91茄子

‘Keep focus on excellence and impact,’ say v-cs after REF pause

Using REF to tackle research culture risks making it too ‘bureaucratic and burdensome’, university leaders warn as Vallance rethinks changes to weightings

Published on
September 5, 2025
Last updated
September 5, 2025
Source: iStock/phaustov

The UK’s Research Excellence Framework has been paused for three months to allow for a review of efforts to measure and reward research culture.

Science minister Patrick Vallance has warned against overcomplicating the exercise after the weighting given to people, culture and environment (PCE) was increased from 15 per cent to 25 per cent for the 2029 iteration.

Questions have been raised about whether PCE can be assessed robustly using metrics, with some university leaders warning the credibility of the REF could be undermined.

Here four vice-chancellors give their reaction to Times Higher Education.

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

Shitij Kapur, vice-chancellor and president of King’s College London

“I took comfort from the fact the minister is committed to the REF, committed to having a REF in 2029 and preserving quality-related (QR) research funding. Those three things are very important. We could have heard a minister who said: ‘You’re struggling to sort out the REF, you don’t need QR’.

“Patrick Vallance is one of the few ministers to acknowledge the pressures around full economic costing for research. He didn’t provide a solution, but it shows an understanding of the research pressures that we face and he is responding to these issues.”

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

On moves to?increase the weighting?of people, culture and environment (PCE) from 15 per cent in REF 2021 to 25 per cent in 2029: “We were not part of the pilot to devise metrics [for PCE] so I haven’t seen the results. However, if the metrics are not robust we have to be cautious about raising the tariff on environment because, in the long run, that will destroy credibility in the REF.

“And, if you undermine the REF, you undermine the case for QR and that loss would hugely harm research in the UK, which is vital to ensuring we have talented people in our universities and wider economy.

“We would like the REF to be deployed in a way that best incentivises quality and rewards talent in our universities.”

David Maguire, vice-chancellor of University of East Anglia

“The opportunity to re-evaluate REF 2029 is a good thing. I always favour a research assessment exercise that focused on outputs, not inputs, and preferred the weighting used previously. Any change to the REF introduces more bureaucracy into the system and universities have to adapt to this.

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

“The last REF wasn’t perfect but it was probably the best exercise that has taken place. Given the last REF was a known quantity we should have not deviated too far from it without good cause.”

Nishan Canagarajah, vice-chancellor and president of University of Leicester

“We welcome the delay – we should make sure the REF is focusing on quality and impact.

“The delay will allow us to clarify the weightings that should be attached to each element of the exercise.

“I’m pleased, however, the overall timeline hasn’t changed because universities have already done a huge amount of work on this.”

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

Rama Thirunamachandran, vice-chancellor and president at Canterbury Christchurch University and a former director for research, innovation and skills at the Higher Education Funding Council for England, where he developed the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise – a forerunner to the REF

“The REF is being asked to do a lot more things, under the current proposals, than it was originally intended to do.

“While there are a number of factors that can help to create a good research culture, the REF is not necessarily the right mechanism to achieve this. We should incentivise a whole range of behaviours that should be part of institutional culture, not simply related to research, we need to remain focused on excellence and impact.

91茄子

ADVERTISEMENT

“There is a risk that if you add too much to the REF it will become much more bureaucratic and burdensome for everyone involved. Environment should be about whole institutions having a good research culture where they acknowledge and value all staff. It should be about creating an institutional culture which tries to recognise and reward research excellence.”

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com

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
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (2)

new
Well VCs are right for once and we must praise them when they do the right thing. They do need to start showing a bit of backbone over the REF now and push for reform of the excercise, slimming it down and making it more cost effective and value for money. I think this is something that would appeal to government as well. Surely UKRI are not immune to the pressures of fiscal restraint? This is an obvious area where real savings could be made with no real deterioration of the exercise, quote the reverse actually. I find it staggering that in such a financial crisis no-one is looking at the cost and fitness of this bureaucratic Behemoth. If I was in charge of the thing I would instruct them to model 25% 50% and 75% cuts to it and see what they would look like.
new
I agree. I can't understand when everything else is being cut to the bone, staffing, teaching, class sizes etc etc this massive bureaucratic exercise remains sacrosanct and, if anything, new addtions and new protocoals will even incresae its burdensome nature. We should be looking at savings across the board and brining in effeciencies. The TEF, which is bad enough, is no where near as expenseive as this. It's become an industry in itself, a "firm within a firm" as they say.
new
Patrick presses the panic button!! Something's up!!! Has someone blundered yet again?

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT