/ Full archive

Innovate 2016 – Spotlight on innovation event

events

Hosted by UKTI and Innovate UK, Innovate 2016 is a two day event showcasing the very best of innovation talent and global opportunities for businesses. The event includes:

  • an exhibition of the most cutting edge innovations
  • inspirational keynotes from some of the most respected industry thought leaders
  • discussions with international buyer and investors
  • fantastic networking opportunities
  • in-depth seminars on key market trends
  • a business Support Zone highlighting the breadth of Government support for innovation

The event will be held 2-3 November in Manchester.

Click here to find out more.

Latest Major Funding Opportunities

The following funding opportunities have been announced. Please follow the links for more information.

Economic and Social Research Council

ESRC invites applications for an Understanding the Macroeconomy Network Plus. The aim of the network is to develp the capacity needed to sustain a substantive policy-oriented research programme, which is focussed on the macroeconomy. The Network will include representatives from the policy community and the private sector as well as academics from the economics profession and other disciplines which have the potential to add value in this area. It will be charged with providing leadership in connecting interdisciplinary research groups and networks, ensuring the new initiative can best add value in the context of existing capacity and current research agendas (whether or not ESRC-funded).

Maximum budget: £3.7 million. Closing date for outline proposals: 4pm, 20/09/16.

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council

EPSRC is inviting tenders for a contract to run a mid-range facility providing a high-specification electron microscopy  service to the UK academic community and other users. Full details of how to apply will be in the relevant published OJEU and Contracts Finder notices. The contract will run initially for three years with an option to extend it to five years subject to a review. Bidders will need to provide information on the specification of the equipment they intend to operate, the facilities and the service they intend to provide, the staffing of the facility and the cost of the service.

Maximum award: Not specified. Closing date: 07/09/16.

Global Food Security

Global Food Security, in collaboration with  BBSRC, ESRC, NERC and the Scottish Government, invites applications for its second call on Resilience of the UK food system in a global context. There are three overlapping thematic priorities in the programme. Proposals should address one or more thematic priorities and are encouraged to take a food systems approach

  • Optimising the resilience of agricultural systems and landscape whilst enhancing productivity and sustainability
    At the core of this theme is understanding the relationship between resilience, sustainability and production and how to optimise the trade-offs associated with these tensions. This will help ensure agricultural systems and landscapes that are both resilient and sustainable and balance the provision of food with other ecosystem services in the face of evolving world-wide changes and threats
  • Optimising resilience of food supply chains locally and globally
    This theme is focused on understanding the economic, environmental, biological and social factors affecting the food supply chain, and the interplay between these, to ensure resilience of the food system at a local-to-global level
  • Influencing food choice for health, resilience and sustainability at the individual and household level
    Central to this theme is understanding the drivers behind food choices and how these impact on the wider food system and production, in order to identify interventions that result in provision of nutritious and sustainable food in more resilient and equitable ways

Maximum award: £2.8million. Closing date: 10/11/16.

Natural Environment Research Council

NERC invites applications for access to its High Performance Computing Facilities. Users will be allocated to one of three HPC consortia- oceanography and shelf seas; atmospheric and polar sciences; mineral and geophysics.

Maximum award: Not specified. Closing date: 12/09/16.

Medical Research Council

MRC invites outline proposals for its Stratified Medicine Initiative call – disease-focused partnerships to stratify for patient benefit. This call aims to support consortia to address disease areas where there is a strong case for scientific advancement and major unmet clinical need. Proposals should clearly describe and justify why a particular disease area is likely to contribute important understanding of disease, whether employing stratification by response to treatment or by risk, diagnosis and/or prognosis. The consortia must: build upon existing scientific and clinical expertise; utilise clinical research infrastructure, such as that provided by the National Institute of Health Research, Scottish Government Health Directorates, National Institute for Social Care and Health Research, Welsh Government and Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Northern Ireland; forge significant links with industrial partners.

Total budget: £15million. Closing date: Outline applications due 4pm 01/12/16.

Wellcome Trust

Wellcome Trust invites applications for its Investigator Awards in Science, which fund researchers at all career stages working on important questions of relevance to their scientific remit.

Maximum award: £3million. Closing date: 21/11/16.

If you are interested in submitting to any of the above calls you must contact RKEO with adequate notice before the deadline.

Please note that some funding bodies specify a time for submission as well as a date. Please confirm this with your RKEO Funding Development Officer

You can set up your own personalised alerts on Research Professional. If you need help setting these up, just ask your School’s/Faculty’s Funding Development Officer in RKEO or view the recent blog post here.

If thinking of applying, why not add notification of your interest on Research Professional’s record of the bid so that BU colleagues can see your intention to bid and contact you to collaborate.

CQR launches monthly Seminar Series “In Conversation with …”

13432167_10154245215569855_4045956637427322389_n-001

The Centre for Qualitative Research is kicking off its new seminar series on 7 September at 1 pm in Royal London House (RLH 201 Masterclass Suite).

New to BU and FHSS, Prof. Sam Porter (Head of Social Work & Social Sciences Dept. at FHSS) will join CQR’s Kip Jones and Caroline Ellis-Hill “in conversation” about: “The Relationship between the Arts and Healthcare”.

Mark your diaries now and join us for an intriguing conversation!

Because CQR is keen to make information available to students and staff about qualitative METHODS, the seminars will be arranged somewhat differently than the typical lunchtime seminar.

We are asking TWO (or more) presenters to agree to present each research method as a CONVERSATION…first, between each other, and then with the audience.  We are also asking that no PowerPoint be used in order that it is truly a conversation and NOT a lecture. The conversations will be about a particular research method and its pros and cons, NOT research projects or outcomes.

The “In Conversation with …” Seminar Series will be held on the FIRST WED of each month for nine months beginning in September. They will run from 1 pm until 1:50.

We are then hoping that many will join us for a CQR ‘KoffeeKlatch’ following at Naked Cafe next to RLH after the seminar.

We anticipate that by making the CQR Seminar Series really unique and exciting that they will inspire students and academics alike to investigate the wide range of qualitative methods and expertise available at CQR, and enrich their research projects by doing so.

Below is the list of Seminar dates, topics and presenters. Mark your diaries now so that you don’t miss them!

7 September

RLH 201

The relationship between the arts and healthcare” Sam Porter, Kip Jones & Caroline Ellis-Hill
5 October

RLH 201

Social Work as Art” Lee-Ann Fenge and Anne Quinney
2 November

RLH 201

Phenomenology” Jane Fry and Vanessa Heaslip
7 December

RLH 201

“Auto-biography and Auto-ethnography

 

Judith Chapman and Sarah Collard
11 January (2nd Wed.)

RLH 201

Participatory Action Research and Co-operative Inquiry”   Carole Pound and Lee-Ann Fenge
1 February

RLH 201

Appreciative Inquiry”

 

Clare Gordon and Caroline Ellis-Hill
1 March

RLH 201

Photo-elicitation” Michele Board and Jenny Hall
5 April

RLH 303

Applying Film and TV Methods to Research”

 

Trevor Hearing & Kip Jones
3 May

RLH 303

Ethnography” Janet Scammell and Jonathan Parker
7 June

RLH 201

“CAQDAS (NVIVO, MAXQDA)” Jacqueline Priego and Debbie Holley

Interactive documentary launched – Psychiatric Genetic Counselling Research Project

eye-helix-logo-1100x500

Media and Journalism students Chelsea Nwasike and Grace Brewer have developed an interactive documentary to illustrate the project including the two recent workshops that are helping to transform approaches to psychiatric genetic counselling.

Genetic counsellors and researchers who attended the European and international workshops were interviewed and included in an interactive platform, along with videos from Dr Kevin McGhee and a ‘mental health jar’ demonstration video.

Dr Kevin McGhee explained: “By expanding healthcare professionals understanding of genetics and mental illness and providing a way for people around the world to view these discussions from the workshops, we want to raise awareness and encourage people to take better care of their mental health.

Funded by the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) find out more about this project on the BU Research Website.

 

PGR Feedback – we need your help!

Dear all,

BU and SUBU are currently conducting a survey regarding the experience of those studying a research degree at BU (MRes/MPhil/PhD/EngD/DProf ).

The survey asks questions relating to supervision, resources,  research degree policies, administration and research culture. In order for BU to understand the best practices and things that could be improved we need to build an accurate picture by gathering as many responses as we can.

If you could spare just 10-15 minutes of your time to complete this survey we would massively appreciate it: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/BU_PGR_Student_Experience_2016

Warmest regards

Grad School Header 1

Fieldwork preparation in Nepal

If you have a number of research projects running in the same location it pays to combine some of the preparation.  Thus as part of five different studies and one PhD project, I’m currently in Kathmandu.  The projects are (1) the THET-funded intervention in Nawalparasi; (2) the CEL-funded qualitative research led by Dr. Catherine Angell on CPD (Continuous Professional Development); (3) the FHSS-funded project on transgender which is led by Dr. Pramod Regmi; (4) the FHSS-funded project with Pourakhi which supports Nepali women returning home after having been abroad as migrant workers;  and (5) the Green Tara Trust funded project on improving maternal health care in Dhading and Nawalparasi, and the FHSS PhD project is that of Mrs. Preeti Mahato.  Two of the project and the PhD topcic are closely related as all three cover maternity care in one for or another in Nawalparasi.  The planning meetings we are having in Nepal involve planning training sessions and workshops, resource allocation and research preparation.DSCN0026

Fortunately, it is not all work.  Today I enjoyed Kheer (Achar and Chana) for lunch in the Green Tara flat in Kathmandu a lovely rice pudding with slightly sour green vegetables and chick peas (see photo).  The actual meal is traditionally health tomorrow but as this is the weekend the staff brought it one day forward so that I could join in too.

Finally, I like to thank colleagues who gave me mobile phones and a camera.  One of the mobile phones is already in use by one of the Nepali charity workers in Kathmandu. I bought a new battery and memory card for camera in the UK and it is working fine, the photo with this blog has been taken with the donated camera!

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen (writing from Nepal).

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health Research

 

Digital Economy – Emerging and Enabling Technologies Workshop

InnovateUK_LogoA_Interim_RGBx320govuk[1]

As part of its strategy development for Emerging and Enabling Technologies, Innovate UK are in the process of re-thinking its strategy for the Creative Economy.

The strategy will show the opportunities for UK companies, the barriers to realising those opportunities and the intervention that Innovate UK and its partners will take to help UK companies to achieve success.

There are two worksops being run in London on 17 August.  In this workshop, Innovate UK will share its early, straw-man thoughts , see input, and together design a strategy which describes a future of working together to achieve complementarity, joined up working and great successes for UK innovation.

This workshop is necessary for Innovate UK to launch its strategy at Innovate 2016 on the 2 November.

To register click the links below:

Morning workshop

Afternoon workshop

Brexit and Bills- what it means for the HE Sector and Research.

With a new Prime Minister, new Government department restructures, the second reading of the Higher Education and Research Bill and Brexit, there is a lot of change around the corner for universities and research.

Now that responsibility for higher education has been transferred to the Department for Education, whilst research and science are under the remit of the newly named Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, there are concerns that universities and research and science will become unaligned. The government has attempted to dilute some of these fears by ensuring that the Minister of State for Universities and Science, which is still held by Jo Johnson MP, jointly looks after both universities and science across both government departments.

In addition, leaving the European Union has already sparked concerns for the higher education sector, and in particular for research. On the 25th July Jo Johnson MP attended the European Science Open Forum in Manchester. He spoke of reports that UK participants are being asked not to lead or participate in Horizon 2020 project bids and went on to reassure that the UK remains an EU member during the 2-year renegotiation period, which includes the rights and obligations that derive from this. He also stated that the UK remains fully open to scientists and researchers from across the EU.

Concerns among the sector are still very much present, the Times Higher Education reported worries around possible changes to the way the European Research Council (ERC) could distribute funds. Currently, money is distributed on the basis of excellence, meaning the UK does comparably well in relation to other EU nations, however this could change after Brexit if the ERC decided to run a more redistributive approach- rather than excellence focused. Additionally, the Guardian found cases of British academics being asked to leave EU funded projects or to step down from leadership roles because they are considered a financial liability.

The second reading of the Higher Education and Research Bill also touched on the implications of leaving the EU. Jo Johnson MP said that he is working closely with Brussels, and is grateful to the commitment of his European counterparts that the UK will not be discriminated against. Justine Greening, the new Secretary of State for Education confirmed that the new UK Research and Innovation body (UKRI), which will see the research councils being grouped together, is critical in providing a unified voice to represent the interests of research and innovation when negotiating our new relationship with the EU.

The Higher Education and Research Bill has also prompted concerns around Innovate UK, with the Bill controversially proposing it is included in the new UKRI. This change has not gone unnoticed and the The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee recently ran an inquiry into the implications. The committee has informed the government that the plans to incorporate Innovate UK into UKRI are “wrong and endanger its important business-facing focus.” The inquiry argues that innovation is not a linear process and merging Innovate UK with UKRI runs the risk of linking innovation with science and research too formally. The inquiry is currently waiting for a reply from the Universities and Science Minister, Jo Johnson MP.

In addition, the outcome of Lord Stern’s review of the REF has been published. The report sets out 12 recommendations for the REF, but broadly supports the REF as a way to deliver quality-related research funding. You can view my previous blog post about this here.

Real Stories from North Korea: Defectors Talk during BU Festival of Learning by Dr Hyun-Joo Lim, FHSS

20160628_185523

Over recent years there has been a surge of interest in North Korea, especially concerning issues around human rights abuse. For instance, both the BBC and the Guardian have dedicated North Korea sections on their websites. Additionally, numerous publications have revealed the abhorrent reality faced by North Korean people under its highly secretive totalitarian regime (Demick 2010; Harden 2012; Jang 2014; Kang and Rogoulot 2001). As a consequence, a growing number of North Koreans are leaving their country to seek refuge elsewhere, risking their lives and often their families’. Since 2004, approximately 600 defectors have settled in the UK, creating the largest North Korean community among European countries (Free NK 2014). Yet, compared to defectors settled in other countries, such as South Korea (Lee 2015; Noh et al. 2015), little is known about the UK settlers and their experiences, particularly those who are involved in human rights activism, despite increased coverage of North Korea in the media.

As a South Korean born academic, I was instantly fascinated by the existence of a North Korean community in the UK when I discovered it as part of my research. Upon learning about it, I found out about Free NK, a human rights organisation founded and run by the defectors. According to the founder Mr Kim Joo-Il, Free NK aims to achieve two major goals through their activism: raising public awareness by illuminating the reality of North Korea to the world, whilst also working towards the subversion of the regime by informing its fellow remainders about the outside world through the distribution of newspapers in Europe and to their ‘homeland’. However, as emerged in my interviews with various members, it has faced a range of challenges and obstacles. Given the significance of their work and direct relevance to my research, it seems perfectly appropriate to organise an event as part of BU’s Festival of Learning for wider engagement with the public. Two guest speakers from Free NK travelled to BU on Tuesday 28 June to share their personal experiences in North Korea and the future direction of their work.

The first speaker, Mr Choi Joong-Wha, who served in the North Korean army since graduating high school, expressed his dismay at seeing the reality of the army first-hand. Completely different from what he was taught at school about the army as the protector of people and the country, stealing from ordinary citizens to resolve hunger and raping women were common practice. He also witnessed many soldiers suffering from malnutrition, including himself, with this sometimes resulting in death. When the audience asked him at the end of the event how he survived with little food, he opened up honestly that he was able to survive only through stealing crops and animals from farmers.

The second speaker, Mr Kim Joo-Il, who was an army officer and founded Free NK since his arrival in the UK, focused his talk on Free NK activism and the future of North Korea. He outlined a range of methods that human rights activists deployed to send messages to people remaining in the secret regime, such as the use of balloons and drones. He talked of his experience during his service at the De-militarised Zone near the border with South Korea. During this period, he used to listen to South Korean radio programmes at night because they often spent the late hours in complete darkness due to limited electricity. According to him, these programmes were more enticing because they were not propagandistic but ordinary radio programmes, which revealed a comparatively free life in South Korea. Drawing on this personal experience, Free NK activists try to send newspapers that cover mostly usual news items and adverts to North Korea, rather than containing propagandistic messages.

Mr Kim also pointed out that the successful transformation of North Korea can only be achieved by the ordinary people, not by the privileged class targeted by the international society. Although the ultimate vision of many North Korean defectors is the unification of the North and South through the democratization of the former, both speakers are acutely aware of the huge chasm between the two due to different historical, political and economic paths taken by them. Until then, it will be a long journey.

The event was a great success with excellent engagement from the audience. It was also chosen by BU’s Media and Communications team as a press release that was picked up by the Bournemouth Daily Echo on 4 July 2016.

If you want to know more about my research on North Korean defectors, please email hlim@bournemouth.ac.uk.

 

References:

Chung, B-H. (2009) Between Defector and Migrant: Identities and Strategies of North Koreans in South Korea. Korean Studies, 32, 1-27.

Demick, B. (2010) Nothing to Envy: Real Lives in North Korea. London: Granta.

Free NK (2014). North Korean Residents Society. Available at: http://www.ifreenk.com [Accessed 20 May 2015].

Harden, B. (2012) Escape from Camp 14. London: Mantle.

Jang, J-S. (2014) Dear Leader. London: Ridler Books.

Kang, C-H and Rigoulot, P. (2001) The Aquariums of Pyongyang: Ten Years in the North Korean Gulag. New York: Basic Books.

Lee, H. (2015) The Girl with Seven Names: A North Korean Defector’s Story. New York: HarperCollins.

Noh, J-W., Kwon, Y-D., Yu, S., Park, H-C., and Woo, J-M. (2015) A Study of Mental Health Literacy among North Korean Refugees in South Korea. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 48, 62-71

 

 

 

Lord Stern’s REF Review- the outcome

The outcome of Lord Stern’s independent review of the REF has been published. You can view the report here. The recommendations from the report are as follows.

1.       All research active staff should be returned in the REF (and allocated to a unit of assessment).

2.       Outputs should be submitted at Unit of Assessment level with a set average number per FTE but with flexibility for some faculty members to submit more and others less than the average (this hopes to shift the spotlight from the individual to the Unit of Assessment).

3.       Outputs should not be portable (to encourage a long- term approach to investment).

4.       Panels should continue to assess on the basis of peer review. However, metrics should be provided to support panel members in their assessment, and panels should be transparent about their use.

5.       Institutions should be given more flexibility to showcase their interdisciplinary and collaborative impacts by submitting ‘institutional’ level impact case studies, part of a new institutional level assessment(for a more strategic approach).

6.       Impact should be based on research of demonstrable quality. However, case studies could be linked to a research activity and a body of work as well as to a broad range of research outputs.

7.       Guidance on the REF should make it clear that impact case studies should not be narrowly interpreted, need not solely focus on socioeconomic impacts but should also include impact on government policy, on public engagement and understanding, on cultural life, on academic impacts outside the field, and impacts on teaching (the report recommends that research leading to impact on curricula and/ or pedagogy should be included).

8.       A new, institutional level Environment assessment should include an account of the institution’s future research environment strategy, a statement of how it supports high quality research and research-related activities, including its support for interdisciplinary and cross-institutional initiatives and impact. It should form part of the institutional assessment and should be assessed by a specialist, cross-disciplinary panel. (Institutional-level environment statement will allow for a more holistic view of the HEI).

9.       That individual Unit of Assessment environment statements are condensed, made complementary to the institutional level environment statement and include those key metrics on research intensity specific to the Unit of Assessment.

10.   Where possible, REF data and metrics should be open, standardised and combinable with other research funders’ data collection processes in order to streamline data collection requirements and reduce the cost of compiling and submitting information (to reduce burden and improve transparency).

11.   That Government, and UKRI, could make more strategic use of REF, to better understand the health of the UK research base, our research resources and areas of high potential for future development, and to build the case for strong investment in research in the UK (to help with the UKRI’s aim of being the strategic voice for research in the UK).

12.   Government should ensure that there is no increased administrative burden to Higher Education Institutions from interactions between the TEF and REF, and that they together strengthen the vital relationship between teaching and research in HEIs (the report notes that successful institutions do not separate teaching and research missions, a common dataset that can describe university research and teaching staff is recommended).

Making the Most of Writing Week Part 7: BUCRU – not just for Writing Week!

We’re coming to the end of Writing Week in the Faculty of Health and Social Sciences and by now you will have made a good start or have put the finishing touches to your academic writing projects. Over the last week, we have given you some tips on writing grant applications and highlighted some of the expertise within BUCRU. If you didn’t get the chance to pop in and see us we thought it would be useful to remind you what we’re about and how we can help.

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) supports researchers in improving the quality, quantity and efficiency of research across the University and local National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. We do this by:

  • Helping researchers develop high quality applications for external research funding (including small grants)
  • Ongoing involvement in funded research projects
  • A “pay-as-you-go” consultation service for other work.

How can we help?

BUCRU can provide help in the following areas:

  • Study design
  • Quantitative and qualitative research methods
  • Statistics, data management and data analysis
  • Patient and public involvement in research
  • Trial management
  • Ethics, governance and other regulatory issues
  • Linking University and NHS researchers

Our support is available to Bournemouth University staff and people working locally in the NHS, and depending on the support you require, is mostly free of charge. There are no general restrictions on topic area or professional background of the researcher.

If you would like support in developing your research please get in touch through bucru@bournemouth.ac.uk or by calling us on 01202 961939. Please see our website for further information, details of our current and previous projects and a link to our recent newsletter.

Research in the news: one hour of activity needed to offset harmful effects of sitting at a desk

6_sport00146

BU’s Dr Erika Borkoles has provided expert assessment of research recently published in the Lancet, exploring the links between a sedentary lifestyle and moderate exercise.  This has been widely picked up by the media, including the New Scientist and the Guardian.  Below, she explains the research and its significance.

 

Many scientist in the field of sport, exercise and physical activity have been frustrated for years about why people don’t exercise, play sport, or enjoy daily physical activity, such as moderate intensity walking, even though those who are regularly active they feel the physical, social, and mental benefits.

One of the main problems was providing strong scientific evidence base for showing health benefits of being active. Research has been fraught with trying to work out, the frequency, intensity, lengths of time and the type of activity, whether it is aerobic, strengths based or a combination of the two. Then there was the issue of how the activity of daily living contributes to the structured physical activity’s effect on health.

More recently, research has shown that sedentariness is a separate consideration from being physical active. Sedentariness is now associated with sitting time, and prolonged sitting has been deemed to have significant health risk regardless of physical activity pattern.

The scientific data available is still contradictory, but the recent harmonised meta-analysis by Professor Ulf Ekelund and his colleagues published in the Lancet is providing a reasonably robust evidence that moderate physical activity of 60-75 minutes a day, every day can significantly reduce all-cause mortality risks. The unique point of this meta-analysis is that the authors acknowledge that sedentariness and being active co-exists in one’s life. It might be that someone has a very sedentary job (e.g. truck driver who will perhaps sit more than 8 hours a day) but if they can fit in regularly moderate intensity activity, their risk of dying is significantly reduced.

Interestingly, when the data was scrutinised, those who watched TV for 3 hours a day or more, being active only provided health benefits in the highest activity bands. If TV viewing exceeded more than 5 hours per day, moderate physical activity was not protective.

The good news is that Ekelund et al’s research is providing reasonable scientific evidence for being active is something we should all practice and would benefit from. The main message is from current research findings are: if you job requires prolonged sitting, try to break it up at least once an hour by walking about, making a cup of tea or walk outside for a couple of minutes, but also continue to build in at least 60 minutes of daily moderate activity in your life.

Dr Borkoles provided expert assessment of the Eklund et al’s research, which can be read here.

Nominations for the 2016 John Maddox Prize and London Media Workshop

2016 John Maddox Prize for Standing up for Science
Nominations for the 2016 John Maddox Prize close on Monday, 1st August. 

Now in its fifth year, the prize recognises the work of an individual anywhere in the world who promotes sound science and evidence on a matter of public interest, facing difficulty or hostility in doing so. Details on how to nominate are online here: bit.ly/Maddox2016

The prize is a joint initiative of Nature, where Sir John was editor for 22 years; the Kohn Foundation, whose founder Sir Ralph Kohn was a personal friend of Sir John’s, particularly through their Fellowship of the Royal Society; and Sense About Science, where Sir John served as a trustee until his death in 2009. A passionate and tireless communicator and defender of science, Maddox engaged with difficult debates, inspiring others to do the same. As a writer and editor, he changed attitudes and perceptions, and strove for better understanding and appreciation of science throughout his long working life.

London media workshop

I also wanted to send a reminder that applications for the next Standing up for Science media workshop are now open. The workshop will be at the Francis Crick Institute, central London on Friday 16th September. This full day event is free and for early career researchers and scientists in all sciences, engineering and medicine (PhD students, post-docs or equivalent in first job). Here is the flyer and application form