Dear Mark,

Thank you for your note. I know that the Loughborough University
Faculty of 
Design and Technology achieves 55% in 4* with 30% in 3* and 15% in 2*,

none in 1*.

Sorry if my post was not clear on this -- I was not describing all
universities in
the art and design sector of the RAE, but only the six exemplars named
in Janet's 
post.

"... the future is already here at some of the schools that Janet gives
as exemplars. 
According to the Research Assessment Exercise results for 2008, only
the Royal 
College of Art submission suggests more work in the top 4* range than
in the 
lower ranks." 

I should have written,

"... In the Research Assessment Exercise results for these six schools
in 2008,
only the only the Royal College of Art submission suggests more work in
the 
top 4* range than in the lower ranks." 


But I'd argue that Loughborough is not a case comparable to the future
exemplars.
The Loughborough Faculty of Design and Technology has long been
distinguished 
for exemplary research and a strong research training program built on
classic
lines of the kind that Don Norman and Terry Love advocate in this
debate, as I
do. Others such as David Durling or Chris Rust have addressed these
issues
elsewhere, specifically citing Owain Pedgley's Loughborough PhD as an
exemplar
of excellent research in which design process was integrated into a
comprehensive
and robust research project. His thesis ran over 400 pages in length
with careful
development and rich description at every stage. It achieves full
measure on all
the criteria set forth in the Rugg and Petre list. This typifies all
the work I have
seen at the Loughborough Faculty of Design and Technology.

Six universities have a greater percentage at 4* than any other
category. Loughborough
Design and Technology tops the list with 55:30:15:0, and University of
Reading 
Typography and Graphic Design follow with 45:35:10:10. (For clarity,
both submissions
have two parts, and art lags behind design at both universities.) Both
surpass RCA.
Two more universities have a larger number in 4* than any other
category: Brighton
and Dundee. This is also true of Goldsmith's art in a split submission,
but not true of
Goldsmith's design.

Thanks for your correction. It states explicitly what I should have
written, adding 
the extra words for clarity. 

In the interests of full disclosure, I will add that I am a
Loughborough graduate, albeit 
honorary. 

Warm wishes,

Ken

Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS
Professor
Dean

Swinburne Design
Swinburne University of Technology
Melbourne, Australia

 
>>> Mark Evans <[log in to unmask]> 12/13/2009 06:04 AM >>> 

--snip--

Whilst the RCA did extremely well in the RAE, the Department of Design
and 
Technology at Loughborough University did, in fact, have a greater 
percentage of submissions in the higher categories. Our submission to
the RAE 
was as a stand-alone Department that received £12.5M in external
research 
income during the six and a bit year assessment period (the RCA
received 
£10.5M). Our submissions were judged as:

- 55% at 4* ("Quality that is world-leading in terms of originality,
significance 
and rigour")

- 30% at 3* ("Quality that is internationally excellent in terms of
originality, 
significance and rigour but which nonetheless falls short of the
highest 
standards of excellence")

- 15% at 2* ("Quality that is recognised internationally in terms of
originality, 
significance and rigour")

- 0% at 1* ("Quality that is recognised nationally in terms of
originality, 
significance and rigour")

- 0% at 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")

The results are available at
http://www.rae.ac.uk/results/qualityProfile.aspx?
id=63&type=uoa)

--snip--