RAE 2008, UK

RAE Panel N History employed the following descriptors of the definitions of quality levels forresearch outputs (bold are :

4* – quality that is world-leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour.

Originality can be in the form of reshaping interpretations or approaches or opening up new sources, new data or material. Significance will be judged on the basis of, for example, depth and likely lasting scholarly value. Rigour will be judged on, for example, accuracy, clarity and standards of scholarship. Work graded 4* will be outstanding in respect of virtually all these qualities. Such work is or ought to be a primary point of reference in its relevant field, ie, a contribution of which every serious worker in that relevant field is or ought to be aware.

3* – quality that is internationally excellent in terms of originality, significance and rigour but which nonetheless falls short of the highest standards of excellence.

Work graded 3* will be outstanding in respect of many of the criteria listed above for 4*. It is or ought to be a point of reference in its relevant field, ie, a contribution of which serious workers in that relevant field are or ought to be expected to be aware.

2* – quality that is recognised internationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour. 

Work graded 2* will be distinguished by some of the qualities listed above. It makes a substantial contribution and merits attention in its relevant field.

1* – quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour.

Work which makes a valuable contribution and merits some attention.

Unclassified – quality that falls below the standard of nationally recognised work. Or work which does not meet the published definition of research for the purpose of this assessment. Or ‘missing’ outputs, where the reason for submitting fewer than four outputs has not been accepted by the subpanel.

"In judging outputs the sub-panel will be guided solely by its view of their research quality. All cited outputs will be judged on academic merit regardless of the medium (for example, inpaper or electronic form) or location of publication. Web-based publications, including for instance those published on publicly available departmental web-sites, will be judged by the same standards and criteria as other outputs."

"The sub-panel will look for evidence of the following in judging the quality of outputs: originality, contribution to the advancement of knowledge and understanding, scope or range of the work, and scholarly rigour."

"Types of output will not be ranked against each other, and outputs not already subject to a peer review or refereeing process will not for that reason be regarded as of lesser quality. No form of output will be regarded as intrinsically inferior to any other." (emphasis added)