research excellence framework (ref)

Research Excellence Framework

Securing a world-class, dynamic and responsive research base across the full academic spectrum within UK higher education

The REF is the UK’s system for assessing the quality of research in UK higher education institutions. It first took place in 2014 and 2021 . The next exercise is planned for 2029.

What is the REF’s purpose?

• Inform the allocation of block-grant research funding to HEIs based on research quality
• Provide accountability for public investment in research and produce evidence of the benefits of this investment
• Provide insights into the health of research in HEIs in the UK

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) is the UK’s system for assessing the excellence of research in UK higher education institutions (HEIs). The REF outcomes are used to inform the allocation of around £2 billion per year of public funding for universities’ research. The REF is a process of expert review, carried out by sub-panels focused on subject-based units of assessment (UoAs), under the guidance of overarching main panels and advisory panels. For the purposes of the REF, research is defined as a process of investigation leading to new insights, effectively shared.

Latest news

View all news

Launch of submission size survey

Today we have launched a submission size survey for REF 2029.   This survey is to understand the potential volume change of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff in each REF Unit of Assessment (UoA) for Higher Education Institutions (HEI) since REF 2021. Significant national increases or decreases in FTE at the Unit of Assessment (UoA)…

Membership confirmed for REF advisory panels 

Today the REF Team have announced the membership of the Research Diversity Advisory Panel (RDAP) and the People and Diversity Advisory Panel (PDAP).  The RDAP will develop strategies to support the equitable recognition of diverse forms of research within REF 2029 development, delivery and assessment.  The PDAP will develop strategies to support recognition of a…

REF 2029 main panel chair recruitment

We are pleased to announce that you can now apply to become a chair for the REF 2029 main panels.   We welcome and encourage applications from diverse groups. There are four main panels and we are seeking to appoint sector leaders in the broad areas of:  Find out more about the role requirements and how…

Quick links

About the REF

OA consultation

Publications

Contact REF

Logo guidelines

• Share on twitter
• Share on facebook

REF 2021: Quality ratings hit new high in expanded assessment

Four in five outputs judged to be either ‘world-leading’ or ‘internationally excellent’.

• Share on linkedin
• Share on mail

The quality of UK scholarship as rated by the Research Excellence Framework has hit a new high following reforms that required universities to submit all research-active staff to the 2021 exercise.

For the first time in the history of the UK’s national audit of research, all staff with a “significant responsibility” for research were entered for assessment – a rule change that resulted in 76,132 academics submitting at least one research output, up 46 per cent from 52,000 in 2014.

Overall, 41 per cent of outputs were deemed world-leading (4*) by assessment panels and 43 per cent judged internationally excellent (3*), which was described as an “exceptional achievement for UK university research” by Steven Hill, director of research at Research England, which runs the REF.

In the 2014 assessment 30 per cent of research got a 4* rating, with 46 per cent judged to be 3*.

Who’s up, who’s down? See how your institution performed in REF 2021 Output v impact: where is your institution strongest? Unit of assessment tables: see who's top in your subject More staff, more excellent research, great impacts: David Sweeney on REF 2021

Analysis of institutional performance by Times Higher Education now puts the grade point average at UK sector level at 3.16 for outputs, compared with 2.90 in 2014. Scores for research impact have also increased , from 3.24 to 3.35.

At least 15 per cent of research was considered world-leading in three-quarters of the UK’s universities.

And analysis by THE suggests that institutions outside London have improved their performance the most, with several Russell Group universities from outside the “golden triangle” of Oxford, Cambridge and London making major gains .

REF 2021 results at a glance: 

See here for full results table.

The results of the REF will be used to distribute quality-related research funding by the UK’s four higher education funding bodies, the value of which will stand at around £2 billion from 2022-23.

The requirement to submit all research-active staff was introduced following the review of the REF conducted by Lord Stern in 2016 and was designed to reduce institutional “game-playing” over which staff members were submitted.

Outputs in REF 2014 and 2021 

The uptick in quality may be driven by universities focusing instead on which of their researchers’ outputs should be submitted, allowing greater flexibility to pick “excellent” scholarship.

In the 2014 exercise, each participating researcher was expected to submit four outputs, but this time the number of outputs can range between one and five, with an average of 2.5 per full-time equivalent researcher expected. In the 2021 exercise, a single output was submitted for 44 per cent of researchers who participated.

University staff had welcomed the new submission rules which had removed the “emotional pressure” caused by deliberations over whether they would be “in or out” of the REF – a decision that often had consequences for future promotions, said David Sweeney, executive chair of Research England. “There is no longer that same pressure on individuals,” he reflected.

Methodology: how THE calculates its REF tables

However, the rule change has been linked to universities’ decisions to move many staff on to teaching-only contracts in recent years, with the latest data showing that about 20,000 academics  are employed on such terms compared with five years ago .

This change represented a welcome clarification of academics’ roles rather than “game-playing’ on behalf of institutions, insisted Mr Sweeney. “If these contracts represent the expectations of institutions and the responsibilities of academics, that is not game-playing, it is transparency,” he said.

David Price, vice-provost (research) at UCL and chair of the REF’s main panel B (physical sciences, engineering and mathematics), agreed that “the REF may have helped in resolving many contractual ambiguities. Game-playing has not been noticeable,” he said.

Dame Jessica Corner, pro vice-chancellor (research and knowledge exchange) at the University of Nottingham , said that “less focus on individuals with the partial separation of outputs from academics has been helpful”.  

“That outputs can be returned by institutions where individuals worked if they move jobs has reduced, though not entirely eliminated, the academic transfer market,” she added.

James Wilsdon, Digital Science professor of research policy at the University of Sheffield , agreed. “The large-scale transfers of people between institutions that we saw in the lead-up to REF 2014 have definitely reduced, which is positive,” said Professor Wilsdon, who said that while “choices around inclusion and exclusion of individuals with ‘significant responsibility’ have been complex in some institutions – particularly less research-intensive universities – some have welcomed the clarity that this brought to different roles in terms of research, teaching and hybrid roles.”

“The game-playing, where it occurs, is often more subtle: it’s about the gradual sifting and reordering of what kinds of research, and what kinds of impact, are deemed ‘excellent’,” he explained.

Kieron Flanagan, professor of science and technology policy at the University of Manchester , questioned the extent to which REF game-playing had been eliminated.

“There is bound to have been some of this happening because habits are hard to break – people who run university research have come in a management system informed by REFs over the past 10 to 20 years – some game-playing is inevitable,” he said.

However, Jane Millar, emerita professor of social policy at the University of Bath , who chaired the social sciences REF panel, believed the Stern review reforms had “worked well”.

“We saw a great diversity in the submissions, from very small to very large, from well-established and new units,” said Professor Millar, who added that there had been “examples of world-leading and internationally excellent quality across the range”.

THE Campus: How I plan to get through REF results day THE Campus: The good, the bad and the way forward: how UK universities should respond to REF results THE Campus: Don’t let the REF tail wag the academic dog

Interdisciplinary research was also “well presented”, with the Stern reforms encouraging greater links between subjects, with “sub-panels whose reach stretched through to design and engineering, physical and/or biological sciences, humanities, biomechanics, and medicine”, added Professor Millar.

With an international review body  examining the future of the REF , there has been some speculation that this could be its final incarnation.

But Mr Sweeney said that the REF remained an important tool in justifying the £9 billion or so in research funding given to institutions in open-ended funding that is likely to flow from the exercise.

[email protected]

POSTSCRIPT:

Print headline:  REF submission rules help push quality to new high

Register to continue

Why register?

• Registration is free and only takes a moment
• Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
• Sign up for our newsletter

Or subscribe for unlimited access to:

• Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
• Digital editions
• Digital access to THE’s university and college rankings analysis

Already registered or a current subscriber? Login

Related articles

REF 2021: Golden triangle looks set to lose funding share

Although major players still dominate on research power, some large – and small – regional institutions have made their mark

REF 2021: Increased impact weighting helps push up scores

Greater weighting helps medical institutions in particular improve overall positions

REF 2021: subject rankings

Main panel C records biggest increase in number of submissions and participating staff

REF 2021: More staff, more excellent research, great impacts

The latest iteration of the UK’s national research audit has fulfilled its aim to identify research quality across the whole system, says David Sweeney

Reader's comments (2)

You might also like.

Scrapping the REF would jeopardise the UK’s dual research funding

Better to work with an exercise that justifies block funding and drives many desirable behaviours within universities, say Anton Muscatelli and Miles Padgett

Don’t wait to tackle open access books cash challenge, REF told

Difficult conversations about how the REF’s post-2029 open access books mandate will be financed cannot be avoided, say experts

How Research England supports research excellence

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) was the first exercise to assess the impact of research outside of academia. Impact was defined as ‘an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia’.

Impact case studies

As part of the 2014 Research Excellence Framework exercise, UK higher education institutions (HEIs) submitted 6,975 impact case studies demonstrating the impact of their research on wider society.

These case studies provide a unique and invaluable source of information on the impact of UK research. UK higher education (HE) research has wide and varied benefits on the economy, society, culture, policy, health, the environment and quality of life — both within the UK and overseas.

Universities engage with a range of public, private and charitable organisations and local communities. Analysis found that these wider impacts and benefits often stem from multidisciplinary work.

Latest report: Patterns in research outputs

Publication patterns in research underpinning impact in REF2014  describes patterns in research outputs submitted by UK higher education institutions to the 2014 Research Excellence Framework and to previous Research Assessment Exercises (RAEs).

The REF impact case study database

The impact case study database is a searchable tool that will make the impact case studies widely available and will enable analysis and automated text mining.

The licence arrangements relating to the use of this database can be accessed on the National Archive .

An initial analysis of the REF impact case studies is captured in the report, The nature, scale and beneficiaries of research impact .

The REF impact case studies were analysed by Digital Science, a division of Macmillan Science and Education, working in conjunction with its sister company Nature Publishing Group and the policy institute at King’s College London. This analysis was co-funded by the UK Funding Bodies, Research Councils UK and Wellcome Trust.

Maps of impact case studies

The maps of impact case studies indicate the local and global spread of research impact for UK higher education institutions (HEIs) by impact type and research area.

They are based on the names of locations referenced in REF2014 impact case studies and categorised in the REF impact case study database.

Last updated: 31 March 2022

This is the website for UKRI: our seven research councils, Research England and Innovate UK. Let us know if you have feedback or would like to help improve our online products and services .

Results and submissions

Introduction to the ref results, view ref results, view analysis of the ref results, submitted outputs' details, impact case study database, environment database, download the results, download submissions.