RESEARCH
A. Scope: The quality assurance system for research covers quality control for all research activity within the University, i.e. all research carried out by the academic employees and by doctoral or master students.
B. Purpose: To develop processes and procedures conducive to strengthening academic standing and research quality and to support implementation of the University's goal to develop powerful research which will strengthen the University's international reputation, infuse its teaching with new ideas, and provide both industry and the community with new knowledge.
C. Terms and definitions:
1. Annual individual assessment: An evaluation of research activities of all academic employees at Reykjavik University by international specialists.
2. Assessment of Schools: The process where outside parties, usually from abroad, are called upon to evaluate the status of each School in the international research community.
3. Academic employee: An academic employee at RU is someone who either holds, or is expected to undergo a review to determine his or her ability to hold, the title of assistant professor, associate professor, professor or professor of the practice.
D. Key processes:
1. Annual individual assessment: An evaluation of research activities of each individual academic employee is conducted annually by five international specialists. The assessment was first conducted in 2007. The main objective of the assessment is to examine the quality of the research and research activity of all academic employees at RU during a 5 year period. The RU Research Council is responsible for and in charge of the assessment in collaboration with RU Research Services. The evaluation process is operationally coordinated by RU Research Services.
i. Evaluation panel: The Evaluation Panel is selected by the RU Research Council in collaboration with the Schools. Each School is asked to recommend at least 5 distinguished foreign experts as potential candidates, i.e. 25 candidates in total. The Schools are explicitly asked to consider all possible conflicts of interest in their recommendations. From these the RU Research Council selects the Panel, which comprises one representative for each major research field/School. Furthermore the Council appoints one of the selected members as the chair of the Evaluation Panel. The Panel members are required to declare a conflict of interest where s(he) deems it appropriate.
ii. Evaluation process: The Evaluation Panel uses the Annual Research Report from each academic employee to evaluate his/her research activity. All faculty members who conduct research and publish, using Reykjavik University as their affiliation, are obliged to deliver before 1st of October an Annual Research Report and be evaluated. Panel members are asked to base their evaluation and hence their rating primarily on the quantity/quality of research output in peer-reviewed outlets. The Evaluation Panel assigns the following rating to each member of academic staff of each School:
a. None or insignificant research activity.
b. Little but nontrivial research activity.
c. Contributes to the research community but little impact.
d. Considerable and active participant in the research community, with a clear contribution and impact.
e. Significant and active participant in the research community, with a substantial contribution and impact
iii. Rating guidelines: All comparisons are to the international research community in each field and impact is evidenced by publications, citations, derived work, advising of doctoral students/post-docs, grants, stature, etc. The Panel is encouraged to use the entire category scale. However, the highest ranking should not be given unless the Panel concludes that the researcher has established a strong international standing.
2. Assessment of Schools: Consistent with its research strategy the University has decided that each of its Schools should undergo research evaluations every five years, carried out by panels of international experts in the respective fields. The main objective of the evaluation is to examine the quality of the research and research activity of the Schools with regard to the international level of research in the field and to produce quality profiles, i.e. an Evaluation Report for all research activity made by the Schools. It is expected that the first assessment will be conducted in 2009 on at least two Schools. The RU Research Council is responsible and in charge of the assessment in collaboration with RU Research Services. The evaluation process is operationally coordinated by RU Research Services.
i. Evaluation panel: The evaluation is conducted by three distinguished external researchers. The Panel is selected by the RU Research Council in collaboration with the School, which is asked to recommend at least 7 foreign experts as potential candidates. The Schools are explicitly asked to consider all possible conflicts of interest in their recommendations. From these the RU Research Council selects the Panel membership. Furthermore the Research Council appoints one of the selected members as the chair of the Evaluation Panel. The Panel members are required to declare a conflict of interest where s(he) deems it appropriate.
ii. Evaluation process: The evaluation is based principally on a so called “Self-Assessment Form”, site visits and interviews, as well as on other material provided by the coordinator, i.e. Annual Research Reports from each faculty member at the School. Additional important written material will be obtained during site visits and interviews. The evaluation panel also uses any additional public material, such as citation indices, etc. During the site visits, a sample of researchers will be interviewed e.g. the Dean, senior staff, post-doctoral researchers, administrative staff, visiting scholars, postgraduate students, etc.
iii. Rating and recommendation guidelines: The Panel is asked to assign a numerical rating of the quality of the research output at the Schools (see table below).
The Panel is also asked to provide recommendations on the future development of the Schools. The following key issues are addressed:
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the School?
• What are the opportunities and challenges for the School?
• Recommendations on how the School can improve its research performance.
• Recommendations on specific research activities - both single-discipline and interdisciplinary research.
• Recommendations on development of research environment and infrastructure.
• Recommendations on the role of doctoral/post-doctoral training.
• Recommendations on other relevant issues.
E. Documentation and issuing of key documents, instructions, and results: Following the individual assessment, an Evaluation Report is written and edited by the Panel members with the assistance of the Coordinator. The report is confidential and only for internal use. The result of the evaluation is made available to the Deans of the Schools, who then reveal individual ratings to individual researchers. A statistical summary is made available on the RU website. The outcome of this evaluation is used in distributing the annual governmental research funds between the Schools, i.e. the research activities 2004-2008 affects the distribution of the governmental research funds among the Schools in 2009. Furthermore, the outcome of the evaluation is used by the Deans in annual reviews with staff. Following the School assessment, an Evaluation Report is written and edited by the Panel members with the assistance of the Coordinator. The Evaluation Report is confidential, although the main findings of the report will be published on the University‘s website. The evaluation will be used to develop each School's research profile and to refine their research strategies.
F. Responsibility: Director of RU Research Services, Chair of Research Council, Research Council, Provost.
