View Document

Classification of Research Outputs Policy

This is the current version of this document. To view historic versions, click the link in the document's navigation bar.

Section 1 - Background Information

(1) Australian Catholic University (ACU) is required by the Commonwealth Government to report on the research outputs of all of its staff and students and to attest to the accuracy of the report, including the classification of research outputs. The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) also requires ACU to record and keep current, the University collection of research outputs: The TEQSA Guidance Note: Research and Research Training.

(2) Information on research activity is collected and maintained on the University’s research information system. Academic staff members report their research activity information to ACU and these data are verified, maintained and monitored for compliance with the Higher Education Research Data Collection (HERDC) specifications. ACU may be subject to audit at any time on the report.

Top of Page

Section 2 - Glossary of Terms

Term Definition
Research Research is defined in accordance with the Government expectations as contained in HERDC specifications and ERA guidelines.

The definition of research and how it should be interpreted is provided in documentation provided by the Commonwealth Government in order to ensure accurate reporting through HERDC.

The HERDC definition of research and experimental development, abbreviated as R&D, is consistent with the Organisation for Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) definition of research and experimental development set out in the Frascati Manual 2015. R&D is defined as:

“creative and systematic work undertaken in order to increase the stock of knowledge – including knowledge of humankind, culture and society – and to devise new applications of available knowledge.”
For an activity to be an R&D activity it must satisfy five core criteria:
  1. To be aimed at new findings (novel);
  2. To be based on original, not obvious, concepts and hypotheses (creative);
  3. To be uncertain about the final outcomes (uncertain);
  4. To be planned and budgeted (systemic); and
  5. To lead to results that could be possibly reproduced (transferable and/or reproducible).
Top of Page

Section 3 - Policy Purpose

(3) This Policy forms part of the University’s governance framework for the classification and re-classification of research outputs. It outlines the roles of the author, the Faculty, the Associate Dean, Research (ADR) and Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Enterprise) (ODVCRE) in the finalisation of an output’s classification. This Policy will ensure that the classification of research outputs meets definitional standards.

Top of Page

Section 4 - Application of Policy

Current staff

(4) The ODVCRE will conduct regular harvests of publication metadata from external publication databases and create e-forms in Orion for authors to utilise to report their publication outputs to the University. It is the responsibility of the first ACU Author or the next listed ACU author (if the first ACU author is no longer at ACU) to submit the e-form for published outputs to the Faculty within four weeks of its creation.

(5) Once an output is in its final form and ready to be recorded in the ACU research information system (see the Research Publication Policy), the lead ACU author will complete the Orion Publication e-form (Orion e-form), providing the specifications of the output. On this form the author will also select the appropriate classification for that output (A1, etc.) and the appropriate codes for Field of Research, Type of Activity and Socio-Economic Objective.

(6) The Orion e-form will be submitted with the uploaded soft copy evidence to the ADR of the Faculty for endorsement.

(7) Endorsed submissions will be forwarded by the Faculty to the ODVCRE.

(8) Where the ADR does not endorse the staff member’s recommendation on classification, the ADR will provide an explanation to the staff member as to the new classification.

(9) Where a dispute arises, or where the ADR is unsure of the classification of a particular output, the following processes will apply:

  1. The ADR (copy to the Executive Dean) will request a written statement (maximum 1 page) from the staff member articulating the rationale for the originally proposed classification.
  2. A Faculty panel (with the ADR or Executive Dean as Chair and members appointed by the DVCRE) will review this new information and the research output in question and make a recommendation on the classification of the output.
  3. Following Faculty panel review, the Faculty will forward the output, the outcome of the review, and the staff member’s rationale to the ODVCRE for further review. The ODVCRE may seek further advice as deemed necessary to determine the final classification of the research output.
  4. The decision of the DVCRE will be final and there will be no further appeal.
  5. Following the review by the ODVCRE the output with its final HERDC classification will be forwarded to the Associate Director, Research Systems and Reporting, for entry into ACU’s research information system Orion. The output will be entered into the HERDC/ERA collection or the University collection.

Newly Appointed Staff

(10) Data will be entered for the preceding six years only.

(11) It is the responsibility of the Faculty to complete publication data entry to a level two verification entry stage including its classification. This should be done within three (3) months of the staff member’s appointment.

(12) Where the classification of an output is not clear, or where there is disagreement with the staff member regarding the classification of an output, then the steps described above in clause (8)d. will apply.

Annual Audits

(13) The ODVCRE will conduct a regular audit of the classification of research outputs and may at any time refer a research output to the DVCRE for a review of its classification.

Top of Page

Section 5 - Roles and Responsibilities

(14) It is incumbent on a Faculty to provide information sessions to its staff on how expert peer review panels interpret the definition of “research” as specified by HERDC and ERA.

(15) The Faculty provides central oversight of the correct classification and submission of all outputs for the HERDC and University collections.

(16) The Vice-Chancellor and President, on the advice of the DVCRE, provides final confirmation to the Commonwealth Department of the accuracy of ACU’s research data collection.

Top of Page

Section 6 - Review

(17) Unless otherwise indicated, this Policy will still apply beyond the review date.

Top of Page

Section 7 - Associated Information

(18) For related legislation, policies, procedures and guidelines and any supporting resources, please refer to the Associated Information tab.