Research assessment has a dual character. On the one hand it is rooted in material facts and objective methods. Strong research quality and quantity should be and are rewarded in the research excellence framework (Ref). On the other hand, the outcome is shaped normatively by institutions that select and fashion data for competitive purposes.
科研评估具有双重性，一方面它是根植于用客观的方法用物品得出实验结果。强大的研究质量和数量应该在Ref中得到重视。另一方面，得出的结论要根据学校竞选的目的进行修正。
It is also influenced by the subject area panels that define what research should be considered outstanding on a global scale. It’s for this reason that research assessment is only partly reliable as an indicator of the real quality of the work of universities, especially comparative quality.
这也是受专业领域的影响科研成果要在全球范围内得出杰出的成果。这是科研评估仅仅局部考察学校成果的质量的一个原因，尤其是对评选质量的考察。
In that respect, Ref is similar to all performance assessments in policy settings. The reality is very complex, it is never fully captured in the data, some things (eg citation impact in top journals) are easier to measure than others (eg long-term impacts of research on policy and professional practice), and experienced players are best at gaming the system in their own interest.
字这个方面，在政策设定上Ref和其他评估标准很相似。事实很复杂，在数据中不能完全获得，有些事实(例如著名杂志期刊的文章引用)比另一些(例如专业措施和政策的长期影响)更容易衡量得出结果。有经验的人很擅长根据自己的兴趣运作系统。
A very strong overall Ref performance signifies a large concentration of outstanding work. It is an unambiguous plus. All the same, precise league table positions in the Ref, indicator by indicator, should be taken with a grain of salt.
Ref的全部结果表明了工作的关注点。这是一个模糊的界定，同样的，Ref准确的排名表，每个数据都应该带着怀疑的态度不能全信。
“Ref assesses simulations of impact”
During the Ref, the indicators for “impact” – which are new to the 2014 assessment – are the least objectively grounded and most vulnerable to manipulation. This is because of the intrinsic difficulty of measuring the changes to society, economy and policy induced by new knowledge.
在Ref中，影响的指数——在2014年的评估中是新的指数，是最不客观的一项指数同时也是最容易被操控的。这是由于衡量社会变化，新知识引导的经济和政策难以被衡量的固有本质决定的。
The crafted “impact-related” data that is collected during the Ref assessment process also presents challenges. A sophisticated industry has already emerged, manufacturing examples of the relevant “evidence” of impact. Ref assesses simulations of impact, rather than actual impact.
手工制作的影响相关的数据在Ref评估过程收集的时候存在挑战。一个复杂的行业兴起了，制造相关证明的例子。Ref评估的是模仿的影响而不是真实的。
Research is getting better all the time: or is it?
First, between the 2008 RAE and the 2014 Ref there has been a notable inflation of the proportion of UK research outputs judged to be “world leading” (rated 4*) and “internationally excellent” (rated 3*).
科研一直都发展的很好，确实是这样吗?
首先，在2008年的RAE和2014年Ref中，英国科研成果的产出被评为世界顶尖的比例出现波动。
In 2008, just 14% of research outputs were judged to be 4* and 37% were judged to be 3*, a total of 51% in the top two categories. In 2014, the proportion of the work judged to be outstanding had somehow jumped to 72%, with 22% judged to be 4* and another 50% judged to be 3*. This phenomenal improvement happened at a time when resources in higher education were constrained by historical standards.
在2008年，仅有14%的成果评定为4*,37%的评定为3*两个分类里面只占51%。到了2014年，优秀科研成果的比例一下增加到了72%，22%评定为4*而有50%评定为3*。这种现象改变出现在由于历史标准被限制的高等教育。
While genuine improvement no doubt has occurred in at least some fields, the scale and speed of this improvement beggars belief. It reflects a combination of factors that generate boosterism.
在很多领域确实出现了改善，这种速度和规模是不太真实的。反映出的是因素的结合产生除了虚夸的效果。
以上就是留学群为您整理的最新新闻资讯，内容均译自《卫报》，如果喜欢请按Ctrl+D进行收藏!
小编推荐：
2015年英国大学排名Top100
