In the run-up to REF 2022 several instances came to light where institutions were alleged to have used internal and/ or external REF audit scores for purposes other than those for which scores had been gathered, and to which reviewers and reviewees had consented in good faith and at the outset of the review. These alleged other purposes included use of the data to inform the decisions of promotions panels as well as deliberations regarding redundancy.
This paper articulates some reasons why internal and external REF audit scores should not be used for any purpose other than to guide decisions about REF submissions. We propose that our paper might be adopted by Subject Associations and Learned Societies to encourage good practice across the sector. We hope it may help individuals more robustly to question potential misuse of REF audit data in their own institutions. We suggest that in time, institutions might consider committing to a code of good practice regarding such internal and external scoring of research.
For the avoidance of doubt, the audit data to which this paper refers are those data garnered from internal institutional audits and commissioned external reviews of Unit of Assessment (U0A) submissions only, not data emanating from the REF itself, or the judgements made by REF panel members. Our conclusions are not directed at the national REF exercise, whose conditions, rules and practices are more rigorous than are those of internal audits and/or of reviews conducted by specially appointed external individuals for a department or institution.
Click here to read the paper in full: Position Paper on REF Audit Scores.docx
