Category / Research themes

Lunchtime Seminar with Dr Rosie Read – “Into the Field: undergraduate students and community-engaged ethnography”

You are cordially invited to this lunchtime seminar which is open to all students and staff.

Please feel free to bring your lunch.

Wednesday 13th January 2016

13.00 – 13.50pm

Studland House, S218

“Into the Field: undergraduate students and community-engaged ethnography”

How can undergraduate students learn to do ethnographic fieldwork? Is it feasible to ask them to design and undertake collaborative ethnographic research with community organisations, in a mutually beneficial fashion? This paper will reflect on recent work aimed at enhancing BA Sociology and Anthropology students’ practical understanding and appreciation of ethnography. It focuses on recent fieldwork students carried out in West Howe, Bournemouth, between October and December 2015, which involved intensive collaboration with a range of local organisations. It will discuss some of the pleasures and challenges of this enterprise, from the teacher’s (unit leader’s) perspective. Through an evaluation of which aspects of ethnographic research students’ enjoyed and (in some cases) excelled at, and which they struggled with, I will broach wider debates in social research about what ethnography is, what it is for, what is (or is not) unique about it.

Dr Rosie Read is a social anthropologist and principal lecturer / programme leader of BA Sociology and Anthropology in the Faculty of Social Sciences. Further information available here: http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/author/rread/

http://staffprofiles.bournemouth.ac.uk/display/rread

Want to know more about our upcoming sandpit, What will Marty McFly need in 25 years?

BU Challenges, Funding opportunities, Research themes, Training

Here’s some more information…

Which means…?

We’re seeking to come up with novel research which addresses one of the ‘grand challenges’ – how do we realise the transformational impact of digital technologies on aspects of community life, cultural experiences, future society and the economy?

So, who should attend?

The sandpit is open to everyone, and we do mean all BU staff and PhD students. You don’t need a track record in digital research, though we’d like yoclocku to consider attending if you do have. It doesn’t matter whether you have a research track record or not. We want anyone who thinks they might have something to contribute (and even those who think they don’t), and who is available all day on 26 January and during the morning of 27 January to come along.

What do I need to prepare in advance? What will the sandpit entail?

Absolutely nothing in advance. During the sandpit, you’ll be guided through a process which results in the development of research ideas. The process facilitates creativity, leading to innovative and interdisciplinary research ideas. These ideas will be explored with other attendees, and further developed based on the feedback received.

What if I don’t have time to think about ideas in advance?

You don’t need to. Some inspiring speakers with a range of backgrounds will be coming along to give you ideas…

What about afterwards? Do I need to go away and do loads of work?

Well… that depends! Tthe sandpit will result in some novel research ideas. Some of these may be progressed immediately, others might need more time to think about. You may find common ground with other attendees which you choose to take forward in other ways, such as writing a paper.

What if my topic area is really specific, such as health?

Your contribution will be very welcome! One of the main benefits of a sandpit event such as this, is to bring in individuals with a range of backgrounds and specialisms who are able to see things just that bit differently to one another.

So, is this just networking?

Definitely not, it is a facilitated session with the primary intention of developing innovative research ideas, which also enables the development of networks. It gives you the opportunity to come up with research ideas which you may develop over time, together with the chance to find common ground with academics from across BU.

So, how do I book onto this event?

To take part in this exciting opportunity, BU academic staff  and PhD students should complete the Sandpit Application Form and return this to Dianne Goodman by Tuesday 12th of January – please note the deadline has been extended due to the festive break. Places are strictly limited.

By applying, you agree to attend for the full duration of the event – full day 26th January and half day 27th January.

 

This event is part of BU’s Interdisciplinary Research Week.

BU helps secure Wellcome Trust Seed Award

REF Subjects, Research themes

The heart of an insect.

The heart of an insect.

A £100,000 Wellcome Trust Seed Award has been granted to fund a project using fruit flies (Drosophila) to examine an important yet poorly understood aspect of human heart physiology.

The heart senses and adapts to its own highly dynamic mechanical environment. This environment changes beat-by-beat, as well as over longer timescales, due to altered physiology or as a consequence of disease. Failure to detect and adjust cardiac performance accordingly is associated with arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. The mechanism for this adaptation is not known.

The goal is to study the cellular and molecular basis of this mechanism using the Drosophila heart as a simple model. Preliminary data obtained for an Honours project suggests that stretch-activated mechanosensitive ion channels are key components.

Research supported by Paul Hartley’s lab here at Bournemouth University and led by Dr Barry Denholm (University of Edinburgh) will investigate the hypothesis that these channels provide a direct link to convert physical force (stretch of the cardiac tissue) into biochemical signal (ion flux), which in turn regulates heart physiology and function (contractility).

Extended date to apply – What will Marty McFly need in 25 years?

BU Challenges, Funding opportunities, Research themes, Training

Or, to put it another way, how do we realise the transformational impact of digital technologies on aspects of community life, cultural experiences, future society and the economy’?

On 26th and 27th January 2016, RKEO will be hosting a sandpit workshop to facilitate exploration of this topic to: clock

  • Raise awareness – interdisciplinary approaches are an integral element of research success
  • Provide a space to explore ideas
  • Provide a mechanism for continual peer review
  • Support proposal development
  • Stimulate research proposals in promising areas of research for the University

The Research Sandpit process comprises:

  • Defining the scope of the issue
  • Sharing understanding of the problem domain, and the expertise brought by the participants to the sandpit
  • Taking part in break-out sessions focused on the problem domain, using creative and innovative thinking techniques
  • Capturing the outputs in the form of a research project

To take part in this exciting opportunity, BU academic staff should complete the Sandpit Application Form and return this to Dianne Goodman by Tuesday 12th of January – please note the deadline has been extended due to the festive break. Places are strictly limited.

By applying, you agree to attend for the full duration of the event – full day 26th January and half day 27th January.

This event is part of BU’s Interdisciplinary Research Week.

Last chance – What will Marty McFly need in 25 years?

BU Challenges, Funding opportunities, Research themes, Training

Or, to put it another way, how do we realise the transformational impact of digital technologies on aspects of community life, cultural experiences, future society and the economy’?

On 26th and 27th January 2016, RKEO will be hosting a sandpit workshop to facilitate exploration of this topic to:

  • Raise awareness – interdisciplinary approaches are an integral element of research successclock
  • Provide a space to explore ideas
  • Provide a mechanism for continual peer review
  • Support proposal development
  • Stimulate research proposals in promising areas of research for the University

The Research Sandpit process comprises:

  • Defining the scope of the issue
  • Sharing understanding of the problem domain, and the expertise brought by the participants to the sandpit
  • Taking part in break-out sessions focused on the problem domain, using creative and innovative thinking techniques
  • Capturing the outputs in the form of a research project

To take part in this exciting opportunity, BU academic staff should complete the Sandpit Application Form and return this to Dianne Goodman by Tuesday 12th January – please note the deadline has been extended due to the festive break. Places are strictly limited.

By applying, you agree to attend for the full duration of the event – full day 26th January and half day 27th January.

This event is part of BU’s Interdisciplinary Research Week.

New Public Health paper on Christmas Eve

Publishing, writing

Douglas 2015 Men healthOur latest paper and the last one for 2015, published the day before Christmas.  The paper ‘Implementing Health Policy: Lessons from the Scottish Well Men’s Policy Initiative’ appeared in AIMS Public Health [1].  The paper draws on evaluation research led by Dr. Flora Douglas (University of Aberdeen).  This was a set of evaluations of the Well Men’s Health projects which were part of an initiative running in many health regions (or health boards as they are called in Scotland).

 

The focus of this particular paper centres around the fact that little is known about how health professionals translate government health policy into action [2]. Our paper examines that process using the  Scottish Well Men’s Services policy initiative as a ‘real world’ case study [1]. These Well Men’s Services were launched by the Scottish Government to address men’s health inequalities. Our analysis aimed to develop a deeper understanding of policy implementation as it naturally occurred.  We used an analytical framework that was developed to reflect the ‘rational planning’ principles health professionals are commonly encouraged to use for implementation purposes.

Our analysis revealed four key themes: (1) ambiguity regarding the policy problem and means of intervention; (2) behavioral framing of the policy problem and intervention; (3) uncertainty about the policy evidence base and outcomes, and; (4) a focus on intervention as outcome. This study found that mechanistic planning heuristics (as a means of supporting implementation) fails to grapple with the indeterminate nature of population health problems. A new approach to planning and implementing public health interventions is required that recognises the complex and political nature of health problems; the inevitability of imperfect and contested evidence regarding intervention, and, future associated uncertainties.

 

The paper is published in an Open Access journal, so it is easily and freely available to public health professionals, policy-makers and health workers across the globe.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen 

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Douglas, F., van Teijlingen, E., Smith, W.C.S., Moffat, M. (2015) Implementing Health Policy: Lessons from the Scottish Well Men’s Policy Initiative, AIMS Public Health 2 (4): 887-905. http://www.aimspress.com/article/10.3934/publichealth.2015.4.887/fulltext.html
  2. Killoran, A., Kelly, M. (2004) Towards an evidence-based approach to tackling health inequalities: The English experience. Health Education Journal;63: 7-14.

Mixed methods: not without its downside?

REF Subjects

Prof Edwin van Teijlingen

Conducting mixed-methods research has become very popular over the past decade especially in the health research field.1-4 This development ties in with the growth in inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary research. Many grant applications, PhD project and the resulting papers especially in the health field apply a mixed-methods approach, where in the past a single approach would have dominated.   This interest in combining methods seems to be the case even in the more traditional quantitative field of clinical effectiveness and randomised controlled trials. Whilst I find this development encouraging as a mixed-methods social scientist, it also makes me wonder whether the applicants putting forward a mixed-methods project have thought about the disadvantages or at least the opportunity costs of using such approach.

A mixed-methods approach is ‘simply’ combining two or more research methods to address a research question, i.e. what the label suggests. It is often perceived as the combining of qualitative with quantitative methods, but it can technically also be a mix of quantitative methods or a combination of qualitative methods. The advantage of a mixed-methods approach is that the different methods in the mix address different aspects of the research question and that combining these methods offers a synergetic effect. So what are the possible limitations of or barriers to mixed-methods research?

First, using a mixed-methods approach means you need an understanding of two different philosophies and how to bring the findings of these two different methods together.4-6   One requires expertise in two different research approaches, either as individual or in the team as well as someone who can do the combining of the findings. For the latter you really need someone in the team who understand the pragmatic approach commonly used in mixed-methods approaches. Otherwise there is a great risk that the original mixed-methods study will be analysed and reported as two or more separate papers each based on data from one of the methods applied in the mixed-methods study.

Secondly, you can spend your money only once, hence there are opportunity costs. Thus if the maximum grant is £200,000 or £300,000 you can’t spend the full amount on the designing a large-scale quantitative study/survey, as you need to spend a proportion of your money and your attention and time on your qualitative study.

Thirdly, and related the above, both quantitative and qualitative methods have ‘rules’ about sampling and sample-size.5 Just because you have two methods this does not mean you can necessarily do a study with a smaller sample. The sample size calculations will still say you need at least xxx participants. Similarly, although perhaps not so rigidly you need a certain number of interviews or focus groups to do you qualitative study appropriately.

Fourthly, a common mistake seems to be to add a bit of qualitative research to a larger quantitative study, perhaps a bit tokenistic.7 Often it is so obvious in a grant application that the qualitative research is an add-on, an afterthought perhaps from a reviewer in the previous failed grant application.

Finally, not all mixed-methods studies are the same, in fact each mixed-methods study is more or less unique in the way in the way it mixes and matched individual research methods.3 So although mixed-methods may be the best way to address a particular research question, your particular proposed mixed of quantitative and qualitative research might not be the most appropriate to answer the overall research question.8

As with all research methods and research proposals my recommendation is if in doubt go and find an expert for advice.6 If necessary get an expert on your team of researchers to strengthen your application.

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1.  Barbour, R.S. (1999) The case of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in health services research. Journal of Health Services Research Policy, 4(1): 39-43.
  2. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Wasti, S.P., Sathian, B. (2014) Mixed-methods approaches in health research in Nepal, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(5): 415-416.
  3. Plano Clark, V.L., Anderson, N., Wertz, J.A., Zhou, Y., Schumacher, K., Miaskowski, C. (2015) Conceptualizing Longitudinal Mixed Methods Designs: A Methodological Review of Health Sciences Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9: 297-319.
  4. MacKenzie Bryers, H., van Teijlingen, E. Pitchforth, E. (2014) Advocating mixed-methods approaches in health research, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(5): 417-422. http://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/12018/9768
  5. Bryman, A. (1988) Quality and Quantity in Social Research, London: Routledge
  6. Bazeley, P. (2003) Teaching mixed methods. Qualitative Research Journal, 4: 117-126.
  7. Maxwell, J.A. (2016) Expanding the History and Range of Mixed Methods Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10: 12-27.
  8. Brannen, J. (2005) Mixing methods: The entry of qualitative & quantitative approaches into the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8(3): 173-85.

 

Live Migration of Virtual Machines to the Cloud and its associated issues

PG research

We would like to invite you to the latest research seminar of the Creative Technology Research Centre.LiveMigration

 

Speaker: Ibrahim Mansour

 

Title:   Live Migration of Virtual Machines to the Cloud and its associated issues

 

Time: 2:00PM-3:00PM

Date: Wednesday 6th January 2016

Room: P302 LT, Poole House, Talbot Campus

 

Abstract: Cloud computing provides users the ability to access shared, online computing resources. However, providers often offer their own proprietary applications, interfaces, APIs and infrastructures, resulting in a heterogeneous cloud environment. This heterogeneous environment makes it difficult for users to change cloud service providers; exploring capabilities to support the automated migration from one provider to another is an active, open research area. Many standards bodies (IEEE, NIST, DMTF and SNIA), industry (middleware) and academia have been pursuing approaches to reduce the impact of vendor lock-in by investigating the cloud migration problem at the level of the VM. However, the migration downtime, decoupling VM from underlying systems and security of live channels remain open issues. This talk focuses on analysing recently proposed live, cloud migration approaches for VMs at the infrastructure level in the cloud architecture.   The talk will highlight issues with flexibility, performance, and security of the approaches, including additional loads to the CPU and disk I/O drivers of the physical machine where the VM initially resides. Finally, the talk will introduce how a new approach, LibZam (Libya Zamzem) will be developed. LibZam is a tangible system that will work towards addressing the identified limitations.

 

We hope to see you there.

 

Congratulations to Dr. Caroline Ellis-Hill

NIHRDr. Caroline Ellis-Hill  has just been accepted as a qualitative methodologist on the NIHR (National Institute for Health Research) panel for Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR).  Caroline from the Centre for Qualitative Research (CQR) in FHSS is the second BU academic to join a NIHR panel this year.  Earlier this year Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen was invited to be a member of the NIHR’s HTA Clinical Evaluation & Trials Board ( http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/our-people ).

Congratulations!

Professors Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

HSS Writing Week 4th-8th January – How can Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit support you?

writing

bucru identity

The Faculty of Health and Social Sciences is holding a Writing Week between 4th-8th January 2016 aimed at supporting staff to find time in their busy academic diaries to prioritise writing grant applications and papers for publication.

The Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit offers methodological and statistical collaboration for all healthcare researchers in the area. It supports researchers in improving the quality, quantity and efficiency of research across Bournemouth University and local National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. It incorporates the Dorset office of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service who offer free methodological support to researchers who are developing research ideas in the field of health and social care.

BUCRU will be supporting Writing Week in HSS by holding two drop-in sessions on Tuesday 5th January and Thursday 7th January 12-2pm in R508 Royal London House. We would also like to extend the invitation across the other Faculties for anyone who feels we may be able to support them. For those unable to attend the drop-in sessions, we would be delighted to arrange an alternative appointment.

Please see further information here, contact our adminstrator Louise Ward on 01202 961939 / bucru@bournemouth.ac.uk or visit our website. We look forward to seeing you!

Congratulations to FHSS staff on latest KPI publication

Knowledge Exchange, Knowledge Transfer, Publishing

Five RiversCongratulations to FHSS Celia Beckett and Jaqui Hewitt-Taylor and colleagues Richard Cross and Pam McConnell based at Five Rivers Child Care, Salisbury. Their first paper describes the exciting process of a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) project between BU and Five Rivers Child Care which started in 2012 and finished recently in 2015.[1]    The project was established to develop a stepped assessment package that would help to identify the emotional and behavioural needs of children who are looked after to ensure the right services are accessed and to monitor their progress.

 

Congratulations,

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Celia Beckett , Richard Cross , Jaqui Hewitt-Taylor , Pam McConnell (2015) Developing a process for assessment of the emotional and behavioural needs of “looked after” children: the Five Rivers model Journal of Children’s Services, 10(4):  324-38.