The benefits of assessment, and some risks.

Cunliffe, Barry

In 1989, as a response to government directives, the then Universities Funding Council (now the Higher Education Funding Council for England - HEFCE) instituted a Research Assessment Exercise. Each subject area in each university was assessed by a panel of experts and the quality of its 'research' was graded, in the most recent exercise, in 1992, on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the top. HEFCE then used this quality rating together with the number of 'research-active staff' entered for each academic unit as the absolute factors from which the grant for research for the individual university department was calculated.

After recovering from its initial stunned disbelief, the effect on the university world was electrifying. Applications for research grants shot up, forests had to be cut to deal with the exponential growth in the volume of publications and a surprising number of academics found themselves in a premature and happy retirement, which differed little from their previous working lives. In short, we had been introduced to the novel concept of productivity.

I have no wish to be misunderstood as an apologist for Thatcherism, but I am bound to say that the short sharp shock had an immediate beneficial impact: while it may have killed off some, it galvanized others. Old excavation archives were dragged out from beneath beds, dusted off and prepared for publication; new research initiatives, properly costed and programmed, were set up, and university administrations suddenly discovered new sources of money to encourage research-active staff to become even more active. It was like a breath of fresh air gusting through the venerable woodwork.

But let us pause for a moment to consider what is at stake. At Oxford one large arts department was graded 4. Had it gained the expected 5 the University would have been [pounds]600,000 per annum better off. One colleague, appalled at the distorting effect which the exercise was having on academic life, suggested that the University might refuse to take part in the next round. Had it agreed to do so it would have stood to lose [pounds]50 million. In other words, in this game, the stakes are high. As a result universities have been studying the rules with unusual attention to detail, and it is rumoured that Departments of Mathematics have been developing software packages to compute options and probabilities.

There is no doubt that so far the RAE has had a stimulating effect on research. In the broad spectrum of disciplines which are the concern of this Society I am sure that much of the new work we have enjoyed hearing and reading about has been encouraged, at least in part, by the new research ethos that is now abroad.

But there is a down side and one which is becoming increasingly worrying. The present scoring militates against collaborative work between universities and is encouraging new and unhealthy rivalries. Appointments are being made with an eye far more on the publication record of a candidate than on his or her teaching and administrative ability. Star performers are being head-hunted with inducements of research professorships on the calculation that their presence and quality will increase the departmental rating to the extent of generating more money than is needed to pay the salary. In some departments selected performers are being cocooned and surrounded by a royal jelly of research money to enable them to concentrate solely on giving birth to a constant stream of high-rated publications. Even more worrying is the recent spate of senior academic appointments made by invitation without the posts being advertised for open competition. The ensuing resentment is potentially destructive. If we are not very careful the academic world will sink to the pig-trough mentality of the newly privatized utilities, and the dual values of scholarship and service to the discipline, which we hold important, will become debased by the pressure of market forces.

All is by no means gloom. I firmly believe that the benefits of the RAE can be considerable, and by dextrous policing and controls the red-braced wide boys beginning to pop up in the university system will be kept in their place - subservient to the will of the academics. The potential for abuse is fully appreciated by the HEFCE administrators, who, in spite of transient political ideologies of our paymasters, are with us in their determination to see that our universities remain healthy and creative places. The next two years will be crucial.

Note: Reprinted from Anniversary address 1995, Annual report: proceedings 1995: 9-10. London: Society of Antiquaries, 1996.