Skip to content

Engagement and Impact Assessment 2018-19

Back to home page
Section 1 | NATIONAL OVERVIEW

Engagement and Impact Ratings

  • Print
  • Email
  • Email
  • Twitter

This section provides a national summary of research performance and a summary of the data that was submitted for the EI 2018 assessment.

The charts show the distribution of ratings across all UoAs for engagement, impact and approach to impact.

Of the 626 engagement UoAs that were rated in EI 2018, 215 (34 per cent) attained a rating of high. A further 317 (51 per cent) attained a rating of medium. Overall, 85 per cent of engagement UoAs were rated at medium or high.

Of the 637 UoAs that were assessed for impact in EI 2018, 277 (43 per cent) attained a rating of high. A further 284 (44 per cent) received a rating of medium. Overall, 88 per cent of UoAs were rated as high or medium for impact.

For approach to impact, 159 (25 per cent) attained a rating of high. A further 325 (51 per cent) received a rating of medium. Overall, 76 per cent were rated as high or medium for approach to impact.

Note: UoAs, aside from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research impact study, could indicate (flag) whether the impact study contained Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander content. The purpose of the flag was to assist in the allocation of impact studies to panel members with the most relevant expertise including, where required, across panels.

Seventy-two of 637 impact studies were flagged by universities as having Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research content. Thirty of these were assigned across panels. Of those, two UoAs received both a rating for the overall content of the impact study, and a rating for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research content for impact and/or approach to impact.




Distribution of ratings across all UoAs—Engagement

Donut graph showing the distribution of ratings across all UoAs for Engagement. The rating with the highest distribution was Medium at 51 per cent, followed by High at 34 per cent and Low at 15 per cent.

Distribution of ratings across all UoAs—Impact

Donut graph showing the distribution of ratings across all UoAs for Impact. The rating with the highest distribution was Medium at 44 per cent, followed by High at 43 per cent and Low at 12 per cent.

Note: 12 Built Environment and Design and 20 Language, Communication and Culture each had a UoA that received impact ratings for the overall content of the impact study and for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research content. Totals in the doughnut charts may not sum to 100% due to rounding.

Distribution of ratings across all UoAs—Approach to impact

Donut graph showing the distribution of ratings across all UoAs for Approach to Impact. The rating with the highest distribution was Medium at 51 per cent, followed by High at 25 per cent and Low at 24 per cent.

Note: 12 Built Environment and Design had a UoA that received approach to impact ratings for the overall content of the impact study, and for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research content.
  • Research Engagement
© 2019 Australian Research Council, All Rights Reserved, ABN 35 201 451 156
DisclaimerContact Us
Engagement and Impact Assessment 2018-19 National Report

Contents

  • HomeCEO’s ForewordGuide to the ReportReport Information
  •  INTRODUCTION

     INTRODUCTION

    • Background
    • Objectives
    • Definitions
    • Unit of Assessment (UoA)
    • Low Volume Threshold
    • EI 2018 Assessments
    • EI 2018 Reference Periods
    • EI Rating Scales
    • Assessment Panels
    • Key EI 2018 Documents
    • Use of the EI National Report
  • SECTION 1:NATIONAL OVERVIEW

    SECTION 1:NATIONAL OVERVIEW

    • Engagement and Impact Ratings
    • Research Engagement
    • Impact
    • Approach to Impact
    • Units of Assessment
  • SECTION 2:RESEARCH ENGAGEMENT

    SECTION 2:RESEARCH ENGAGEMENT

    • Introduction
    • Engagement Narratives

      SECTION 2:RESEARCH ENGAGEMENT

      Engagement Narratives

      • Collaboration with strategic stakeholders
      • Public participation (citizen science)
      • Providing specialist resources and services to external stakeholders
      • Provision of specialist training or trainee programs
    • Engagement Indicators

      SECTION 2:RESEARCH ENGAGEMENT

      Engagement Indicators

      • Cash support from research end-users (specified HERDC Category 1 and Categories 2, 3(i,ii,iii) and 4)
      • Total HERDC income (specified HERDC Category 1 and Categories 2, 3(i,ii,iii) and 4) per FTE
      • Proportion of specified HERDC Category 1 grants to all HERDC Category 1 grants
      • Research commercialisation income
      • Indicator charts
      • Additional quantitative Indicators
  • SECTION 3:IMPACT AND APPROACH TO IMPACT

    SECTION 3:IMPACT AND APPROACH TO IMPACT

    • Introduction
    • Impact Studies

      SECTION 3:IMPACT AND APPROACH TO IMPACT

      Impact Studies

      • Delivering cutting edge technology with partners
      • Community support and safety
      • Improving everyday life
      • Fostering communities
      • Addressing challenges affecting society
    • Approach to Impact

      SECTION 3:IMPACT AND APPROACH TO IMPACT

      Approach to Impact

      • Support for ongoing collaboration
      • Provision of infrastructure
      • Support mechanisms for knowledge transfer
    • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research

      SECTION 3:IMPACT AND APPROACH TO IMPACT

      Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research

      • Impact—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research
      • Approach to impact—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research
    • Impact Studies—Supplementary Information

      SECTION 3:IMPACT AND APPROACH TO IMPACT

      Impact Studies—Supplementary Information

      • Additional FoR codes for impact studies
      • FoR Codes for associated research
      • Socio-Economic Objectives (SEO) codes
      • Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification (ANZSIC) Codes
      • Science and Research Priorities
      • Countries where impact is occurring
      • Keywords
      • Beneficiaries
      • Additional quantitative indicators
  • SECTION 4:EI 2018 INSTITUTION REPORT

    SECTION 4:EI 2018 INSTITUTION REPORT

    • 01 Mathematical Sciences
    • 02 Physical Sciences
    • 03 Chemical Sciences
    • 04 Earth Sciences
    • 05 Environmental Sciences
    • 06 Biological Sciences
    • 07 Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences
    • 08 Information and Computing Sciences
    • 09 Engineering
    • 10 Technology
    • 11 Biomedical and Clinical Sciences
    • 11 Public and Allied Health Sciences
    • 12 Built Environment and Design
    • 13 Education
    • 14 Economics
    • 15 Commerce, Management, Tourism and Services
    • 16 Studies in Human Society
    • 17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
    • 18 Law and Legal Studies
    • 19 Studies in Creative Arts and Writing
    • 20 Language, Communication and Culture
    • 21 History and Archaeology
    • 22 Philosophy and Religious Studies
    • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research
    • Interdisciplinary
  • Abbreviations and Appendices

    Abbreviations and Appendices

    • Abbreviations
    • Appendix 1—Eligible institutions
    • Appendix 2—Fields of Research (FoR) Codes Used in EI and Assessment Panels
    • Appendix 3—FoR 11 Medical and Health Sciences