The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?
This paper investigates the extent to which the outcomes of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise, determined by peer review, can be explained by a set of quantitative indicators, some of which were made available to the review panels. Three cognate units of assessment are examined in detail: business & management, economics & econometrics, and accounting & finance. The paper focuses on the extent to which the quality of research output, as determined by the RAE panel, can be explained by the journal quality indicator published by the Association of Business Schools. The main finding is that although a high proportion of the variation between universities in their RAE outcomes can be explained by quantitative indicators, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim by the ABS that its Journal Quality Guide is a sufficiently accurate predictor of research quality to justify a predominant role in the research assessment process. A further finding is that there appears to be an element of bias in the decisions reached by the business & management panel and by the economics & econometrics panel.
Year of publication: |
2009
|
---|---|
Authors: | Taylor, Jim |
Institutions: | Department of Economics, Management School |
Saved in:
freely available
Saved in favorites
Similar items by person
-
Relative pay and job satisfaction: some new evidence
Bradley, S, (2003)
-
The English Baccalaureate: how not to measure school performance
Taylor, Jim, (2011)
-
Job autonomy and job satisfaction: new evidence
Bradley, S, (2003)
- More ...