Peer review will continue to form a "fundamental" element of ߣߣÊÓƵ's system for assessing the quality of university research.

Kim Carr, the Innovation, Industry, Science and Research Minister, has launched a consultation on how to replace the now-defunct research quality framework. The new system will use metrics - measurements of research outputs, such as the number of times an academic's published research is cited by other scholars - but it will continue to incorporate an element of peer review.

"You need peer review: peer review is the fundamental instrument for keeping everyone honest," Mr Carr told The ߣߣÊÓƵn newspaper.

The move comes as the UK consults on plans to replace a peer review-based research assessment exercise with a system based largely on metrics for science subjects.

ߣߣÊÓƵ

Mr Carr said that ߣߣÊÓƵ's new system, to be called Excellence in Research for ߣߣÊÓƵ (Era), will use metrics, including citation data, to help keep costs down.

The plan is for eight expert review panels, which would correspond to the discipline "clusters" covered by the country's research councils, to assess the quality of research by discipline and institution.

ߣߣÊÓƵ

The system will draw on the expertise of leading researchers in the ߣߣÊÓƵn Research Council's College of Experts and the review panels of the National Health and Medical Research Council, Mr Carr said.

"The Commonwealth invests billions each year in research. The Era model will provide hard evidence that taxpayers are getting the best bang for their buck," he said.

The Government plans to pilot the Era in disciplines where metrics are most widely accepted, such as physical and biological sciences.

"In parallel," Mr Carr said, "we will continue consultation with other disciplines about metrics appropriate to their disciplines, noting that some measures will be appropriate to all disciplines and that for all disciplines expert review of the metrics is essential."

ߣߣÊÓƵ

The proposals have been well received in the ߣߣÊÓƵn higher education sector. Most people see the plans to use the expertise of the ARC as a sensible use of an existing resource.

Merlin Crossley, acting deputy vice-chancellor for research at the University of Sydney, told The ߣߣÊÓƵn: "It's going to save an enormous amount of additional bureaucracy and time because the processes already exist. It's very, very sensible."

Glenn Withers, chairman of Universities ߣߣÊÓƵ, said expert review would assist with assessment of the arts and would "help to ensure that evaluation metrics are interpreted by those well placed to judge quality and merit".

The consultation is now under way. The ARC's advisory council, which is overseeing the process, was due to put out a paper detailing the plans in full after ߣߣÊÓƵ went to press.

ߣߣÊÓƵ

john.gill@tsleducation.com.