|
Did the materials provided to verify the research impact convince the Panel that the key impact claims had been corroborated?
|
Was the link between the research and the claimed post-research impact clearly demonstrated?
|
How broad was the reach of the impacts on the relevant constituencies, when reach is defined as spread and breadth of influence post-study?
|
How important are the post-research impacts to products, processes, behaviors, policies, and/or practices, when importance is defined the significance and noteworthiness of an impact and its ability to endure?
|
|
8–9 – Corroborated
|
8–9 – Significant contribution
|
8–9 – Extensive reach because it has widespread reach in relevant constituencies in multiple countries
|
8–9 – Extremely important
|
|
6–7 – Probably corroborated
|
6–7 – Good contribution
|
6–7 – Broad reach because it has widespread reach in relevant constituencies across multiple regions, or states, in Australia or internationally
|
6–7 – Very important
|
|
5 – Possibly or partially corroborated
|
5 – Moderate contribution
|
5 – Moderate reach because it is reaching relevant constituencies in multiple discrete locations
|
5 – Moderately important
|
|
3–4 – Not corroborated but further information could provide a more convincing corroboration
|
3–4 – Small or some contribution
|
3–4 – Some reach (modest) because the impact has only modest reach in local constituencies, or has continued in the areas where the study was conducted
|
3-4 – Some import
|
|
1–2 – Not corroborated and it is unlikely that further information could provide a more convincing corroboration
|
1–2 – There is no discernible link between the underpinning research and the claimed post-study research
|
1–2 – Limited or no assessable post-study reach
|
1-2 – Limited or no assessable post-study importance
|
