegeneric statement, and of the following discipline-specific circumstances:

a. Difficulties in undertaking field work due toparticular circumstances.

b. Catastrophic loss of critical facilities or failureof scientific missions (eg, satellite launchfailure).

c. As described above, all specific circumstanceswill be considered on a case-by-case basis, butthe sub-panel notes that given publicationpatterns in this discipline it is anticipatedthat the vast majority of early career staff willbe able to submit four outputs forassessment.

56. The sub-panel will also be mindful of healthand safety restrictions imposed on pregnant andbreastfeeding women which may have preventedthem from undertaking some types of researchduring the assessment period, and have thereforehad a negative impact on their research activity.

57. The sub-panel will look for information onan individual’s return to scientific momentum,and the support provided to them by theirdepartment to do so will be illustrative of theresearch environment.

Working methods 58. The assessment will be one of peer reviewbased on professional judgement.

59. At its first meeting in 2008, the sub-panelwill divide submissions between its members andexternal specialist advisers, followingconsideration by the chair in consultation with

30 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E


sub-panel members of declared conflicts ofinterest and members’/advisers’ fields of specificexpertise.

60. Every output will be assessed by three sub-panel members and or external specialistadvisers. External assessors will be used whenthere is no expertise or insufficient expertise onthe sub-panel, or conflicts of interest exclude asub-panel member who is an expert from makingthe assessment. One of the sub-panel experts oran external expert will be designated as the personmost familiar with the subject matter and willassess the output in detail. The other experts willnormally assess the output in less detail, with aminimum requirement of reading the abstract,introduction and conclusions, and examiningenough of the illustrations and tables to make anassessment. In assigning an agreed score the sub-panel will give due consideration to the level ofexpertise of the assessors. If the expert assigned toread the output in detail is external, a sub-panelmember will be assigned to summarise thefindings of the assessments and propose a score.Where there are significant differences betweenthe assessments of the sub-panel members orexternal experts, a fourth sub-panel member orexternal expert will be asked to make a furtherdetailed assessment.

61. Applied research will be judged using thesame criteria as basic or strategic research.

62. Requests for information from other sub-panels will be made at the first meeting in 2008.Other sub-panels asked to provide levels foroutputs and/or esteem indicators must providethese in good time so that their levels can beincluded in the scoring process with enough timefor Sub-panel 17 to seek clarification of detailfrom the other sub-panel(s). Other sub-panels willbe asked to assess outputs using the samemethodology, and in return Sub-panel 17 willassess their outputs in whatever way helps them tointegrate the results into their quality profile.

63. Where four outputs have not been returnedin respect of a submitted individual, the reasons,as given in RA5b for confidential matters or inthe ‘Other relevant details’ field of RA2 in thecases of major pieces of work, will be discussed by

the sub-panel. Where the reasons are deemedsatisfactory, the missing outputs will bedisregarded. Where a significant piece of work isclassed as being of exceptional scale and scope, itwill be scaled as appropriate. If the reasons are notdeemed to be satisfactory, or if no reason isprovided, an Unclassified grade will be awardedfor each missing output.

64. Research environment measures for adepartment will be initially considered by threemembers of the sub-panel and the chair (ordeputy chair if appropriate). They will assess theoverall research environment and then moderate itto take into account particular areas of strength orweakness identified, in line with the measures ofenvironment stated in the sub-panel’s criteria, inorder to arrive at a quality profile. Jointsubmissions will be considered in their entirety,and institutions will need to state the basis for thejoint submissions and the benefits that accrue.

65. The assessment of the research environmentwill be weighted at 20% of the overall qualityprofile. The panel will take into account thestatistical information returned in RA3 and RA4as well as information contained in RA5 relatingto indicators of research environment. The generalfactors assessed will include:

a. Research strategy.

b. Research expenditure.

c. Research students and studentships.

d. The presence and contribution in thedepartment of senior visitors, honorary staff,research fellows, facility users, and links withusers of applied research.

e. Physical infrastructure and investment (eg, from SRIF).

f. Staffing policy, and support for early careerstaff, new entrants and staff with othermitigating factors, including the role ofsupport staff.

66. The sub-panel will be neither mechanisticnor formulaic in regard to the way theenvironment is judged. Each of the six areas inparagraph 65 will be used to judge the vitality andhealth of the department.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 31

Panel E


67. The assessment of esteem will be made inrespect of the esteem indicators provided for eachmember of staff submitted for assessment, takinginto account their career stage and specificindividual circumstances. The esteem indicatorslisted for each individual will normally beassigned a quality level by those members of thesub-panel who have assessed their outputs. If thenumber of qualifying sub-panel members fallsbelow three because external assessors have beenused, additional sub-panel members will beassigned to the task.

68. The chair of the sub-panel will read allsections RA3, RA4 and RA5 of submissions (withthe exception of those in which he has a conflictof interest, which will be read by the deputychair). A member of the sub-panel will benominated to act as chair in the event that boththe chair and deputy chair have a conflict ofinterest. A minor interest by the chair will betreated in the same way as for any other sub-panelmember (ie, they may be present but notcontributing to the discussion or acting as chair).

69. The sub-panel will reach final quality levelsand profiles through consensus or, where this isnot possible, by majority vote. The sub-panel willrecommend to the main panel a quality profile foreach submission returned within the UOA whichis consistent with its published criteria.

32 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E


Absences of chair and declaration of interests 1. A deputy chair has been elected from theoutset, to cover any planned or unforeseenabsences of the chair. The boundaries of thedeputy chair’s role are to replace the sub-panelchair in the event of their absence from both themain panel and sub-panel, to take over the sub-panel chair’s duties in the event of illness, and toreplace them on the sub-panel where they have aconflict of interest. Where members, includingthe chair, declare a current or recent majorinterest in an institution, they will withdraw. Theformal note of discussion provided by thesecretary shall be the only part of that discussionto which members who have been asked towithdraw are party.

2. The sub-panel will declare minor interests tothe sub-panel secretariat, in line with guidanceprovided in Annex 4, and the chair will determineappropriate methods for handling any conflicts ofinterest arising. Members will not necessarilywithdraw but may not be asked to lead thediscussion.

UOA descriptor3. The UOA includes all aspects of experimentaland theoretical chemistry.

UOA boundaries4. The sub-panel expects to receive submissionsfrom all areas of chemistry. In areas where thesub-panel thinks that it lacks relevant experience,eg, electro-chemistry, it will augment its ownexpertise by referring outputs to either specialistadvisers or another appropriate sub-panel. Thesub-panel will utilise external advisers ofappropriate expertise who will provide advisoryjudgements on outputs, to form part of the sub-panel’s overall assessment of research outputs.Where a submission is deemed to cross theboundaries between the UOA and others, selectedoutputs will be referred to specialist advisers orsent to an appropriate sub-panel. The sub-panelexpects to refer work at its boundaries to thosesub-panels covering Pharmacy (UOA 13),Biological Sciences (UOA 14), Agriculture,

Veterinary and Food Science (UOA 16), EarthSystems and Environmental Sciences (UOA 17),Physics (UOA 19), Applied Mathematics (UOA21), Chemical Engineering (UOA 26), Metallurgyand Materials (UOA 29), Education (UOA 45)and others as appropriate. The sub-panel asksdepartments to inform them of other UOAs towhich they have submitted.

5. Institutions should not feel that they have tosplit a cohesive unit across UOAs, but areencouraged to indicate elements of a submissionthat should be referred to other UOAs.

6. Final responsibility for the assessment of allcomponents of a submission will lie with the sub-panel which originally received the submission.

Research staff7. Category C staff will be treated in the sameway as Category A staff for the assessment ofresearch outputs. Departments should provideclear evidence, in RA5c, of the status of andcontribution to the research programme made byCategory C staff. The evidence of such linksincludes:

• supervision of research students or contractresearch workers

• use of departmental facilities

• membership of or leadership of an activeresearch group

• address of submitting department onpublished outputs.

8. Examples of Category C staff might includeindependently funded research fellows and staffwithin embedded research units.

9. The contribution of staff in Categories B andD to the research environment at the census datewill be considered. However such staff will notcount towards the quality profiles for outputs andesteem. When considering such staff,consideration will be taken of the date of leaving.Institutions may also wish to make a case for theongoing impact of such staff on the environmentof the department. The assessment ofenvironment will also consider the way such staffare replaced.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 33

UOA 18, Chemistry


Panel E

10. In RA5b the sub-panel requests departmentsto bring to its attention specific staffcircumstances (eg, sick leave, maternity leave,career breaks/delays) which have had a significantimpact on the research programme. These are tobe treated confidentially.

11. The sub-panel wishes to encourage thesubmission of early career researchers. Early careerresearchers are individuals who entered theacademic profession on employment terms thatqualified them for submission to the RAE 2008 asCategory A staff on or after 1 August 2003.Departments are encouraged to explain thecontext of such individuals in RA5, particularlythe impact of their subject specialism on theperiod of time that it takes to establish a researchprofile.

12. When assessing the research environment thesub-panel will look for evidence of theappointment of early career staff and new entrantswithin a department’s recruitment strategy inRA5. The sub-panel will recognise early careerresearchers as an indication of vitality whenconsidering the research environment, togetherwith the support provided to staff that haveexperienced breaks in their careers during theassessment period.

13. In assessing the esteem of early careerresearchers and new entrants, the sub-panel willtake account of the career stage of the individualwhen agreeing the appropriate levels of esteemmeasures for each quality level. The context forthe outputs of early career researchers, such asthose completed while a postgraduate or apostdoctoral researcher, will be considered.

14. The career stage of all individuals in RA5and expected performance in relation to theappropriate peer group will be judged as ameasure of research esteem.

Research outputs15. Research outputs will be weighted at 60% ofthe overall quality profile.

16. The sub-panel will neither rank nor regardany particular form of output as inherently of

greater or lesser quality than another. In additionto printed academic outputs, it will consider (butnot be limited to) outputs in the following form:

• new materials, devices, images and products

• intellectual property, whether in patents orother forms

• work published in non-print media.

17. The context of the output and thecontribution to the research field, particularly theimpact on the wider field of science, will beconsidered in relation to the significance of aparticular output. In assessing work as being 4*(ie, ‘world-leading in terms of originality,significance and rigour’) the sub-panel will expectto see evidence of some of the followingcharacteristics:

• agenda setting





• major changes in policy or practice withrespect to applied research

• impact on processes, production andmanagement and user uptake.





34 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E

UOA 18, Chemistry




• has influence and importance outside the UK







22. Given that chemistry is a disciplinecharacterised by a high publication rate, staff inCategories A and C are expected to submit themaximum of four research outputs. However, thesub-panel recognises that there may be validreasons for individuals submitting fewer than themaximum number of outputs, and departmentsare required to provide explanation for this inRA5b.

23. The sub-panel aims to assess in detail allsubmitted outputs. Where those assigned to assessan output are unable to reach a consensus, thechair will assign a further panel member to readthe output. The sub-panel will assign each outputa quality level which will be carried forward to thedepartmental quality profile for outputs.

24. The sub-panel expects departments to makeuse of the ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2only in the exceptional circumstances indicated

below. Departments must not use the ‘Otherrelevant details’ field in RA2 to offer opinions onthe quality of an output.

25. The sub-panel expects to receive differentitems of research output for each researchersubmitted by a department, and will therefore notnormally expect to see the same output appearmore than once in a submission to this UOAfrom a department. However, there could becircumstances where two or more individuals havemade clear and distinctive contributions to theoutput, eg, where a theorist and experimentalistcombine to perform a coherent data collection,analysis and interpretation, or where synthesis,biology, spectroscopy or imaging are combined ina single output. In these circumstances – ie, wherethe same output appears more than once in thesubmission – the sub-panel will expect to see anexplanation in the ‘Other relevant details’ field inRA2, including identification of distinctivecontributions.

26. Citation rates and journal impact factors willnot be used as measures of quality. Howeverdepartments might wish to highlight in up to 50words, in the ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2,outputs with particularly high citation rates, aswell as outputs describing highly novel research.The sub-panel would welcome commentsdescribing the impact of the research on otherfields, products, processes, production,management and user take-up in industry. Formulti-authored papers, departments should usethe ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2 toidentify the contribution of individuals or thecontribution to multidisciplinary research. In thecase of un-refereed outputs (which may includethe outputs from applied research) it is essentialthat departments provide information in the RA2‘Other relevant details’ field on the impact of theresearch, including generation of income ifappropriate.

Research environment27. Research environment will be weighted at20% of the overall quality profile.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 35

Panel E

UOA 18, Chemistry

28. Departments should include in RA5 indicatorsof their research environment. This will include:

• research strategy

• research income

• research students and studentships

• staffing policy, and support for early career staff,new entrants and staff with other mitigatingfactors, including the role of support staff

• departmental esteem measures, eg, prizesawarded to the department as a whole, ratherthan to an individual, or the presence in thedepartment of senior visitors, especially fromoverseas

• physical infrastructure.

29. The sub-panel will be neither mechanisticnor formulaic in regard to the way theenvironment is judged. Each of the six areas inparagraph 28 will be used to judge the vitality andhealth of the department, and an approximatelyequal weight will be given to each.


30. The number of research studentships and thenumber of research students will be regarded asevidence when assessing the researchenvironment. This will include consideration of:

• research masters degrees awarded per staff FTE

• doctoral degrees awarded per staff FTE

• studentships per staff FTE.

31. The sub-panel will not differentiate betweensources of funding for research studentships. Thisinformation will be used to assess the health andvitality of the research environment.

Research income

32. Research income (as per the definition ofresearch income in RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance onsubmissions’), will be regarded as evidence of theresearch environment. The sub-panel will base itsjudgements on the following measures:

• income by source per staff FTE

• research assistants per staff FTE.

33. In its assessment of research environment andthe sustainability of research activity, the sub-panel will consider the financial health of adepartment’s total level of research income, takinginto account all sources of income and theappropriate level of funding for subject disciplinesoffered by the department. Departments shouldcomment on income in relation to researchactivity and subject coverage. The sub-panel willattach greater weight to external income awardedvia a process of evaluation.

34. Allocation of central facilities and resources,both national and international, will be seen asimportant and will carry similar weight to grantincome.

35. The sub-panel will assess how capitalexpenditure by a department supports its physicalinfrastructure. The sub-panel would therefore liketo receive a separate statement of income from:

• the Joint Infrastructure Fund

• institutional infrastructure support, includingthe Science Research Investment Fund andsimilar sources.

Research structure36. The sub-panel is aware that the concept ofresearch groups varies between sub-disciplines andinstitutions. Departments are therefore asked todescribe the organisational networks that supportthe research of the department, and how thedepartment (or departments in the case of jointsubmissions) chooses to structure itself.

37. This should include:

a. How the different streams of activity areorganised, how they operate and their mainachievements.

b. Other UOAs to which related work has beensubmitted, and any difficulties of fit betweendepartmental structure and the UOAframework.

c. Mechanisms and practices for promotingresearch, and sustaining and developing anactive and vital research culture.

d. The nature and quality of the researchinfrastructure, including: significant

36 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E

UOA 18, Chemistry

equipment; research facilities; space; qualityof buildings; library facilities; IT/computingsupport (including those for researchstudents); promotion of, attendance at, andparticipation in, conferences; and facilities forresearch studentships.

e. Arrangements for supportingmultidisciplinary, interdisciplinary orcollaborative research.

f. Information on the relationship with researchusers, particularly industry, commerce orgovernment; together with the contributionto industry and society of researchundertaken, particularly any results orprocesses which have demonstrably advancedeconomic and social development.

g. Mechanisms and practices for promotingresearch and sustaining and developing anactive and vital research culture.

h. Any other issues on which the departmentbelieves the sub-panel would find commenthelpful.

38. There will be no advantage in artificiallygrouping staff in delineated research areas if thereis little or no evidence of a common intellectualbasis in that group.

39. The sub-panel affirms that multidisciplinaryand interdisciplinary submissions will be given thesame weight as single discipline submissions;subjects which, by nature, are multidisciplinary orinterdisciplinary will not be classed as intrinsicallyinferior. The sub-panel expects to use theexpertise of other sub-panels and externalspecialist assessors to judge multidisciplinary andinterdisciplinary research as appropriate.

Staffing policy

40. The sub-panel will be looking at the overallstaffing policy of the department, in particular theongoing sustainability of research which willinclude a reference to the demographics of thedepartment. Other factors will include:

a. Arrangements for developing and supportingstaff in their research, including how thissupport relates to their non-research duties.

b. Arrangements for developing the research ofcolleagues new to research and for integratingthem into a wider, supportive research culture.

c. Details on how the departure of staff inCategories B and D has affected the strength,coherence and research culture of thedepartment at the census date.

Research strategy

41. The sub-panel wishes to receive a briefdescription of the research strategy for the six yearsfollowing the submission date. In considering thestrategy, the breadth of the subjects offered by adepartment will not be taken into consideration.However, the department needs to indicate itsoverall philosophy and how this relates to its chosensubject mix and delivery of the research strategy.Other issues that could be covered include:

a. A statement about the main objectives andactivities in research over the six years fromthe submission date, including any ongoingresearch work that is not producingimmediate visible outcomes.

b. A self-assessment of how research plansdescribed in RAE2001 have developed, andhow they link with the strategy for the nextsix years.

Esteem indicators42. Esteem indicators will be weighted at 20% ofthe overall quality profile.

43. Departments should list indicators of peeresteem and national and international recognitionwhich relate to the staff submitted (Categories Aand C) and which have been achieved during theassessment period. The sub-panel will take intoconsideration the career stage of the individualwhen agreeing the appropriate levels of esteemmeasures for each quality level, and informationshould be presented in such a way as to allow thesub-panel to undertake this assessment.

44. Esteem measures will include (but are notlimited to and in no particular order):

• plenary lectures

• invited lectures

RAE 01/2006 (E) 37

Panel E

UOA 18, Chemistry

• conference organisation

• college membership of the Engineering andPhysical Sciences Research Council and othersimilar services for research funding providers

• named international lectures

• visiting appointments such as professorships

• election to fellowship of learned societiessuch as the Royal Society

• editorship of journals and membership ofeditorial boards

• recent large grants if not shown in RA4

• co-ordination of large EU grants

• prizes for research

• senior research fellowships

• industrial consultancy/spin-out activity

• joint appointments or secondments withindustry; company directorships andappointments to science advisory boards

• positions of elected office in national andinternational associations and organisations

• expert witness in legal disputes.

45. The sub-panel will consider up to amaximum of four categories of esteem measuresper member of staff. The panel is limiting theesteem measures on the grounds that it wishes toassess the breadth of esteem in the department as awhole and to ensure that appropriate measures ofesteem indicators for early career staff are givenadequate prominence. Measures of the same typemay be aggregated, eg: Measure 1 – delivery of 10plenary lectures; Measure 2 – membership of fiveeditorial boards; Measure 3 – organisation of threenational conferences; Measure 4 – named prize.

Applied research and practice-based research46. In the assessment of applied research, themain panel expects sub-panels to requestdepartments to provide an explanation in the‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2 of significantuse or application of the research submitted forassessment.

47. In the assessment of esteem andenvironment, sub-panels will consider the extentto which staff interact with bodies external to thehigher education sector.

48. Outputs that relate to research on theteaching of any of the disciplines covered by MainPanel E will be considered initially by the relevantsub-panel and then cross-referred to UOA 45(Education) where necessary, with a request foradvice to be returned to the relevant sub-panel.The final assessment will lie with the sub-panelwhich originally received the submission.

49. The sub-panel will augment its expertise byconsulting with external specialist advisers whereappropriate. This can include the referral of singleresearch outputs, particularly in the case ofinterdisciplinary research work. In all cases wherethis is required, the advisers’ judgements willinform the sub-panel’s overall assessment ofresearch outputs. External specialist advisers willbe given explicit guidance on the assessmentcriteria and working methods of the sub-panel.Experts from the user community may beconsulted in relation to applied work.

Individual staff circumstances50. In assessing submissions, the sub-panel willnormally expect the number of outputs listed forstaff to be proportionate to the time they havehad available for research. While the sub-panelwill consider each case on its own terms, it willnormally accept a reduction in the number ofsubmitted outputs to take account of thecircumstances described in paragraph 39 of thegeneric statement. In the case of early careerresearchers, although the sub-panel will considerspecific circumstances on a case-by-case basis, itnotes that, given publication patterns in thisdiscipline, it is anticipated that the vast majorityof early career staff will be able to submit fouroutputs for assessment.

51. The sub-panel will also be mindful of healthand safety restrictions imposed on pregnant andbreastfeeding women which may have preventedthem from undertaking some types of researchduring the assessment period, and have thereforehad a negative impact on their research activity.

38 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E

UOA 18, Chemistry

52. The sub-panel will look for information onan individual’s return to scientific momentum,and the support provided to them by theirdepartment will be illustrative of the researchenvironment. Institutions may also includeinformation on personal circumstances that mayhave affected the research esteem of individuals,such as circumstances limiting the ability toattend international conferences.

Working methods53. Each output will be assigned to two membersof the sub-panel, who will review the output andsuggest a grading. Where there are significantdifferences of opinion on quality level, the outputwill be referred to a third member.

54. A sub-group of the sub-panel – to includethe chair and two other members – will assignoutputs based on area of expertise (taking intoaccount both major and minor conflicts ofinterest).

55. For esteem and environment, eachsubmission will be assigned to two members ofthe sub-panel who will take lead responsibility foran institution and read the RA3, RA4 and RA5for the submission. The two assessors willindependently produce a quality level for esteem,based on the indicators given for each member ofstaff, in order to take into account the career stageof individuals. They will also produce an overallprofile for the environment, based on theenvironment indicators given for the departmentas a whole. Where there is agreement the profileswill be passed to the full sub-panel forratification. Where there is disagreement the fullsub-panel will discuss the matter and arrive at anagreed profile. It is expected that members willread every RA5 submitted and that the chair willread sections RA3, RA4 and RA5 of everysubmission in detail to ensure consistency ofassessment.

56. Where submissions appear to cross UOAboundaries, the sub-group referred to inparagraph 54 above will initially review thesubmission, to identify that it does cross the UOAboundaries and will refer it to another UOA orspecialist adviser as appropriate. Where outputs or

parts of a submission are referred to anotherpanel, this will be for advice only and the finaldecision and weightings applied will remain withthe Chemistry sub-panel.

57. All discussions of submissions will only takeplace at meetings of the sub-panel.

58. Provisional quality profiles will be presentedto the sub-panel. It will reach a decision byconsensus on the quality profile for thedepartment to be sent for approval to the mainpanel. If a consensus cannot be attained, finalquality profiles will be decided by a simplemajority vote. The chair will have the castingvote.

59. Joint submissions will be assessed in the sameway as submissions from a single institution.

Additional information requested60. The sub-panel would wish for departmentsto explain the use made of support staff, bothtechnical and those on teaching-only contracts,and how such support aids the research culture ofthe department. In seeking this information, thesub-panel wishes to recognise explicitly the rolethat such staff have in supporting the overallresearch strategy of the department. This will beconsidered in the assessment of environment.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 39

Panel E

UOA 18, Chemistry

40 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Absences of chair and declarationof interests1. A deputy chair has been elected from theoutset, to cover any planned or unforeseenabsences of the chair. Where members, includingthe chair, declare a current or recent majorinterest in an institution, they will withdraw fromdiscussions. The deputy chair will assume thechair whenever the sub-panel chair is asked towithdraw, or is temporarily unavailable. Theformal note of discussion provided by thesecretary shall be the only part of that discussionwhich members who have been asked to withdrawwill see.

2. The sub-panel will declare minor interests, tothe sub-panel secretariat, in line with the guidancein Annex 4, and the chair will determineappropriate methods for handling any conflicts ofinterest arising. Members will not necessarilywithdraw but may not be asked to lead thediscussion.

UOA descriptor3. The UOA includes theoretical, computationaland experimental studies of: quantum physics;atomic, molecular and optical physics; plasmaphysics; particle physics and nuclear physics;surface and interface physics; condensed matterand soft matter physics; biophysics;semiconductors, nanoscale physics, lasers,optoelectronics and photonics; magnetism,superconductivity and quantum fluids; fluiddynamics; statistical mechanics, chaotic and non-linear systems; astronomy and astrophysics,planetary and atmospheric physics; cosmologyand relativity; medical physics; applied physics;chemical physics; instrumentation; pedagogicresearch in physics.

UOA boundaries4. The sub-panel is structured to judgecoherently the quality of submissions under theumbrella of physics. In areas where the sub-panellacks relevant experience, it may augment its ownexpertise by consulting external advice, eg, in thearea of nanoscale physics. The sub-panel willappoint individuals of appropriate expertise who

will provide advisory judgements on selectedwork. The advisers’ judgements will inform thesub-panel’s overall assessment of research outputs.External assessments of esteem and environmentmay also be obtained when it is judged thatappropriate expertise is not on the sub-panel.

5. The sub-panel may also refer outputs to andliaise with other sub-panels where work is at theboundaries of the UOA. The sub-panel asksdepartments to inform it of other UOAs to whichthey have submitted, and/or to which otherUOAs they wish their work to be submitted forconsideration. Where cross-referral has beenrequested by an institution – or if the sub-panelfeels that a submission spans the boundarybetween two or more UOAs – it will cross-refer,via the RAE team, to other sub-panel(s) asappropriate.

6. Final responsibility for the assessment will liewith the sub-panel which originally received thesubmission.

Research staff7. The contributions of staff in Categories A andC will be treated identically for the purposes ofproducing a quality profile for research outputs ofa group; however contributions of each group tothe departmental quality profile will be weightedby the relevant number of FTEs in that group.

8. Departments should provide clear andsubstantial evidence, in RA5c, of the status of andcontribution to the research programme made byCategory C staff. Evidence of commitments mightinclude a contractual agreement, supervision ofstudents, address used on publications orsignificant length of the connection.

9. The contribution of staff in Categories B andD to the research environment at the census datewill be considered in terms of whether thedeparture of such staff has been managedeffectively and how they have been replaced.However such staff will not count towards thequality profiles for outputs and esteem. Whenconsidering such staff, consideration will be takenof the date of leaving. Institutions may also wishto make a case for the ongoing impact of suchstaff on the environment of the department.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 41

UOA 19, Physics


Panel E

10. The sub-panel requests departments to bringto its attention, in section RA5b of thesubmission, specific staff circumstances (eg, sickleave, maternity leave, career breaks/delays,engagement on long-term projects) which havehad a significant impact on the researchprogramme. These are to be treated confidentially.

11. Early career researchers are individuals whoentered the academic profession on employmentterms that qualified them for submission toRAE2008 as Category A staff on or after 1 August 2003. Submissions containing earlycareer researchers will not be disadvantaged, andtheir presence will be taken to indicate researchvitality in a department. The sub-panel wishesinstitutions to indicate how they have encouragedthe development of the potential of early careerresearchers and other new entrants; and to giveany evidence of national and, if applicable,international esteem, so that full account can betaken of their contribution to the researchprogramme and long-term development of thedepartment.

Research outputs12. Research outputs will be weighted at 60% ofthe overall quality profile.

13. Outputs relating to basic research and thoserelating to practical applications, includingpublished patents, will be equally acceptable.Outputs should be self-contained and will bejudged on the quality of the science demonstratedtherein. The sub-panel will expect to see relevantevidence in cases where the practical applicationsare considered as important. The extent to whichthe research has wide implications over a broadfield will, in appropriate cases, play a role in thejudgements made by the sub-panel.

14. The sub-panel will base its deliberations onthe quality of a maximum and normal expectationof four outputs.

15. The sub-panel will examine all outputs; andno less than 50% of the research outputs will beexamined in detail. Sub-panel members will usetheir professional judgement and their initialexamination of the outputs to identify which will

be examined in detail. Books, edited works andreview articles will carry weight if they containnew and original material and relate to work towhich the author has made major contributions.Publication in academic journals with rigorouseditorial and refereeing standards may be taken asan indicator of quality. However, the guidingprinciple will be that the sub-panel will base itsdeliberations on the quality and significance ofthe scientific work in the outputs submitted,regardless of the medium of publication.

16. In assessing work as being 4* (ie, ‘world-leading in terms of originality, significance andrigour’), the sub-panel will expect to see evidenceof some of the following characteristics:

• agenda setting












42 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E

UOA 19, Physics









21. The outputs will be considered and a qualityprofile produced, taking into account the contextof the set of outputs within the research group.All outputs must be assigned in RA2 to one of theresearch groups in RA5 (see paragraph 36).

22. Where fewer than four outputs are submittedfor an individual, a reason(s) must be provided inRA5b. There are two broad types of valid reasonfor the submission of fewer than four outputs:

a. Absence from research, reasons for whichmight include continuous periods of absencefor maternity and other parental leave, illness,and secondment to non-research posts for asubstantial proportion of time.

b. Engagement in a substantial research projectwhere the research has yet to produce anoutput which can be submitted as part of the RAE.

23. The sub-panel recognises that much of theresearch within its remit is collaborative in natureand naturally leads to multi-authored researchpublications. Collaborative work is a naturalconsequence of cross-disciplinary activity or ofvery large scale experimental projects, and thesub-panel has no wish to discriminate against

outputs resulting from such activity. In particular,the sub-panel recognises that many members ofstaff named in RA2 will naturally wish to submitmulti-authored publications as evidence ofresearch quality, and that the list of co-authorscould include researchers from the same researchgroup, from a different department within thesame institution, from different institutions, andfrom overseas.

24. In addressing the issue of how to allocatecredit for the contribution by a submittedmember of staff to a research output producedand published in collaboration, the sub-paneloffers the following guidelines:

a. Where the number of authors is small (fewerthan five), the sub-panel will normallyassume that any individual citing thepublication has made a significantcontribution to the work. The overall qualityof that output will be credited to the qualityprofile.

b. Where the number of authors is large (five ormore), the sub-panel will expect to seeevidence of the extent of an individual’scontribution to the research output. The sub-panel recognises that there are differentpractices across different areas of the subjectwith respect to how author lists arepresented, ranging from alphabetical-by-author to explicit identification of ‘leadauthor(s)’. Therefore, where there is anyambiguity, the sub-panel will expect to seethe nature and extent of an individual’scontribution defined in the ‘Other relevantdetails’ field of RA2.

25. The sub-panel will not normally expect to seethe same publication appear more than once in asubmission to this UOA from a particulardepartment. However, there could becircumstances where two or more individuals havemade clear and distinctive contributions to theoutput, eg, where a theorist and experimentalistcombine to perform a coherent data collection,analysis and interpretation. In thesecircumstances, ie, where the same publicationappears more than once in the submission, thesub-panel will expect to see an explanation in the

RAE 01/2006 (E) 43

Panel E

UOA 19, Physics

‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2, includingidentification of distinctive contributions.

26. Departments may make appropriate use ofthe ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2, up to amaximum of 50 words. This might include:

a. An explanation of the role of an individualmember of staff within a collaboration.

b. An explanation of the role of an individualmember of staff within a co-cited output.

c. Information on and explanation of thecurrent or potential significant use orapplication of research submitted.

27. It should be noted that explanation ofauthorship protocol for the discipline is notnecessary. Institutions should not use the ‘Otherrelevant details’ field of RA2 to offer opinions onthe quality of the output.

28. Research on the teaching of any of thedisciplines covered by the sub-panel will beconsidered initially by the sub-panel then cross-referred to UOA 45 (Education) where necessary.

29. The final recommendation to the main panelon the quality profile will remain with the sub-panel which originally received the submission.

Research environment30. The research environment will be weighted at20% of the overall quality profile. Assessment willbe based on the evidence provided, which willinclude:

a. Research income, numbers of postdoctoralresearch assistants, and success in gainingtime at national or international facilities asindicators of the quality of the research asseen by funding agencies, especially when theresearch support is dependent on rigorouspeer review or a competitive process.

b. The number of research students andresearch degrees awarded, as an indicator ofthe level and quality of research.

c. Where work is relevant to industry, the levelof industrial support and resources providedwill be taken into account, in terms of theevidence relating to the resources andopportunities available to staff.

d. The presence in the department of seniorvisitors, especially from overseas.

e. Other statements in RA5 relating to thevitality of research and to prospects fordevelopment.

f. The sub-panel will consider evidenceconcerning the research environment for thesubmission as a whole, and will use thisevidence to form a quality profile for theresearch environment.


31. The sub-panel will use the standard analysesprovided by the RAE team on research students,research studentships and number of higherdegrees awarded to judge the quality of theresearch environment.

32. All sources of funding for researchstudentships will be regarded equally.

Research income

33. Research income (as per the definition ofresearch income in RAE 03/2005 ‘Guidance onsubmissions’) gained after a competitive process orrigorous peer review will carry the greatest weight.Its absolute magnitude will be judged in relationto the needs of the areas of research concerned.Allocation of central facilities and resources,whether reported numerically or textually, andincluding satellites and observatories, bothnational and international – will be seen asimportant and will carry similar weight. Supportthrough international agencies will carry weight injudgements of the environment. In the case ofapplied work, research income may be used asevidence of the potential practical importance ofsuch work.

34. The sub-panel will assess how capital incomeby a department supports its physicalinfrastructure. The sub-panel would therefore liketo receive a separate statement of income from:

• non-institutional infrastructure such as theJoint Infrastructure Fund

• institutional infrastructure support such asthe Science Research Investment Fund andsimilar sources.

44 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E

UOA 19, Physics

35. Support in kind can be brought to theattention of the sub-panel in RA5a.

Research structure

36. The sub-panel will wish to be informed ofthe research groups within a submission.Provision of information on research groups inRA1, RA2 and RA5 is mandatory for UOA 19,and it is essential that the information provided inRA1, RA2 and RA5 reflects these groups and thatclear cross-references are made. Research groupsshould relate to the staff listing in RA1.Submissions should include, as appropriate,comments about the sizes of these groups, theirprimary activities and achievements, and theresources provided by the institution, includingresearch infrastructure.

37. Attention should be drawn to importantcollaborative activity, at both the national andinternational level. Interdisciplinary researchshould be clearly identified in the submission, andthe key features of the work and its internalsupport highlighted. The sub-panel affirms thatmultidisciplinary and interdisciplinary submissionswill be given the same weight as single-disciplinesubmissions, and subjects which, by nature, areinterdisciplinary or multidisciplinary will not beclassed as intrinsically inferior. The sub-panelexpects to use the expertise of other sub-panelsand external specialist assessors to judgemultidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research asappropriate. Departments are asked to indicate towhich other UOAs this or related work has beenor should be submitted for consideration.

Staffing policy

38. The sub-panel will wish to take into accountthose members of staff returned as research active,whose research contribution is not necessarilyevident from the outputs. Likewise, attentionshould be drawn to early career members of staff,who have not yet had the opportunity tocomplete a substantial amount of work forpublication. Relevant information about bothcategories of staff must be provided in RA5b.

39. The sub-panel will wish to considerinformation on arrangements for developing andsupporting staff in their research, including how

this fits with their non-research duties. It will alsowish to receive information on how staff new toresearch or at the early stages of research aresupported and developed, and integrated into awider research culture.

Research strategy

40. The sub-panel will look for an organisationalstructure within the submission that promotesresearch of high quality and will lead to vigorousdevelopment in the future. The sub-panel willexpect to see evidence of a strategy for maintainingthe vitality and quality of the department over thesix years from the submission date.

41. Departments are invited to comment ontheir strengths and weaknesses and to provideinformation about the main objectives in researchover the next six years. If appropriate, the sub-panel will wish to be informed as to the extentthat the plans submitted in RAE2001 have beenachieved.

Indicators of esteem 42. Research esteem will be weighted at 20% ofthe overall quality profile.

43. Departments should report indicators of peeresteem and national and international recognitionwhich relate to the individual staff submitted.Esteem will be assessed in relation to the careerstage of an individual. Indicators might include:

a. Invited papers at major national andinternational conferences, as indicators ofnational and international recognition.

b. Involvement of research-active staff in nationaland international planning and committeework relating to research, including editorialwork and the organisation of the scientificprogramme of major conferences.

c. Any prizes and awards gained by theresearch-active staff, as indicators of nationaland international recognition.

d. Any fellowships that have been competitivelyawarded (eg, by the Engineering and PhysicalSciences Research Council, Particle Physicsand Astronomy Research Council, RoyalSociety) and other fellowships.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 45

Panel E

UOA 19, Physics

e. Where work is relevant to industry, the levelof industrial support and resources providedwill be taken into account particularly whereit is competitively sought.

f. The involvement of research-active staff inscientific advisory boards of companies,government departments and public bodies.

g. The presence in the research group of seniorvisitors, especially from overseas, as anindicator of international recognition.

44. The sub-panel will consider evidence ofesteem by research group and will use thisevidence to form a quality profile for esteem.Information should be made available in such away to allow this.

Applied research and practice-based research45. In the assessment of applied research outputs,the sub-panel will ask departments to provide anexplanation in the ‘Other relevant details’ field inRA2 of significant use or application of theresearch submitted for assessment.

46. In the assessment of esteem andenvironment, sub-panels will consider the extentto which staff interact with bodies external to theHE sector.

47. Research on the teaching of any of thedisciplines covered by Main Panel E will beconsidered initially by the relevant sub-panel andthen cross-referred to UOA 45 (Education) wherenecessary, with a request for a judgement to bereturned to the relevant sub-panel. The finalassessment will lie with the sub-panel whichoriginally received the submission.

48. The sub-panel will augment its expertise byconsulting with external specialist advisers whereappropriate. In all cases, such advice will inform thesub-panel’s overall assessment of research outputs.

Individual staff circumstances 49. In assessing submissions, the sub-panel willnormally expect the number of outputs listed forstaff to be proportionate to the time they havehad available for research. While the sub-panel

will consider each case on its own terms, it willnormally accept a reduction in the number ofsubmitted outputs to take account of thecircumstances described in paragraph 39 of thegeneric statement. In the case of early careerresearchers, although the sub-panel will considerspecific circumstances on a case-by-case basis, itnotes that, given, publication patterns in thisdiscipline it is anticipated that the vast majority ofearly career staff will be able to submit fouroutputs for assessment.

50. The sub-panel will also be mindful of healthand safety restrictions imposed on pregnant andbreastfeeding women which may have preventedthem from undertaking some types of researchduring the assessment period, and have thereforehad a negative impact on their research activity.Such impacts may include issues relating to esteem.

51. The sub-panel will look for information onan individual’s return to scientific momentum,and the support provided to them by theirdepartment will be illustrative of the researchenvironment. Institutions may also includeinformation on personal circumstances that mayhave affected the research esteem of individuals,such as circumstances limiting the ability toattend international conferences.

Working methods52. The assessment will be one of peer reviewbased on professional judgement.

53. The assessment of the quality of research willbe based on the sub-panel’s judgement,knowledge and expertise in the subject area asinformed by the submission. Where the sub-panelidentifies areas in which it does not have thenecessary expertise to assess an output, externaladvice will be sought. Alternatively, whenappropriate, the submission (or parts thereof )may be cross-referred to other sub-panels forcomment. All such contact will be via the sub-panel secretary and the RAE team, and not bysub-panel members directly, in the initial stages.Sub-panel members may contact the specialistadvisers once the outputs have been considered,to discuss any issues that may have arisen.

46 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Panel E

UOA 19, Physics

54. All members of the sub-panel will read RA0,RA1, RA3, RA4 and RA5 of all submissions.

55. When considering the research outputs, sub-panel members will use their professionaljudgement and their preliminary reading of theoutputs to identify which outputs will beexamined in detail.

56. For each research group within a submission,two or more nominated members of the sub-panel (taking into account subject specialisms,conflicts of interest and requirements for cross-referral) will be responsible for the examination ofoutputs. The cited outputs will be considered anda quality profile produced, taking into accountthe context of each output within the whole set ofoutputs for the research group.

57. The members of the sub-panel responsiblefor the examination of the outputs will presentthe profile for the research group to the sub-panel.

58. Judgements made by the sub-panel will notbe affected by the size of a research group orsubmission. It is recognised that groups of all sizescan produce work of the highest quality.

59. Where four outputs have not been submittedfor an individual, the reasons for this, as given inRA5b, will be discussed by the sub-panel. If thereasons are not deemed satisfactory, anUnclassified grade will be awarded for the missingoutput(s). Where the reasons are deemedsatisfactory, the missing outputs will not befurther considered.

60. The profile for esteem for a research groupwill be drawn up by the two sub-panel memberswho have been assigned that research group’soutputs, and will be based on the evidencepresented.

61. Two sub-panel members will be assigned to asubmission in order to assess the researchenvironment and produce a profile for thesubmission as a whole, based on the evidencepresented. The overall environment quality for adepartment may be moderated to take intoaccount particular areas of strength or weaknessthat might be identified.

62. The final profile for the submission will beweighted according to the FTE number ofresearch-active staff in each of the research groups.Account will be taken of activities which span twoor more research groups where this leads toenhanced quality.

63. In cases where consensus is not attained, finalquality levels will be decided by open votingamong sub-panel members. The chair (or deputychair as appropriate) will have the casting voteshould this be required. The sub-panel willrecommend to the main panel a quality profile foreach submission returned within the UOA whichis consistent with its published criteria.

64. Joint submissions (from more than oneinstitution) will be assessed in the same way assubmissions from a single institution.

65. Weight will be attached to other informationavailable to the sub-panel, as follows:

a. Factual information provided by the ResearchCouncils’ observers.

b. Any external advice received in cases wheremembers of the sub-panel feel that this mayassist them to form a reliable opinion.

RAE 01/2006 (E) 47

Panel E

UOA 19, Physics

48 RAE 01/2006 (E)

RAE 01/2006 (E) 49

1. Sub-panels will use their professionaljudgement to form a view about the qualityprofile of the research activity described in eachsubmission, taking into account all the evidencepresented. Their recommendations will beendorsed by the main panel in consultation withthe sub-panel.

2. ‘World-leading’ quality denotes an absolutestandard of quality in each unit of assessment.

3. ‘World leading’, ‘internationally’ and‘nationally’ in this context refer to qualitystandards. They do not refer to the nature or

geographical scope of particular subjects, nor tothe locus of research nor its place ofdissemination, for example, in the case of‘nationally’, to work that is disseminated in theUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and NorthernIreland.

4. The profile for a submission that contains noresearch which meets the 1* threshold will be 100% Unclassified. A submission that contains noresearch (that is, no work that meets thedefinition of research for the RAE) will not beawarded a quality profile.

Annex 1Quality profiles and definitions of quality levels

Table 1 Sample quality profile*

Unit of FTE Category A Percentage of research activity in the submissionassessment A staff submitted judged to meet the standard for:

for assessment

4* 3* 2* 1* Unclassified

University X 50 15 25 40 15 5

University Y 20 0 5 40 45 10

* The figures are for fictional universities. They do not indicate expected proportions.

Table 2 Definitions of quality levels

4* Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour.

3* Quality that is internationally excellent in terms of originality, significance and rigour but which

nonetheless falls short of the highest standards of excellence.

2* Quality that is recognised internationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour.

1* Quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour.

Unclassified Quality that falls below the standard of nationally recognised work. Or work which does not meet the

published definition of research for the purposes of this assessment.

Building a quality profile5. Panels are required to consider all thecomponents of the submission when reaching anoverall quality profile (see Figure 1). Thecomponents equate to the different data collectedin the RAE, namely submitted staff information(RA1), research outputs (RA2), research studentdata (RA3), research income (RA4), and thesupporting statement on research environmentand esteem indicators (RA5a).

6. These different components will be assessedunder three over-arching elements: researchoutputs, research environment, and esteemindicators. Research outputs (RA2) will always beassessed as one of these three elements.

7. Main panels have decided whether thecomponents of submissions other than researchoutputs (RA3, 4 and 5) will be assessed under the‘Research environment’ or ‘Esteem indicators’element. For example, a panel may consider thatresearch income contributes to the researchenvironment, or that it is a measure of esteem inits subject area. Similarly research studentnumbers, research student completions and

research studentships may either be part of theresearch environment or an indicator of esteem.Main panels explain in their statements of criteriaand working methods their reasoning forassigning components of the submission to aparticular element.

8. Main panels have allocated a percentageweighting to each of three elements – researchoutputs, research environment and esteemindicators – which indicates the extent to whichthe different elements will contribute to theoverall quality profile of a submission. Given theprimacy of expert review in the process, theweighting allocated to research outputs must be atleast 50% of the overall quality profile: somemain panels have decided that research outputsshould be weighted more highly. Main panels hadto allocate a significant weighting to each of theother aspects (environment and esteem) as theysaw fit, but since the quality profile will bedefined in multiples of 5%, the minimumweighting in either case will be 5%. Main panelshave defined their reasoning in their criteriastatements.

The percentage weightings for the three elements are illustrative. Panels should allocate these weightings. The

minimum weighting for the research outputs profile is 50%. In this example the overall quality profile shows 15% of

research activity is at 4* level. This is made up of 70% x 10 (research outputs), 20% x 20 (research environment) and

10% x 30 (esteem indicators), rounded as described in paragraphs 12-15 below.

Figure 1 Building a quality profile

Overall quality profile

Quality level 4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

% of research 15 25 30 20 10activity

eg 20% (Minimum 5%) eg 10% (Minimum 5%)eg 70% (Minimum 50%)

The overall quality profilecomprises the aggregateof the weighted profilesproduced for researchoutputs, researchenvironment and esteemindicators

Research outputs

4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

10 25 40 15 10

Research environment

4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

20 30 15 20 15

Esteem indicators

4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

30 25 10 20 15

50 RAE 01/2006 (E)

RAE 01/2006 (E) 51

9. Sub-panels will assess research outputs anddevelop a quality profile for this element. Sub-panels will also assess the evidence within thecomponents of the submission assigned to theresearch environment and esteem indicatorselements, and draw up a quality profile for each.

10. Sub-panels will sum the three weightedquality profiles to develop an overall qualityprofile for the submission. They will use therounding methodology described in paragraphs12-15 of this annex to round the overall qualityprofile. Overall quality profiles will be publishedin steps of 5%.

11. Sub-panels will finally confirm that, in theirexpert judgement, the overall profile is a fairreflection of the research activity in thatsubmission, and that their assessment has takenaccount of all the different components of thesubmission.

Rounding

12. All sub-panels will adopt a cumulativerounding methodology to ensure that the overallquality profile for any submission will alwaysround to 100%, and to avoid the unfairconsequences that simple rounding can produce.They will first sum the weighted quality profilesfor outputs, environment, and esteem and thenadopt a cumulative rounding methodology.

Worked example

13. Using the example in Figure 1, first calculatethe initial overall profile, that is, the sum of theweighted profiles for outputs, environment andesteem.

4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

Outputs 10 25 40 15 10

Environment 20 30 15 20 15

Esteem 30 25 10 20 15

Weighted

70% 7 17.5 28 10.5 7

20% 4 6 3 4 3

10% 3 2.5 1 2 1.5

Initial profile 14 26 32 16.5 11.5

14. Cumulative rounding works in three stages:

a. The initial profile is:

4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

14 26 32 16.5 11.5

b. Stage 1: Calculate the cumulative totals (forexample the cumulative total at 3* or betteris 26+14=40).

4* 3* or 2* or 1* or u/c or

better better better better

14 40 72 88.5 100

c. Stage 2: Round these to the nearest 5 %,(rounding up if the percentage ends inexactly 2.5 or 7.5).

4* 3* or 2* or 1* or u/c or

better better better better

15 40 70 90 100

d. Stage 3: Find the differences betweensuccessive cells to give the rounded profile.So, for example, the percentage allocated to2* is the difference between the cumulativetotal at 2* or better, minus the cumulativetotal at 3* or better (70-40 =30).

4* 3* 2* 1* u/c

15 25 30 20 10

15. Cumulating totals the other way (roundingdown if the percentage ends in exactly 2.5 or 7.5)gives exactly the same answer.

52 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Main panel UOA UOA name

A 1 Cardiovascular Medicine

2 Cancer Studies

3 Infection and Immunology

4 Other Hospital Based Clinical Subjects

5 Other Laboratory Based Clinical Subjects

B 6 Epidemiology and Public Health

7 Health Services Research

8 Primary Care and Other Community Based Clinical Subjects

9 Psychiatry, Neuroscience and Clinical Psychology

C 10 Dentistry

11 Nursing and Midwifery

12 Allied Health Professions and Studies

13 Pharmacy

D 14 Biological Sciences

15 Pre-clinical and Human Biological Sciences

16 Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science

E 17 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences

18 Chemistry

19 Physics

F 20 Pure Mathematics

21 Applied Mathematics

22 Statistics and Operational Research

23 Computer Science and Informatics

G 24 Electrical and Electronic Engineering

25 General Engineering and Mineral & Mining Engineering

26 Chemical Engineering

27 Civil Engineering

28 Mechanical, Aeronautical and Manufacturing Engineering

29 Metallurgy and Materials

H 30 Architecture and the Built Environment

31 Town and Country Planning

32 Geography and Environmental Studies

33 Archaeology

Annex 2Units of assessment and main panels

RAE 01/2006 (E) 53

Main panel UOA UOA name

I 34 Economics and Econometrics

35 Accounting and Finance

36 Business and Management Studies

37 Library and Information Management

J 38 Law

39 Politics and International Studies

40 Social Work and Social Policy & Administration

41 Sociology

42 Anthropology

43 Development Studies

K 44 Psychology

45 Education

46 Sports-Related Studies

L 47 American Studies and Anglophone Area Studies

48 Middle Eastern and African Studies

49 Asian Studies

50 European Studies

M 51 Russian, Slavonic and East European Languages

52 French

53 German, Dutch and Scandinavian Languages

54 Italian

55 Iberian and Latin American Languages

56 Celtic Studies

57 English Language and Literature

58 Linguistics

N 59 Classics, Ancient History, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies

60 Philosophy

61 Theology, Divinity and Religious Studies

62 History

O 63 Art and Design

64 History of Art, Architecture and Design

65 Drama, Dance and Performing Arts

66 Communication, Cultural and Media Studies

67 Music

54 RAE 01/2006 (E)

(Changes in phrasing from the definition used forthe 2001 RAE are in bold.)

‘Research’ for the purpose of the RAE is to beunderstood as original investigation undertaken inorder to gain knowledge and understanding. Itincludes work of direct relevance to the needs ofcommerce, industry, and to the public andvoluntary sectors; scholarship*; the invention andgeneration of ideas, images, performances,artefacts including design, where these lead tonew or substantially improved insights; and theuse of existing knowledge in experimentaldevelopment to produce new or substantiallyimproved materials, devices, products andprocesses, including design and construction. Itexcludes routine testing and routine analysis ofmaterials, components and processes such as forthe maintenance of national standards, as distinctfrom the development of new analyticaltechniques. It also excludes the development ofteaching materials that do not embody originalresearch.

* Scholarship for the RAE is defined as the creation,development and maintenance of the intellectualinfrastructure of subjects and disciplines, in forms suchas dictionaries, scholarly editions, catalogues andcontributions to major research databases.

Annex 3Definition of research for the RAE

Major interests All panel chairs, members, secretaries, observersand specialist advisers are bound by the followingarrangements for avoiding conflicts of interest.

1. All main panel chairs and members, sub-panelchairs and members, panel secretaries andassistant secretaries, observers and specialistadvisers (hereafter collectively called panelmembers) are asked to make a declaration of theirinterests. For the purpose of the RAE, interests aredefined as:

a. The institution(s) at which the individual isemployed.

b. Any institution at which the individual hasbeen employed since January 2001.

c. Any institution(s) at which the individual hasbeen engaged in substantial teaching orresearch since the start of the assessmentperiod (1 January 2001); this might includeinstitutions at which the individual has thestatus of visiting lecturer/fellow/professor orsimilar.

d. Any institution(s) at which the individual’spartner and/or immediate family member isemployed.

Panel procedures

2. A complete list of the declared interests ofpanel members and others involved in theassessment will be prepared by the RAE team andmade available, in confidence, to panels whenthey start their work.

3. Individuals will be asked to update the RAEteam regularly on any additional interests.Complete lists of declared interests will beupdated and circulated accordingly on an ad hocbasis.

4. As a matter of principle, individuals willwithdraw from panel meetings when submissionsare discussed from the HEIs in which they declareto have an interest. Each main and sub-panel willpublish in its criteria statement its protocol fordealing with declared interests, in line with thisprinciple.

Requests for information

5. Panel members are likely to receive numerousinvitations to discuss issues concerned with RAE2008. Although the RAE team seeks improvedclarity and transparency during this exercisethrough the dissemination of information, we donot wish panel members to compromise theirposition by entering into discussions which couldbe perceived to give a particular individual orinstitution an unfair advantage.

6. It is therefore strongly recommended thatpanel members should not discuss issuesconcerning individual departmental orinstitutional submissions. However, they mayaccept invitations to talk at meetings where anumber of different institutions are represented,for example those arranged by a professional bodyor subject association.

7. If any member has concerns over a potentialconflict of interests or the propriety of a proposedaction s/he should discuss it with the RAEmanager.

8. Panel members are not expected to suspendnormal relations with their colleagues and peersduring the exercise. They should not feel in anyway obliged, for example, to withdraw fromexternal examining, or participation inappointment committees. They are, however,asked to exercise caution in dealings withindividual departments, or with subjectassociations or similar bodies, where there is anactual or clearly inferrable connection with theirpanel membership.

Minor interests

9. The RAE team has also invited main and sub-panels to consider operating a policy wherebypanel members declare minor interests on an adhoc basis, so that they can be minuted in panelmeetings and handled on a case by case basis.The following were offered as examples of minorinterests and possible methods of dealing withthem. They are illustrative and do not constitutean exhaustive or prescriptive list:

a. Panel member supervises or co-supervises oneor more doctoral students from a submitting

RAE 01/2006 (E) 55

Annex 4Declarations of interest

institution. Panel member declares this for thepanel to note.

b. Panel member supervised a doctoral studentwho went on to become a research active staffmember within a submission made to thepanel. Panel member declares this and doesnot take lead/sole responsibility for assessingthe published output linked to that individual.

c. Panel member was supervised as a doctoralstudent by a research active staff memberwithin a submission made to the panel. Panelmember declares this and does not takelead/sole responsibility for assessing thepublished output linked to that individual.

d. Panel member is co-investigator or co-holderof a grant with the submitting institution.Panel member declares this and does not takelead/sole responsibility for assessing thepublished output linked to that individual.

e. Panel member is on the editorial board of ajournal series published by a submittingdepartment or unit, or has co-organised aconference or conference series with asubmitting department. Panel memberdeclares this and does not take leadresponsibility for assessing the researchenvironment and esteem indicators element ofthat submission.

f. Panel member has acted during the assessmentperiod as a member of an appointment orpromotions committee for a submittingdepartment or unit, or has provided referencesfor staff members returned in the submission.Panel member declares this for the panel tonote.

g. Panel member acts as an external examiner forresearch degrees for a submitting departmentor unit. Panel member declares this and doesnot take lead/sole responsibility for assessingthe research environment and esteemindicators element of that submission

h. Panel member studied at a submittingdepartment or unit before the assessmentperiod. Panel member declares this and doesnot take lead/sole responsibility for assessing

the research environment and esteemindicators element of that submission.

i. A member of the panel member’s wider familystudies or works at a submitting department orunit. Panel member declares this for the panelto note.

10. Panels might wish to invite a panel memberwho declares a number of minor interests in oneinstitution to treat that institution as a majorinterest.

56 RAE 01/2006 (E)

All panel chairs, members, secretaries, observersand specialist advisers are bound by theconfidentiality arrangements described in thefollowing letter.

CONFIDENTIALDear

Research Assessment Exercise 2008:Confidentiality arrangements

Purpose

1. This letter sets out arrangements for ensuringthat all information contained in RAEsubmissions made by institutions for the 2008RAE is maintained and treated confidentially bypanels1. As for the 2001 RAE, apart frompersonal data and details of confidential outputs,information from submissions will be publishedon the internet following completion of theassessment: we expect to publish this early in2009. The arrangements described below providefor maintaining the confidentiality of allsubmission information unless or until such timeas it becomes freely available in the publicdomain.

2. The letter also deals specifically with thetreatment by panels of any confidential researchoutputs that may be cited in submissions.Research outputs in the 2008 RAE are defined aspublicly available, assessable outputs of research inwhatever form. However, institutions may submitfor assessment confidential outputs provided theymark them as ‘confidential’ in submissions andmake them available to panels.

3. The letter also describes arrangements forensuring the confidentiality of panels’ discussionsabout submissions, or other information deducedfrom or generated as a result of submissions.

4. We have two objectives in placingconfidentiality obligations on panel members.Firstly, subject only to any legal obligations onHEFCE to disclose further, we wish to ensurethat the starred quality profile awarded to eachsubmission and the brief feedback given inconfidence to heads of institutions by the panelvia the RAE team stand as the only public

comment from panels and their constituentmembers on any individual submission. Secondly,we aim to discourage parties who are not involvedin the assessment process from approaching orplacing pressure on panel members to discloseinformation about the panel’s discussion ofparticular submissions. In other words,maintenance of confidentiality is essential if panelmembers are not to be inhibited from expressingtheir opinions freely in panel discussions, andtherefore essential to the effective operation of theRAE as a peer review. In legal terms, a breach ofconfidentiality by a panel member may, in certaincircumstances, constitute a breach of dataprotection legislation and/or a breach of acommon law duty of confidentiality, may give riseto financial losses, or may infringe or impactupon intellectual property rights in researchoutputs.

5. The obligations set out below will subsistindefinitely.

Obligations on panel members

Information contained in RAE submissions

6. The higher education funding bodies, throughthe RAE team, collect a range of informationfrom institutions in RAE submissions for thepurpose of assessing the quality of research. Inrecognition of this purpose, you shall use anyinformation which you receive in RAEsubmissions from institutions only for thepurposes of carrying out your functions as a panelmember.

7. You shall not make copies of such informationexcept as is necessary to carry out your function asa panel member. You shall destroy, or return tothe RAE manager, originals and any copies youmay make of such information, as soon as theyare no longer needed for that function or on therequest of the RAE manager, whichever may besooner. This provision applies equally to papercopies or those stored in electronic or other non-paper formats.

8. You shall not disclose the information receivedto any other person except your fellow panelmembers and panel observers and secretaries. You

RAE 01/2006 (E) 57

Annex 5 Confidentiality arrangements

1 In this context, ‘panels’ refers both to main and sub-panels. The same arrangements for ensuringconfidentiality will apply, so far as they are relevant, to chairs, members, observers and secretaries of mainand sub-panels and to specialist advisers.

shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that otherpeople cannot have access to the information,whether held in paper or electronic copy. Inparticular, it is important to remember thatcomputer systems and specifically e-mail are notnecessarily secure, and you agree to exerciseappropriate caution when using them. Fullguidance on the storage and transmission of RAEinformation will be included in the guidance topanels which will be provided to panel membersand made publicly available in January 2005.

Confidential research outputs

9. Confidential research outputs will be indicatedas such in submissions and will clearly be marked‘confidential’. You shall treat as confidential allsuch information, including the research outputsthemselves and details of their sponsors orcommissioning organisations. Even if youpersonally consider that the designation‘confidential’ may be wrong, you agree to acceptany designation of confidentiality which aninstitution has placed upon part or all of itssubmission. If you feel in a particular case thatthis inhibits you from carrying out your functionas a panel member, you should raise the issue withthe RAE manager who will be able to provide orseek advice.

10. An institution’s submission may containmaterial which is patented or patentable, which issubject to other intellectual property rights, whichis commercially sensitive, or which the interests ofthe institution and/or its researchers require to bekept confidential or given a restricted circulation.Institutions make submissions to the RAE on theunderstanding that their position in these regardswill not be prejudiced by the fact of submission.You shall respect and honour that understandingand act accordingly. You are in particularreminded of the danger of ‘prior disclosure’ in thecase of potentially patentable material, and theparamount need therefore to respect theconfidentiality of such material.

Discussion about submissions and informationdeduced from submissions

11. You agree that you shall restrict yourdiscussion of submissions and of research groups

described within submissions to panel meetingsand to related dialogue between yourself, the RAEteam, panel secretary and assistant secretary andmembers of the main and sub-panels with whichyou work. You shall not discuss with anyone whois not involved in the assessment process, asdescribed above, either the submission or theassessment of an identifiable institution or groupof institutions whose individual members couldbe identified, still less the work of individualresearchers named in submissions, even ifostensibly anonymised. You may, of course,comment on the process and conduct of the 2008RAE in general terms. If you are at all unsure asto what is covered by ‘in general terms’ youshould seek advice from the RAE manager.

12. Nothing in this agreement prevents you fromdisclosing information after it becomes freelyavailable in the public domain (without thebreach of any obligation of confidentiality), orwhich you are required by law to disclose, orwhich was already known to you and not subjectto confidentiality obligations before beingdisclosed to you in the context of the RAE. Itwould be prudent, however, to contact the RAEmanager in advance to discuss any possibledisclosure. Some information provided to orgenerated by RAE panels may be disclosableunder the Freedom of Information Act 2000.However, if you receive any request forinformation which falls or may fall under that Actyou must pass it to the RAE manager forconsideration and action, and you should notrespond to such requests yourself. If you are inany doubt with regard to any issue ofconfidentiality, either in general terms or inrelation to a particular piece of information, youshould seek advice from the RAE manager or,following completion of the RAE, the Director(Research and Knowledge Transfer) at HEFCE.

13. Acceptance of these confidentialityobligations is a condition of your appointment asa panel member. The four higher educationfunding bodies reserve the right to amend themembership of RAE panels in the event of anybreach of the confidentiality obligations on panelchairs and members.

58 RAE 01/2006 (E)

Annex 6Word limits for RA5a, RA5b and RA5c and RA2 ‘Other relevantdetails’ field

RAE 01/2006 (E) 59

RA5aThe maximum word count for the textualcommentary section (RA5a) will vary based onthe number of Category A FTE staff in thesubmission as follows:

FTE Category A staff Word limit

1-5 3,600

6-10 4,200

11-15 4,800

16-20 5,400

21-30 6,600

31-40 7,800

41-50 9,000

51-60 9,800

61-75 11,000

76-90 12,000

Over 90 12,750

Note that these word counts equate to at least thepage limits per FTE used in the 2001 RAE forRA5 and RA6 combined.

RA5b and RA5cFor all UOAs, RA5b (individual staffcircumstances) and RA5c (informationconcerning Category C staff ) will be a maximumof 300 words per researcher.

Institutions should refer to the generic statementand to each sub-panel’s statement of criteria andworking methods for further advice about theinformation to be returned in each case.

60 RAE 01/2006 (E)

RA2 ‘Other relevant details’ fieldEach sub-panel has set a maximum word limit for the ‘Other relevant details’ field in RA2. Please refer to the appropriate sub-panel statement for details of the information required in this field.

Sub-panel UOA Word limit

1 Cardiovascular Medicine 50

2 Cancer Studies 50

3 Infection and Immunology 50

4 Other Hospital Based Clinical Subjects 50

5 Other Laboratory Based Clinical Subjects 50

6 Epidemiology and Public Health 50

7 Health Services Research 50

8 Primary Care and Other Community Based Clinical Subjects 50

9 Psychiatry, Neuroscience and Clinical Psychology 50

10 Dentistry 50

11 Nursing and Midwifery 50

12 Allied Health Professions and Studies 50

13 Pharmacy 50

14 Biological Sciences 50

15 Pre-clinical and Human Biological Sciences 50

16 Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science 50

17 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences 50

18 Chemistry 50

19 Physics 50

20 Pure Mathematics 300

21 Applied Mathematics 300

22 Statistics and Operational Research 300

23 Computer Science and Informatics 300

24 Electrical and Electronic Engineering 100

25 General Engineering and Mineral & Mining Engineering 100

26 Chemical Engineering 100

27 Civil Engineering 100

28 Mechanical, Aeronautical and Manufacturing Engineering 100

29 Metallurgy and Materials 100

30 Architecture and the Built Environment 300

31 Town and Country Planning 50

RAE 01/2006 (E) 61

Sub-panel UOA Word limit

32 Geography and Environmental Studies 50

33 Archaeology 50

34 Economics and Econometrics 50

35 Accounting and Finance 50

36 Business and Management Studies 50

37 Library and Information Management 50

38 Law 50

39 Politics and International Studies 100

40 Social Work and Social Policy & Administration 100

41 Sociology 100

42 Anthropology 100

43 Development Studies 200

44 Psychology 100

45 Education 150

46 Sports-Related Studies 100

47 American Studies and Anglophone Area Studies 300

48 Middle Eastern and African Studies 300

49 Asian Studies 300

50 European Studies 300

51 Russian, Slavonic and East European Languages 300

52 French 300

53 German, Dutch and Scandinavian Languages 300

54 Italian 300

55 Iberian and Latin American Languages 300

56 Celtic Studies 300

57 English Language and Literature 200

58 Linguistics 300

59 Classics, Ancient History, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 300

60 Philosophy 300

61 Theology, Divinity and Religious Studies 300

62 History 300

63 Art and Design 300

64 History of Art, Architecture and Design 300

65 Drama, Dance and Performing Arts 300

66 Communication, Cultural and Media Studies 300

67 Music 300

62 RAE 01/2006 (E)

The following data analyses will be available to sub-panels for each submission (and a total for each UOA).

1. Headcount number of research-active staff, by category.

2. Full-time equivalent (FTE) number of research-active staff in Category A.

3. Headcount number of research-active staff in Categories A and C together.

4. Headcount number of research-active staff in Categories A, B, C and D together.

5. Headcount number of research-active staff in Categories A and C together, with each of 0, 1, 2, 3,and 4 outputs submitted for assessment (five separate totals).

6. Headcount number of research fellows.

7. FTE number of research fellows.

8. Total number of outputs submitted for assessment.

9. FTE research assistants (from RA1).

10. FTE research assistants (from RA1) per FTE research-active staff.

11. FTE research students (from RA1).

12. FTE research students (from RA1) per FTE research-active staff.

13. FTE research students (from RA3a).

14. FTE research students (from RA3a) per FTE research-active staff.

15. Median FTE number of research students (from RA3a) per FTE research-active staff.

16. Number of doctoral degrees awarded, by year.

17. Number of doctoral degrees awarded, by year, per FTE research-active staff.

18. Number of doctoral degrees awarded, by year, per FTE research student (student numbers takenfrom RA3a).

19. Number of masters degrees awarded, by year.

20. Number of masters degrees awarded, by year, per FTE research-active staff.

21. Number of new studentships (total across all years), by sponsor.

22. Number of new studentships (total across all years) per FTE research-active staff, by sponsor.

23. Number of new studentships (total across all years) per FTE research student (student numbers takenfrom RA3a), by sponsor.

24. Median number of new studentships (total across all years) per FTE research-active staff (total acrossall sponsors).

25. Research income (total across all years), by source.

26. Research income (total across all years) per FTE research-active staff, by source.

27. Median value of research income (total across all years) per FTE research-active staff (total across all sources).

There will be two separate sheets of figures: one in which figures per research-active staff will use FTECategory A staff numbers; and another in which figures per research-active staff will use headcountCategory A plus Category C staff numbers.

These analyses are in addition to the standard listing of data and information presented to panels in RA1to RA5.

Annex 7 Standard data analyses for all sub-panels

Northavon House, Coldharbour Lane, BRISTOL BS16 1QD

www.rae.ac.uk

rae criteria panel ereference rae 01/2006 (e) publication date january 2006 enquiries to ed hughes,...

Documents