Whether you are a new supervisor, you plan to be one, or you have experience but are new to Bournemouth University, this development workshop is for you.
The workshop, which is mandatory for new supervisors, offers the necessary knowledge to supervise Postgraduate Research students by placing this knowledge within both the internal and external regulatory framework.
This workshop will cover the following key areas:
Nature and scope of doctoral study and the role of a supervisor
Code of Practice for Research Degrees at BU, its purpose and operation
Monitoring, progression, completion and process of research degrees at BU
Importance of diversity, equality and cultural awareness
Student recruitment and selection
Keeping students on track: motivation and guidance
Book your place onto one of the Doctoral Supervision: New Supervisors Development workshops below. Further details about this workshop can also be found on the staff intranet.
Hosted by the Doctoral College, these one hour online lunch bite sessions supplement the regular New and Established Supervisory Development Sessions and are aimed at all academic staff who are new to, or experienced at, supervising research degree students and are interested in expanding their knowledge of a specific aspect or process in research degree supervision.
Each session will be led by a senior academic who will introduce the topic, and staff will benefit from discussions aimed at sharing best practice from across BU. Bookings are arranged by Organisational Development.
This session is focused on expanding individuals’ knowledge on the additional support available to PGRs with disabilities, what reasonable adjustments can be made, and the role of the supervisor. This discussion will be led by Ildiko Balogh, Student Services.
Staff attending this session will:
have gained additional knowledge of additional support available to PGRs with disabilities
have gained additional knowledge of how supervisor can support PGRs with disabilities
be aware of the relevant sections of the Code of Practice for Research Degrees
Further details on the session as well as information on future lunchbite sessions can also be found on the staff intranet.
Date: Thursday 1 December 2022
Time: 12:00 – 13:00, Teams
To book a place on this session please complete the booking form.
We would like to invite you to the 2nd symposium of the BU’s Interdisciplinary Neuroscience Research Centre on Monday the 16th of January 2023 from 9:15-13:00 at the Create LT, Fusion Building (ground floor).
The symposium is entitled “New Frontiers in Neuroscience: Neuroimaging and Integrative Multi-Sensing Methods”. We will focus on these two themes from a cross-disciplinary angle, leveraging synergies between different departments at BU and our collaborators in industry, charities, and at the NHS. We think that this is a good opportunity to have informal discussions on grant proposals, also to explore shared interests with our external guests.
The schedule is:
9:15. Welcome and coffee.
9:30. Keynote talk by Prof. Mavi Sanchez-Vives, Biomedical Research Institute IDIBAPS, Barcelona. Human Brain Project Task Leader.
10.20-10:40. Coffee and grants discussion.
10:40-11:40. Session I. Neuroimaging and clinical applications.
11.40 -12.00. Coffee and grants discussion.
12.00-13:00. Session II. Integrating Multi-sensing approaches and industrial applications. Concluding remarks.
Thank you very much and we are looking forward to seeing you there. If you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact any of us (Ellen Seiss, eseiss@bournemouth.ac.uk or Emili Balaguer-Ballester eb-ballester@bournemouth.ac.uk).
Congratulations to Professor Dimitrios Buhalis, who has been recognised by Clarivate™ as one of the world’s most influential researchers who have been most frequently cited by their peers over the last decade.
Clarivate provides information, data and insights to universities, nonprofits, funding organisations, publishers, corporations, government organisations and law firms across the world to help accelerate and advance innovation.
Fewer than 0.1% (1 in 1,000) of the world’s population of scientists and social scientists received the Highly Cited Researchers™ distinction in 2022.
Highly Cited Researchers have demonstrated significant and broad influence reflected in their publication of multiple highly cited papers over the last decade. These highly cited papers rank in the top 1% by citations for a field in the Web of Science™.
He said: “It is extremely rewarding to know that the research I’ve been doing in the last 30 years has been useful to many other researchers to build their research and develop this concept. It is also very rewarding to know that the research has an impact on society, bringing value to different stakeholders and communities around the world.
“Of course, the research has been happening with many collaborators, including students and researchers and colleagues from all over the world, and most have been co-authored with several of my 200 collaborators.”
Professor Buhalis is a strategic management and marketing expert with specialisms around information communication technology applications in the tourism, travel, hospitality and leisure industries.
“All my research is about relevance and impact on business practice and global policy and it is cutting edge,” he said.
‘It is forecasting the future and identifies enabling technologies that bring value to different stakeholders and, by doing so, designing a better future.”
He added: “Being able to forecast the future and identifying technologies that can support progress is a critical element of the research, and that is why it is published early, before other researchers engage in inquiry, and that’s why it’s widely cited.”
“My advice would be to follow your heart, make relevant and useful cutting edge research that contributes to society globally, and citation will follow.”
The speakers will be Liz Bailey (PGR, CIPPM) and Dr. Hayleigh Bosher, Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law at Brunel University and author of Copyright in the Music Industry (Edward Elgar, 2021).
The talk titled ‘There is something about music’ will present six cases from the last 20 years from the perspective of unknown musicians who accused the famous of infringement (i.e., such as Ed Sheeran). With some poetic licence and imagining their perspective through case commentary and media interviews, this presentation tells their story from the ‘not so famous’ side of life and how difficult it is to prove someone has stolen your work.
This is also the story of how unknown musicians are faced with finding ways to penetrate the music industry. It appears that the only way this is possible is by showcasing their work through online sites such as SoundCloud or YouTube and playing their work to managers and producers they meet at networking events, in the hope that these people who have heard their music are influential enough to open doors to a lucrative future.
The nature of the industry provides little proof of music changing hands, paper trails are often sketchy or non-existent and denial seems to be the best defence when it comes to being accused of plagiarising music.
The courts have struggled with this lack of factual evidence connecting the original music to the accused, and their solution concludes to one of coincidence, leaving no room for further accusation.
This seminar will be useful for anyone with an interest in music and wishing to know more about the law surrounding it.
BU’s Dr Keith Parry contributes to this article from The Conversation, sharing the experiences of family members of those with brain injuries as a result of sport…
Sport-induced traumatic brain injury: families reveal the ‘hell’ of living with the condition
San Francisco 49ers running back Jeff Wilson Jr (centre) in action against Los Angeles Rams linebacker Leonard Floyd (left) and Los Angeles Rams defensive tackle Aaron Donald (right) an NFL game in California in 2022. EPA-EFE/JOHN G. MABANGLO
This article is part of the Insights Uncharted Brain series.
Jill* looked drained as we sat down to speak about her late husband. It had been a long day. It was February 2020, and we had been conducting interviews at the Concussion Legacy Foundation family huddle.
Despite being tired, Jill, 47, was keen to be interviewed. She wanted to share what she had gone through and hoped her story might help others. We sat down in a quiet corner of the foyer of the Rosen Centre hotel in Orlando, Florida, and I listened to her speak for over 90 minutes.
You can listen to more articles from The Conversation, narrated by Noa, here.
She told me all about her husband, Michael, a larger-than-life character who was the “life and soul of the party”. She spoke about how he had played many sports and had experienced multiple diagnosed concussions playing American Football and lacrosse – but this never dimmed his enthusiasm for sports.
Jill described how his behaviour gradually changed. How he forgot simple tasks. How he became aggressive. How his behaviour had become so erratic, she didn’t feel they were welcome at social events anymore. She said:
You’re just watching somebody you love disappear before your eyes and it’s hell.
Then one day she was on the phone to her husband while he was at work and the call went quiet. Jill rushed to his office, only to find that he had taken his own life.
Jill was one of the 23 interviews we conducted with family members over the three days our research team spent at the Concussion Legacy Foundation event. Our conversations provided an insight into what it was like living with a former athlete with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a neurodegenerative disease similar to Alzheimer’s that has been caused by repetitive head impacts in contexts like sport and the military.
This story is part of Conversation Insights
The Insights team generates long-form journalism and is working with academics from different backgrounds who have been engaged in projects to tackle societal and scientific challenges.
The people we spoke to had been through so much. The confusion, hurt and despair of seeing the mind of someone they love gradually deteriorate seemed overwhelming. But we also saw some positive signs, such as how they wanted to share their stories to help others, and how there appeared to be a shared determination to change things for the better and to make sport safer so other families wouldn’t have to go through what they’d experienced.
Head injuries in sport
Chronic traumatic brain injury associated with boxing has been known about for around 100 years. In 1928, Harrison Martland first described chronic traumatic encephalopathy in retired boxers. It was first referred to as “punch-drunk syndrome” or “dementia pugilistica” and sometimes develops in boxers as a result of long-term sub-clinical concussions (not detectable by the usual clinical tests).
In 2002, neuropathologist Bennet Omalu examined the brain of Mike Webster, a former National Football League (NFL) player who died from a heart attack after his physical and mental health had rapidly deteriorated. Subsequently, former NFL players sued the league, claiming that they had received head trauma or injuries during their football careers, which caused them long-term neurological problems.
The VA-BU-CLF UNITE Brain Bank at Boston University is the largest tissue repository in the world focused on traumatic brain injury (TBI). In a 2017 study into the first 202 donated brains, high rates of CTE were found, with 177 diagnosed with CTE, including 110 of 111 from the NFL players (99%). The brain bank now has over 1,000 brains from donors as young as 14 who have been exposed to brain traumas, primarily from playing sport. Studying these brains is crucial, not only for preventing, diagnosing and treating CTE, but also understanding the long-term consequences of concussion and traumatic brain injury.
Subsequent research from Boston University’s CTE Center in 2019 found that every year of playing full tackle American football increases the risk of developing CTE by 30%. So for every 2.6 years of playing, the risk of developing CTE doubles.
But the problem is not isolated to American sports. Compared with most other sports, rugby union has a relatively high injury rate, including at school level in the UK where it is often a compulsory sport. In addition, it has been reported that there is about one brain injury per match in international rugby.
Demise of England’s ‘lions’
In football, concussion often results from accidental head impacts (like head-to-head collisions or collisions with the goalposts). But a growing number of studies have shown that detrimental sub-concussive impacts (a bump, blow or jolt to the head that does not cause symptoms) may result from repeatedly heading the ball. And there have been an increasing number of high-profile examples in recent years who have been raising awareness of this issue.
In late 2020, three incidents shifted attitudes on the dangers of football. First, Norbert “Nobby” Stiles, a member of England’s 1966 Fifa World Cup winning team, died. Stiles had been diagnosed with dementia and the cause of this disease was linked to repeated heading of the ball in his career.
Then, it was announced that Sir Bobby Charlton, another World Cup winning hero, had also been diagnosed with dementia. He was the second member of his family to suffer with this disease as his brother, Jack (who played in the same winning team) had died earlier in the year after his own battle with dementia.
Bobby Charlton was thus the fifth of the 11 starting players in the 1966 final to have been diagnosed with neurological diseases. Media reports have linked all of these cases to the repeated heading of footballs during their playing careers.
But the first case that drew attention to the link between football and traumatic brain injury was that of Jeff Astle. Following his death in 2002, the coroner’s verdict at the inquest into his death at the age of 59 recorded a verdict of “death by industrial disease”, linked to heading heavy, often rain-sodden, leather footballs. Astle’s health had deteriorated – he had struggled with an eating disorder and was unable to recognise his children.
Astle’s daughter, Dawn, has become a leading figure in the campaign to protect footballers. She presented evidence to the 2020 DCMS committee on concussion and brain injury in sport. Her submission to the committee included the following comment:
My dad choked to death in front of me, my mum and my sisters. Please think about that for one minute. He choked to death because his brain had been destroyed. Destroyed because he was a footballer. I don’t want any other family to go through what my family went through, and continue to go through every day. Please don’t let my dad’s death and all the other footballers deaths be in vain. My dad was my hero and my best friend. His death will haunt me forever.
Families speak out
In February 2020, our team of five researchers were invited by Chris Nowinski, the CEO of the Concussion Legacy Foundation, to Orlando. The CLF is an international non-profit organisation that aims to support athletes affected by head injury, and to assist patients and families by providing personalised help to those struggling with the outcomes of brain injury.
Our interviews were conducted at their “family huddle”, which was a support event for family members to allow them to share stories and connect with others who have had similar experiences.
We were given the opportunity to talk to family members, and build trust and rapport. This gave us a greater insight and understanding of their world. We conducted interviews with the partners, parents, siblings and the children of the deceased athletes.
Our research, published in The Qualitative Report, was presented as an ethnodrama (playscript) to best allow the stories of the family members to be heard. This also showed the distinct temporal phases that these family members went through, and by sharing these stories we hope this raises awareness of the powerful emotions they have experienced.
This article is accompanied by a podcast series called Uncharted Brain: Decoding Dementia which examines new research unlocking clues to the ongoing mystery of how dementia works in the brain. Listen to the full series via The Anthill podcast.
Disbelief and confusion
Many of the people we spoke to said the initial stage, when they started to see changes in the behaviour of their loved one, created very strong emotions because they couldn’t understand why this was happening. They had seen someone they loved decline in front of their eyes. Alice, 68, reflected on seeing this change in her husband: “He went from functioning perfectly, to struggling to remember or do anything he was so used to doing.”
People went on to recall specific instances when this behavioural decline became noticeable. For example, David told us this about his brother: “Once when he went to the airport to pick up my aunt. He proceeded to drive her around, and she finally said, ‘Where are we going?’” He replied that he didn’t know.
There was evidence of a mounting feeling of hopelessness that declines in neurological functioning were causing. Another striking, distressing example was this story Sophie told about her husband:
One weekend, I had 12 big black trash bags to go out to the garbage. And I told him when I got up and went to work on Monday morning, I said, ‘those are going out to the trash tomorrow’. I came home after work and he had unpacked every trash bag … I just sat there and cried … I’d worked a 12-hour day. I said, ‘why did you unpack all that trash?’ and he couldn’t tell me why. He just didn’t know.
Others reinforced other emotions at seeing this happening to their loved one. Emily explained how she felt: “I do think at the start you are in this sense of disbelief because the person you love is doing these things that are out of character.” And Evelyn reflected on the sadness of seeing such changes:
I was shocked, but also felt like the world had been turned upside down. We were so happy. I remember just sobbing.
Researchers have previously highlighted the emotional consequences that family members experience when they witness the decline of their loved one. For example, one 2019 study involving interviews with 20 wives of either current or retired professional American football players, revealed their serious concerns about the cognitive, emotional and behavioural decline of these players. Some wives identified behavioural changes that included rage, reduced positive social interactions and various erratic behaviour, like starting risky business ventures.
As we also found, deterioration in cognitive functioning meant that those affected by traumatic brain injury were no longer able to carry out simple household tasks and often struggled with language problems.
Anger, guilt and fear
Another study, which examined families who have experienced a severe traumatic brain injury outside of sport highlighted the difficulties caused by the uncertainty of the situation – both in terms of the progression of the illness and how to support and deal with the cognitive, physical and behavioural changes exhibited after the injury.
All of this presents huge challenges to families. Negotiating appropriate treatment is hard and the emotional and physical exhaustion of dealing with these difficulties just keeps mounting up for the people involved.
Our participants explained the toll it took on them as they saw first-hand the severe changes in behaviour as their loved one experienced further decline. For example, Katherine said she felt drained and responsible. “It’s hard because you don’t know what’s happening,” she said. “So you just blame yourself and think you are the reason. And that’s not good for your own wellbeing.”
Helen spoke about her intense feelings as her partner drank as a response to his condition:
I was so angry at him for making the same choices over and over with drinking though. Like, “you’ve drank so much that you fell down the stairs in front of me at home, are you kidding me?” And it hurt, you know, and left a lot on my plate, so I was really, really, angry. And that didn’t help things.
Changes in behaviour created further problems for family members, such as how their loved one was perceived in social situations. Elizabeth described one specific incident at a party:
We went to a catered event, and he would take the top of the [burger] bun off, take the meat out to eat, put the bun back, and then go to the next one. And someone caught him and was like, “what is he doing?” Of course, we never got invited back to any of those people’s homes. No one wanted to have anything to do with him because they couldn’t understand him.
Laura also spoke about the implications of a lack of understanding of this condition, highlighting how others would misinterpret her husband’s actions. This led to feelings of sadness as they became socially isolated from their friends. She said: “When we went to events, a lot of people thought he was an alcoholic, because he could have one cocktail and then he’d fall. They had no idea that the falling had nothing to do with that one drink that he had. And it became very sad because people didn’t want to have us around.”
Our participants also spoke of the burden as a result of effectively becoming their partner’s primary caregiver. Sophie spoke about the struggles she faced with supporting her husband with daily tasks. “I couldn’t physically handle him,” she said. “At that point he was unstable. He would shuffle, and fall, and he couldn’t get in and out of the shower. He was also incontinent, and I couldn’t handle him by myself. I felt so weak.”
Evelyn also spoke of these experiences, highlighting that the physical size of her partner caused significant strain. “The sheer problem with these guys was their physical size. As the disease progressed, he fell probably 10-15 times a day, and we’d have to figure out how to get him up. I was both physically and mentally exhausted,” Evelyn said.
Meanwhile, others spoke of the physical fear of danger they felt. Like Emily who told us:
I did become scared of him. I hate to say that, but I did. He made me sign some papers and I had no idea what they were. He was just escalating and escalating, and he was standing over me and I just knew if I didn’t sign that paper, I was in physical danger. Which was an awful thought to have about your own husband that you love.
Moving forward
Our interviews gave family members the chance to reflect on their time living with and caring for their loved one, and also, how they might approach the situation differently. Helen told us she wished she had taken more time for herself, and advised anybody going through a similar situation to “get into therapy, to help you process everything and to let you have an outlet”.
Katherine agreed, saying: “You’ve got to try and take some time for yourself. I remember I took a trip with a girlfriend once and I was scared to death the whole time I was gone, but I went, and we had a wonderful time, and I’m so glad I did it. You know, trying to keep some semblance of normalcy in your life for yourself, for your own good. Try to keep yourself healthy, eat healthily, work out. Keep yourself well because there really was nothing, I could do for him except be present. I couldn’t make him well.”
Other family members reflected on the dangers of certain sports. For example, Alice highlighted how her awareness had increased, giving her the knowledge and understanding to allow her to come to terms with her husband’s situation. She realised there were “significant pathologies” that he had no control over that affected his decision-making.
His brain was still functioning, and he was still able to make decisions, just the wrong parts of the brain were directing his decisions. That totally makes sense now, so that’s been a huge relief, that he wasn’t just an asshole in his own right, he really just couldn’t control it.
While our data contained accounts full of sadness, participants also reflected on different ways they were moving forwards in a positive way after experiencing the death of a loved one. Laura detailed the benefits of attending the huddle and being with people who had been through similar struggles: “Everyone here is in the same boat. It may not have looked exactly the same for us, but we don’t have to explain for once. And just the support I’ve got from the people here has been great.”
Others talked about how the support helped the grieving process and inspired them to get involved and help other families. For example, Evelyn spoke of the need to make changes at a junior sport level: “I’m just so concerned this horrible disease is hitting younger and younger people, yet no one knows about it … giving people the information to be able to make the correct decision is super important.”
The final word goes to Elizabeth, who had become involved in the support work of the CLF, and spoke of her new found purpose to help others. She said it helped make her loss “bearable” because “millions” might benefit and “hopefully not have to experience the kind of tragedy that affected our family”.
I feel like part of the reason this happened is for me to be part of raising more awareness and be a part of this movement towards new culture change. I can help families navigate … the difficult waters of dealing with this. And so, I feel like it speaks to sort of a calling … I have in life or part of my purpose.
Consequences
What is clear to us after concluding this research project is that greater recognition of the challenges faced by both those living with diseases of the brain, such as CTE, and their carers is needed.
We heard about the devastating losses and tragedies. But we were also privileged to highlight more positive stories that showed how people were able to move forwards and help others to create a constructive change in sport so others won’t have to suffer.
It also illustrates how neurodegenerative disease resulting from head trauma as a consequence of impact sports has far reaching effects – not only the athletes, but also those around them. This represents a growing public health concern and societal problem.
It shows that greater recognition of the challenges faced by both those living with diseases of the brain, such as CTE, and their carers, is needed.
We hope their stories will stimulate discussion and be used to support people who might be going through similar experiences. Our findings might be used to help practitioners, sporting governing bodies and charities such as the CLF, to understand more fully these negative emotional responses and, in turn, consider strategies that might be developed to support people. In turn, these organisations must also act to address the causes of head injuries to make sports safer.
All names in this article have been changed to protect the anonymity of those involved.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
The current cost of living crisis has seen people cut back on sustainable practices and products, opting for cheaper alternatives, while non-renewable energy sources are also being revisited as a means to provide energy security.
Sustainability during the cost of living crisis
Are these sensible short-term measures or major steps backwards for sustainability?
A free online event will explore what it means for businesses to be truly sustainable and how economic prosperity can be balanced against protecting our environment.
The event will take place from 7-8.30pm on Monday 21 November, as part of BU’s online public lecture series.
Dr Mili Shrivastava, co-founder of BU’s Centre for Sustainable Business Transformations, and Professor of Marine Biology and Conservation Rick Stafford will speak at the event, followed by a discussion and audience questions.
This is the first event in our 2022/23 online public lecture series, which showcases the university’s research and expertise across key areas. The first lecture series attracted more than 1,000 attendees from across the world.
Adam Morris, Engagement Officer at Bournemouth University, said: “We’re excited to launch this year’s online public lecture series, giving people the opportunity to find out more about our research and learn something new from the comfort of home.
“Hot off the heels of the COP27 climate change conference, we’ll be discussing this important issue and exploring the role businesses can play in supporting sustainability.”
Events over the coming months will cover the role of women in journalism, orthopaedic surgery, and the story of Stonehenge.
Hosted by the Doctoral College, these one hour online lunch bite sessions supplement the regular New and Established Supervisory Development Sessions and are aimed at all academic staff who are new to, or experienced at, supervising research degree students and are interested in expanding their knowledge of a specific aspect or process in research degree supervision.
Each session will be led by a senior academic who will introduce the topic, and staff will benefit from discussions aimed at sharing best practice from across BU. Bookings are arranged by Organisational Development.
This session is focused on expanding individuals’ knowledge on the challenges of and best practice for supervising overseas PGRs. This discussion will be led by Dr Hanaa Osman, BUBS.
Staff attending will:
have gained additional knowledge of the challenges of supervising overseas PGRs
have gained additional knowledge of the best practice for supervising overseas PGRs
Further details on the session as well as information on future lunchbite sessions can also be found on the staff intranet.
Date: Wednesday 9 November 2022
Time: 12:00 – 13:00, Teams
To book a place on this session please complete the booking form.
This is your one stop shop for all things impact, public engagement and research communications within RDS.
On the site, you will find resources for communicating your research, increasing its impact and engaging the public with your research.
You’ll find links to RKEDF training sessions, guides to impact, public engagement and research communications along with information about useful contacts within RDS and news about the REF.
The site is easily navigable and is divided into three sections:
Research Impact:
This section outlines how we can help you to plan, accelerate and evidence the impact of your research and includes resources, contact details of our Impact Advisers and links to useful information on impact pathways, the REF and impact training.
Public Engagement with Research:
In this section, we explain how we can help when you want to engage with the public to share your research. The ways to do this are many and varied but ultimately, high quality public engagement has huge benefits for BU, for society and for you – the academic. Here you can find links to advice, training and funding along with the contact details of our Public Engagement team and details of how to join the thriving BU Public Engagement Network.
Research Communications:
Here, we offer you support and guidance on the different ways of sharing your research with different audiences. This includes working with the media (including our partnership with The Conversation), writing for the web and using social media.
The site will be updated regularly and has been designed to be as user friendly as possible. Please make sure you bookmark and keep checking back regularly for updates and news.
The full oral presentation list will be released in due course.
This year we are delighted to announce our keynote speaker is Professor Anna Feigenbaum, with her talk ‘networking from below’.
Abstract:
As postgraduate research students and early career researchers you likely hear the word “networking” all the time. You must network at conferences, network for participant recruitment, network for jobs. You need to network for funding bids, network for sharing your research with the public and network for making an impact. But what is this elusive art of networking? In this talk Professor Anna Feigenbaum will introduce her career approach of “networking from below”. This includes building ‘survive and thrive’ networks with doctoral student colleagues, learning how to approach senior academics, identifying what you have to give and how to best ask for the support or collaboration you want to receive. Delivering this practical advice, Professor Feigenbaum will share her 4C principles for networking success: curiosity, clarity, coordination, and care.
We hope many of you can join us in supporting and promoting the postgraduate research culture and community at Bournemouth University.
This year’s International Open Access Week features the theme of “Open for Climate Justice”.
In conjunction with the International Open Access Week which is taking place all of this week, we are happy to share with you a guest blog post from Dr Lyle Skains, a Principal Academic In Health and Science Communication with Faculty of Media and Communication. Dr Skains’s feature article talks about “Building a Climate Change Educator Community through Open Access”.
You & CO2 (YCO2) is an innovative, interdisciplinary project combining research and public engagement activities to encourage young people, aged 12-15, to engage with the global problem of climate change on a local scale and to commit to behaviour changes that will reduce their carbon footprint. Specifically, we collaborate with teachers to offer a series of multidisciplinary workshops teaching teens about climate change and climate action through playing/reading and creating interactive digital narratives. We then measure the effects of the workshops on student attitudes toward climate change and action.
Because the research team is so strongly committed to action around climate change, we’ve agreed to make all materials associated with the project open access (OA) as much as possible, to ensure that not only do our peers in academia (with institutional affiliations and library access) have access to the knowledge we are generating, but also so that teachers, parents, kids, and policymakers have easy access as well.
YCO2 materials encompass three areas: research outputs, teaching materials, and creative/coding materials. We’ve made all three areas OA. Some are easier than others! There’s no publishing industry or career metrics associated with the production of teaching materials and creative/coding texts, so we’re free to distribute those via the internet, direct from us to you. Our research outputs, however, are a different story.
For a lot of academics (me included!), the words “open access” are, to para-quote Anthony from Season 2 of Bridgerton, the “bane of our existence, and the object of all our desires”. As researchers, we’d love for all of our work to be open access—in general, we got into this gig to generate and share new knowledge, not to be content monkeys for an overgrown publishing industry.
Of course, somewhere along the line that’s what we became, and if we actually want our work to be OA (and we do, and our funders do…), we have to bail out that publishing beast with every OA article by paying some pretty steep publishing fees. Not to mention the fact that we have to navigate a maze of rules, regulations, bureaucracy, changing funders’ requirements, and institutional agreements just to get our research in a respectable form that everyone can access. It’s… a lot.
For every journal article we publish on YCO2—and so far we’ve published three, with two more in review—we jump through every one of these hoops. It’s important that we do. Our program’s purpose is to educate and influence people to act against climate change. It does no good whatsoever if no one knows about it. The project is designed to be run in schools, so it needs buy-in from teachers, headteachers, principals, IT professionals, and parents.
We don’t have a built-in distribution service. We rely on word of mouth, social media, presentations at public events, and direct contact with schools. Teachers find us through Twitter and Royal Society newsletters. If we are going to be able to convince them to run our program in their classrooms, they need to see what we’re doing with it. What we (and by extension they) are getting out of it. We shouldn’t be the only ones benefiting from the knowledge they help us generate.
When they see our website, our publications, our freely offered teaching materials, teachers can determine exactly how the program fits with their needs, how they can use it to improve their curriculum, and how their input and activities contribute to future iterations of the program. Making our materials OA helps us develop a relationship between teachers and the YCO2 program, establishing a network of climate change educators dedicated to effecting change.
That makes it worth all the hoop-jumping and red tape, not that we don’t wish there were a better way!
This year’s International Open Access Week features the theme of “Open for Climate Justice”.
In conjunction with the International Open Access Week which is taking place all of this week, we are happy to share with you a guest blog post from Dr Xin Zhao, a Senior Lecturer at the Department of Communication and Journalism with Faculty of Media and Communication. Dr Zhao’s feature article takes us into an “Exploration of the concept of environmental justice”.
I like things to be categorised. This is perhaps the biggest reason why when approaching an academic topic or area, I am so drawn to the definition of a concept, as well as its components. The same occurs to my study of environmental justice.
You have probably seen a generalised definition of environmental justice somewhere, like the one below:
…fair treatment for people of all races, incomes and occupations, regardless of gender, residence, educational level, age, political position or background, regarding the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, policies, and meaningful involvement in the decision-making processes of the government, and the fair distribution of environmental burdens and benefits to all. (Quan, 2002, p. 464)
Then a simple question arises, how would we evaluate whether an activity is “just” or not, environmentally speaking. I appreciate that the world is too complicated to be answered in such manner. But at least we need to know what standards we would use in the evaluation.
So as a researcher, I dig. Although there is no comprehensive list of all standards, I pieced together available literature in areas such as environmental science and organisation communication and came up with my own list. The list includes components such as “rich people pay”, “openness and participation”, “adequacy”, and “transparency”. With operationalised definitions, it became straightforward when evaluating relevant statements prevalent in various discourses, such as news articles. For example, “Greenpeace praised the Orange Alert that had been declared for putting restrictions on construction and industry, but said that it was “clearly not enough”” from The Independent (Griffin, 2015) clearly addressed the adequacy issues in environmental justice which points to the all-around (not partial), timely (not outdated), and accurate (not wrong) way of addressing environmental issues.
Definitions make me feel secure because it functions as a foundation for any further research. I employed the above components in my study of the media representations of environmental justice in the case of China’s air pollution by China’s outward-focused news media (Zhao, 2021). My study showed the consistency of China’s mediated international communication in covering the overall architecture of governmental policies in dealing with air pollution issues (“adequacy”). Interestingly, it also identified an extension of the scope of the content of communication. China’s news media also exposed the general causes of air pollution (“polluter’s responsibility”) and the detailed demands from the public, especially those from the vulnerable groups (“special need”) and those concerning the public’s involvement in the decision-making and execution procedures (“openness and participation”). With the aid of the conceptual mapping about the notion of environmental justice, I am able to generate meaningful findings regarding real-world issues.
Of course, the list of components I came up with needs to be honed through tests and debates, like any other concepts, let alone we are talking about one of the trickiest concepts, i.e. justice. The list needs to be expanded and revised when bringing in the issues such as race, colour, and national origin when discussing environmental justice issues in the international and cross-cultural settings. Only with clear and straightforward concepts can reasonable responsibilities be assigned and executed, for example, who should shoulder the duties of managing the hazardous waste and which groups or communities should receive extra protection from the harms. This could be a fruitful area of study and I look forward to relevant collaborations.
Reference:
Griffin, A. (2015). Beijing Smog ‘Red Alert’ Issued, The Independent. 7 December. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/beijing-smog-red-alertissued-schools-and-businesses-to-completely-shut-down-as-chinese-capital-issues-first-everextreme-warning-a6763286.html (Accessed: 19 September 2021).
Quan, R. (2002). Establishing China’s Environmental Justice Study Models. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 14(3), 461-487.
Zhao, X. (2021). How ‘public’ is communicated in China’s public diplomacy: communicating environmental justice in the case of air pollution in China. Networking Knowledge: Journal of the MeCCSA Postgraduate Network, 14(2), 65-94.
The Doctoral College Newsletter provides termly information and updates to all those involved with postgraduate research at BU. The latest edition is now available to download here. Click on the web-links provided to learn more about the news, events and opportunities that may interest you.
If you would like to make a contribution to future newsletters, please contact the Doctoral College.
Hosted by the Doctoral College, these one hour online lunchbite sessions supplement the regular New and Established Supervisory Development Sessions. They are aimed at all staff who are new to, or experienced at, research degree supervision and are interested in expanding their knowledge of a specific aspect or process.
Each session will be led by a senior academic who will introduce the topic, and staff will benefit from discussions aimed at sharing best practice from across BU. Bookings are arranged by Organisational Development.
Join us next week in celebrating the 2022 International Open Access Week at BU. Open Access Week 2022 is an opportunity to join together, take action, and raise awareness around how open can be a means for climate justice.
There will be a series of exciting communications and events happening across the week, so read on to find out more!
Daily blog posts on the Research Blog highlighting the different elements relating to open access at BU and why it matters!
An OA Daily Riddle competition will be launched on each day on the Research Blog; with a chance at winning a £20 Amazon voucher!
Featured articles by BU academics on the theme of climate justice
An online OA information session jointly organised by RDS and BURO on 24th October (Monday) at 2pm – Click here to join the session!
Available templates for BU staff to download and use as teaching template to highlight the International Open Access Week and what it means at BU
Open Access Week is an invaluable chance to connect the global momentum toward the open sharing of knowledge with the advancement of policy changes and the importance of social issues affecting people around the world. The event is celebrated by individuals, institutions and organizations around the world. So do join in to celebrate this important week and to make a difference!
The official hashtag of Open Access Week is #OAweek.
The call for abstracts for The 14th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference is still open, closing Monday 24 October.
The conference is a great opportunity for postgraduate researchers to showcase and promote their research to the BU community whether they have just started or are approaching the end of their journey at BU.
Attending the conference is a great opportunity to engage and network with the postgraduate research community and find out more about the exciting and fascinating research that is happening across BU.
Abstracts are invited from postgraduate researchers to take part in the live research exhibition or to present via oral or poster presentation.
This autumn, visitors to Weston-super-Mare on the west coast of England will be confronted by the strangest of sights, a repurposed oil rig and temporary art installation and high-rise garden dubbed the “See Monster”.
Located in a shallow pool at the former Tropicana open-air swimming baths, once home to artist Banksy’s Dismaland, it is one of ten major commissions that comprise Unboxed: Creativity in the UK. A £120 million year-long programme of free events and activities, Unboxed was conceived and funded by the UK government as a post-Brexit celebration with a mission to inspire conversations and future careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.
See Monster is a huge, ambitious project. It is one of the UK’s biggest public art works and the first to reuse a structure synonymous with fossil fuels to raise awareness of the climate emergency, renewable energy and sustainability.
But questions have been asked about the project’s impact and legacy. Particularly, critics have mentioned how the decision to tear it down after only six weeks of operation (on November 5) appears wasteful and counter to the environmental message – although this is necessary to avoid any impact on the wading birds that migrate to the area in the winter.
The See Monster has also been caught up in criticism of the Unboxed festival itself, which has been branded “an irresponsible use of public money” at a time of great economic uncertainty and hardship.
Like London’s controversial Marble Arch Mound, an artificial hill designed to attract shoppers to Oxford Street that came in over-budget and which was widely panned, the See Monster calls into question the value of “pop-up” attractions in revitalising our towns and cities, and of culture-led urban regeneration in general.
Pop-up tourism
At 35 metres tall and weighing 450 tonnes, the See Monster is split over four levels with a 10-meter waterfall cascading from the lowest level. It features small trees, plants and grasses. There is a playground slide and animated sculptures, including some 6,000 “scales” attached to the exterior that move in the wind. There are also water atomisers to generate clouds and numerous vantage points offering unrivalled views of the resort and surrounding countryside. It attracts a range of visitors, from curious tourists to organised visits by school groups.
These “here today, gone tomorrow” visitor attractions are the extension of a trend that began in the 1990s with pop-up shops in empty units along high streets and in shopping centres and precincts. The “experience industries”, including tourism, have long been used as a tool of urban regeneration, with former factories, warehouses, harboursides and deep mines rebuilt into museums, bars and restaurants, hotels, and shopping malls.
Structures like the See Monster take this one step further. Instead of a permanent change of use, they temporarily occupy, reuse and adapt existing structures and infrastructure in towns and cities left redundant or in danger of redundancy by economic and financial crises and other triggers of change, such as the pandemic.
These temporary installations are made for the Instagram age, generating countless selfies, positive comments and “likes” on social media.
Research has shown that pop-ups can attract significant footfall, spending and publicity for the host town or city. They can also help reimagine a run-down or underutilised site, as with the Tropicana, with a view to attracting private investment and a permanent change of use (such as Castlefield Viaduct park in Manchester). More altruistic possibilities include creating open space for communities for recreation, promoting behaviour change (for example taking up exercise or sustainable living) or raising money for good causes.
The ‘cult of the temporary’
Despite the reported benefits, geographers Ella Harris and Mel Nowicki question whether the pop-up phenomenon is good for cities. Temporary urbanism, they argue, promotes short term fixes to complex and enduring urban problems. It can also create precarity (think zero hours jobs and short-notice evictions).
These pop-ups are a distraction from the deeper problems of capitalism and the pathologies of urban life, such as air pollution and grinding poverty. In this, they tend to perpetuate inequalities rather than tackling their root causes.
A lot depends on the pop-up. Ambitious, expensive projects like the See Monster can struggle to live up to the hype and are vulnerable to the criticism that the money would be better spent on schools and hospitals. Smaller, community-led schemes with modest ambitions, or serendipitous events like Dismaland that seem to come out of nowhere, are likely to be better received and to leave a positive legacy.
While pop-ups are themselves transitory in nature, the trend towards ephemera, simulation and event-based tourism in urban areas is here to stay. That means the debate on whether they are good or bad for our towns and cities will carry on, long after the See Monster has retreated from public view.
The Doctoral College team have been delighted with the nominations that have come in recently for the ‘Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Awards’. We wish to extend our congratulations to all recipients who have recently received their award certificate.
Here are some of the heartfelt nominations we have received:
“He was one of my examiners for my major review viva. He was interested, facilitative and supportive throughout my viva. He offered advice of other texts for me to read and concepts to include in my thesis.”
“She provides the best advice in the most difficult situations aligned with the Code of Practice. Thank you very much for supporting us in our roles as academics. Much appreciated.”
“She is an outstanding supervisor, superb at challenging me, supporting the development of my research/critical thinking skills. She is incredibly knowledgeable and has provided me with outstanding levels of support and stellar guidance during my PhD journey so far.”
Why not make someone’s day and take five minutes and nominate a PGR, academic or professional staff member for a Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award to say thanks and give recognition for their hard work?
These awards recognise the outstanding contributions to postgraduate research degrees at BU by any PGR, academic or professional staff member. They can be nominated throughout the year by any member of the postgraduate research community to anyone that they feel is exceptional, has exceeded expectations, and has had a positive impact on the postgraduate research culture at BU.
Eligibility
You can nominate anyone involved in postgraduate research at Bournemouth University to receive an award certificate. There are no award criteria, as long as the submission falls within the guidelines, whoever you’ve selected will receive a Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award!
How to nominate
We’ve made it really easy for you to nominate someone for a Doctoral College Outstanding Contribution Award – it’s just a short online nomination form!
BU staff can login below:
Other services
Don’t miss a post!
Subscribe for the BU Research Digest, delivered freshly every day.
Paper in BMJ Global Health
The Month in Research: November 2023
New sociology book published late November
Deadline Extended!! Social Work and Social Policy Academics – REF roles
MSCA Staff Exchanges 2023 Call Info Session
Congratulations to Xin Zhao, Catherine Talbot and Tabitha Baker for winning BA seed funding!
Horizon Europe News – November 2023
BU Marketing Researcher Awarded COMFOCUS Research Fellowship: Embarking on Food Neuroscience Marketing Research Journey in Slovakia
More Information on Horizon Europe Association