Category / REF Subjects

UoA25 funding – call for new proposals

REF Subjects

cel-logo-web    cemp-logo

The Centre for Excellence in Learning and the Centre for Excellence in Media Practice invite new applications for funding (up to £3000) to develop research outputs and impact and to enhance the research environment in relation to the Research Excellence Framework Unit of Assessment: Education.

Up to three proposals will be funded in this round.

This fund is exclusively to support the development of research and the generation of research impact in close alignment with BU’s UoA25 strategy, sub-themes and development spending plan. It is expected that recipients of funding will work towards submission to UoA25 in REF 2020. Staff applying for new funds, having been in receipt of UoA25 funding in 2015-16 will be subject to a review of outputs / impact generated from previous funding.

Funds can be used for the following kinds of activity:

  • Research output generation
  • New project development
  • Impact generation
  • Research events (hosting, arranging)
  • Data conversion

NB conference attendance should be funded through faculty QR budgets.

Applications – uoa25-funding-application-2016-17 – can be submitted up to January 13th 2017, and are particularly welcome from groups of staff with clear capacity-building objectives for UoA25.

PGR students will need to demonstrate that this funding is specifically for UoA25 related activity and cannot be covered by the standard PGR development funds.

Applications to: Brian McNulty, Research Development Co-ordinator, Faculty of Media & Communication – bmcnulty@bournemouth.ac.uk

Line manager or supervisor support is required for the level of commitment to the activities proposed.

All funds must be spent or committed by the end of July 2017.

 

How to Write a 4* Article

BRIAN, Guidance, Publishing, REF Subjects, Research assessment, Training, writing

Prof. Mark Reed

A fortnight ago Prof Mark Reed, Professor of Socio-Technical Innovation at Newcastle University and the man behind Fast Track Impact, tweeted some thoughts on how to write a 4* paper for the REF. He went on to explain his thinking in more detail in a guest post on the Research Fundementals blog, the post is published here with the authors permission.

_____________
How do you write a 4* paper for the Research Excellence Framework (REF)? It is a question I’ve asked myself with some urgency since the Stern Review shredded my REF submission by not allowing me to bring my papers with me this year to my new position at Newcastle University.

Obviously the answer is going to differ depending on your discipline, but I think there are a few simple things that everyone can do to maximize their chances of getting a top graded research output.

I’m going to start with the assumption that you’ve actually done original, significant and rigorous work – if you haven’t then there is no point in reading any further. However, as I am increasingly asked to pre-review papers for colleagues across a range of disciplines, I am seeing examples of people who write up work as a 2* or 3* paper that has the potential to get a better score. I should point out that I believe that there is an important role for 1* and 2* papers, and that I regularly write these on purpose to address a problem of national significance and frame it for the specific, narrow audience that is likely to be able to benefit most from my work. However, whether I like it or not, as a Professor in a research-intensive University, there is an expectation that I will be submitted as a 4* researcher, which means I need a few 4* papers as well.

You can see some more detailed thoughts on what I think makes 4* for different types of paper in this Tweet:

As you’ll see from the discussion under that tweet though, my more detailed thoughts probably only apply to Units of Assessment across panels A-C, and probably isn’t relevant to the arts and humanities.

Having said this, I think there are a number of things we can all do to maximize the chances of our work being viewed favourably by REF panelists.

  1. Write to the criteria: when I was learning to drive, my instructor told me that in the test I should make sure I moved my head when I was looking in the rear view mirror, to make sure the examiner noticed I was using my mirrors. We’re all used to writing to the criteria of funding calls, and in fact we are all perfectly used to writing papers to the criteria of our target journals. In the last REF, research outputs were judged against three criteria: originality, significance and rigour. Whatever the interpretation of these criteria in your discipline, have you made it explicit to REF panelists reading your work exactly what is original, and why it is so original? Have you explained and effectively justified the significance of your work? And have you included evidence that your methods, analysis and interpretation is rigorous, even if you have to use supplementary material to include extra detail about your methods and data to get around journal word limits?
  1. Get REF feedback before you submit your work for publication: find out who is going to be reviewing research outputs for REF internally within your Unit of Assessment at your institution and ask them to review your work before you submit it. They may be able to make recommendations about how you might improve the paper in light of the REF criteria. Sometimes a little bit of extra work on the framing of your research in relation to wider contexts and issues can help articulate the significance of your work, and with additional reading and thinking, you may be able to position your work more effectively in relation to previous work to demonstrate its originality more clearly. Adding a few extra details to your methods and results may re-assure readers and reviewers that your approach is indeed rigorous. This is not just about doing world-leading research; it is about demonstrating to the world that your work is indeed world-leading. For me, these criteria are nothing new and are worth paying attention to, whether or not we are interested in REF. Meeting these three criteria will increase the chances that you get through peer-review and will increase the likelihood that your work gets cited.
  1. Analyse and discuss good practice in your own area: the only way to really “get your eye in” for REF is to actually look at examples of good and poor practice in your own area. Below, I’ve described how you can design an exercise to do this with your colleagues. You can do it yourself and learn a lot, but from my own experience, you learn a lot more by doing this as a discussion exercise with colleagues who work in your area. If you can, take notes from your discussion and try and distill some of the key lessons, so you can learn collectively as a group and more effectively review and support each others’ work.

How to organize a discussion to work out what makes a 4* paper in your area:

  • Identify top scoring institutions for your Unit of Assessment (UOA): download the REF2014 results, filter for your UOA (columns E or F), then filter so it only shows you the outputs (column J), and then filter for 4* (column L), showing only the institutions from your UOA that had the highest percentage of 4* outputs. Now for those institutions, look across the table (columns L-P) to see which has the highest proportion of outputs at either 3* or 4*. For example, an institution may have 80% of its outputs graded at 4* and 15% graded at 3*, meaning that 95% of its outputs were graded at 3-4*
  • Download a selection of papers from the top scoring institutions: go to your UOA on the REF website, find and click on the institutions you’ve identified in step 1, under “view submission data”, click on “research outputs”, copy and paste output titles into Google Scholar (or your search engine of choice) and download the articles. You may want to select outputs randomly, or you may want to go through more selectively, identifying outputs that are close to the areas your group specialize in
  • Repeat for low scoring institutions so you can compare and contrast high and low scoring outputs
  • Discuss examples: print copies of the high and low scoring outputs, labeled clearly, and in your next UOA meeting, let everyone choose a high and a low-scoring example. Given them 10-15 minutes to quickly read the outputs (focusing on title, abstract, introduction, figures and conclusions so you’re not there all day) and then ask the group (or small groups if there are many of you) to discuss the key factors that they think distinguish between high and low scoring outputs. Get your group(s) to distill the key principles that they think are most useful and disseminate these more widely to the group, so that anyone who wasn’t present can benefit.

It would be great if I could tell you that these are my “three easy ways to get a 4* paper” but doing work that is genuinely original, significant and rigorous is far from easy. If you have done work that is of the highest quality though, I hope that the ideas I’ve suggested here will help you get the credit you deserve for the great research you’ve done.

Sound recording, stories and memory: listening to stories ‘told’ by a tree

We would like to invite you to the latest research seminar of the Centre for Games and Music Technology Research.

sellasia

Speaker: Dr Panos Amelidis  (Bournemouth University Lecturer In Music & Audio Technology).

 

Title:     Sound recording, stories and memory: listening to stories ‘told’ by a tree

 

Time: 2:00PM-3:00PM

Date: Wednesday 7th December 2016

Room: P409, Poole House, Talbot Campus

 

Abstract: The village of Sellasia in Southern Greece has perfect conditions for the cultivation and production of olives and olive oil, an activity very important for the economy of its inhabitants. But, can an olive tree be transformed into a fictional conduit of storytelling using audio recording technology and its possibilities? This seminar refers specifically and discusses three aspects of a practice-based research project, an audio-visual installation, ‘Stories of a Tree’ based on the sound produced by the olive tree as well as the soundscape of Sellasia. The first aspect is the concept and research questions of the project. The second concerns the methodology which was implemented for its realization, and the content in which it was placed. The third is the artistic challenge of communicating something about history and memory, related to the Sellasia village, through the medium of composed sound and interactive technology using a mixture of field recordings and interviews collected during the author’s staying at the village, as part of a residency organized by McGill University.

 

We hope to see you there.

New edition qualitative research book

Publishing, writing

hollowaygalvin-2017Congratulations to BU Professor Emerita Immy Holloway and FHSS (Faculty of Health & Social Sciences) Visiting Faculty Professor Kathleen Galvin on the publication of the latest edition of Qualitative Research in Nursing and Healthcare [1].  This new edition offers insights into both the abstract ideas in qualitative research and its practical procedures. Structured into four sections, the new edition looks at the initial stages, methods of data collection, qualitative approaches and analysis of collected data.  Professor Galvin is Professor of Nursing Practice in the College of Life, Health & Physical Sciences, at the University of Brighton.  Both Immy Holloway and Kate Galvin are affiliated with BU’s Centre for Qualitative Research (CQR), the longest running research centre in FHSS.

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

 

Reference:

  1. Holloway I & Galvin K. (2017) Qualitative Research in Nursing and Healthcare. Wiley-Blackwell 4th ed.

 

Surveys at Avebury and Stonehenge on German TV

Collaborative research between Professor Tim Darvill in the Centre for Archaeology and Anthropology at BU and Professor Fritz Lüth of the German Archaeological Institute in Berlin was featured in a short television programme made by ARD, the first German channel, first broadcast on 26 November. The programme focuses on the extensive high resolution geophysical surveys being undertaken within the Avebury and Stonehenge World Heritage Site, and was filmed during the 2016 fieldwork season in September. Click here to view the programme.

CEMP books – ‘bumper crop’

Publishing, writing

51gjvbgj4gl-_sx352_bo1204203200_

November / December see the publication of several books authored / edited by CEMP researchers.

Doing Text: Media After the Subject (Julian McDougall, Auteur / Columbia University Press – with Pete Bennett)

Teaching and Learning on Screen: Mediated Pedagogies (Mark Readman, Palgrave MacMillan)

Popular Culture and the Austerity Myth: Hard Times Today (Julian McDougall, Routledge – with Pete Bennett)

Also forthcoming this academic year –

Digital Media, Culture and Education: Theorising Third Space Literacies (Julian McDougall, Palgrave MacMillan, with John Potter)

The Routledge International Handbook of Media Literacy Education (Julian McDougall, Routledge, with Belinha de Abreu, Alice Lee, Paul Mihaildis and Jad Melki)

Doing Theory on Education: Using Popular Culture to Explore Key Debates (Julian McDougall, Routledge, with Andy Cramp).

Fusion project leads to best paper award

Fusion, Fusion Investment Fund

Work by BU researchers examining the human aspects of Digital Rights Management has won a best paper award at the Fourth International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and IP Law. This is joint work carried out by Marcella Favale, Neil McDonald, Shamal Faily, and Christos Gatzidis.

This work, which resulted from research carried out during the FIF funded MADRIGAL project, examines the perspective of DRM from the perspective of content creators using qualitative socio-legal analysis.

In addition to this work, we were also invited to write an extended version of this paper for SCRIPTed, which is currently in press.

Well done Marcella and the rest of the MADRIGAL team!

Congratulations to FHSS orthopaedics academics

Publishing

j-nurs-ortho-2016Congratulations to James Gavin, Tikki Immins and  Thomas Wainwright on the publication of their systematic review: ‘Stair negotiation as a rehabilitation intervention for enhancing recovery following total hip and knee replacement surgery‘.

Reference:

Gavin, J., Immins, T., Wainwright, T. (2016). Stair negotiation as a rehabilitation intervention for enhancing recovery following total hip and knee replacement surgery. Int J Orthop Trauma Nurs. Available online October 2016

 

Enhanced Rehabilitation Of The Upper Limb Following Stroke By An Adaptive Virtual Reality And FES Approach

PG research

We would like to invite you to the latest research seminar of the Games and Music Technology Research.presimage

 

Speaker: Nathan Barrett (A Bournemouth University PhD student based at Salisbury NHS).

 

Title:     Enhanced Rehabilitation Of The Upper Limb Following Stroke By An Adaptive Virtual Reality And FES Approach

 

Time: 2:00PM-3:00PM

Date: Wednesday 30th November 2016

Room: PG11, Poole House, Talbot Campus

 

Abstract: Of the approximately 150,000 people a year who suffer a stroke in the UK, 85% of survivors are left with some degree of motor dysfunction in their upper limb. Complete functional recovery has been found to occur in just 5% to 34% of cases. These low rates may be due to rehabilitative interventions that lack the volumes of specific motor practice needed to induce neuroplasticity – a form of cortical rewiring that allows the brain to adapt after damage. Assistive technologies, such as Functional Electrical Stimulation (FES) and virtual games, can augment such therapy and may be beneficial to a person’s recovery.

FES is a type of electrotherapy which has good clinical evidence for its use. Electrically-stimulated movements, however, often lack combined voluntary effort – a factor necessary to aid effectiveness. Virtual games, on the other hand, often inspire huge amounts of volitional movement, although, particularly with popular commercial devices, this movement isn’t always therapeutic.

Combining the two is therefore an attractive prospect, yet attempts at this have resulted in systems that are costly, immobile and commercially unavailable. There is therefore a need to combine the two within a system that fulfils the criteria for an effective assistive technology. The system, Esmé (the Electrically-Stimulated Movement and game Environment), is currently in development. This seminar provides an overview of the project and discusses next steps.

 

 

We hope to see you there.

CMC’s Promotional Cultures and Communication Centre wins prestigious industry research award

Business Engagement, Fusion

CMC’s Promotional Cultures and Communication Centre (PCCC) is delighted to announce that the recent research project they undertook for Exterion Media won ‘Best Research Initiative’ at last week’s Media Research Group Awards.  The MRG is the industry group for research professionals working in media related roles and is a great showcase for the work we do here.

The project was titled ‘The Mood of the Underground’ and undertaken in partnership with COG Research, a leading independent research agency.  It comprised of a number of elements: a literature review undertaken by PCCC- CMC; a proposed approach recommended by CMC; primary research completed by PCCC-CMC and COG, and delivery of the final debrief written by PCCC-CMC and COG.

Congratulations to Stuart Armon, Rebecca Jenkins, Chris Miles, Georgiana Grigore, Janice Denegri-Knott, Jill Nash and Shenel McLawrence who worked on this project.

14:Live with Dr Ashley Woodfall returns on Thursday!

Student Engagement

Do you want to get creative for an hour? Do you have an interest in creative research methods?

14:Live is back tomorrow on Thursday 17 November with Dr Ashley Woodfall!8115-rkeo-14live-digital-signage-v3-0

Join us as we get creative and discuss Mess and Mayhem: Creative/Reflective Methods at Play. This mess and discussion led session will be a space to discuss the use (and abuse) of creative research methods. How can they help trigger meaningful research interactions, and how the outcomes might be understood?

This session will be exploring research in a creative environment from drawing, to molding, to improv’ and beyond. We ask if creative reflective methods can share something of your own life world and whether these methods can help unlock metaphorical insights that are missed through more traditional approaches.

Come along on at 14:00-15:00 on Floor 5 of the Student Centre for an hour of mess and mayhem. There will be free drinks and snacks!

If you have any questions then please contact Hannah Jones

BU’s Clinical Academic Doctorates; an example of good practice in new official guidance

The Association of UK University Hospitals (AUKUH) has today released new guidance, Transforming healthcare through clinical academic roles in nursing, midwifery and allied health professions: A practical resource for healthcare provider organisations

The guide is aimed at NHS organisational leads with the responsibility for developing and embedding clinical academic roles for nursing, midwifery and allied health professions. Clinical academics serve as a crucial connection between the NHS and universities, working to train future generations of healthcare workers while engaging in research which can improve outcomes for patients and help increase efficiency.

The guide contains practical information, case studies and templates. One of the case studies highlighted is BU’s innovative clinical academic doctorates. The pragmatic four-year clinical doctorate model enables midwives and nurses to remain in practice while conducting a piece of research to meet clinical priorities. The four-year clinical doctorate is a joint development involving academics at Bournemouth University and clinical colleagues at NHS trusts. The doctorate is structured to enable students to spend two days a week in clinical practice and three days conducting research. All research projects are jointly developed to meet an identified clinical need.

The model originated for midwives in Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, where we have eight fellows, and has now been adopted by the Isle of Wight NHS Trust, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Poole Hospitals NHS Trust and Dorset County Hospitals NHS Trust (Way et al., 2016). The model is also being extended to other disciplines, with our first nurse fellow at Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Trust.

 

Professor Debbie Carrick-Sen, Co-Chair of the group which produced the guidance, says:

‘Creating this resource has required a significant amount of collaboration from colleagues across healthcare and we are truly grateful to them. The energy that has gone into it is a huge credit to the professions involved. Through this guidance they have the means to share their immense successes, learn from each other and ultimately work to the benefit of patient care.

‘The guidance will be the starting point. We have established a network of organisational leads with the responsibility for its development and for using it to implement clinical academic roles across the UK. This gives us a fantastic opportunity to begin a nationwide dialogue and to transform health and social care in the UK.’

 

Way S, van Teijlingen E, HundleyV, Westwood G, Walton G, Wiggins D, Colbourne D, Richardson C, Wixted D, Mylod D (2016) Dr Know. Midwives, 19, 66-67.

ESRC Festival of Social Sciences

BRIAN, Business Engagement, innovation, Knowledge Transfer

Dr John Oliver, from the Advances in Media Management research cluster, recently delivered a keynote lecture at the Open Innovation Design Jam competition at the University of Glasgow. The event formed part of the ESRC’s Festival of Social Science programme of activities that ran from 5th-12th November across the UK.

The Design Jam also involved a number of short, intensive brainstorming sessions in which teams developed innovative solutions to challenges. This event was an opportunity for innovators and businesses to explore open, collective and user-led innovation.
Dr Oliver’s talk on media innovation strategies presented empirical data on how the innovation practices of UK media firms had transformed firm capabilities and corporate financial performance.

Midwifery Graduation: Honours & Awards

international, PG research, student research

alison-sheenaAlongside Bournemouth University’s midwifery and other health and social care students who graduated in last Friday’s ceremony, BU honoured prominent midwife Sheena Byrom OBE with an Honorary Doctorate for her services to the profession. Sheena Byrom gave an inspiring speech at Friday’s Graduation.  Sheena said, “If they can keep in their hearts the passion and the drive they had when they first came to the university, it will help them to be more resilient and keep them motivated towards what they want to do. Healthcare is a blend between love and science and both are equally important. In practice, it is key that they have the skills, but the things that makes the difference are love and compassion.”

rachelalisonedwinAlongside Sheena two students from the Centre of Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health(CMMPH) graduated with a PhD in Midwifery.  Dr. Alison Taylor received her PhD for her qualitative research on breastfeeding. Her thesis is entitled ‘It’s a relief to talk ….’: Mothers’ experiences of breastfeeding recorded on video diaries.  Dr. Rachel Arnold was awarded her PhD for her research Afghan women and the culture of care in a Kabul maternity hospital.

Congratulations to all BU undergraduates and Rachel, Alison and Sheena!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH