In fact, the REF grading is NOT suppose to take into account where the article is published. Many think that this means a publication in a “top tier journal”, IT DOES NOT. The second problem I have, and arguably the greater problem, is the misconception academics have about what a ‘REF-returnable output’ is. Now this pressure may only come around every 3-4 years leading up to the REF but there is the problem that a temporary requirement becomes the defacto standard. This means they need to either get a post-doc or find something else to do while they get four publications together, submitted and published (all within the cycle of the REF, after 2014 the clock is reset).

Many PhD students will get their degree without any publications under their belt or only one or two. Some PhD students are told by their advisers to concentrate on their PhD and not to focus on publications. Not an impossible range BUT it depends on who you are and who you work with. Why do I find this trend disturbing? For one, it sets the minimum bar of four publications (this what is meant by four REF returnable outputs) for anyone attempting to get an academic job. As if some how one could measure the impact research has now and into the future (a debate for another day). For those unaware the REF is a programme undertaken every five years in the UK to “measure” research impact. This requirement has been popping up more and more in academic job postings for archaeologists. ‘Publication record of at least four REF-returnable outputs since 2008, or equivalent commensurate with stage of career.’

OK not disturbing but number 2 requirement is: ‘PhD in Archaeology or cognate discipline at the time of application’ Here is a new job posting (warning, link my not work when job closes) and the first requirement under essential criteria:

I have been seeing a very disturbing (in my opinion) trend in job postings for Archaeology Academic jobs in the UK.

Dougs word clock uk