/ Full archive

Grants Academy book yourself into the Feb Sessions – Apply by Friday 24th of Jan !!

Grants Academy, Training

The Grants Academy has been described by members as ‘brilliant’, ‘excellent’, ‘extremely educational and stimulating’ and ‘very beneficial’. It has also increased bids submissions from members acting as a Principal Investigator by 41% and 20% as a co-Investigator. Members have significantly increased their funding successes too and obtained funding from organisations such as the AHRC, European Commission, ESRC, British Academy, English Heritage and Burdett Trust for Nursing.

How does the Academy work?  Members attend an initial two day training course off campus, facilitated by an external expert bid writer with a well-developed draft proposal. The training days will cover the art of proposal craftmanship, the rules of the writing game and other invaluable information to help you perfect your proposal during the days. Feedback on these days from existing members have been very positive  ‘the workshop was the best I have ever attended’. 

Members can then further develop their proposal over a couple of weeks, gaining unlimited support from the external facilitator in doing so and the cohort re-gathers for a mock peer review panel of each other’s applications. This gives a unique insight into this process in a supportive environment and helps further refine the proposal. One member has described this session as ‘[I now have] profound insights in[to] how the system works…and to realize how that must be for professional reviewers’.

What other support is given? Throughout the 18 month membership of the Grants Academy, members benefit form UNLIMITED support from the external facilitator (and in some cases additional external reviewers) which has been invaluable in helping members secure external funding ‘[His] input enabled me to produce a clearer, more logical and convincing proposal. He also alerted me to issues I had not previously considered and encouraged me to think about ‘impact’ and value for the UK in new ways’.

Members also have bespoke assistance from R&KEO in finding funding and collaborators. They also have access to a library of successful proposals from BU, a travel grant (£250), guaranteed places on Funder visits organised for them and surgeries with external facilitators.

How do I apply? To apply for a place, please contact me Dianne Goodman and I will send you a Membership Agreement Form to be signed by you, your line manager and your DDRE. Applications close on January 24th 2014 for the next training sessions due to take place on the: 3rd February, 4th February, 24 February 2014.

There is a waiting list for spaces on the Grants Academy due to its success and you will be added to this if no places are available on the next cohort. If you find that you are unable to make these dates you may find it helpful to know that we have 2 further Grants Academy sessions which will be held on the:

24th and 25th of Mar and the 22nd Apr 2014

12th and 13th of May and the 9th of Jun 2014

You are welcome to apply and register for one of the future Grants Academy sessions (either February or the sessions listed above) and we are happy to put your name on our list for a future session provided you can confirm at the time of applying that you have blocked out these dates in your calendar and we receive your application signed by your line manager and DDRE.

What’s the small print? When making your application, you must ensure that you are available for the 3 dates in their entirety. Membership is only obtained once all training days have been attended. Obligations of membership are that at least one proposal for external funding must be submitted within the first six months of membership. As the training days are attended with a draft proposal, this should be obtainable. Within 18 months at least three proposals for external funding must have been submitted. Failure to meet these obligations will lead to membership being revoked.

If you have any questions about the Grants Academy please get in contact with Dianne Goodman (scheme administrator) or Rebecca Edwards (scheme manager).

Grants Academy Next Workshops – Deadline for your Application to join for the Feb Sessions – 24th January 2014 – get yourself booked in today – a few spaces left!!

CEMP Bulletin and Fellows

Funding opportunities

Here is the new CEMP bulletin Jan 2014

Following the call for expressions of interest in November, CEMP have awarded five fellowships for a two year period to Milena Bobeva (Centre for Excellence in Learning), Anna Feigenbaum (Media School), Richard Wallis (Media School), Neal White (Media School) and Ashley Woodfall (Media School).  The reciprocal arrangement with CEL is that Milena joins us as a fellow in CEMP and CEMP will lead on a CEL project to tie together educational research across BU. This input will really add value to CEMP and support us in delivering our strategy and forging collaborations across the Media School and BU.

Colleagues who wish to follow up an opportunity in the bulletin or have proposals for educational / pedagogic research which CEMP can support, please contact Julian McDougall or any of the CEMP Fellows.

Good start of the year: Early crop of 2014 publications

Publishing, Research Ethics

HSC staff saw the fruit of their hard work in 2013 as a great number of papers have been accepted for publication or actually appeared in print in the first three weeks of January.  

 

 

There are a number of 2014 papers in health care journals, including papers in Nurse Education in Practice, The Practising Midwife, Journal of Clinical Nursing, Birth, ISRN Family Medicine, Perspective in Public Health, an editorial in Midwifery and two in the same issue of Health Science Journal.  There was also an early contribution from our social science colleagues in The Journal of Adult Protection and, last but not least a book chapter in Case Studies in e-Learning Research.

 

  1. Morley, D., 2014. Supporting student nurses in practice with online communication tools. Nurse Education in Practice, 14, 69-75.
  2. Bennett, S and Scammell, J (2014) Midwives caring for asylum-seeking women: research findings.  The Practising Midwife. 17 (1) p9-12
  3. Whitford, H., Aitchison, P., Entwistle V.A., van Teijlingen, E., Davidson, T., Humphrey, T., Tucker, J. Use of a birth plan within woman-held maternity records: a qualitative study with women and staff in northeast Scotland, Birth (accepted).
  4. Norton, E. 2014 The application of humanization theory to health-promoting practice. Perspectives in Public Health, (online first 2013)
  5. Sapkota, T., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2014) Nepalese health workers’ migration to the United Kingdom: A qualitative study.  Health Science Journal 8(1):  57-74.
  6. Hunt, J.A., Hutchings, M. (2014) Innovative group-facilitated peer and educator assessment of nursing students’ group presentations, Health Science Journal 8(1): 22-31.
  7. Harding, A., Sanders, F., Medina Lara, A., van Teijlingen, E., Wood, C., Galpin, D. Baron, S., Crowe, S., Sharma, S. Patient choice for older people in English NHS primary care: theory & practice,  ISRN Family Medicine (accepted).
  8. Norton, E., Holloway, I., Galvin K. 2014. Comfort vs risk: a grounded theory about female adolescent behaviour in the sun. Journal of Clinical Nursing. (online first 2013)
  9. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Matthews, Z., Lewis, G., Graham, W.J., Campbell, J., ten Hoope-Bender, P., Sheppard, Z.A., Hulton, L. (2014) Millennium Development Goals: All good things must come to an end, so what next? Midwifery 30: 1-2.
  10. Parker, J.,  Ashencaen Crabtree, S. (2014) Covert research and adult protection and safeguarding: an ethical dilemma? The Journal of Adult Protection (accepted).
  11. Hutchings, M, Quinney, A., Galvin, K.  Clark, V. book chapter IN: ‘The Yin/Yang of Innovative Technology Enhanced Assessment for Promoting Student Learning’ Case Studies in e-Learning Research.   Book is now available at:  http://www.academic-bookshop.com/ourshop/prod_2915879-Case-Studies-in-eLearning-Research-for-Researchers-teachers-and-Students.html

 

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

Your chance to influence research and knowledge exchange support at BU – deadline looming

R & KE Operations

The deadline is looming for your chance to influence how you receive research and knowledge exchange support! The RKE Operations team are implementing improvements to the way we work and we want your feedback. Contribute by completing this short survey https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GTHQG3F by 9th February 2014 – and we’ll do our best to make sure you receive the kind of support you want.

Jenny Roddis

International, Interdisciplinary, Innovative: the AHRC brings grant bidding advice to BU

Funding opportunities, Fusion

On January 20, 2014 Bournemouth University played host to a lunchtime visit from the AHRC. The funding advice seminar covered general information about the Arts & Humanities Research Council, as well as tips and advice on AHRC bid writing here at from BU. In the lead up to the AHRC visit, the BU Research Blog offered a great round up of key facts and figures. Reiterated at the event were the AHRC’s commitments to:

  • Influence public policy
  • Engage with the creative economy
  • Impact internationally
  • Increase their profile with public

The AHRC offers research grants, fellowship grants, network grants and a special international stream. Across all funding lines, international collaboration was stressed, as were innovation, interdisciplinary work and making a clear case that your planned output matches the target audience for your research agenda.

Our AHRC visitors also highlighted their focus on developing management and leadership skills for Early Career Researchers. If you are out of your PhD for less than 8 years or in an academic post for less than 6 years, you are eligible to apply for their ECR streams. While ECRs go through the same grant process, the success rate is higher, as the ‘bar’ for a fundable project rests below their standard streams.

The Pivotal Peer Review

The AHRC reps also gave valuable insight on the evaluation process. Every proposal is ranked on a 1-6 scale by a group of up to four peer reviewers, selected from their list of 1,000 senior academics. If your proposal includes technical components, such as developing a digital archive, it will additionally be reviewed by someone who knows the technologies you’re engaging.

If your proposal scores a 4 our higher by the majority of reviewers, you’ll make the second round. Here you’ll have a chance to respond to reviewer feedback and clarification questions. “Don’t underestimate the importance of this response,” we were told. The clarity and directness of your PI response can make your application a success.

Also illuminating the evaluation process, the reps from AHRC attempted to demystify the term “impact.” In recent years the notion of ‘impact’ has caused much controversy – especially in the arts and humanities. “Impact is not just economic,” they assured us. Influencing quality of life, public service, policy and creative output also count as impact. To figure out how to articulate the impact of your research, they advised us to “simply ask yourself who, what and how” people benefit from your research.

The AHRC reps also said to keep an eye out for highlight notices that feature key strategic research themes. These themes–currently, Care for the Future, Digital Transformations, Science in Culture, and Translating Cultures—are intentionally broad and intended to offer space for a wide range of research subjects and activities.

Improving our Bids at BU

Bringing their advice home, to end the seminar, the AHRC reps offered some excellent tips for improving our bid writing here at BU.

  • BU has 9 AHRC reviewers, let’s take advantage of their expertise and experience.
  • The BU research blog is full of grant writing advice and info on the grants academy
  • Our BU research office offers an internal review process, use it!
  • Check out the peer review college section of the AHRC website.
  • Give yourself 3 months to develop your bid from research to writing to final edits.
  • Don’t be too repetitive in the bid and watch your spelling!
  • Make sure your methods of dissemination are appropriate for your stakeholders.
  • The reviewers love to see clear timescales and ‘value for money‘
  • Always ask yourself: Is this the best way to do this research?
  • If you get to the PI response round, it is crucial and can move up your overall ranking.
  • Remember, it’s not just about having a great proposal, you’re in a big pool competing against other really good research.

 Added to this are a couple reflections I had from my perspective as an Early Career lecturer in the Media School, a CEMP fellow and Fusion Fund committee member:

  •  ‘Rise-Up Collaborations’ – Early Career Researchers can pair with senior academics as CIs for the AHRC’s various ECR strands. As emergent researchers, we are often scared of the ‘big bids’ and tempted to stay small or follow professors onto their large-scale research projects. The in-built collaborative nature of the AHRC ECR routes are a great opportunity to push forward with our own initiatives and lead a team, supported by more experienced CIs.
  •  ‘The Three I’s’ – International, Interdisciplinary and Innovative research tops the agenda of the AHRC. This means great opportunities to be thinking about projects both across Schools at BU and with international university’s we have MoUs and Erasmus partnerships with. These ‘three Is’ are also embedded in Fusion. Pump-priming SMN Fusion Grants could be a great place to initiate the early stages of an AHRC bid for those of us in the arts and humanities seeking to expand our research horizons.

Toward a better science of promoting walking: A cross-school Fusion project

Fusion

 

Samuel Nyman (Psychology, DEC), Andrew Callaway (ST), and Kelly Goodwin (ST) were awarded Research Development Fund – Small Grant funding for 2013 to conduct a study to promote walking among older people. Over the summer they identified a further fusion opportunity so that students from both schools could be involved. They report their experience here:

Co-creation in the School of Tourism

Our study began with the purchase of pedometers (small device to count walking steps) and actigraphs (small device to count walking steps but can also measure intensity, i.e. if walking or running). These were then used by students in the School of Tourism in a group project. Their task was to recruit 10 older people from the local community to take part in a study whereby they wore the devices every day for 60 days to measure how much walking they did. But this was not just a sports science project to look at whether pedometers or actigraphs reported the same results. It was multidisciplinary in that participants were enrolled into an N-of-1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), whereby each day they took part in a different psychological condition. Each morning participants had to set a goal for the day that was either to increase their walking steps or eat more fruit and vegetables (active control condition). They also had to either wear a pedometer that showed them how many steps they had walked so far that day, or a pedometer that was sealed (and so they would not know how many steps they had walked; another active control condition). These different conditions were based on control theory, that suggests that if people set themselves a goal to walk more, and can keep check on how much they have done, then they will be likely to walk more steps on those days than on the other days (when they had to state a goal for fruit and vegetable intake and could not see how many steps they have done). N-of-1 trial designs are recommended by the MRC framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions and help ascertain whether theories work at the individual level.

This part of the project was completed before the summer of 2013, and provided students in the School of Tourism a group project and a very useful learning experience. Students were posed with a more challenging and rewarding project of engaging with older people with the local community. They also had to contend with the challenges of group work, project management, learning and teaching others to use the objective physical activity monitors, and dealing with the challenges of conducting short-longitudinal data collection in the field. The students helped in the co-creation of new knowledge to test if pedometers or actigraphs were better at measuring walking activity, and in testing whether control theory shows promise as a means of behaviour change at the individual level measured by walking activity.

Co-creation in the School of Design, Engineering and Computing

Before launching into the analysis over the summer, the project team (Nyman, Callaway, and Goodwin) identified a further opportunity to enhance the data collected by the above student group project and provide a further opportunity for fusion.

Andrew Callaway identified that published studies in this area simply compare one measure of physical activity with another, as we had done, with no evidence as to which is the closest to a ‘true’ measure of what really happened (both devices will not be completely accurate). He proposed a further study that compares the two measures of pedometers and actigraphs against a criterion measure – a measure that was known to be truly accurate. This entailed the design and implementation of a laboratory-based study whereby students would walk on a treadmill and have their physical activity monitored by several devices simultaneously, including manual and video-recording of steps walked.

The set up entailed volunteers to walk on a treadmill at different speeds (all comfortable walking paces) with pedometers, actigraphs, and a sensewear armband strapped on them, and a video camera recording their walking plus other volunteers manually counting the number of walking steps performed. You will be surprised how difficult it can be to correctly count the number of steps walked in a two minute period! With the combination of all these measures we should arrive at a close to ‘criterion’ measure to compare the devices with.

Third year students from the BSc Psychology framework who had elected to study the Health Psychology unit volunteered to help with this experiment in the Sports Lab. This was a great learning opportunity for the psychology students as none of them had seen the sports lab before or the equipment used for physical activity monitoring. In the session the students also had the opportunity to engage with two members of staff and five third year student volunteers from the School of Tourism to access their expertise in sports science and performance analysis. Dr Nyman also used the sessions as an opportunity to relate the material from the lecture the day before to the seminar sessions, and to demonstrate to students the output that can be obtained from actigraphs (using TV screens) and what this affords in terms of more nuanced health psychology research questions that can be answered. The students had the opportunity to be involved in the co-creation of new knowledge that will challenge the perceived wisdom of the reliability of objective physical activity monitoring.

Conclusion

After recently completing the laboratory experiment, we now have all the data to begin analysis and writing up. We are pleased with the outcome of the two studies above and feel they are a great example of fusion in terms of cross-school collaboration and co-creation of new knowledge, embedded within existing teaching programmes. Conducting the two studies has also provided us as researchers with new data that will lead to peer-reviewed publications.

We would like to thank the older people and health psychology students that volunteered to help with the studies, and the School of Tourism students that volunteered to help us with the recent laboratory experiment.

 

Students who helped with the project: Front Row (L to R): Sam Sayer, Emma Rylands, Joe Hill. Second row (L to R): Calum Sharpin, James Baum.

 

Dr Samuel Nyman, BUDI and Psychology Research Centre
Andrew Callaway and Kelly Goodwin, Centre for Events and Sport Research

AHRC – a success for BU

Funding opportunities, R & KE Operations

By Eva and Alex

 

 

 

Following yesterday’s Blog post on the AHRC – a success for BU, we would like to focus on the Faculty of Science and Technology’s success with AHRC. Over the last few years the Faculty of Science and Technology’s have a 45% success rate from 20 projects submitted with 9 funded.

So how did we achieve this success you ask?  Well we took to the offices of Christchurch House to interview successful AHRC grant holders Dr. Mark Matlby and Dr. Emma Jenkins to find out…

Mark Maltby

What was your project about?

Cultural and Scientific Perceptions of Human-Chicken Interactions : It’s part of the Science in Culture Call.  The project aims to unite scholars from different disciplines, members of the public, interest groups and schoolchildren through the study of human exploitation of chickens, an under-researched species that has the potential to provide new insights about the past, present and future of human society and their relationships with animals.

 How is it going?

It began on January 6th – so early days!

What do you want to achieve?

One of the main aims is to get researchers from different disciplines to work together constructively and exchange knowledge and expertise in pursuit of a common research goal.

What gave you the edge, do you think?

Being positive/enthusiastic in statements in the application and in response to reviewers’ comments.. Working with colleagues from other institutions who have successfully gained and carried out research grants. Their expertise in writing the Case for Support, Objectives etc was invaluable.

In hindsight, what would you do differently, what advice would you give to others?

Despite our best efforts, we were tight to the deadline for application. What took more time than I expected was getting the cost estimates sorted. Particularly if you are applying with partners, allow enough time for members of other institutions to react.

Any other comments from your experience that are worth noting.

We certainly benefitted from having an interview rehearsal. Learn to write very concisely as word limits are challengingly limited.

 

Emma Jenkins

What was your project about

The project is concerned with developing a method to help us understand more about how Neolithic sites in southwest Asia (c 11,700-7800 cal BP) were used. This is an important period in human history which saw the advent of sedentism, agriculture, and ultimately the rise of complex societies. It is also, however, one of the most poorly understood. This is partly due to the problems associated with site recognition and partly because of the lack of preservation of many forms of evidence, particularly biological. As a result, many Neolithic sites are comprised of a series of structures, the function of which is difficult, if not impossible, to interpret. Therefore, it is critical that we maximise the information that can be acquired from these sites.

 Our project uses recent advances in archaeological scientific techniques, namely phytolith (bodies of silica that form in and around plant cells)and geochemical analysis (traces of chemicals in soils resulting from human induced activities and waste, e.g. phosphorous, calcium and manganese) in a novel way. We will conduct a large scale combined analysis of phytoliths and geochemical elements from ethnographic sites to determine if certain activity areas, for example middens, hearths and floors, have particular phytolith and geochemical signatures that can help us recognise these same areas archaeologically.  

 How is it going

We have recruited two excellent new team members who will start with us in March and April and are busy making plans for our field season in April in Jordan. However, we have also hit problem number one but I am a firm believer in looking for solutions rather than focusing on the problem!

 What do you want to achieve?

On the academic front I want to have a successful field season in Jordan, leading to the collection of a good range of samples which will enable us to produce worthwhile and valid results. The aim is to publish these as peer reviewed journal papers. The ultimate aim is for us to apply for further funding to pursue related research areas.

We also plan to produce two 10 minute documentaries. The first will show  how scientific methods can be used in archaeology which I can use in my STEM Ambassador and general outreach work. The second is focused on documenting and presenting a sympathetic portrayal of traditional ways of life in Jordan and the relationship between people and a challenging but beautiful and ancient environment and landscape. The latter film is particularly pertinent because the traditional lifeways in Jordan are fast disappearing as a result of western influence.

 What gave you the edge, do you think?

I think there were a number of factors which led to this project being funded. Perhaps the most important was the team of people. All of us had a proven track record in our discipline and a history of working in Jordan. Even though this was awarded to me as an Early Career Grant, my collaborators hold senior positions within their institutions and have a strong publication record relating to the project research areas. We had done pilot studies involving phytoliths and geochemical analysis on ethnographic sites in Jordan which demonstrated that the method had potential. Another strength was the fact that I had run (or co-run) projects in Jordan previously so could demonstrate project management skills. Last, but definitely not least, I think Martin Pickard from Grantcraft helped a lot in the layout and design of the proposal which improved it enormously.

 In hindsight, what would you do differently, what advice would you give to others?

I over thought the impact part of the project (the documentaries) and originally made them too specific and complicated. We have since changed their focus and this makes them much more in line with the academic aims.

 As for my advice-don’t have two babies while trying to write a grant application in a timely fashion!

 No seriously,

  • Spend a lot of time thinking about the project and don’t under estimate how much time the project planning can take.
  • Cover yourself for every possible criticism. I wrote in a contingency plan in case there were any political problems in Jordan that made fieldwork unfeasible. The reviewers all seemed to like the fact that I had addressed this potential problem.
  • Make sure your project is good value for money and that you have a good team of people
  • Ask for help . I asked a lot of people within my discipline for advice and to read my application. One of my colleagues noticed a rather fundamental flaw in my proposal in its early stages and suggested alternative archaeological sites which made the project much more coherent.

 Also any other comments from your experience that are worth noting.

Designing the project was a really worthwhile experience and led to me finding fantastic team members whom I hope to work with in the future.

~Don’t miss tomorrow’s edition, when we hit the streets of Weymouth house for the Media School story on their fantastic success with the AHRC.

Marketing Colloquium- Recent Challenges & Advances in B2B Marketing 21st March 2014

Please click on link for further details on how to register for this free event organised by Kaouther Kooli. 

The event is aimed at Researchers and Practitioners in marketing. Please see http://news.bournemouth.ac.uk/events/event/marketing-colloquium-recent-challenges-advances-in-b2b-marketing-21-march-2014/ for further information on this.

The registration is now open for this free event on 21st March 2014 at The Executive Business Centre.

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/myevent?eid=10060560407

Currently, the closing date for abstract submissions is 21st Feb.

 

The BUDI Themes – how you can get involved with dementia research!

Research themes

 

The BUDI Themes – how you can get involved with dementia research!


The Bournemouth University Dementia Institute (BUDI) continues to expand and build on its excellent start since its launch in May 2012. We are pleased to have recently welcomed three research assistants to the team who are helping prepare grant proposals for various research and enterprise income. On the 24 October BUDI held an away day with 25 staff (7 others were unable to attend) to discuss our strategy for meeting our targets for developing successful research proposals. While we had a successful meeting and are energised to write research grant proposals, the BUDI team would like to extend an invitation to colleagues from across all schools to partner with us in writing bids for research and enterprise income. 

To this end, BUDI will be hosting an informal tea / coffee and cake morning on Tuesday 28 January 2014 in The Retreat, for staff to come and meet the team and discuss their potential collaboration with BUDI on dementia research projects. 

To help staff see where they might work with BUDI, we have summarised the five BUDI themes below. Under each theme we engage in research, and provide consultancy, service evaluation, and education / training services. However for this event, we are looking in particular to partner with colleagues in developing research grant proposals:

Theme 1: Dementia Awareness and Knowledge Translation
This theme is about raising awareness of dementia in the community and translating knowledge into practice. It is about challenging stereotypes and assumptions made of people with dementia. For example, we are holding an ESRC-funded public engagement event on dementia and showcasing the work of BUDI.

For more information, please contact Anthea Innes or Clare Cutler.
http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/dementia-institute/dementia-awareness-education-and-knowledge-translation/

Theme 2: Dementia Friendly Environments
This theme is about making sure that the environments in which people live and frequent are designed in a manner that is accessible for people with dementia. For example, ensuring care homes and hospitals are designed to help prevent people getting lost and able to access toilets, gardens.

For more information, please contact Jan Wiener or Mariela Gaete-Reyes.
http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/dementia-institute/dementia-friendly-environments/

Theme 3: Improving Services and Care Provision
This theme is about striving to provide the best in health and social care for people with dementia and best support for their carers. For example, working with care homes and community services to evaluate and improve the care they provide so that it better meets the needs and preferences of individuals.

For more information, please contact Samuel Nyman or Clare Cutler.
http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/dementia-institute/improving-services-and-care-provision/

Theme 4: Dementia Friendly Leisure
This theme is about working with the leisure and tourism industry to improve the accessibility of services so that they can be enjoyed by people with dementia. For example, helping museums, art galleries, hoteliers, etc. become more dementia friendly to facilitate social participation by people with dementia in their local community and tourist sites.

For more information, please contact Stephen Page or Anthea Innes
http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/dementia-institute/dementia-friendly-tourism-and-leisure/

Theme 5: Leadership, Education and Staff Development
This theme is about influencing leaders and managers so that organisations can improve their dementia awareness and effectiveness in serving people with dementia. It is also about developing the knowledge and skills of staff who directly serve people with dementia.

For more information, please contact Rick Fisher or Anthea Innes
http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/dementia-institute/leadership-and-staff-development/

We hope that many colleagues will be able to attend the event and foster research proposals together. If you are able to attend, please inform Michelle O’Brien mobrien@bournemouth.ac.uk in advance by Monday 20 January for catering purposes. If you are unable to attend but would like to discuss a research theme, please contact the relevant theme lead mentioned above.

The BUDI team

NRG talk on Victorian narratives of motherhood

Women's Academic Network

We are delighted to announce that Professor Emma Griffin from the University of East Anglia will be presenting a paper to the Media School’s Narrative Research Group as part of this semester’s series of talks.  The title of Emma’s paper is ‘Victorian Mothers: perspectives from working-class autobiography’, and the full abstract for Emma’s talk appears below.  The event will take place at 4p.m on 5 Feb in the Casterbridge suite. All welcome.

Abstract:
Historians like to imagine that emotions such as maternal love are largely constant across time and space.  They argue that mothers in earlier times loved their children in much the same way as we do today, though they accept that love was often expressed in different ways.  This paper turns to working-class autobiography to consider these claims.  It asks how the emotional ties of family life were expressed and sustained in households where space and resources were scarce.  It concludes that material deprivation had the power to undermine family relationships in ways that historians have usually been reluctant to admit.

Research website training sessions

Training

 BU’s new research website is an externally facing communications channel. It allows you to add and update research-related content quickly and easily. The site is flexible and accommodates a range of digital media content. You can login with your usual BU username and password and start creating content here.Screen shot of new website

We are hosting a series of 90 minute training sessions, which are open to all BU academic staff, post graduate research students and those supporting researchers in their communications activity.

During the session you will learn the following:

  • Why BU has a new research website
  • How you can upload content to the website
  • How the site can be used most effectively to maximise exposure of BU research.

There are three sessions taking place next month on Talbot Campus and at the Lansdowne. These are hosted by the website designer Matt Northam and me. Sessions are informal and if they fall over lunchtime, do feel free to bring a sandwich!

To book on one of the following sessions please use the links below…

Friday 7 February 2014 12:00-13:30 – S103 Studland House, Lansdowne Campus

Friday 14 February 2014 10:00-11:30 – P131 Poole House, Talbot Campus

Friday 14 February 2014 14:30-16:00 – P131 Poole House, Talbot Campus

If you have any questions about the website or training sessions, please email the research website team.

 

Open access and monographs – a new HEFCE project – UPDATE

Publishing

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceLast month I added a post about HEFCE’s plans to launch a new project to investigate the issues regarding open access publishing of monographs and other long-form scholarly works (Open access and monographs – a new HEFCE project). HEFCE have now confirmed that this project has started and is being undertaken in partnership with the AHRC and the ESRC.  It aims to identify and draw together a body of evidence concerning monographs and open access publishing and is expected to run until mid-2014.

You can read the full report here: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/newsarchive/2014/news85292.html

You can access all of the project documentation here: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/rinfrastruct/oa/monographs/

Further updates from the group will be posted over the coming months.

AHRC – a success for BU

Grants Academy, R & KE Operations

AHRC are visiting BU today (find out how you can join in) and so it is timely to highlight our success with obtaining funding from them.

BU’s success rate of applying for funding with the AHRC has improved over the last few years from 33% in 2011/12 (the AHRC’s financial year runs from April to March), to 50% in both 2012/13 and 2013/14.

Since 2008, notable successes have occurred in the following Schools/Faculties:

Faculty of Science and Technology have a 45% success rate from 20 projects submitted with 9 funded

Business School have a 60% success rate from 5 projects submitted with 3 funded

Media School have a 44% success rate from 25 projects submitted with 11 funded

So, what is it that we need to know about the AHRC? 

Firstly, they have more than 50 disciplines within its remit. The arts and humanities is a large, dynamic and diverse body of disciplines and activities.  They range from practice-based work through to scholarly enquiry into history and culture. What they have in common, however, is a distinctive approach to ways of thinking about the conceptual, creative and historical basis of the human world.  You can find out more about their strategic priorities here.

Since receiving its Royal Charter in 2005, the AHRC has made a total of more than £700 million of funding available for arts and humanities research.  The AHRC’s Delivery Plan 2011-15 commits them to spend 72 percent of research funding in responsive mode schemes and 24 percent on targeted programmes, including International and Knowledge Exchange activities.  Since 2005, more than 16,400 research outputs have been published as a result of AHRC funding.  Of all disciplines in the UK, the humanities produce the largest world share of published articles at nearly 11 percent.

The RAE (Research Assessment Exercise) 2008 revealed the scale of the arts and humanities research base, with 14,000 active researchers, representing 27 percent of researchers in the UK. Across all disciplines, arts and humanities researchers achieved the highest proportion of top-rated 4* work, defined as ‘world-leading in terms of originality, significance and rigour.’  The latest available statistics suggest that there are 17,000 academic staff within the arts and humanities who are involved in research either wholly or coupled with teaching duties in UK institutions.

How have BU benefitted from AHRC funding? 

AHRC have funded several types of grants in BU including responsive mode, early career, and large grants.  The biggest impact has been the Block Grant Partnership that has led to several Masters and PhD students being funded in the School of Applied Sciences and the Media School.  These have helped fund students researching areas such as ‘Physiochemical past integrating geochemical & geophysical approaches to site location & interpretation’, ‘Identifying activity areas in Neolithic sites through ethnographic analysis of phytoliths & geochemical elements’, and ‘Film, digital & media production’.  As mentioned above, several research grants have also been won, the most recent being research into ‘Music publishing’ in the Business School and a large grant researching ‘Cultural and scientific perceptions of human-chicken interactions’ in the School of Applied Sciences.

How do I go about applying to the AHRC?

The key message here is to spend time writing and refining applications, making use of the support available (such as the internal peer review and the Grants Academy), and making sure your applications are of as high a quality as possible prior to submission.  BU is especially keen to reduce the number of bids submitted to Research Councils whilst significantly increasing the quality of those which are submitted. BU initiatives, such as the internal peer review scheme – RPRS (please note this is mandatory for research council applications) and the Grants Academy, have been specifically established to support academics to design, write and structure competitive, fundable research proposals and to maximise their chances of being awarded funding. It is excellent to see that these initiatives are so popular amongst academic colleagues and I would encourage you to make use of the support available. 

RKEO recently published a blog article that listed fifteen top tips for getting research funding, as advised by an AHRC panel member.  This should help to increase your chances of being successful when applying for research funding.  Other useful information can be found in the research toolkit on the blog, which provides guidance on applying to research councils.  Advice is giving on how to write a research summary, case for support, impact statement, justification of resources, and a data management plan, as well as advice on ethics.  As all research councils require electronic submission of applications with a two-stage institutional check and approval, you need to have finalised your application five working days before the funder cut off in order for RKEO to check and approve your application to ensure it stands the best possible chance of being successful.  As soon as you think you might apply for funding, do get in touch with your RKE Operations contact and we will help you through the process.

So, if that has whet your appetite and you’re keen to find out more, do come along to the AHRC visit today at 12 noon (registration details can be found here).

An Update from the Centre for Face Processing Disorders

Awarded & submitted bids, Fusion, Post-award

The Centre for Face Processing Disorders was established in July 2012, supported by investment from both HEIF and Fusion funds.  Our Centre primarily examines prosopagnosia (face blindness) in adults or children who are either born with the condition, or acquire face-processing difficulties following neurological damage.  The close of 2013 not only earmarked the 18-month anniversary of the Centre, but also the end of our internal funding period.  This pump-priming resulted in the rapid consolidation of the Centre, underpinned by the appointment of two post-doctoral research fellows (Dr Nicola Gregory and Dr Rachel Bennetts) and one PGR (Anna Bobak).  These appointments were rapidly followed by the addition of two permanent members of academic staff: Professor Chang Hong Liu and Dr Angela Gosling.

It seems apt that this report should begin with some discussion of the Centre’s contributions to REF-2014.  Indeed, as I’m sure is the case for many individuals across BU, I feel I am still ‘coming down’ from the rather intense preparations that filled many hours over the past couple of years.  Work from the Centre not only resulted in key research outputs that were submitted to the REF, but also to an Impact Case Study for UoA4.    While some of the impact we achieved occurred in rather momentous one-off events (e.g. convincing the NHS Choices website to feature prosopagnosia in its A-Z of conditions, or sparking debate about prosopagnosia in the House of Commons), our other contributions were founded on basic ‘numbers’, or perhaps more fundamentally, the work ethic and sheer hours of research time that were dedicated to this project from research staff and students alike.

Of course, the co-creation and co-production of all our outputs is central to BU’s Fusion agenda.  When this project first started, the concept of Fusion was fresh to our ears; and as the first round of Fusion-funded projects now reach their end dates, it seems timely to reflect on this component of our work.  In our first year, we supported four voluntary second year undergraduate research placements (via the Department of Psychology’s Research Apprenticeship Scheme), two voluntary final-year research placements, six final year projects, two MSc projects, and two paid undergraduate summer research placements.  Importantly, the student projects were co-ordinated with our over-riding research aims, and the projects were therefore more sophisticated and engaging than the typical student dissertation.  Indeed, all students received training and experience in neuropsychological testing and the diagnosis of face-processing deficits, and attended our bi-weekly lab meetings where they contributed to the planning and interpretation of key investigations.  Their significant contributions to our research programme have enabled them to be listed as co-authors in the six research publications that have resulted from Year One.

But the benefits to these students has gone beyond the mere (but very respectable) addition of research papers to their CVs.  Strikingly, over half of the undergraduate members of the Centre have or will remain at BU to complete the MSc Lifespan Neuropsychology – and continue their research with us.  These same individuals wish to pursue doctoral research within the Centre.  In short, this co-creation model of working grabs students in and gives them the ‘research bug’, while of course boosting internal recruitment for postgraduate study.  The benefits to us as staff members are huge – if this model continues, a set of home-trained graduates with considerable expertise in our field will consistently be produced, sustaining the pathway of our research for years to come.

I feel I should stop writing now as this has become a rather long blog.  There are other achievements which I haven’t yet mentioned, including the substantial media coverage of the Centre (e.g. in a CBBC documentary and several national newspapers), some key research publications, and our public engagement activities, which recently received external funding from the British Psychological Society.  As an early-career researcher, I have been very fortunate to receive this pump-priming, and am currently reaping the benefits of the co-creation aspect of this work.  The next step is to secure further external funding to ensure the sustainability and growth of the Centre, and of course to make that critical ‘five-year plan’ to ensure the complementary development of all strands of the Centre’s work.

For more information, visit our website: www.prosopagnosiaresearch.org.

Book writing: essential information for researchers

Training

Coming soon is essential training on book writing. A must for researchers, especially those looking to write their first book.

Facilitated by Professor Stuart Allan, this session will provide advice on the following topics:

  • writing for book publications
  • submitting chapters
  • Intellectual property rights
  • copyright
  • attribution
  • co-authorship

Facilitated by: Professor Stuart Allan, The Media School

Aimed at: Academic Staff

Date: Monday 27th January 2014

Time: 14.00-16.00

Location: PG22, Ground Floor, Poole House, Talbot Campus

To book your place on this workshop, please email staffdevelopment@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

BU Social Science Study Leave at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Fusion, Women's Academic Network

Just one week into our fusion-funded study leave and work is developing, growing and coalescing around the objectives we set and negotiated last June and July.

We arrived in Kuala Lumpur last Saturday evening (11th Jan), stumbling into our hotel after the 11-hour flight having watched the films Rush and one featuring an improbably accident prone and deranged Sherlock Holmes character, with the children glued to Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2.

Sunday 12th January took us straight into our first meeting, after a brief punctuation for swimming, to discuss the plight of the Jakun, a tribe of the Orang Asli (first people), living at Tasik Chini, one of only two natural freshwater lakes in Peninsula Malaysia. The effects of mining, concomitant environmental damage, the needs of the people and some of the perceived tensions between those working and researching with the Orang Asli were described.

Our thoughts concerning the plight of the Orang Asli were further agitated by discussion with the social science team, the meeting being chaired by Prof Dato’ Mushrifah Idris, the head of the Tasik Chini Research Centre at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM – National University of Malaysia) of which we are honoured to be visiting professors. The mining activities have expanded significantly since we last met with Prof Mushrifah in summer 2012 and the outlook for the already resettled Orang Asli seems increasingly bleak.

A large part of our work whilst we are with UKM is to assist with the research. We were heartened to learn of the formation of the social science team within the Tasik Chini Research Centre since our earlier discussions with Prof Mushrifah, a natural scientist. Discussion centred on the fact-finding work and concern to illuminate the perceptions of the Orang Asli, our particular contribution being to consider how we can elicit the stories, beliefs, wants and needs of an increasingly voiceless people.

Over the next few weeks we will be making introductory visits and meeting people who work alongside these groups as advocates and welfare workers. The social science team also want us to work with their social work and sociology student groups to help develop a community development approach at the Tasik Chini site. It was suggested that a Participatory Action approach would probably be the best way forward where community members act as equal partners with academic staff and students to identify needs and solutions.

From the first meeting onwards, we also discussed some of the fears expressed about developments in social work education and practice as Malaysia moves slowly towards passing, and subsequently, implementing its Social Work Bill. A new college initiative is being proposed to address some of the anxieties of non-social work graduates and many NGOs regarding the concern that they will be marginalised by graduate social workers solely benefitting from social work becoming a protected title. We have been asked to advise on the curriculum in this venture.

We were also invited to assist in the development of a new Master’s programme in social work at UKM, determining whether a niche in medical sociology and social work or an emphasis on marginalised and disadvantaged groups would play best to strengths. Prof Vishantie Sewpaul, vice president of the International Association of Schools of Social Work and Kwa-Zulu Natal South Africa, and ourselves joined the UKM team in exploring how they might best develop the academic elements and niche areas. This will involve further discussion but was given a boost the following day (Thurs 16th) at a special colloquium at the Institut Sosial Malaysia, in which we advised on publication and research strategies.

In between this work, background reading, catching up with emails (when we can as email connection is sporadic!) trying to swat mosquitoes, find food and locate a local launderette – and generally navigate our way around on foot in a largely non-pedestrian society where wheels are essential, we are also busily educating our children. In many ways this provides an important balance and helps us in engaging with our family-friendly hosts!

We have also been delighted to meet our former Malaysian students attending the meetings that we have each respectively taught over the years at Universiti Malaysia Sarawak and at University of Hull, who have now reached positions of prominence in their chosen professions. We were both astonished to find out that so many people we have met this week were not only were aware of our individual previous research but were able to refer knowledgably to a number of our papers that relate to the Malaysian context.

So early days and only one week in; but already there are signs of meeting those key fusion objectives of developing international research links, educational opportunities that may link to professional practice outcomes.

Jonathan Parker & Sara Ashencaen Crabtree

SciTech Design Engineering Level C students’ study trip

PG research

Sustainable Design Research Centre (SDRC) within the University’s Faculty of Science & Technology (SciTech) has established significant research links through match funded PhD degree researches with The Tank Museum at Bovington and Defence Science & Technology Laboratory (DSTL) Ministry of Defence (MoD) [lead by Dr Zulfiqar Khan].  SDRC has been conducting research in structural integrity in terms of degradation through corrosion in large military vehicles of historic importance, corrosion condition monitoring and life prediction.

SDRC has been actively engaging Design & Engineering Framework students in research activities to enhance their experience of learning at BU. One of the models to facilitate research informed education is through students’ projects. Design Engineering Level C students will be working on their project (4th project of the unit and 50% of the total course work) within their Design Methods & Project unit (40 credit) [Dr Zulfiqar Khan, unit leader]. Students will have the opportunity to learn about the materials, manufacturing techniques, mechanics at the interface & degradation issues within the context of track and sprocket. The students are tasked to propose a design solution for reliability & durability of the tracks utilising alternative materials, geometrical configuration and/or manufacturing techniques. The students visited The Tank Museum to study various Tanks and gather specific information.

If you need further information on the above academic activity please contact

 

Dr Zulfiqar Khan

Associate Professor

Director SDRC

Email: zkhan@bournemouth.ac.uk