Research assessment has a dual character. On the one hand it is rooted in material facts and objective methods. Strong research quality and quantity should be and are rewarded in the research excellence framework (Ref). On the other hand, the outcome is shaped normatively by institutions that select and fashion data for competitive purposes.
科研评估具有双重性，一方面它是根植于用客观的方法用物品得出实验结果。强大的研究质量和数量应该在Ref中得到重视。另一方面，得出的结论要根据学校竞选的目的进行修正。
It is also influenced by the subject area panels that define what research should be considered outstanding on a global scale. It’s for this reason that research assessment is only partly reliable as an indicator of the real quality of the work of universities, especially comparative quality.
这也是受专业领域的影响科研成果要在全球范围内得出杰出的成果。这是科研评估仅仅局部考察学校成果的质量的一个原因，尤其是对评选质量的考察。
In that respect, Ref is similar to all performance assessments in policy settings. The reality is very complex, it is never fully captured in the data, some things (eg citation impact in top journals) are easier to measure than others (eg long-term impacts of research on policy and professional practice), and experienced players are best at gaming the system in their own interest.
字这个方面，在政策设定上Ref和其他评估标准很相似。事实很复杂，在数据中不能完全获得，有些事实(例如著名杂志期刊的文章引用)比另一些(例如专业措施和政策的长期影响)更容易衡量得出结果。有经验的人很擅长根据自己的兴趣运作系统。
A very strong overall Ref performance signifies a larg...