UK academics are used to having their work judged both on its scholarly quality and its impact on the wider world.

But this distinction makes no sense, according to a thinker on how research is communicated, who argues that academics should be able to choose at the end of their research whether to release a video via YouTube or publish an academic paper.

The issue of quality versus impact emerged in 2014¡¯s research excellence framework, the UK¡¯s huge assessment of research that helps determine university funding. Controversially, for the first time in 2014 the ¡°impact¡± of research ¡°beyond academia¡± counted for 20 per cent in the assessment process.

But during a recent discussion about the future of the REF, which is next due in 2021, Cameron Neylon, professor of research communication at Curtin University, said this division should end.

ÖйúAƬ

¡°If I could change one thing in the REF, it would be to remove the separation of impact and outputs,¡± he told an event titled The Road to REF 2021: Is the UK Leading or Lagging in?its Approach to Research Assessment?,?held in London on 7 December.

¡°They are all¡­effects this research is having on the outside world.¡±

ÖйúAƬ

¡°I¡¯d love to live in a world¡±, he continued, where a ¡°primary care researcher could make the choice between publishing a YouTube video intended for the education of nurses versus publishing an academic paper¡±.

He also criticised the focus on ¡°excellence¡± in the REF as vague, as it was a ¡°term that is trying to mean far too many things to mean anything¡±.

¡°In using words like excellence, quality and impact, we avoid the difficult political discussions¡­as to what it is we actually care about," he added. "What is the academy for? What is public investment for?¡±

A??of the REF published last summer, led by British Academy president Lord Stern of Brentford, called for a ¡°broadening and deepening¡±?of the definition of impact in the next REF so that it includes ¡°groundbreaking academic impacts such as research leading to the creation of new disciplines¡±.

ÖйúAƬ

However, a consultation released by the?UK¡¯s four ÖйúAƬ funding bodies?on 8 December said this kind of academic impact would be ¡°more appropriately¡± assessed when looking at the quality of academic outputs, or a university¡¯s research environment, rather than in the impact section of the REF.?

david.matthews@tesglobal.com