Michael Otsuka (LSE) writes:
The REF ranking your UK colleague sent you is misleading because it simply ranks according to the overall amount of funding a Department will receive, based on the current funding formula. But this sum depends to a large extent on the overall number of people who were submitted to the REF, which, in turn, depends to a large extent on how large the Department is.
A less misleading ranking, which doesn't give large Departments such a gratuitous advantage simply for being large, is one that just takes the percentage of a Department's overall quality profile ranked 4*, multiplies that by 3, and adds that to the percentage of that Department's overall quality profile ranked 3*. This reflects the government's current formula of funding just 3* and 4* research, with 4* research funded at 3 times 3* research. But it treats all quality profiles of Departments as equal, however many people were submitted.
Here's the ranking which this generates:
1. University of Oxford
2. University of Birmingham
3. King's College London
4. University College London
5. University of Cambridge HPS
6. University of St Andrews
7. London School of Economics and Political Science
8. University of Edinburgh
=8. University of Warwick
10. University of Essex
11. University of Sheffield
12. University of Leeds
13. University of Bristol
14. University of Cambridge Phil
15. Birkbeck College
One thing neither your colleague's ranking nor my ranking does is adjust for the ratio of those who were submitted to those who could have been submitted. We don't yet have data for the total number in a Department who could have been submitted, however.
I should note my colleague in the UK also sent me a version of this, too, I was not clear on which results were most relevant.
UPDATE: The full REF results by subject are downloadable here. (Thanks to several readers for the pointer.)
ANOTHER: Filippo Contesi writes:
Please note that, as well as measuring "impact" (for 20% of the overall score), the REF also measures the "environment" of an institution (worth 15% of the overall score), which, alongside things such as number of doctoral degrees awarded, also measures (rather puzzingly, at least prima facie) the institution's research income: http://www.ref.ac.uk/about/guidance/ref4environmentdata/ .
AND ANOTHER: Chris Bertram (Bristol) is not impressed.
ALSO I'M OPENING COMMENTS for folks to weigh in about this. Signed comments (full name, valid e-mail address) will be very strongly preferred.
