ReseaRch Quality assuRance foR the futuRe a ... - Lund University

Part 2 – Conclusions of the review
PART 2 – CONCLUSIONS OF THE REVIEW
12. The terms of reference for the review in paragraph 5 (see also Annex
4) contain two broad components: firstly a review of the current
status of research in the University of Lund, and secondly how
the University’s research might be strengthened and the goals of
the strategic plan that relate to research achieved. Section E below
summarises the first, and Annex 1 provides in-depth analysis at
the level of individual Panels. In relation to the second, section F
below suggests cross-cutting, University level priorities; Annex 1
makes suggestions for improvement at the level investigated by
individual Panels; and section H comments on national processes
that influence the quality of research.
E. SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCH EVALUATIONS
13. The detailed panel reviews at the level of individual units of
assessment are contained in Annex 1. The following summaries
are presented as an overview of the assessment for those who do
not wish to go into detail. To do this we have somewhat arbitrarily
subdivided the assessment into five areas: Humanities and Arts,
Social Sciences, Science, Medicine, and Engineering.
E1. HUMANITIES AND ARTS
(Panels: 2 Religious Studies, 3 Arts, 4 Philosophy/Languages)
Theology and Religious Studies
14. Research quality ranges from excellent in some units to good/
very good in others. Research, particularly in the areas of Biblical
Studies, Church History and History of religion is based on a
small number, particularly of full professors who have widespread
international reputations and contribute to the main contemporary
theological debates and issues. The standard is very good/excellent,
but there is a lack of the infrastructural support and the PhD
students that would translate this into an outstanding effort and
create greater impact in current international debates.
14