PBRF 2018 Quality Evaluation Update
PBRF 2018 Quality Evaluation Update
The Performance-Based Research Fund (PBRF) 2018 Quality Evaluation met a major milestone in July when the submission phase ended for participating tertiary education organisations (TEOs).
The Performance-Based Research Fund (PBRF) 2018 Quality Evaluation met a major milestone in July when the submission phase ended for participating tertiary education organisations (TEOs).
The PBRF encourages and rewards the breadth and diversity of research excellence and its role in supporting and developing New Zealand and our tertiary education sector. The Quality Evaluation makes up over half of the PBRF (just over $1 billion over the six-year funding period) and is based on the assessment of the research performance of staff at participating TEOs.
PBRF Principal Advisor Amber Flynn says that overall the 36 participating TEOs met the 13 July 2018 final submission deadline.
“Because this is the fourth Quality Evaluation round, most of the participating TEOs have good internal submission processes in place. The Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) also offered additional training and support for this round, which was well received by the sector,” said Amber.
Participating TEOs include all eight universities, two wānanga, 13 institutes of technology and polytechnics and 13 private training establishments.
For the Quality Evaluation, TEOs determine which of their staff members are eligible to participate using the criteria in the Quality Evaluation guidelines. TEOs then compile Evidence Portfolios (EPs) for eligible staff and submit them to the TEC through the custom-built PBRF IT System. Over 8,000 EPs were submitted for this round.
Manager, University Investment Dr Dafydd Davies says the TEC has worked with the sector to establish a robust and fair assessment process.
“Each researcher’s EP is assigned and assessed by at least two panel members before being assessed by the full panel. This process ensures that no single panellist is responsible for the decision on the final Quality Category given to an EP.
“A Moderation Panel, comprised of a Principal Moderator, two Deputy Moderators and the 13 peer review panel Chairs, ensures that standards are consistent across peer review panels and the PBRF Guidelines are adhered to,” he says.
Following the assessment phase, an interim report on 2018 Quality Evaluation results with indicative funding allocations will be released in April 2019.