Double trouble

August 6, 2015

The supposed “doubling” of research quality in life sciences reflects both numerator and denominator (“REF triumph of life sciences ‘lacks credibility’”, News, 30 July). As judged by the fact that it came near the bottom of the post hoc table of grade point averages by unit of assessment, life sciences was excessively tough in the 2008 research assessment exercise; it was presumably recalibrated in 2014. And if something becomes 2.38 times bigger than a predecessor, it does not increase by 238 per cent.

Douglas Kell
Research chair in bioanalytical science School of Chemistry, and Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, University of Manchester

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 6 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Most Commented

Doctoral study can seem like a 24-7 endeavour, but don't ignore these other opportunities, advise Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O'Gorman

Matthew Brazier illustration (9 February 2017)

How do you defeat Nazis and liars? Focus on the people in earshot, says eminent Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt

Laurel and Hardy sawing a plank of wood

Working with other academics can be tricky so follow some key rules, say Kevin O'Gorman and Robert MacIntosh

Improvement, performance, rankings, success

Phil Baty sets out why the World University Rankings are here to stay – and why that's a good thing

Warwick vice-chancellor Stuart Croft on why his university reluctantly joined the ‘flawed’ teaching excellence framework