/ Full archive

HE policy update for the w/e 12th November 2021

Here’s our round up of the news from the last couple of weeks.

Parliamentary News

David Thomas, a co-founder of the Oak National Academy, has been appointed as a part time policy adviser to Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi. His policy brief will focus on recovery, academies and remote education. Former free school founder Mark Lehain has been appointed as Zahawi’s policy special adviser.

All change at the OfS

The OfS have announced that chief executive, Nicola Dandridge, will leave the regulator at the end of April 2022. This was anticipated as Dandridge’s original term was extended for one year to cover the period to April 2022. The recruitment of her successor will be closely watched with many a keen eye judging the impartiality of the process.

But in the meantime, they are not wasting any time, as they have launched a consultation on their next year strategic plan.  The contents are not very surprising given what we have been hearing from them and from Ministers.  There is a Wonkhe article here which is a little bit critical….

  • What’s missing? An opportunity to say something on sector cohesion and co-regulation has been missed. There should really have been something about external pressures – the recovery and change as a result of Covid-19, the wellbeing of staff, the incoming demographic pressure on the system.
  • If you were writing a new strategy for anybody involved in English higher education, your environmental analysis would include the potential government response to the Augar report and the incoming Lifelong Loan Entitlement … You will search the strategy consultation in vain for more than a single line noting the LLE might be a thing. So maybe a goal around delivering and supporting systemic changes. And another about working in partnership with other agencies.
  • There’s a school of thought that would suggest waiting until you have all your senior roles filled before you wrote a strategy – the whole point of recruiting good board members and directors is to let them have an input into things like this, surely?
  • .. Now if you were an organisation whose principal beneficiaries were named in your title, you might reasonably set about involving those beneficiaries in determining those priorities, right?… Nothing. Nada. Even the paternalism doesn’t sound especially benevolent this time around. There’s a couple of pages reminding us that 25 different directions in ministerial guidance letters have helped shape the strategy, both not a single word on how students have.

Anyway, extracts from the consultation proposal are here.  As well is what is missing, we invite you to form your own views on how chilling it is.  Spoiler: it’s chilling.

Regulatory approach

Our approach is based on a set of minimum expectations that we refer to as the ‘regulatory baseline’.

  • The regulatory baseline is a set of regulatory expectations that represent the minimum performance to which students and taxpayers are entitled. The baseline is predominantly expressed through our conditions of registration and all providers are required to satisfy these. We also use statements of expectation and other tools to express this minimum level of performance from providers to which students and taxpayers are entitled.

…During the next strategic period, our work will be strongly focused on ensuring that providers are meeting these expectations. Performance that falls below our regulatory baseline fails students, who contribute through their time, effort and fees. It fails taxpayers, who support a significant investment of public funds through grants and subsidised loans. It also fails to deliver the objectives set out in our regulatory framework.

We use a range of regulatory approaches to secure compliance with the baseline: setting clear expectations for compliance with our conditions of registration; taking proportionate action to secure compliance with this baseline, escalating enforcement action where it is breached; and intervening where a provider is at risk of dropping below it. We also communicate information and use influence to incentivise compliance with the baseline.

Where it is proportionate to do so, we regulate to ensure that providers cannot continue to access student loan funding, grant funding, and degree awarding powers, if their performance falls below this baseline.

In regulating providers against this baseline, we use a risk-based and proportionate approach. This means that we prioritise and act according to the risk posed to students and taxpayers, and that our interventions are proportionate to that regulatory risk. This approach enables us to minimise burden on providers where possible: providers that represent low risk to students and taxpayers will experience lower regulatory burden.

Above the baseline, we believe that autonomous providers making their own decisions is the best way to ensure the sector can flourish and innovate. We do not prescribe how universities and colleges should operate beyond our minimum requirements, and most of our activity will be designed to ensure that providers meet these expectations.

We will, however, influence and incentivise providers to perform beyond our minimum requirements over the next strategic period. Student choice has a significant role in shaping the sector to respond to students’ needs and goals: effective information, advice and guidance plays a major role in driving high quality outcomes. We will therefore take steps to ensure that students and their advisers have access to relevant and targeted information to inform their choices about whether, what and where to study.

 We will also use other methods. For instance, in using our funding powers to incentivise certain outcomes or through such mechanisms as the TEF.

Areas of focus

The two areas that we will focus on from 2022 to 2025 are quality and standards, and equality of opportunity. … These areas of focus are important in their own right, and they have only become more so in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. In response to the pandemic, we paused some of our reporting requirements as higher education providers adapted to the novel and fast-moving environment. As we transition out of the early stages of the pandemic over the next strategic period, we know that quality and standards will be of utmost importance to students. Many have faced significant disruption to their education during the pandemic, while new opportunities have emerged from the significant change that came with it. Meanwhile, gaps in opportunity have for the most part stagnated or widened during the last two years, and longer-term effects are still unclear, adding further imperative to focus on this area.

Goals

Quality and standards

  • Students receive a high quality academic experience that improves their knowledge and skills, with increasing numbers receiving excellent provision.
  • Students are rigorously assessed, and the qualifications they are awarded are credible and comparable to those granted previously.
  • Providers secure free speech within the law for students, staff and visiting speakers.
  • Graduates contribute to local and national prosperity, and the government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda.

Equality of opportunity

  • Students’ access, success and progression are not limited by their background, location or characteristics.
  • Prospective students can choose from a diverse range of courses and providers at any stage of their life, with a wide range of flexible and innovative opportunities.
  • Providers act to prevent harassment and sexual misconduct and respond effectively if incidents do occur.
  • Providers encourage and support an environment conducive to the good mental health and wellbeing that students need to succeed in their higher education.

Enabling regulation

  • Providers are financially viable and sustainable and have effective governance arrangements.
  • Students receive the academic experience they were promised by their provider and their interests as consumers are protected before, during and after their studies.
  • The OfS minimises the regulatory burden it places on providers, while ensuring action is effective in meeting our goals and regulatory objectives.

Is University worth it?

The University All Party Parliamentary Group (supported by Universities UK) published Is university worth it? Young people’s motivations, aspirations and views on student finance. The Group commissioned this research to gather better evidence of prospective students’ views on the student finance system as it stands, potential reforms to the system and the post-18 education options available to them. They found that less affluent students could be worst hit by a reduction in the number of universities or the number of courses on offer. Read more – there is a good short summary of the report available on the APPG website.

Research

The Spending Review reconfirmed the Government’s intentions for research but lengthened the timescale, speech:

So we will also invest more in innovation. The UK is already a world-leader. With less than 1% of the world’s population, we have 4 of the world’s top 20 universities; 14% of the world’s most impactful research; And the second most Nobel Laureates. We want to go further.

I can confirm we will maintain our target to increase R&D investment to £22bn. But in order to get there, and deliver on our other priorities, we’ll reach the target in 2026-27. Spending, by the end of this Parliament, £20bn a year on R&D. That’s a cash increase of 50%. The fastest increase ever. And I can confirm for the House that this £20bn is in addition to the cost of our R&D tax reliefs. Combined with those tax reliefs, total public investment in R&D is increasing from 0.7% of GDP in 2018 to 1.1% of GDP by the end of the Parliament.

How does 1.1% compare internationally? Well, the latest available data shows an OECD average of just 0.7%. Germany, investing 0.9%. France, 1%. And the United States, just 0.7%. This unprecedented funding will:

  • Increase core science funding to £5.9bn per year by 2024-25, a cash increase of 37%.
  • Meet the full costs of associating with Horizon Europe;
  • Establish the new Advanced Research and Invention Agency with £800m by 2025-26.
  • And strengthen our focus on late-stage innovation, increasing Innovate UK’s annual core budget to £1bn……double what it was at the start of the Parliament.

More detail:

BEIS will receive £14.2 billion for R&D funding by 2024/25, an increase of £3 billion from 2021/22. As a result, core science funding to National Academies, universities and research institutions will rise to £5.9 billion by 2024/25. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) will receive £5 billion by 2024/25 to fund health research via the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), with £2 billion spent in 2024/25.

Other key announcements include:

  • £2.1 billion will be allocated for association to the Horizon Europe funding programme;
  • The Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) budget, which contains funding for research, will return to 0.7% of GDP by 2024/25;
  • The new Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA) will receive £800 million by 2025/26, with £50 million in 2021/22.
  • In addition, £95 million will be invested in increasing the uptake of innovation in the NHS and £30 million invested in in research skills and training, which will focus on improving diversity by increasing the number of life science researchers from under-represented groups. NHS England will receive £5.9 billion to help clear the backlog of patients waiting for tests and treatments. Genomics England will launch a pilot scheme to detect rare diseases, Generation Genome, which aims to sequence 100,000 new-borns; and a Diverse Data project will aim to tackle healthcare inequalities by increasing the proportion of under-represented groups in genomics research.

ARIA: The Committee stage of the Advanced Research and Invention Agency Bill in the House of Lords is scheduled to begin from 17 November.

Clean Tech: The Prime Minister has launched an international plan to accelerate the delivery of affordable clean technologies worldwide by 2030. Modelled on the UK’s Net Zero Strategy, the Agenda will see countries and businesses coordinate and strengthen their climate action each year to dramatically scale and speed up the development and deployment of clean technologies and drive down costs this decade. The aim is to make clean technologies the most affordable, accessible and attractive choice in each of the most polluting sectors by 2030, especially supporting the developing world to access the innovation and tools needed to transition to net zero.

Innovation: The Council for Science and Technology have written to the Prime Minister giving advice on encouraging scale up investment in innovative science and technology companies.

Parliamentary Question: Shared prosperity fund

Admissions

It was confirmed that 2022 exams will go ahead with results to be released on the usual days. Meanwhile Ofqual published details of the contingency arrangements for awarding Teacher Assessed Grades (TAGs) for use in the event that exams are not able to go ahead in summer 2022 due to the pandemic. Ofqual’s document follows the Sept-Oct 2021 consultation on the arrangements – responses highlighted the following themes:

  • The importance of clear and timely communication around the decision to implement contingency plans, including establishing the level of disruption required before implementing TAGs nationally and providing sufficient notice ahead of this.
  • Exam boards should take a greater role in any TAG process in 2022, compared to 2021 arrangements. Exam fees should be proportional to the level of services provided and regular exam fees would not be justifiable. A greater level of refunds should be offered if exams are unable to go ahead, and awarding organisations should provide additional support through exam papers or question banks, moderation and/or marking, among other services.
  • Any TAG process for 2022 should follow the process from 2021 as closely as possible to minimise confusion among teachers, students and parents.
  • Some respondents called for exams to go ahead regardless of underlying circumstances. These respondents felt exams were the best way to assess student knowledge and it would be difficult to ensure the fairness and consistency of TAGs across the country.

Following the consultation, if the pandemic disrupts the exam diet again in 2022, students will be given extra help to prepare for GCSEs, AS and A Levels as follows:

  • students taking GCSEs in English literature, history, ancient history and geography will not need to cover the usual range of content in the exams
  • students taking GCSEs in all other subjects will be given advance information about the focus of the content of the exams to help them focus their revision
  • students taking AS and A levels will be given advance information about the focus of the content of the exams to help them focus their revision
  • students taking GCSEs in mathematics will be given in their exams copies of formulae they would in other years have to memorise
  • students taking GCSE physics and combined science will be given in their exams a sheet covering all the equations they might need to apply in the exams
  • If exams had to be cancelled in summer 2022, students’ grades would instead be determined by their teachers, using a Teacher Assessed Grades (TAGs) approach similar to that used in summer 2021.
  • The advance information for GCSE and AS and A levels will be published no later than 7 February 2022. The government retains the flexibility for advance information to be deployed at other points ahead of 7 February if circumstances require.
  • Some changes have also been made to the way non-exam assessments that are used in some GCSE, AS and A level subjects are taken, to address difficulties that might otherwise be caused by the pandemic.
  • Ofqual has decided that grade boundaries for summer 2022 will be set so that more students than was the case before the pandemic receive higher grades, providing a safety net for students in this transitionary year.
  • Centres should plan assessment opportunities to a timetable that secures evidence which could be used to inform TAGs if necessary.

Ofqual has produced guidance for schools, colleges and other exam centres and written to centres, students and private candidates.

Access & Participation

Several weeks ago we brought you news that Katharine Birbalsingh was the Government’s intended choice for the Chair of the Social Mobility Commission (SMC). High level appointments such as hers undergo a pre-appointment hearing at the appropriate parliamentary committee. The Women and Equalities Committee has published its report following Katharine’s pre-appointment hearing finding her a suitable candidate for Chair of the SMC, and recommending she be appointed for an initial term of three years.

In their conclusion to the report, the Committee notes Birbalsingh has several major strengths, including a track record of enhancing the life chances of disadvantaged young people through education, excellent communications skills, and a forceful character with the ability to challenge institutions and received wisdom. They note her forthright views on education which they say she defends robustly but also note that she will need to demonstrate her ability to listen to, and work collegiately with, colleagues and stakeholders with whom she will not always agree.

The Committee also comment on her relatively narrow field of experience in secondary education and that her vision for social mobility beyond the sphere of education was much less clear. Because of this they say they believe she will need further support from a wide range of fellow Commissioners with diverse backgrounds, knowledge and experience across all relevant areas of social policy and sectors of the economy.

In part due to the above the Committee urges the Minister to recruitment the new Commissioners immediately and recommends their terms be staggered so that they do not all expire at the same time.

Student Finance

The Spending Review did not set out the Government’s intentions towards implementing remaining aspects of the Augar review – despite all the hype. More information is promised later – although as this tweet highlights we’ve heard that one before!

You may have missed our recent updates giving loads of background and context to the ongoing speculation about possible changes to HE funding.  In case you did, we have created a briefing which puts it all nicely in one place along with the latest speculation on what next.  BU readers can find it here.

The Department for Education has published a written ministerial statement on higher education student finance arrangements for the 2022/23 academic year.

  • Tuition fees will be frozen for 2022/23 at the same levels as 2021/22, meaning the maximum fee level for a standard full-time course will remain £9250.
  • Maintenance loans will see an increase by forecast inflation of 2.3 percent, including for DSA.
  • The same increase will be applied to postgraduate loans.
  • Individuals relocated under the Afghanistan Relation and Assistance Scheme will qualify for student support and home fee status.
  • Home fee status will also be extended to the family members of all persons settled in the UK, subject to three years residence in the UK and Islands immediately before the start of the course.
  • Those who have settled status on arrival in the UK, who come to the UK from specified British Overseas Territories and who are starting full-time and part-time undergraduate courses in 2022/23 will be eligible for tuition fee loans.
  • Government will lay regulations implementing changes to student finance for undergraduates and postgraduates for 2022/23 in November.

Michelle Donelan, Minister for Higher and Further Education said in a written ministerial statement:

  • The changes set out above demonstrate our commitment to supporting economic development in the British Overseas Territories and enabling those who wish to study at one of our world class education providers to be able to do so.
  • I expect to lay regulations implementing changes to student finance for undergraduates and postgraduates for 2022/23 in November. These regulations will be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny.
  • The Government continues to consider the recommendations made by the Augar Panel carefully. We plan to set out a full response to the Review of Post-18 Education and Funding in due course.

Michelle Donelan has also reportedly agreed to improve official information on maintenance loans for students in England after the founder of MoneySavingExpert.com, Martin Lewis, wrote a formal letter requesting this in June. The letter explained that there is what he calls the implicit “parental contribution” built into the student finance system and argued it needs to be made explicit.

Donelan tweeted yesterday saying:

  • “I’m working with [MoneySavingExpert.com] to make our loan system simpler & more transparent for students/parents – inc. highlighting what family income means-testing means for parents’ contribution to their children’s study.
  • “This ensures that Govt support prioritises disadvantaged students from low income households, who otherwise wouldn’t be able to attend university. This in turn increases access, opportunity and opens up higher education to talented people from all walks of life.”

Not being overt about this information leaves many parents unprepared and unable to find the cash to help.  It all adds to the confusion and concern about student finances.  These changes don’t affect the amount provided – but do set expectations more clearly.  Our fees, funding and finance brief gives a lot more information on how this all works.

NSS

The OfS have announced the NSS will run as usual in 2022. The questions will be the same as 2021 (without the specific Covid questions) plus a pilot of a new set of questions. A consultation on the future of the NSS will run in summer 2022.  More information here.

Higher Technical Qualifications

The Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) has published information and guidance on higher technical qualifications (HTQs). It explains how the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has launched a national opt-in approval scheme for new and existing qualifications, which will recognise prestigious HTQs that provide the skills that employers want. Awarding bodies can submit qualifications to be approved against the Institute’s occupational standards at levels 4-5.

The first approvals cycle for Digital qualifications concluded in Summer 2021, with the first approved qualifications available to be taught from September 2022. Cycle 2 will launch on 5 July 2021 for submissions of qualifications for Health & Science and Construction, with a further opportunity for Digital qualifications. This will be followed in 2022 by submissions for:

  • Business and Administration
  • Education and Childcare
  • Engineering and Manufacturing
  • Legal, Finance and Accounting

These will be followed in 2023 by:

  • Agriculture, Environmental and Animal Care
  • Catering and Hospitality
  • Creative and Design
  • Hair and Beauty

Sexual Violence

Dods summarise a new study examining sexual violence by male HE students. You can read the one-page summary and recommendations for universities here.

Guidance – undertaking education abroad (Turing)

The DfE published new guidance for students undertaking education or placements abroad, including the Turing Scheme, Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps, during the coronavirus pandemic.

Parliamentary Questions

Other news

Subjects: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) has launched a new consultation on 13 Subject Benchmark Statements, which have been reviewed by QAA in collaboration with expert Subject Advisory Groups.

Covid: The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has published the latest statistics (to 1 Nov 2021) from the Student COVID-19 Insights Survey (SCIS) in England, which includes information on the behaviours, plans, opinions and well-being of higher education students in the context of guidance on the pandemic. Main points:

  • The majority (91%) of students have said they had already been vaccinated against coronavirus (COVID-19) at least once.
  • A significantly higher proportion of students reported having had two vaccine doses in late October (85%) than reported in late September (78%).
  • A minority (8%) of students said they had not been vaccinated against COVID-19; of those, half (51%) said they were fairly or very unlikely to take a vaccine if offered, and a third (32%) said they were fairly or very likely to accept the vaccine if offered.
  • Around half (49%) of students had taken a COVID-19 test in the previous seven days.
  • If they developed symptoms, 92% of students reported they would request a test.
  • Students who had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were significantly more likely to request a test if they developed symptoms (95%), than students who had not been vaccinated (73%).
  • When asked what they would do if they developed symptoms, 57% of students reported they would stay at home for 10 days; this is similar to late September (58%).
  • The average life satisfaction score for students was 6.6, which was significantly lower than those aged 16 to 29 years in general (7.0) and the adult population in Great Britain (7.1).
  • Students were significantly more likely to report their mental health and well-being had worsened (32%) compared with late September (26%); however, this is still significantly lower than in late May (50%).

Subscribe!

To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email policy@bournemouth.ac.uk. A BU email address is required to subscribe.

External readers: Thank you to our external readers who enjoy our policy updates. Not all our content is accessible to external readers, but you can continue to read our updates which omit the restricted content on the policy pages of the BU Research Blog – here’s the link.

Did you know? You can catch up on previous versions of the policy update on BU’s intranet pages here. Some links require access to a BU account- BU staff not able to click through to an external link should contact eresourceshelp@bournemouth.ac.uk for further assistance.

JANE FORSTER                                            |                       SARAH CARTER

VC’s Policy Advisor                                                              Policy & Public Affairs Officer

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

 

 

 

FMC research process seminar this Tuesday. Exploring the ‘black box’ of Google News algorithms: a methodology

You are warmly invited to this week’s FMC research process seminar.

Tuesday 16 November, 2-3pm.

Exploring the ‘black box’ of Google News algorithms: a methodology

Prof Dan Jackson (BU)

The algorithms underpinning search results and recommendations – the cornerstone of navigating the web – have been described as “the great ‘known unknown’ of search engines” (Ørmen 2016, p.110). At the same time, news consumers are increasingly reliant on algorithms to sort, organise, and recommend news to us based on information that they collect from us. Given the normative implications of such a role, it’s therefore crucial we research the outcomes of algorithmic personalisation, especially in news. Methodologically, this is not a straightforward task, though, and one that communication scholars are still coming to terms with. In this presentation I will walk through the mixed methods research design employed in our study of news personalisation in Google News. First, in a quasi-experimental design, we asked a diverse set of participants to search Google News for four search terms and report the first five stories they were recommended on each term.  We then conducted a manual content analysis on the stories recommended by Google News for our search terms (N=192), focusing on their favourability towards the search term in question. After briefly summarising the outcomes of the study, I will then reflect on these methods and how we might apply them elsewhere.

Join Zoom Meeting

https://bournemouth-ac-uk.zoom.us/j/9292103478?pwd=UzJnNTNQWDdTNldXdjNWUnlTR1cxUT09

Meeting ID: 929 210 3478

Passcode: rps!4fmc

Bournemouth research cited in The Sunday Times

Today Bournemouth University’s research on Nepali migrant workers and kidney problems was cited in The Sunday Times. In the preparation for the Qatar 2022 men’s football world cup The Sunday Times published an article under the title ‘Dying for the World Cup‘.

Dr. Pramod Regmi and Dr. Nirmal Aryal were awarded funding from GCRF (The Global Challenges Research Fund) and Bournemouth University’s QR fund.  This work resulted in an editorial highlighting that low-skilled migrant workers in the Middle Wast and Malaysia are at a disproportionately higher risk of kidney problems. The working conditions are often Dirty, Dangerous and Difficult (referred at as the 3Ds) include physically demanding work, exposure to a hot environment, dehydration, chemical exposures, excessive use of pain killers, and lifestyle factors (such as restricted water intake and a high intake of alcohol/sugary drinks) which may precipitate them to acute kidney injuries and subsequent chronic kidney disease [1].  And recently, a national survey of nephrologists (kidney specialists) on their perceptions of the size of the problem of kidney health in Nepali migrant workers [2].

 

 

References:

  1. Aryal, N., Regmi, P.R., Sedhain, A., KC, R.K., Martinez Faller, E., Rijal, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2021). Kidney health risk of migrant workers: An issue we can no longer overlookHealth Prospect 21(1): 15-17.
  2. Aryal, N.Sedhain, A.Regmi, P.KC, R. K., van Teijlingen, E. (2021). Risk of kidney health among returnee Nepali migrant workers: A survey of nephrologists. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences 12(12), 126–132.

 

Not going in!

Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending the online workshop ‘500 Years of Childbirth’ together with by CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health) colleges Dr. Juliet Wood and Dr. Laura Iannuzzi. The session ‘500 Years of Childbirth’ was part of Being Human Festival, the UK’s national festival of the humanities which runs 11–20 November 2021.  History has always been a passion of me, and the presenters, Julia Martins and Carly Lokrheim, linked early modern history with childbirth in the 21st century. 

This wonderful session reminded me of my draft chapter I wrote for my PhD thesis three decades ago.  My thesis A social or medical model of childbirth? : comparing the arguments in Grampian (Scotland) and the Netherlands at the University of Aberdeen was supervised by Dr. Peter McCaffery.  Peter wisely said to me: “You really needed to write this chapter to make sense of the history of midwifery in your head, but it does not really fit the thesis.”  He added: “You have too many words already.  You know that it is not going in?” The material of this history chapter was not lost as I used loads of text from it it in the introduction section for a textbook [1].  The section ‘History of Midwifery: Introduction’ became part of our edited volume Midwifery and the Medicalization of Childbirth: Comparative Perspectives (Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Huntington, New York, USA) [2].

It is a message I occasionally repeat to my own PhD students.  Under the circumstances I may fing myself saying things like “This is something you had to get of your chest, or you had to write it to make sense of it, but as it stands do you think it fits your argument?”  Or more subtly in a supervision meeting, tell us: “What does this section add to your overall story in the thesis?”

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, E. (2004) History of Midwifery: Introduction, In: van Teijlingen, E. Lowis, G., et al. (eds.), Midwifery & the Medicalization of Childbirth, NY: Nova Sci., pages: 43-52.
  2. van Teijlingen , E., Lowis, G., McCaffery, P. & Porter, M. (eds.) (2004) Midwifery and the Medicalization of Childbirth: Comparative Perspectives, New York: Nova Science. [Paperback ISBN: 1-59454-0314].

Apply now: the Research Impact Fund is open for 2021/22!

We are pleased to announce that the Research Impact Fund is now open for applications.

This call is for researchers at all stages of their careers to support the planning and development of impact from new or ongoing research. For 2021/22, the fund has been split into two strands:

Strand 1: To support the development of new research partnerships and networks, to lay the groundwork for future research projects.

Strand 2: To provide support for emerging impact from existing underpinning research.

Who can apply?

Strand 1 is aimed at early career researchers (those who are within 7 years of completing their doctorate, or equivalent experience, and are not associate professors / professors) and staff who are new to research (academic staff who have not published an academic output, or received internal or external funding for research). The funding aims to support colleagues to engage with key stakeholders at the very beginning of the research process, to establish partnerships and networks to support the co-creation of research questions. The panel would like to fund multiple projects and therefore particularly welcome applications for projects up to £2,000.

Strand 2 is aimed at academic staff with existing research which has the potential for impact, or is starting to result in impact. The funding aims to support the development of research impact across BU and begin to identify potential case studies for post-REF2021 exercises. The panel would like to fund multiple projects and therefore particularly welcome applications for projects up to £4,000.

What we’re looking for

Applicants need to demonstrate a clear understanding of how their research – whether proposed or existing – can lead to impact. The UKRI defines research impact as “an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia”.

For strand 1, the emphasis is on establishing and developing relationships with partners, organisations and research users that will lead to impact in the future. This may involve:

  • Collaborating with partners to apply for external funding
  • The co-creation of research questions
  • Building relationships with policymakers and policy brokers
  • Creating a stakeholder advisory group to suggest additional activities for achieving impact, as well as reviewing and providing feedback on proposed activities.

With strand 2, the focus is on maximising the potential of existing research by identifying activities that will translate outputs into impact/s.

This may include, but is not limited to:

  • Developing printed and digital resources
  • Collating further data sets
  • Creating briefings and information leaflets for policymakers
  • Updating and developing websites to disseminate findings and encourage/monitor use
  • Identifying additional potential beneficiaries and stakeholders
  • Undertaking media activity to raise awareness, change opinions or attitudes, mobilise action or influence decisions by people with power.
  • Creating new methods of engagement with the research findings, e.g., video, podcasts, apps etc.
  • Developing associated educational resources based on insights.

Application process

To apply, please first read the policy and guidance notes. Then submit the relevant online form. PDF versions are supplied so that you may preview the form, but must not be submitted:

Strand 1 application form

Strand 1 application form pdf version

Strand 2 application form

Strand 2 application form PDF version

Applications must be submitted by Friday 10th December.

If you have any questions about your application, please email Amanda Edwards.

Applicants are strongly advised to attend the surgery session on applying for internal funding for impact and public engagement on Thursday 18 November and / or book a 1-2-1 session with an Impact Advisor. Find out more about the surgery and book a place here.

BU’s Research Principles

Putting the Research Impact Fund into strategic context, under BU2025, the following funding panels operate to prioritise applications for funding and make recommendations to the Research Performance and Management Committee (RPMC).

There are eight funding panels:

  1. HEIF Funding Panel
  2. GCRF Funding Panel
  3. Research Impact Funding Panel
  4. Doctoral Studentship Funding Panel
  5. ACORN Funding Panel
  6. Research Fellowships Funding Panel
  7. Charity Support Funding Panel
  8. SIA Funding panel

Please see further announcements regarding each initiative.

These panels align with the BU2025 focus on research, including BU’s Research Principles.  Specifically, but not exclusively, regarding the Research Impact Funding Panel, please refer to:

  • Principle 5 – which sets of the context for such funding panels,
  • Principle 6 and Outcome 9 – which recognises the need for interdisciplinarity and the importance of social science and humanities (SSH).

The ACORN Fund Round 4 is Now Open for Applications!

The ACORN Fund (Acceleration Of Research & Networking) for Early Career Researchers Round 4 is now open for applications.

This round slightly differs from previous rounds. Two options for ECRs are available – Standard Grants up to £5,000 that can be delivered before the end of July 2022 and Large Grants up to £10,00 for projects to be completed within 12 months. For more details, refer to the ACORN Fund Policy Autumn 2021 document.

Each applicant is allowed to only submit one proposal for Round 4 and should use one of the supplied templates accordingly. The closing date is Friday, 10th December 2021 (5pm); to be considered eligible, all applications must be submitted to the email account acorn@bournemouth.ac.uk before the deadline.

This scheme will provide c. five awards, of up to £5,000 each and up to two awards, of up to £10,000 each, to support BU’s ECRs, with the most promising talent, to gain experience of managing and leading their own pilot research projects. These awards support BU’s commitment to the Concordat to Support to Career Development of Researchers and are made possible by BU’s QR (Quality Research) allocation for 2021/22 financial year.

For eligibility, you must be able to comply with the following:

  • Applicant must have completed their PhD;
  • Applicant must have a post at BU (established or fixed term) for the full duration of the award and the post-award commitments or longer;
  • To be considered an early career researcher (ECR), applicant should have held a 0.2 or above research contract for no more than six years in total, excluding periods where the applicant was involved in non-research employment or not at work (e.g. caring responsibilities);
  • ACORN award holders cannot hold more than one BU internal award concurrently.

Note that open access publication costs are not eligible, but these can be requested from the BU Open Access Publication Fund (OAPF). Any planned travel expenses are subject to COVID restrictions and, generally, are not recommended.

Following links, you can find ACORN Large Grant and Standard Grant application forms. In addition, to assist with the budget section, please refer to the RKE Internal Funding Sample Costs. As this does not require Full Economic Costing, you should not contact your faculty’s Funding Development Officer to complete the costing for you. Please address any queries as below.

Applications require support from faculty and mentor, so please start your application early and obtain all approvals as soon as possible. Applicants are responsible for obtaining faculty sign-off before submitting the application.

For those interested to find out more, we will be running a workshop led by the ACORN Panel Chair Prof Jan Wiener on Tuesday 23th November 2021 from 2pm to 4pm. Workshop will take place in a face-to-face setting, please come to F106 (Fusion Building) with your questions.

Please address any further queries to RDS via acorn@bournemouth.ac.uk

Putting the ACORN Fund into strategic context, under BU2025, the following funding panels operate to prioritise applications for funding and make recommendations to the Research Performance and Management Committee (RPMC):

  1. HEIF Funding Panel
  2. Research Impact Funding Panel
  3. Doctoral Studentship Funding Panel
  4. ACORN Funding Panel
  5. Research Fellowships Funding Panel
  6. Charity Support Funding Panel
  7. SIA Funding panel

These panels align with the BU2025 focus on research, including BU’s Research Principles. Specifically, but not exclusively, regarding the ACORN Fund, please refer to:

  • Principle 5, which sets of the context for such funding panels;
  • Principle 6 and Outcome 9, which recognise the need for interdisciplinarity and the importance of social science and humanities (SSH);
  • Outcomes 4 and 5, where ECRs are provided with the mechanisms for support such as mentors and, through schemes including the ACORN fund, gain budgetary responsibility experience.

Register to attend (FREE) – The 13th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference

Register to attend the Annual Postgraduate Research Conference  – all welcome!

Come along to support our postgraduate research community at the Annual Postgraduate Research Conference, Wednesday 1 December 2021, 09:30 – 17:30. Oral presentations will be hosted on Zoom.

You are also invited to come along to FG06 during the day to network, and for PGRs we will be offering the opportunity to get a free professional headshot during the lunch break.

There will be a virtual poster exhibition on the BU website and across the blogs during the week of the conference with further pre-recorded presentations available to view at your leisure.

The full brochure, with all presenters and presentation types, will be circulated in the next few weeks. In the meantime, please see the conference programme for the day below.

It would be great to see many of you there. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to get in touch: pgconference@bournemouth.ac.uk. 


Natalie Stewart (Research Skills & Development Officer), Doctoral College.

Paper published outlining good practice for receiving informed consent

A paper has been published by Hugh Davies (Chair, Oxford A NHS Research Ethics Committee) and the members of Oxford A Research Ethics Committee (REC) which includes a model for what the REC considers to be good practice in terms of consent for research participation. The paper proposes that there are four simple steps which consent processes should be built around:

  • Step 1: Introducing the study and the choices: helping the potential participants get an overview of the proposal and introducing the key issues.
  • Step 2: Explaining all the details of the study using the detailed Participant Information Sheet.
  • Step 3: After a gap, if necessary, reviewing and checking understanding.
  • Step 4: Reaching agreement and recording consent.

The paper outlines common issues such as information provision to participants, inadequate public involvement, and lack of proportionality.

You can access the paper here.

Remember that RDS offers training in informed consent, as does the National Institute for Health Research. If you are interested in accessing this training, please email Research Ethics.

Template documents are also available via the Health Research Authority website.

Congratulations to Recipients of the ‘Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award’!

The Doctoral College team have been delighted with the nominations that have come in for our recently launched ‘Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Awards’. We wish to extend our congratulations to all recipients who have recently received their award certificate.

Since launching in October 2021 we have presented 34 awards! 

Here are some of the heartfelt nominations we have received so far:

“She is always ready to lend a listening ear and a helping hand. I think that I am really blessed to have her as a supervisor and she needs to be recognised for her hard work.”

“She is dedicated to the PGR community, playing central role in maintaining a sense of cohort identity with the Faculty.”

“For his unwavering support for PGRs progress, community and sense of belonging. Ensuring connectedness throughout Covid times and helping students transition back to face-to-face contact.”

“He is undoubtedly an outstanding person to work with, to learn from, and to rely upon in time of need.”

“She was our PGR Rep during the pandemic and worked so hard to pass concerns of the PGR community to administrators or the DDRPP to find a solution. She arranged coffee mornings and lunchtime-seminars for the PGRs to get together in an academic and social environment.”


Why not take five minutes and nominate a PGR, academic or professional staff member for a Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award and say thanks and give recognition for their hard work?

These awards recognise the outstanding contributions to postgraduate research at BU by any PGR, academic or professional staff member. They can be nominated throughout the year by any member of the postgraduate research community to anyone that they feel is exceptional, has exceeded expectations, and has had a positive impact on the postgraduate research at BU.

Eligibility

You can nominate anyone involved in postgraduate research at Bournemouth University to receive an award certificate. There are no award criteria, as long as the submission falls within the guidelines, whoever you’ve selected will receive a Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award!

How to nominate

We’ve made it really easy for you to nominate someone for a Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award – it’s just a short online nomination form!

BrainTrainUK’s visit to Bournemouth EEG Lab

It has been such a long time since we came under lockdown in March 2020. This term has seen teaching and research activities gradually coming back to normal!

Today, our long-time partner, BrainTrainUK, visited the Bournemouth EEG Lab to discuss progress on an EEG project (neurofeedback of inter-brain synchrony for social anxiety intervention) and future plans. This is the first time they visited us since Feburary 2020.

Our collaborator and friend, Stuart Black, wrote a short piece of news on the BrainTrainUK website. Please feel free to have a relaxing read by clicking this link. Below is the photo Stuart took today in one of our EEG labs. From our facial expressions, you know we were having fun!

From left to right in the photo: Hayley Clarke and Stuart Black from BrainTrainUK, Xun He (Head of Bournemouth EEG Lab, Psychology), Marcia Saul (CDE EngD student), Fred Charles (Creative Technology).