Quantifying Quality: Can Quantitative Data (“Metrics”) Explain the 2001 RAE Ratings for Social Policy and Administration?

Abstract

Abstract This paper finds that around 80 per cent of the differences in the ratings awarded in the 2001 RAE for social policy may be “explained” using half a dozen pieces of quantitative data. Social policy excellence—as judged by peer review—is associated with the award of doctorates, the amount of money raised, publications in a particular (if broad) range of journals and books by major publishers, and being large. Even taking account of differences on all these factors, the analysis found that new universities fared worse than their quantitative data would suggest. It is argued that quantitative data should play a larger role in decisions about research quality, aiding equity and transparency.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.