RAE 2008 Engineering

1. RAE 2008 Engineering Ann Dowling, Chairman Main Panel G - Engineering EPC Congress 21-23 March 2005

2. Quality Profile† †Guidance to Panels, January 2005

3. Overall Quality Profile Research Environment Esteem Research Outputs

4. Engineering Panels Main Panel Sub-Panels Ann Dowling Chairs of Sub-panels User & International members 24 Electrical and Electronic Engineering Steve Williamson, Manchester 25 General Engineering and Mineral & Mining Engineering Geof Tomlinson, Sheffield 26 Chemical Engineering Stephen Richardson, Imperial 27 Civil Engineering Adrian Long, Queen’s Belfast 28 Mech, Aero and Manufacturing Eng Neil Halliwell, Loughborough 29 Metallurgy and Materials Julia King Imperial

5. Engineering Panels Main Panel Sub-Panels • Co-ordinate criteria for assessment and working methods across sub-panels • Help consistency between sub-panels during the assessment phase • Endorse quality profiles • Co-ordinate requests for specialist advice beyond expertise of the sub-panel • International members • Produce final report on state of research in the discipline • Draft criteria for assessment and working methods • Produce draft quality profiles and brief feedback on each submission • Advise the main panel on cross-referrals and need for specialist advice

6. Criteria and Consultation • Currently Panels working on draft criteria and working methods • May – June Internal consistency checks and legal advice • Summer 2005 Publish draft criteria and working methods • Consultation Opportunity for subject communities to have input to the criteria and working methods for their disciplines • October 2005: Panels work on final criteria • Late 2005: Finalise and publish

7. Engineering Panels We are currently about half way through drawing up draft criteria These are current thoughts but may change before draft is issued in the summer Overall Quality Profile Research Environment Esteem Research Outputs 50% 20% 30%

8. Engineering Panels We are currently about half way through drawing up draft criteria. These are current thoughts but may change before draft is issued in the summer 50% Research Outputs • Normally 4 research outputs/person • Less for those new to academia, either at the start of their career or recruited from industry, or who have had a career break • Outputs could be published papers; conference contributions; technical reports; patents awarded; evidence of new processes, materials, new devices/software; books/chapters • Assessed through excellence in • - originality, significance/impact and rigour • - all types of research (applied, interdisciplinary, practice-based) given equal weighting • Encouraged to use text box in Section RA2 (up to 100 words) to explain concisely why particular research outputs have been selected and their significance or impact, eg • - independent recognition of quality of output eg prizes awarded • - significance of output eg impact on industrial processes or practice, or on other research • - include evidence to support reasons given eg details of contacts in industry who have benefited from work, new research areas opened up etc (subject to dipstick testing)

9. Engineering Panels • We like • ‘Characteristics of Highly Regarded Groups’ in the • EPSRC/Royal Academy of Engineering International Review of Engineering • Basic technical core competency in underlying field of work • Excellent people resources, high quality infrastructure • Strong leadership, shared vision, good strategic plan (leading to both academic excellence and good management) • Strong interaction with stake-holders (industry, medicine and government, as appropriate) that influences practice & commercialisation • Well attuned to the needs of stakeholders, & ability to adapt to market changes • Strengths in both engineering analysis and creative synthesis • Ability to draw excellent postgraduate students and postdoctoral researchers, from home and abroad, through a fine world-wide reputation • Strong, supportive university environment

10. Engineering Panels We are currently about half way through drawing up draft criteria. These are current thoughts but may change before draft is issued in the summer 20% Environment • Research student quantitative data, • number of students • particularly interested in completed degrees • profile based on overall numbers/FTE (RA3) and distribution across • assessment (RA5) • Textural information from RA5 • the institution’s vision, strategy, where relevant update on research plans in RAE2001, • mechanisms and practices for promoting research and sustaining research culture • nature and quality of research infrastructure • if applicable,arrangements for supporting interdisciplinary and collaborative research • if applicable, arrangements for commerialisation of research ideas, support for • technology transfer and for interactions with end-users • approach to developing and supporting staff

11. Engineering Panels We are currently about half way through drawing up draft criteria. These are current thoughts but may change before draft is issued in the summer 30% Esteem • Research grant quantitative data, • all external funding for research will be considered equally • profile based on ranked order of value/FTE (RA4) and distribution across assessment (RA5) • Textural information of esteem indicators from RA5 • eg plenary addresses, prizes, patents awarded, honours and awards, editorships, learned society engagement, prestigious Fellowships, consultancy, long term collaborations, leadership of consortia • considered in context of career stage of individuals • exemplars of • interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary research • national or international collaborations • commericalisation activity • distribution across submission

12. 4* 3* 2* 1* u/c 20 25 25 15 15 The overall quality profile is comprised of the aggregate of the weighted profiles produced for outputs, research environment and esteem indicators. Overall Quality Profile We are currently about half way through drawing up draft criteria These are current thoughts but may change before draft is issued in the summer Quality Level % of Research Activity Research Environment Esteem Research Outputs 50% 20% 30%

13. Engineering Panels • We are only half way through drawing up • draft criteria and working methods • Sharing these now for transparency • May change before publication of draft criteria in summer • There will be a consultation period before they are • finalised at the end of the year • Comments welcome

14. Practical information

15. Data Collection RAE team • proposing a web-based submission system, with server located at HEFCE • recently asked for data collection contacts in HEIs and surveyed them on data needs • running focus groups for invited software contacts to develop user interface • investigating ways of collecting published outputs in electronic form from HEIs • would welcome views on feasibility

16. Content of Submissions • Will be explained in Guidance on Submissions, but using 2001 forms, in 2008 RAE Team expect… • RA0 – summary information • RA1 – staff: note no category A* staff in 2008 • RA2 – research outputs • RA3 – research students & studentships • RA4 – research income • RA5 –esteem and environment • Including RA5b – confidential staff information

17. Submission Timetable • 31 July 2007 • End of assessment period for research income and research student data • 31 October 2007 • Census date • 30 November 2007 • Closing date for submissions • 31 December 2007 • End of publication period (cut-off point for publication of research outputs) • December 2008 • Results published