Sheil panel’s five big ways for a better research  system

The stand-outs in the ARC review are

* protection for discovery research: by incorporating the “commitment to funding pure basic, strategic basic and applied research into the purposes of the National Competitive Grants Programme” in the ARC Act.

* reducing the application burden: with a two-stage process, culling props at a two-five page peer-reviewed expression of interest stage with those passing developing full proposals

* ditching existing performance reviews, Excellence for Research in Australia and Engagement and Impact) but not replace  them with metrics-formula, “because of the evidence that such metrics can be biased or inherently flawed.”

* empowering the ARC to review research performance by,

working with regulator TEQSA to create measures of research performance for university registration

developing “a framework for regular evaluation and reporting on the outcomes of the national competitive grants programme”

– “a programme to evaluate current and future research capabilities” starting with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers and research

* protect the ARC: by establishing a “board with responsibilities for appointment of the ARC CEO, the College of Experts and approvals of individual grants,” under the NCGP


to get daily updates on what's happening in the world of Australian Higher Education


  , ,