Are there already metrics which continue to develop, sometimes transformingly, over time and long after HEFCE's first subsequent set of calculations? In the absence of precedents, thought would have to be given to whether citations should time bounded or not and if so by how long.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Kernohan
Sent: 04 January 2017 15:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: REF consultation seeks input on RDM and sharing
Hi Neil - I think this is an interesting idea, but I'd (as someone who works on elements of these areas) be keen to hear how you felt data citation metrics could best be used as an additional proxy for research quality alongside peer review?
I would note that here HEFCE have moved back towards the Wilsdon position on recognising the many issues and flaws known to surround research metrics and the way they are used to make decisions - Stern, to my reading at least, was a little keener initially but was hit with the weight of evidence and opinion during the consultation process.
David
-
David Kernohan
Jisc
-----Original Message-----
From: Research Data Management discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of N.M. Walker
Sent: 04 January 2017 13:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: REF consultation seeks input on RDM and sharing
I would like to see data citation as one of the outputs included under Assessment Metrics:
Question 18:
Do you agree with the proposal for using quantitative data to inform the assessment of outputs, where considered appropriate for the discipline?
If you agree, have you any suggestions for data that could be provided to the panels at output and aggregate level?
i.e. rewarding those that make data that is re-used, rather than merely re-usable.
Cheers
Neil
On 2017-01-04 13:22, WHYTE Angus wrote:
> Happy new year all,
>
> In case you’re not aware, the UK higher education funding bodies
> currently have an open consultation on the next Research Excellence
> Framework, see: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2016/201636/ [1]
>
> The consultation invites comments on how to ‘incentivise units to
> share and manage their research data more effectively’ (Q.37 p.26) .
> The question appears under the Open Access heading in the section on
> Environment, immediately before the questions on institution-level
> assessment of impact and environment, which looks designed to
> encourage suggestions linking the two. Are institution-level case
> studies of RDM support facilities the most we should expect to see, or
> are there other ways the REF should help promote RDM and sharing?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Angus
>
> Dr Angus Whyte
>
> Snr Institutional Support Officer
>
> Digital Curation Centre
>
> University of Edinburgh
>
> +44-131-650-9986
>
> skype: angusawhyte
>
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2016/201636/
Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
The Institute of Cancer Research: Royal Cancer Hospital, a charitable Company Limited by Guarantee, Registered in England under Company No. 534147 with its Registered Office at 123 Old Brompton Road, London SW7 3RP.
This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee only. If the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the message from your computer and network.
|
