Yearly Archives / 2018

Publishing systematic and scoping reviews to improve your research profile

With the forthcoming REF 2021 in mind we would like to encourage both staff and postgraduate students to consider writing up their literature reviews as journal articles. Systematic and scoping reviews are a great way of publishing quality publications. They are highly valued as REF submissions, especially, but not only, in the health field.

There is plenty of support at Bournemouth University: from academic colleagues, with vast experience in writing reviews, to the library team, who can advise on, for example, developing your systematic search strategy and which databases to search.

 

You can start with publishing your review question and research strategy on PROSPERO, international prospective register of systematic reviews. We would like to highlight just one BU example in the field of the social sciences.  FHSS PhD student Orlanda Harvey published her proposed review ‘Support for people who use anabolic androgenic steroids: an investigation into what they want and what they currently access’ late last year on PROSPERO [1].

You might like to have a look at reviews published by Bournemouth University staff, which can be found by searching BURO, our institutional repository of research outputs. Moreover, BU academics have published several methods papers on the doing and writing systematic reviews [2-4].

 

Information about searching the literature for systematic reviews is available on this guide by the library team.

 

Other pages with useful information include:

 

Hopefully we have encouraged you to think about publishing your literature reviews as separate articles, and to seek help early in that process!

 

José López Blanco & Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

For further information, please contact:

José López Blanco, Faculty Librarian (Health and Social Sciences), Library & Learning Support, Academic Services at tel 67350 or email:  hsslibteam@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

References:

  1. Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E., Keen., S. (2017) Support for people who use anabolic androgenic steroids: an investigation into what they want and what they currently access. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017075199 Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017075199
  2. van Teijlingen E., Napper, M., Bruce, J., Ireland. J. (2006) Systematic reviews in midwifery, RCM Midwives Journal 9(5): 186-188.
  3. van Teijlingen, ER, Simkhada, B., Ireland J., Simkhada P., Bruce J. (2012) Evidence-based health care in Nepal: The importance of systematic reviews, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 1(4): 114-118.
  4. Stewart, F., Fraser, C., Robertson, C., Avenell, A., Archibald, D., Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen, E., Boyers, D. (2014) Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase, Systematics Reviews 3,78.

CQR “Go Create!” Lunchtime Seminars 2018-19

The Centre will be hosting a number of lunchtime ‘Go Create!’ seminars for the 2018/19 academic year, all from 1pm to 2pm in Royal London House.

Wednesday 3 October – ‘Creative ways of dissemination and data gathering’, presented bY Liz Norton, Caroline Ellis-Hill and Ann Hemingway, R201

Wednesday 7 November – ‘Creating and sharing stories: Students creation of digital stories in undergraduate midwifery education’, presented by Jan Leamon, R409

Wednesday 5 December – ‘Creative Writing for Academics Mini-session’, presented by Kip Jones, R409

Wednesday 9 January – ‘Expressing research findings with an artist’, presented by Kathleen Vandenberghe, R409

Wednesday 6 February – ‘Exploring self-ageing through participatory drawing’, presented by Curie Scott, R201

Wednesday 6 March – ‘Dead Poets, Live Teachers: Using films to explore the emerging professional identities of trainee teachers’, presented by Mark Readman, R201

    R

Vitae Researcher Development International Conference 2018

On 17 – 18 September 2018 Natalie Stewart (Doctoral College Research Skills and Development Officer), Thomas Stroud (Doctoral College Resources Administrator) and Emily Cieciura (RKEO Research Knowledge and Exchange Development Framework Facilitator) attended the Vitae Researcher Development International Conference, the largest global event dedicated to researcher development.

With around 400 delegates in attendance, the conference explored the latest policy development, future development in the sector and explored the opportunities and challenges of researcher development.

With an emphasis on how to meet the future development needs of researchers for a wide range of careers in and beyond academia, we came back more informed, connected and motivated to ensure Bournemouth University Postgraduate Research Students and Research Staff are provided with comprehensive, targeted and flexible researcher development programmes.

Three Minute Thesis UK Final

The UK National 3MT® Final was hosted at the conference gala dinner where six finalists from across the UK competed to win the coveted £3k grant to spend on a public engagement activity and a place on the Taylor & Francis Journal Editor Mentoring Programme. This year’s judge’s winner was Owen James, University of Edinburgh, with the winning presentation entitled ‘Human myelin in a dish’ and the people’s choice award went to Jamie Khoo with the emotive presentation ‘But is she pretty? How women respond to beauty ideals’. The 3MT® event is definitely a highlight of the conference; hopefully we can get BU PGRs represented in the coming years. Look out for the internal 3MT® event coming up this year. You can watch all of the semi-finalist 2018 presentations on the Vitae Website here.


Doctoral College Researcher Development Programme

The RDP is complementary to postgraduate research degrees here at BU and offers PGRs flexibility to develop their academic, professional and personal skills as and when required. It supports PGRs in gaining the skills needed to complete their research degree whilst also building on transferable skills for employment, whether in academia or beyond, in an increasingly competitive jobs market.

Offering over 150 on-campus workshops, e-learning, an interactive webinar series, and a range of additional online resources, and various events the RDP mirrors the Vitae Researcher Development Framework (RDF) which enables PGRs to tailor their individual developmental journey.

The RDP is open to all PGRs and, access to view the provisions offered on Brightspace is provided to PGR supervisors.

If you have any questions on the RDP please contact the Research Skills and Development Officers Natalie and Clare (pgrskillsdevelopment@bournemouth.ac.uk).

 

RKEO Research and Knowledge Exchange Development Framework

The RKEDF offers a range of opportunities for academics at all career stages to develop their skills, knowledge and capabilities in relation to research and knowledge exchange.

Attending the Vitae conference enables us to share in the best practice across the UK and globally, providing the impetus to embrace innovative researcher development approaches. In the last twelve months, for example, BU has launched a new Early Career Researcher Network, including its Brightspace community, seen successful cohorts for the Writing Academy, Research Council Development Scheme, piloted a new career-based pathway, with dedicated developmental support for ECRs, Mid-Career and Professorial researchers, benefited from inspirational external speakers, and hosted over 150 events ranging from funder briefings to STEAMLabs. Following discussion of your development requirements with your line manager and consideration of how the RKEDF can support these needs, the RKEDF is open to all BU academic staff, including those on fixed and PTHP contracts.

The RKEDF also references the Vitae Researcher Development Framework (RDF).

If you have any questions about the RKEDF, please contact Emily Cieciura, RKEDF Facilitator (RKEDevFramework@bournemouth.ac.uk).

 

BRIAN Down – Thursday 11th October

IT are undertaking essential maintenance to the BRIAN servers on Thursday 11th October 8am. This will involve BRIAN being unavailable to users for a short period of time.

We will communicate on the blog as soon as BRIAN is up and running again.

Reflecting on research using creative methods

We invited a lecture hall of postgraduate research (PGR) students to reflect on their hopes for their research studies using a collage methodology. Image-making enables cognitive disruption (in a good way). Collage can be mediated in various ways. In this situation, magazines and cut-out magazine images were spread across the lecture theatre. PGR students were given the prompt “what are your hopes for your future studies”. They tore out images that caught their attention which were glued onto an A4 page. The meaning of these posters was shared to gather core themes. These were then uploaded to a padlet board. At the end of the session students wrote their action plans on A4 people and sent them (literally) with doctoral college staff by launching paper planes. CEL work with teams to embed making processes into teaching practice. Please contact cscott@bournemouth.ac.uk for further information.

Good luck to all those starting post-graduate research studies!

BA Small Research Grant Awarded for project – Safe Swim: Supporting physical activity and wellbeing for transgender people

Jayne Caudwell (Department of Events & Leisure) and Carly Stewart (Department of Sport & Physical Activity) were successful in the last round of the British Academy Small Grants Scheme. Their research project will contribute preliminary qualitative research findings to inform future provision for transgender and non-binary swim-related activities and opportunities.

Statistics demonstrate that LGBT+ have higher levels of anxiety, depression, and suicidal feelings as a consequence of feeling isolated, and experiences of rejection and bullying. The research project involves a Bournemouth-based transgender group. It focuses on their swim-related activities to explore the benefits of water-based physical activity. Currently, the group privately hires a local pool and by invitation the researchers have attended on three occasions. Preliminary participant observation has identified that group members look forward to the opportunity to swim. Swimming as a form of physical activity can enhance subjective wellbeing. However, there is evidence in the tabloid print media that public response to Swim England’s ‘Guide to Engaging Trans People in Swimming’ (December 2017) involved elements of transphobia. Specifically, a negative reaction to transgender women using female changing rooms. The funded project will provide in-depth research findings in order to influence current policy-formation.

LGBT+ experiences of sport, physical activity and embodied movement continue to be significant concerns given the barriers, constraints, prejudice and discrimination evident within institutionalised sport and physical activity. Since the 1990s sport and leisure studies scholars have documented lesbian and gay peoples’ experiences of participation. This research has helped improve opportunities for lesbian and gay people to participate by raising awareness and increased inclusion and provision. More recently, there has been a turn to transgender participants and issues surrounding the often-constraining binary arrangement and organisation of sport and physical activity. This turn is important because it highlights the different hostilities transgender and non-binary individuals face compared with lesbian and gay participants. However, the focus of this emerging research—transgender and non-binary participation—tends to be competitive sport and the structures that regulate and confirm binary-sex and gender. Less is known about grassroots participation, and/or the new/emerging opportunities and bodily pleasures transgender and non-binary individuals and communities create for themselves and for each other.

There are a small number of transgender and gender non-conforming swim groups in the UK, but there is no current research that captures transgender and non-binary experiences of swim-related activities such as negotiating access to pool time, negotiating access to changing facilities, and the thoughts, feelings and embodied experiences regarding being in the water. As such, the now-funded research is underpinned by the following objectives:

1. To work with a local transgender group to collect, process and disseminate qualitative research findings on how access to swimming facilities impacts individual and group wellbeing.

2. To explore past and present experiences of swimming for transgender and non-binary participants through interviews and focus group research.

3. To access details related to embodied experiences, which might not emerge from traditional methods such as interviews and focus groups, through visual methods such as drawings, photographs, video diaries and digital story telling.

4. To produce, for public consumption, a visual/art representation of the research participants’ experiences of swimming.

How to avoid being late

I published the updated late submissions procedure earlier this week.  I thought it might be useful to those applying for funding to have a few tips on how to avoid being late:

  • Plan out your research for the year, five years and even ten years – the RKEO Research Facilitators can help you with this by discussing your career progression, the impact you want your research to have both short- and long-term, and opportunities available to support you with your research plans
  • Ensure your Research Professional searches are up-to-date and finding the opportunities for you – RKEO Funding Development Officers can help you set up searchers that ensure you get the heads-up on what’s coming up
  • Look for schemes where there are multiple calls and plan realistically for the call deadline that suits you – you don’t have to go for the one in two weeks’ time when there is another in 3 months’ time
  • Look for opportunities to attend funder town meetings/information days for specific calls/ schemes – not only are these great opportunities to get a heads up on what calls are coming out soon but it is also an opportunity to network and find potential research collaborations
  • If you require partners to support your research, ensure these are in place and on board with your plans before considering applying. Similarly, ensure your research team are in place and can support you with the application preparation
  • Don’t put yourself under unnecessary pressure – start writing down your case for support and research ideas before looking for the right funding opportunity
  • Talk to your HoD and peers about what you want to achieve – they will be able to offer you support and can provide peer review
  • Take up the opportunities available under the RKEDF to help you with application writing or attend our STEAMLabs to form interdisciplinary, collaborative groups – these are both great opportunities to network and form new partnerships for future research applications
  • Get all those involved in a proposal on board before writing, especially if the funder has e-submission. Ensure investigators are registered on the e-submission sites; ensure CVs are updated for all those required; ensure letters of support from partners include a recent date, are on headed paper, and are signed; and make sure that any BU letters of support are drafted and that those who will sign it know what your application is about and what support you’re asking BU for.
  • TIME – this is the biggest thing you need! – to ensure your application stands a good chance of success you need to think through your objectives and ensure they’re well defined, make your hypothesis clear, consider the impact of your research, include relevant preliminary data, tell a compelling story, and justify your methods.  See the 12 top tips for writing a grant application provided by the MRC when they visited BU last year.

We’re here to support you and so do get in touch with your RKEO colleagues as soon as you have an idea.

Introduction to Good Clinical Practice – 10th October

Are you interested in running your own research project within the NHS? Good Clinical Practice, or ‘GCP’, is a requirement for those wishing to work on clinical research projects in a healthcare setting.

GCP is the international ethical, scientific and practical standard to which all clinical research is conducted. By undertaking GCP, you’re able to demonstrate the rights, safety and wellbeing of your research participants are protected, and that the data collected are reliable.

The next GCP full day session is scheduled for Wednesday 10th October, at Dorset County Hospital, Dorchester – 8:45am – 4:30pm.

The day will comprise of the following sessions:

  • Introduction to research and the GCP standards;
  • Preparing to deliver your study;
  • Identifying and recruiting participants – eligibility and informed consent;
  • Data collection and ongoing study delivery;
  • Safety reporting;
  • Study closure.

If you’re interested in booking a place, please contact Research Ethics.
Remember that support is on offer at BU if you are thinking of introducing your research ideas into the NHS – email the Research Ethics mailbox, and take a look at the Clinical Governance blog.

Vianna Renaud, FMC PDA and doctoral student, chairs Student Panel on placements at annual ASET 2018 Conference

It was with great pleasure that I chaired a student panel session at the 2018 ASET Conference at the University of Nottingham. ASET, the UK Work Based and Placement Learning association is the leading professional body regarding placement learning and therefore it was wonderful to not only represent Bournemouth University but to also take part in this way.

With students from Ulster University, Southampton, LSE, Southampton, Leicester and University of Central Lancashire, the aim of the session was to encourage discussion around what universities can do to best support the placement experience in the eyes of students. With over 175 delegates from across the UK and Ireland, combined with the variety of backgrounds on the student panel, it was the perfect opportunity to gain their insight within an open and frank forum.

Given the reality of reducing resources within UK HE, critical questions around both central service and faculty based initiatives were asked. The main theme from the student panel was to engage students more with relative activities which included more interaction with final year students, alumni, industry representatives, etc. They agreed that universities need to think about the longevity of the student journey, from Open Days and first year, to final year. There needs to be a visible and clear link between employability activities with the academic curriculum, instead of the placement experience feeling like a bolted on experience. Students want to learn from their colleagues as it was felt that they share more realistic information in comparison to university staff. The concept of Placement PALS came up as a great initiative which for me was a highlight given that we have had this at BU for many years now. There was a consensus that the placement approval process was overall a tedious process, regarding of the software package being used, therefore keeping it as simple as possible was a key point. Another primary concern amongst the students was placement assessment and the importance of it being linked to future interviews for graduate roles. Therefore e-portfolios, a strong LinkedIn profile with recommendations, personal website or blog, amongst others, were discussed as the way forward in helping the student to make the most from the placement experience with a direct impact on their future.

This session contributed greatly to the overall theme of the conference, which was on our role as institutions to future-proof placements. Full conference proceedings will be available shortly at: http://www.asetonline.org/ You can also access the Good Practice Guides, ASET Viewpoints and other ASET publications on the website which are considered to be benchmarks in the sector.

 

Postgraduate Researchers – Welcome to the Doctoral College: Researcher Development Programme 2018-19

The Researcher Development Programme (RDP) offers over 150 workshops, online modules, online resources and an interactive webinar series specifically for postgraduate researchers professional, personal and research development.

The RDP offers the flexibility to meet individual development needs and long-term career development whilst at BU. The programme aims to ensure that postgradaute researchers are fully equipped with the skills and knowledge required to complete their research degree and make a successful transition into their future career, whether in academia or beyond.

Full programme details can be found in the brochure

A quick step user guide on how to use Brightspace and how to book onto workshops can be found here.

If you are a postgraduate researcher or supervisors and have any questions please contact your Research Skills and Development Officers Natalie and Clare on pgrskillsdevelopment@bournemouth.ac.uk

CALL FOR PAPERS – SPECIAL ISSUE “Brand Management and Cocreation: lessons from tourism and hospitality” 

CALL FOR PAPERS – SPECIAL ISSUE
“Brand Management and Cocreation: lessons from tourism and hospitality” JOURNAL OF PRODUCT AND BRAND MANAGEMENT – Planned publication is early 2021. http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=jpbm 

2017 Impact Factor: 2.75

GUEST EDITORS: 

Professor Dimitrios Buhalis, Bournemouth University, UK
Professor Nigel Morgan, Swansea University, UK
Dr Sangwon Park, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, China  

The planned publication early 2021
Deadline for submissions 1 September 2019
Submissions period 1 August 2019- until 1 September 2019. 

________________________________________________

CALL FOR PAPERS 

Branding originated as a means by which a company differentiated its goods and/or services compared to its competitors (Cowley, 1991). The importance of brand management in tourism and hospitality has become more important than ever as the sectors have become mature, global and highly competitive. Hitherto, the creation of strong brands was the result of passive or responsive marketing involvement by brand managers on consumers (Brown, Kozinets, and Sherry, 2003). Recent literature on marketing and brand management, however, suggests that strong brands are generated from a co-creation process, involving consumers’ active engagement (Boyle, 2007). For example, Coupland, Iacobucci, and Arnould (2005, p. 107) comment that “the consumer is an active partner with the marketer in brand-meaning formation”, whilst Brown et al. (2003, p. 30) note “the brand is a milieu where marketing management and consumer commitment co-exist”. 

Tourism and hospitality deal with experiential products and are at the forefront of cocreation (Buhalis & Foerste, 2015) so that the integration of brand management and co-creation is now a crucial issue (Buhalis and Inversini, 2014). In terms of inseparability, one of the service characteristics, the service environment implies the involvement of consumers in the entire service process – including the production and consumption stages (Middleton, Fyall, Morgan, Morgan, and Ranchhod, 2009). Moreover, the development of information technology (e.g. TripAdvisor, Booking, and Expedia) facilitates the sharing of consumer service experiences and their positive or negative reflections as part of co-creation activities, which potentially informs brand development and reputation (Binkhorst and Den Dekker, 2009; Au, Buhalis and Law, 2014). Numerous studies in tourism and hospitality have discussed the brand management and co-creation, separately. However, academic attempts to integrate two important themes are more limited. Therefore, the purpose of this special issue in JPBM is to explore brand management and co-creation in tourism and hospitality contexts using a variety of issues/concepts/examples. We invite submissions on a broad range of tourism and hospitality branding topics in this regard, and welcome both conceptual and empirical contributions. 

Some suggested tourism and hospitality branding topics include:
• Brand cocreation in tourism and hospitality
• Destination branding and cocreation
• Tourism and hospitality branding
• Tourism and hospitality Branding across cultures
• Branding through tourism ecosystems
• Sustainability and tourism branding
• Destination image and destination personality
• Branding for tourism places
• Regenerating obsolete brands in tourism and hospitality
• Tourists engagement with brands
• Brand managers’ approaches to tourism and hospitality products
• Strategies for adapting innovative branding strategies to tourism and hospitality
• The impact of technology on tourism and hospitality branding 

SUBMISSION INFORMATION
Full papers submitted to this special issue are subject to the standard review procedures and rules of Journal of Product and Brand Management. 

http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm?id=jpbm Please note that:

• Papers need to be submitted online to the Special Issue on “Brand management and cocreation: lessons from tourism and hospitality” through the ScholarOne System (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jpbm).
• For informal enquiries you can contact the guest editors.
• Submissions will be blind-reviewed by at least two reviewers.
• Based on the reviewers’ recommendation, the guest editors and the Editors-in-Chief will decide whether the particular submission is accepted as it is, revised and re-submitted, or rejected.

Deadline for submissions 1 September 2019.The Scholar 1 site will not open for submissions until 1 August 2019.  The site will remain open for one month until 1 September 2019. Submissions to the special issue can only be made during this window and should be made by selecting the special issue from the drop down menu which will become available on 1 August 2019. The planned publication is early 2021. 

REFERENCES 

Au, N., Buhalis, D., Law, R., 2014, Online Complaining Behavior for Mainland China Hotels: The Perception of Chinese and Non-Chinese Customers”, International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 15, pp.248-274. 

Binkhorst, E. and Den Dekker, T. (2009), “Agenda for co-creation tourism experience research”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, Vol. 18 No. 2-3, pp. 311-327.

Boyle, E. (2007). “A process model of brand cocreation: brand management and research implications.” Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 16. No. 2, pp. 122-131.

Brown, S., Kozinets, R.V. and Sherry, J.F. (2003), “Teaching old brands new tricks: retro branding and the revival of brand meaning”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 19-33.

Buhalis, D., Foerste, M., 2015, SoCoMo marketing for travel and tourism: Empowering co-creation of value, Journal of destination marketing and management 4 (3), 151-161 76

Buhalis D., Inversini A. (2014) Tourism Branding, Identity, Reputation Co-creation, and Word-of-Mouth in the Age of Social Media. In: Mariani M.M., Baggio R., Buhalis D., Longhi C. (eds) Tourism Management, Marketing, and Development. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

Coupland, J.C., Iacobucci, D. and Arnould, E. (2005), “Invisible brands: an ethnography of households and the brands in their kitchen pantries”, Journal of Consumer Research., Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 106-13.

Cowley, D. (1991), Understanding Brands by Ten People Who Do, Kogan Page, London 

Boyle, E. (2007) “A process model of brand cocreation: brand management and research implications”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp.122-131.

Middleton, V. T., Fyall, A., Morgan, M., Morgan, M., & Ranchhod, A. (2009). Marketing in travel and tourism. Routledge.

CQR Lunchtime Conversations Kick Off 3rd Oct at 1 pm RLH 201

The engaging CQR lunchtime Go Create!

seminar series for 2018-19 begins with

Liz Norton, Caroline Ellis-Hill &

Ann Hemingway

“Creative ways of data gathering &

dissemination”

Oct 3rd 1-2 pm RLH 201

Come prepared for informal conversation, sharing, and audience participation!

“We will be VERY informal!”

See you there!

R

HE policy update for the w/e 21st September 2018

Tuition Fees – means testing?

The Higher Education Policy Institute and Canadian Higher Education Strategy Associates have published a joint research paper on means-tested tuition fees for higher education – Targeted Tuition Fees – Is means-testing the answer? It explores the different funding approaches around the world considering the three major approaches to subsiding students in HE:

  • Equal subsidisation, resulting in a system of free tuition
  • Post-hoc subsidy (eg. England) in which those with smaller financial returns pay less
  • Pre-hoc subsidy, in which reductions in net price are given to poorer students, usually through a system of grants

Targeted free tuition starts from the notion that income-contingent fee loans do improve access but don’t do enough to help those from the poorest households, many of which are extremely debt adverse, and it leads to these families ruling out attending HE. Targeted free tuition suggests means testing and offering those on lowest income partial or full exemption from tuition fees.

The report concludes that “targeted free tuition has both an attractive political and economic logic: it provides benefits to those who need it without providing windfall gains to those who do not. Evidence from several countries over many years tells us that students from poorer backgrounds have a higher elasticity of demand than students from wealthier ones. Put simply, there is far more value for money in reducing or eliminating net tuition for low income students than there is in doing so for wealthier ones”.

Nick Hillman (HEPI) spoke on the report during the Today programme on Radio 4 on Thursday.

Means testing tuition fees is another interesting contribution to the Post-18 Review discussion.  It would of course, increase costs, just at the time when the accounting treatment is about to change and the existing costs become more visible.  You’ll remember we reported last week that the Post-18 Review report is delayed awaiting outcomes on the decision of how to account for student loans, but will Phillip Augar use the delay to cogitate further on tuition fees?

There is an interesting debate, though, about the tension between means testing families at one level (as already happens for maintenance loans) and then basing everything on the graduate premium – i.e. the income of the graduate not the family.  The government will say that the current position is fairer because the amount repaid is all based on graduate income, whereas under this system the merchant banker children of WP families would repay nothing.  The opposing side was expressed on Radio 4 by Polly Mackenzie of Demos. She said that technocratic solutions developed by policy wonks would not solve the problem of student finance. That the public were emotionally opposed to debt and the system is too broken to survive, regardless of the merits of rebranding, renaming or tweaking it.

Alex Usher, the Canadian author of the paper writes for Wonkhe in A case for means-tested fees.

While Becca Bland from Stand Alone highlights that students with complex family situations which approach but don’t quite meet categorisation as an independent student fall through the means testing cracks and all too often can’t access sufficient funding to access or complete HE study. See Family means-testing for student loans is not working.

Education Spending

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) released its annual report on England’s education spend. On HE it summarises:

  • Reforms to higher education funding have increased university resources and made little difference to the long-run cost to the public purse. Universities currently receive just over £9,000 per full-time undergraduate student per year to fund their teaching. This is 22% higher than it was in 2011, and nearly 60% more than in 1997. Reforms since 2011 have cut the impact on the headline measure of the government’s deficit by about £6 billion per cohort entering higher education, but the expected long-run cost to the taxpayer has fallen by less than £1 billion.

The report hit the headlines for the decline in FE spending; this heightened the current speculation that FE spend may be addressed through the post-18 tertiary education funding review. Research Professional report that the IFS write a

  •  “key challenge” facing the higher-education system in England is “ensuring the quality of education provided in a market where students lack good information about the return to their degrees”.
  • “The challenge for the government is to define and produce the metrics on which it wants universities to perform, and incentivise universities to take these metrics seriously.”

The article notes that the TEF, which originally planned to link higher tuition fees to outcomes, would have incentivised HE providers to focus more on their performance metrics. However, a respondent from Exeter University challenged the IFS’ statement, saying:

  • All of this is out of touch with the reality of UK universities. In fact we are awash with metrics and we study them obsessively. Even when the TEF was decoupled from financial incentive, we took it no less seriously. Just look at how the results are received – and celebrated, or challenged.”

The key points from the IFS report:

  • 16-18 education has been a big loser from education spending changes over the last 25 years. In 1990-91, spending per student in further education was 50% higher than spending per student in secondary schools. It is now 8% lower in real terms.
  • FE also suffers from dwindling mature student numbers – the total number of adult learners fell from 4 million in 2005 to 2.2 million by 2016, with total funding falling by 45% in real terms over that period. However, spending per learner has remained relatively constant at £1,000 per year
  • 19+ FE is now sharply focussed on apprenticeships – making up almost half of all Level 2 qualifications undertaken by adults, compared to less than 10% in 2005. They also make up about two-thirds of all Level 3 adult learners
  • At the event launching the report panellists debated T-levels concluding that the new qualifications wouldn’t raise per student funding levels for sixth forms and FE colleges. Any additional funding would only cover the increased number of teaching hours required. The panel also debated whether a focus on occupational and technical skills would leave people vulnerable to economic and trade shocks.

Higher Education

  • Universities receive £28,200 per student to fund the cost of teaching their degrees, with 60% rise since 97/98 largely attributable to tuition fee reforms [Note: this is likely the average tuition fee value across the full duration of a degree, it doesn’t divide perfectly to the £9,250 fee level because fee levels vary for longer four year degrees and placement years.]
  • The expected long run taxpayer cost of providing HE is £8.5bn per cohort. Since 2011 the £6bn reduction in the teaching grant only translates into £800m of savings per cohort, because:
  • The lowest earning 40% of graduates repay £3,000 less student loan over their lifetime than had they started in 2011 (owing to the higher repayment threshold).

Responding to the IFS report Geoff Barton, Association of School and College Leaders, played on the gulf between FE and HE funding levels:

  • “Parents will be horrified to learn of the damage that has been done to sixth forms and colleges by severe real-terms cuts in government funding. They may also wonder why the basic rate of funding for each of these students is just £4,000 compared to tuition fees at university which can be as high as £9,250. [Is Geoff touching on dangerous ground here? Few people want to take out loans to access FE provision!]
  • There is no rhyme or reason for the extremely low level of funding for 16-18 year-olds, and without the additional investment that is desperately needed more courses and student support services will have to be cut in addition to those which have already been lost. It is a crucial phase of education in which young people take qualifications which are vital to their life chances and they deserve better from a government which constantly talks about social mobility.
  • The government’s under-investment in 16-18 education is part of a wider picture of real-terms cuts to school funding which is putting hard-won standards at risk.”

Other fees and funding news

Mis-sold and overhyped: The Guardian ran a provocative article Mis-sold, expensive and overhyped: why our universities are a con claiming universities haven’t delivered on the social mobility and graduate wage premium that politicians promised. If you read to the end you’ll see the author is actually in favour of scrapping tuition fees and increasing levels of vocational provision.

Transparent Value?: Advance HE blogs How does HE create and demonstrate value? Arguing there is

  • too little focus, for example, on the value created for the economy and society, for research, and for collaborations with business. If value is always reduced to short-term financial value this creates a degree of inequality between different stakeholder groups….. we live in a world where there is no collective understanding of value… The nature of value is changing, and it’s changing higher education’s direction. The blog also tackles what it means to be transparent.

Graduate Employability

The OfS have blogged on improving graduate employability.  They say:

  •  more than a quarter of English graduates say they are over qualified for the jobs they are doing. Yet we know that many businesses also say they struggle to find graduates with the skills necessary to the job. This apparent mismatch between what a university education may deliver and what employers say they need underlines the importance of keeping employability in sharp focus throughout students’ experience of higher education.

The blog goes on to highlight the OfS consultation which sets out tough targets for improving employment gaps.  The OfS call for more work placement opportunities:

  • Many employers are now offering degree apprenticeships and this is important and welcome. But we also need more work placement opportunities. It cannot be right that so many students, especially those on courses with little vocational element and those without the right networks, have no access to good work placements or holiday internships while they are studying. This means they are more likely to face a cycle of internships, too often unpaid, after they graduate before they are able to get lasting graduate employment.

Apart from calling for more work-based time the blog’s advice for improving graduate employability is limited to stating:

  • Students need to take up every opportunity available to them during their time in higher education to help improve their employability and get a rewarding job.

The blog also announced that the OfS will launch a competition in October for projects testing ways of improving progression outcomes for commuter graduates (who remain in their home town during study and after graduation).

Pre-degree technical internship – Research Professional writes about a Danish trial scheme which gives students work experience in technical subjects before they commence at university. The scheme consists of a four-week internship undertaken before the degree start date which provides insight into how the learning and knowledge will be applied in practice The trial aims to reduce high dropout rates of 20% on Danish technical courses, with dropout soaring to 30% for students with lower graded prior academic qualifications.

Gender Pay Gap – The Telegraph highlighted how the gender pay gap is apparent even at lower levels of qualification. In women choose lower-wage apprenticeships than men the Telegraph describes how the professions with a dominant female workforce are lower paid, for example women tend towards lower paid child development careers whereas engineering and construction receive higher remuneration.

Admissions

UCAS have published their latest 2018 cycle acceptance figures which sum up the confirmation and clearing period, key points:

  • In England, a record 33.5 per cent of the 18 year old population have now been accepted through UCAS.
  • 60,100 people have been accepted through Clearing in total so far, 150 more than the equivalent point last year, and a new record. Of those, 45,690 people were placed after applying through the main scheme (compared to 46,310 in 2017), and a record 14,410 applied directly to Clearing (compared to 13,640 at the same point last year).
  • A total of 30,350 EU students have been accepted (up 2 per cent on 2017), alongside a record 38,330 (up 4 per cent) from outside the EU.
  • The total number of UK applicants now placed is 426,730, down 3 per cent on 2017, although this comes alongside a 2.5 per cent drop in the number of 18 year olds in the UK population.
  • 495,410 people are now placed in full-time UK higher education through UCAS so far, a decrease of 2 per cent on the same point last year.

Explore the data more through interactive charts here.

Clare Marchant, UCAS’ Chief Executive, said: The highest ever proportions of young people from England, Scotland, and Wales have been accepted, and record numbers of people have a place after applying through Clearing, with their exam results in hand. [Interesting given continued calls for a post-qualification admissions process.]

She continues: The enduring global appeal of studying an undergraduate degree in the UK is clear from the growth in international students with a confirmed place, both from within and outside of the EU. The overall fall in acceptances reflects the ongoing decline in the total number of 18 year olds in the UK’s population, which will continue for the next few years, and follows similar patterns to application trends seen earlier in the year.

Wonkhe describes the data in Drama Backstage? Clearing statistics in 2018 and the Independent’s article says Universities feeling the pinch will have taken generous view of entry qualifications to full places.

Nursing recruitment continues to fall, the UCAS figures for England show a further drop of 570 less students for 2018/19. Last week the NHS figures highlighted a crisis with record levels of vacant nursing posts – just in England the NHS is short of 40,000 registered nurses. Lara Carmona, Royal College of Nursing, said:

  • “When there are tens of thousands of vacant nursing jobs, the Government’s own policy is driving down the number of trainees year after year. These figures are a harsh reminder for ministers of the need to properly address the staffing crisis that is putting safe and effective treatment patient care at risk.
  • This piecemeal approach to policy-making is futile. We urgently need comprehensive workforce plans that should safeguard recruitment and retention and that responds to patients needs in each country. This should include incentives to attract more nursing students.
  • The Government must bring forward legislation in England, building on law in Wales and the current draft bill in Scotland, that ensures accountability for safe staffing levels across health and care services.
  • And where is the review of the impact that those 2015 reforms had? [The removal of the nursing bursary and introduction of tuition fees.] The Department of Health and Social Care promised this two years ago and it is high time it was published.”

However, the response to a parliamentary question on Monday saw the Government remain steadfast to the funding changes:

Q – Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make it his policy to reintroduce bursaries for nursing degrees; and if he will make a statement. [172541]

A – Stephen Barclay: The removal of bursaries and introduction of student loans for nursing degrees has increased the number of nursing degree places that are available. Latest Universities and Colleges Admissions Service data for September 2018 show that there are still more applicants than places available for nursing courses.

As such we have no plans to reinstate a bursary cap on places, which would limit the number of places available.

Electoral Registration

The Office for Students published Regulatory Advice 11: Guidance for providers about facilitating electoral registration. It requires Universities to work with all geographically relevant Electoral Registrations Officers to provide sufficient student information to maintain the electoral register. Good practice case studies for electoral registration are included at Annex A (pages 7-12).

The Office for Students (OfS) has published Regulatory Advice 11: Guidance for providers about facilitating electoral registration, for registered providers in England. Any provider may be randomly selected for scrutiny, but attention will be focused on those where issues have been raised, in particular from electoral registration officers. Good practice and case studies show how universities should take a risk-based approach on the issue, and also raise awareness of democratic engagement and electoral registration.

Staff Migration

The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) published their final report on European Economic Area migration within the UK this week. Here are the key points:

Labour Market Impacts:

  • Migrants have no or little impact on the overall employment and unemployment outcomes of the UK born workforce
  • Migration is not a major determinate of the wages of UK born workers

Productivity, innovation, investment and training impacts

  • Studies commissioned point towards immigration having a positive impact on productivity but the results are subject to significant uncertainty.
  • High-skilled immigrants make a positive contribution to the levels of innovation in the receiving country.
  • There is no evidence that migration has had a negative impact on the training of the UK-born workforce. Moreover, there is some evidence to suggest that skilled migrants have a positive impact on the quantity of training available to the UK-born workforce.

Public finance and public fund impacts

  • EEA migrants pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits. The positive net contribution to the public finances is larger for EU13+ migrants than for NMS migrants.
  • However, net fiscal contribution is strongly related to age and, more importantly, earnings so that a migration policy that selected on those characteristics could produce even higher gains.

Public service impacts

  • EEA migrants contribute much more to the health service and the provision of social care in financial resources and through work than they consume in services.
  • In education, we find no evidence that migration has reduced parental choice in schools or the educational attainment of UK-born children. On average, children with English as an additional language outperform native English speakers.

Summary of recommendations for work migration post-Brexit:

  1. General principle behind migration policy changes should be to make it easier for higher-skilled workers to migrate to the UK than lower-skilled workers.
  2. No preference for EU citizens, on the assumption UK immigration policy not included in agreement with EU.
  3. Abolish the cap on the number of migrants under Tier 2 (General).
  4. Tier 2 (General) to be open to all jobs at RQF3 and above. Shortage Occupation List to be fully reviewed.
  5. Maintain existing salary thresholds for all migrants in Tier 2.
  6. Retain but review the Immigration Skills Charge.
  7. Consider abolition of the Resident Labour Market Test. If not abolished, extend the numbers of migrants who are exempt through lowering the salary required for exemption.
  8. Review how the current sponsor licensing system works for small and medium-sized businesses.
  9. Consult more systematically with users of the visa system to ensure it works as smoothly as possible.
  10. For lower-skilled workers avoid Sector-Based Schemes (with the potential exception of a Seasonal Agricultural Workers scheme)
  11. If an Agricultural Workers scheme is reintroduced, ensure upward pressure on wages via an agricultural minimum wage to encourage increases in productivity.
  12. If a “backstop” is considered necessary to fill low-skilled roles extend the Tier 5 Youth Mobility Scheme.
  13. Monitor and evaluate the impact of migration policies.
  14. Pay more attention to managing the consequences of migration at a local level.

Following last week’s MAC report on international students the sector has speculated that the above recommendations have been influenced by the Home Office and so are likely to be acted upon. Furthermore, during her interview with Nick Robinson this week the Prime Minister said that an immigration policy will be published later in the Autumn. This may be published as an Immigration white paper (a Government statement of intent in relation to immigration, white papers sometimes invite sector response on some small details or call for public support). The PM has also hinted that EU nationals won’t receive special treatment (which is one of the report’s recommendations) and Sajid Javid has been reported saying that EU nationals will face visas and caps. However, immigration is one of the key Brexit bargaining points, one which David Davis, speaking on Radio 4’s Today programme this week, declared wouldn’t be resolved until late on in the negotiation stages.

With the report’s recommendations to support high skilled migration, and previous Governmental assurances towards university academics, the recommendations haven’t sounded any alarms within the HE staff sector. However, universities that rely on EU talent to bolster medium skilled professional roles could face difficulty.

  • Wonkhe report that: An unlikely coalition of 11 right-of-centre think tanks from both sides of the Atlantic has published a joint report – reported in the Sun – calling for the free movement of people between the USA and the UK for anyone with a job offer.
  • The Sun names it an ‘ideal post-Brexit free-trade agreement’. However, the model US trade deal was vehemently opposed by Global Justice Now who state that: trade deals are not the place to negotiate free movement provisions.
  • Universities UK said: “It is good to see the MAC acknowledging many of the positive impacts that skilled European workers have on life in the UK.”
  • The Russell Group was less enthralled stating: “This was a real opportunity to steer the UK towards a more modern and intelligent immigration system, but the recommendations are unimaginative”.

Meanwhile British Future’s National Conversation on Immigration (which Wonkhe says is the biggest ever public immigration consultation – 19,951 respondents) was published this week finding:

  • Only 15% of people feel the Government has managed immigration competently and fairly;
  • Only 13% of people think MPs tell the truth about immigration;
  • Just 17% trust the Government to tell the truth about immigration.

Wonkhe report that: The research concludes that the public wants to hold the government to account for delivering on immigration policy promises, as well as more transparency and democratic engagement on the issue.

The survey also calls for:

  • 3 year plan for migration including measures to increase international student migration
  • Clarity on the status of EU students after Brexit transition
  • Review Tier 4 visa processes
  • Post-study work visa for STEM graduates
  • All universities should produce a community plan, involving university staff and local residents
  • And, a new wave of universities to “spread the benefits that HE brings more widely across the UK”

On the new universities it continues:

  • These institutions should focus on local needs and account for the diverse nature of the places  in which they are established. We recommend that these new institutions specialise in regional economic and cultural strengths and have strong business and community links. They should also be part of a strengthened life-long learning system with clear routes from apprenticeships, through further education and into higher level studies. But these new universities must be new and not repurposed further education colleges.
  • There are a number of ways that a new wave of university building could be financed, so that the burden does not fall on the taxpayer. While students and research grants provide everyday revenue, the capital costs of a new university could be raised through capital markets.
  • There should be clear obligations placed on these new universities to deliver additional courses below degree level, to support lifelong learning, promote good links with employers and to boost the skills of the local population.

International Students

A Research Professional article revisits the MAC Commission’s failure to challenge Theresa May’s refusal to remove international students from the net migration figures. However, it believes Britain’s declining share of the international student market can be saved by the following seven actions:

  • The Home Office should establish a “friendly environment policy” for international students, with improved post-study work options and streamlined visa processes to match our competitors such as Australia.
  • The Department for Education, supported by the Home Office, should roll out an improved Tier 4 pilot based on recruiting from target growth countries such as India and Nigeria.
  • The Home Office must simplify visa procedures and reduce burdens on Tier 4 university sponsors.
  • The Department for International Trade must reinvigorate the “Education is GREAT” campaign, working with universities to maximise impact.
  • The Department for International Development should allocate a proportion of foreign aid spending to providing scholarships and pathway programmes, match-funded by universities.
  • The Home Office and the British Council should review the number and location of English language test centres to attract the brightest and best students, not the richest.
  • The government should immediately announce a continuation of home fee status for EU students in 2020 and beyond.

It concludes: A whole-of-government approach must be adopted and a firm national target for education exports should be set. Education policy and migration policy should support each other in a common commitment to that target. Only then can the UK stay ahead of its competitors in attracting international students and strengthening education exports.

There was also a parliamentary question on last week’s MAC international student’s report:

Q – Steve Double: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Migration Advisory Committee report entitled International Students in the UK, published on 11 September 2018, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of the recommendations in that report; and if he will make statement.

A- Caroline Nokes: We are grateful to the Migrant Advisory Committee for their balanced and comprehensive review into International Students in the UK. We will be carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will be responding in due course.

Artificial Intelligence

Advent of AI leads to job refocus

The World Economic Forum report The Future of Jobs 2018 believes AI and automation technologies will replace 75 million jobs leading companies to change the human role resulting in 133 million new roles by 2022. The WEF report suggests that full time permanent employment may fall and there would be ‘significant shifts’ in the quality, location and format of new roles. The report highlights skills and the need for companies to invest in upskilling their workforce. Saadia Zahidi, Head of the Centre for the New Economy and Society at the World Economic Forum, said: While automation could give companies a productivity boost, they need to invest in their employees in order to stay competitive. Meanwhile this CNBC article which describes the WEF report claims that AI and robotics will create 60 million more jobs than they destroy.

A parliamentary question on AI was responded to this week:

Q – Lord Taylor Of Warwick: What assessment they have made of public perceptions of artificial intelligence ; and what measures they will put in place to ensure that the uptake of this technology is done so in a transparent, accountable and ethical manner.

A – Lord Henley: The Government is aware of a broad range of views on the potential of artificial intelligence . The independent review on artificial intelligence in the UK stressed the importance of industry and experts working together to secure and deserve public trust, address public perceptions, gain public confidence, and model how to deliver and demonstrate fair treatment.

The new Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation (CDEI), AI Council and Office for Artificial Intelligence (OAI) were set up to deliver the recommendations of the review, and therefore have a crucial role to play.

Ethical AI safeguards, including transparency and accountability mechanisms, will be scrutinised and improved through the new Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation – the first of its kind anywhere in the world. The £9m Centre will advise on the safe, ethical and innovative use of data driven tech and help negotiate the potential risks and opportunities for the benefit of consumers.

The UK already has a strong and well respected regulatory environment, which is an integral part of building customer confidence and trust in new innovations. The Government is committed to ensuring that the public continues to be protected as more artificial intelligence applications come into use across different sectors. We believe creating an environment of responsible innovation is the right approach for gaining the public’s trust, and is ultimately good for UK businesses.

Technological Change

Vince Cable, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, spoke on technological change at the autumn party conference:

In the face of relentlessly advancing new technologies, it is easy for people to feel powerless and threatened.  So we have to understand and regulate some of the technologies coming down the track.
Jo Swinson and I are setting up a commission to look at how to turn emerging technologies from a threat into an opportunity.

And if we embrace these technologies, imagine the potential. The potential for robotics in care homes; for machine learning which can detect the first signs of malignant tumour or detect fraud for blockchain which can enable massive, secure, clinical trials and quantum computing which can out-compute computers.  Britain could and should be a leader, investing massively in our science and technology base.

Research

After eight months working together, the UK Parliament and the Devolved Administrations have co-authored a four-page briefing on Research Impact and Legislatures. The work has fed into the Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2021 draft guidelines on submissions and panel criteria. It is also noted that Parliament features in 20% of REF 2014 impact case studies.

Three former Higher Education Academy directors have launched OneHE, a global membership network and collaboration platform focused on effective learning and teaching. It will award innovation grants selected by community vote. UK membership fees start at £3 a month.

Other news

  • Student Accommodation: A Government press release: Savvy students know their renting rights aims to educate students not to put up with dodgy landlords and poor accommodation when the new laws come into force on 1 October. It sets out a checklist of items that students should be aware of and links to the Government’s ‘How to’ guides on renting safely.
  • UCU have published Investigating HE institutions and their views on the Race Equality Charter calling for UKRI to increase the level of an institution’s research funding in recognition of their achievement of the Race Equality Charter. They also recommend an annual audit of the university’s progress in addressing BME attainment gaps. The Mail Online cover the story leading with University professors should be taught about ‘white privilege’ to make campuses more inclusive, union says.
  • And Chris Husbands strikes back in the Guardian article: Other countries are proud of their universities. The UK must be too stating: there’s never been a time when universities have been more important to more people than they are now. Our futures depend on them.
  • Free Speech: Andrew McRae (Exeter University) pushes back to Sam Gyimah highlighting the Conservatives’ failure to uphold free speech in his personal blog – Free speech: whose problem is it really?
  • Mental Health: Sam Gyimah has written to all Vice-Chancellors to urge them to lead the pathway to good student mental health within their institution. However, a Research Professional article criticises the call asking where the research base is to inform such strategic decisions. The writer goes on to state that the UK degree classification system may create stress and replacement with a US grade point average system might be better. She continues there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to tackling student mental health as each institution is different, but universities could help by improving students’ sense of belonging to combat feelings of loneliness.
  • UKRI: Tim Wheeler has been appointed as Director for International within UKRI. Previously Tim was Director for Research and Innovation at NERC, and his role before was Deputy Chief Scientific Adviser (UK Dept for International Development) which included providing science advice to Ministers. Tim remains a visiting professor at the University of Reading.

Subscribe!

To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email policy@bournemouth.ac.uk

JANE FORSTER                                            |                       SARAH CARTER

Policy Advisor                                                                     Policy & Public Affairs Officer

66724                                                                                 65070

Follow: @PolicyBU on Twitter                   |                       policy@bournemouth.ac.uk