The second short presentation was by Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen for BU’s Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perintal Health (CMMPH). His presentation with the title ‘The challenge of perinatal mental health in Nepal’ covered issues around maternal mental health, auxiliary nurse-midwives and stigma and culture in southern Nepal. The project brought together academics, midwives, nurses, and other health workers in Nepal and the UK to help in the training of auxiliary nurse midwives in Nawalparasi on key aspects of mental health and mental health promotion. The project led by Bournemouth University was funded under the Health Partnership Scheme (HPS) which is managed by a London-based organisation called THET (Tropical Health & Education Trust).The third speaker and final speaker Dr Ollie Ross, Consultant Anaesthetist at Southampton General Hospital, introduced the film ‘Hospital’. The film provides a portrait of a state-run hospital in one of the most remote and poor districts of Nepal and how individuals can make a difference to people’s lives. Dr Ross is also a consultant to the Nick Simons Foundation working in Nepal. According to The Nepali Times Nepal’s most accomplished documentary maker, Kesang Tseten, has a knack of bringing out in his films the best in people. He looks for the flower that grows amidst the squalour, and tries to spread a message of hope. His film, Hospital, returns to rural Nepal to portray a hospital in Kalikot where ordinary health workers accomplish extraordinary things.
Category / Fusion themes
We would like to invite you to the latest research seminar of the Centre for Games and Music Technology Research.
Title: Locative Narrative: Location Aware Interactive Storytelling Research in Creative Technology
Speaker: Dr Charlie Hargood
Senior Lecturer In Games Technology, SciTech
Date: Wednesday 2 May 2018
Room: TAG 02 (Tolpuddle Annex)
Locative Narrative is a growing research area concerned with digital interactive stories which respond to the reader’s location. In this talk we reflect on recent research in this space, its outcomes, and how it has led to the current programme of research on narrative systems within the creative technology department.
We hope to see you there.
A project exploring the ‘Study into the Intellectual Property Implications of the Development of Industrial 3D Printing’ was awarded by the European Commission to the Centre for Intellectual Property Policy and Management (CIPPM) in April 2018.
The project led by Co-Director of CIPPM, Professor Dinusha Mendis (Principal Investigator), also includes Dr. Julie Robson, Associate Professor, Marketing (Co-Investigator), Dr. Marc Mimler, Lecturer in Law (Member of Advisory Board), Dr. Sally Weston, Senior Principal Academic in Law (Member of Advisory Board) and Mr. Dukki Hong, PhD Candidate, CIPPM (Research Assistant).
Apart from members of CIPPM, this one-year project also includes partners from UK (University of Glasgow; Added Scientific Ltd), Austria (Technopolis Group), Finland (University of Lapland) and Germany (Boehmert & Boehmert).
The project aims to provide an overview of the past and current industrial applications of Additive Manufacturing (AM) in selected sectors whilst identifying potential challenges and opportunities in need of clarification. In essence, the Study will aim to formulate a clear picture of the Intellectual Property (IP) framework that could enhance the competitiveness of the AM sector in Europe.
This week saw the pre-publication of ‘Qualitative evaluation of mental health training of auxiliary nurse midwives in rural Nepal’ in the international journal Nurse Education Today (published by Elsevier). The paper is a report of an evaluation of a THET-funded projectwhich run from 2015 to 2017. Bournemouth University led a team comprising Liverpool John Moores University and Tribhuvan University (the oldest university in Nepal). These three universities worked together on a training project of Auxiliary Nurse Midwives in Nawalparasi focusing on key aspects of mental health and mental health promotion. The project was funded under the Health Partnership Scheme (HPS) which is managed by a London-based organisation called THET (Tropical Health & Education Trust).
Mental illness is increasingly recognized as a global health problem. However, in many countries, including Nepal, it is difficult to talk about mental health problems due to the stigma associated with it. Hence a training programme was developed to train auxiliary nurse midwives, who otherwise are not trained in mental health as part of their pre-registration training in rural Nepal, on issues related to maternal mental health. After the training programme a selection of auxiliary nurse midwives were interviewed to establish their views on the training, its usefulness and ways to improve it.
Preeti Mahato is a PhD student in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) who undertook an in-depth evaluation of our project as part of her PhD research. This qualitative study has three themes emerging: (1) issues related to training; (2) societal attitudes; and (3) support for women. The ‘training’ theme describes the benefits and limitations of training sessions. ‘Societal attitudes’ describes society’s attitude towards mental health which is largely negative. ‘Support’ describes the positive behaviour and attitude towards pregnant women and new mothers.
The paper concludes that there is a need for continued training for auxiliary nurse midwives who are based in the community. This gives them the opportunity to reach the whole community group and potentially have influence over reduction of stigma; offer support and diagnosis of mental ill-health. There is still stigma around giving birth to a female child which can lead to mental health problems. It is imperative to increase awareness and educate the general public regarding mental health illnesses especially involving family members of those who are affected.
- Mahato, P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Angell, C., Ireland, J. on behalf of THET team (2018) Qualitative evaluation of mental health training of Auxiliary Nurse Midwives in rural Nepal. Nurse Education Today 66: 44-50. http://www.nurseeducationtoday.com/article/S0260-6917(18)30150-3/abstract
A week of intense debate over fees, artificial intelligence, student nurses and the decline of part time provision. Enjoy!
Fees, fees, fees…and the HE Review
HEPI’s Free and Comprehensive University
HEPI have published a new blog The Comprehensive and Free University by Professor Tim Blackman (VC Middlesex, but writing personally). In essence it argues for free fees and a greater focus on the comprehensive university model (institutions that service their regional community with less focus on entrance requirements, generally less research intensive too).
Blackman commences by tackling the current HE Review. He highlights that because the Government have informed the ‘independent’ panel conducting the HE Review that abolishing tuition fees isn’t an option there is already a political bias. He addresses the arguments against abolishing fees (unfair – non-graduate taxpayers footing bill for those that will become higher earners and unaffordable to the public purse) and raises cross-generational fairness (older graduates had no fees and maintenance grants). Instead he feels the simple solution is to raise income rates within the higher and additional tax bands (effectively raising the repayment threshold to £45,000). He notes approx. 66% of graduates are within these tax bands (so 34% are non-graduate high earners that would contribute). He states the cost of abolishing fees is £7.5 billion per year and that increasing the higher rate tax from 40% to 45% (and the additional rate from 45% to 65%) would fully cover the £7.5 billion.
This approach would see the Treasury holding these taxation purse strings. So a pertinent question is – how much of this funding would actually reach universities and who would be the winners and losers from the Government’s allocation method? Currently the funding going direct from students to Universities is a neater, perhaps fairer, system from the University prospective and one that many within Government appear keen to retain. As the tax would be retrospective we could question whether student number controls be reintroduced, at least until the Treasury was confident the public purse would be repaid. And surely there would be even more focus on graduate outcome earnings?
Returning to Blackman, he isn’t a fan of writing off the loans of existing graduates, despite the unfairness of their being the only paying meat within the chronological free tuition sandwich. He feels those paying off their loans will “know that new cohorts paying no fees will still contribute if and when they become higher earners”. He also doesn’t propose the re-introduction of maintenance grants (as the tax income wouldn’t cover this) and states its right for students who chose to move away from home to study to take out a loan to do so. Blackman believes far more students should study locally and the costs commuter students incur to study at their nearest university could be partly met by public transport discounts funded by reducing the subsidy away from the over-60’s away free travel. Note, adjustments for rurality or areas without public transport aren’t adequately addressed.
At first Blackman’s suggestions that only students that are willing to take loans and pay fees should attend a distant institution appears socially regressive. After all it seems to close down student choice – preventing selection of an institution dependent on whether the course content best fits their interest, selection for the perceived quality of the institution, or attending a prestigious institution for the reported employment outcome boost. There is a clear hit to social mobility in expecting those in the poorest areas, who may be most debt adverse to only attend their nearest institution. What if their local institution doesn’t deliver their programme, e.g. medicine. Is Blackman suggesting the choice would be loans and fees or abandon their career aspirations? Blackman defends his localism by explaining that moving away to attend university residentially is a colonial legacy, and happens less in other countries (America, Australia). He sees moving away as a perk which would only continue via the loan system. He states:
A policy of encouraging local study has many benefits. It is less costly to students and taxpayers, greener in transport terms and would take pressure off many local housing markets. It also offers an option for phasing in free higher education. Just as going to university ‘in state’ in the United States means considerably lower fees than studying out of state, free higher education in England could at least initially be restricted to studying ‘in region’, based on the Government Office regions abolished in 2011. Studying out of region would mean paying a regulated fee, at a level to be decided, but similar in principle to how students from Scotland pay fees to attend English universities.
He does go on to address the social mobility elements:
…of course, [its] potentially an argument against this idea if local study becomes the only choice for many people from low income households because they cannot afford the out-of-region fee or lack the resources to maintain themselves away from home. This would only really be an issue of educational disadvantage if the effect was to narrow the choice of types of university or course, but this choice is already narrowed by ‘top’ universities using academic selection in a way that excludes many such people, whose prior attainment tends to be significantly lower than those from better-off households.
Blackman feels the answer lies within requiring all universities to have more diverse intakes – socially, ethnically and by ability: Institutional quotas incorporating a required balance across entry grades and social background – basically an elaboration of current access benchmarks – would provide a basis for the diversification I advocate even without initially confining free higher education to local study. But it would enable such a policy to be managed so that there are enough free local places for the range of prior attainment in any region.
Above all, at a time when young people are under pressure from so many directions, and the number of part-time adult learners is collapsing, abolishing fees and using higher rate tax bands to pay for it would be an important statement about those who are successful in their careers and businesses investing in young people and adult learning.
Blackman pushes back against HE sector criticism that it is seen as the only way and discredits other vocational routes by weaving in the Government push for more flexible methods of degree delivery:
It also seems possible that with this review we will see the progressiveness of student loans for degree study being criticised as a market distortion, tempting students who would be better opting for shorter vocational courses or apprenticeships. Not only does that threaten to undo the progress made so far with widening access to degree study, but it fails to address far more important issues about what we are teaching and how, such as replacing outmoded academic years and credit with more flexible competency-based learning and assessment.
Blackman does believe there is a risk that student number controls could be reintroduced, even with the current fee loan system by noting that the Treasury’s purse isn’t unlimited. The expected future rise in the number of young people aspiring to enter higher education (as outlined in HEPI report 105) will challenge any funding system, but loans no longer mean that student number controls are off the agenda given the level of taxpayer contribution to settle unpaid debt and support high-cost subjects. The idea that fees and loans would guarantee university autonomy and funding has also worn thin with the Office for Students’ new regulatory regime and a further fees freeze.
Loan Interest Rates
The RPI inflation rise created renewed criticism this week as it means student loan interest rates will increase to 6.3% in September (up from 6.1%). Much of the controversy stems from the use of RPI which has been denounced as inappropriate method for student loans (RPI is no longer used as a national statistic). The Government now uses the consumer price index for many calculations and there have been calls for it to be applied to student loans. The Guardian ran with the story: Ministers under fire as student loan interest hits 6.3% on Wednesday. To put this into context re-read Martin Lewis’ explanatory article for his clear explanation of why (for 83% of students) the interest rate rise won’t mean they ever pay more. Here’s an excerpt:
The interest doesn’t change what you repay each year
You become eligible to repay your student loan in the April after you leave University.
From this point, students must repay loans at a rate of 9% of everything they earn above £25,000 each year (or more technically £2,083 a month). So if you earn £30,000, as that’s £5,000 more than the threshold, you repay 9% of it – which is £450 a year.
This means the amount you owe (the borrowing plus interest) never has an impact on what you repay each year. I know people really struggle with this, so let’s pick out of the air a current salary of £35,000 (purely done for maths ease as it’s £10,000 above the threshold) and look at how different levels of borrowing impact your repayments – though the same principle applies whatever you earn.
As you can see, changing what you owe – even to the absurd level of £1 billion – simply doesn’t impact your repayments (you may find it easier to listen to my BBC Radio 5 Live student finance podcast to understand this).
HE Review and Fees
At UUK’s Political Affairs in HE Forum on Thursday HE fees received frequent mention. A wide range of personal views were stated: Conference Chair Stephen Bush (New Statesman) opened by declaring the days of £12,000 fees are gone. Katie Perrior (previous Director of Comms at No 10) highlighted how if the Government can only make a measly concession on fees its better ’not to go there’ with the nuance the review should focus on wider issues instead. Her take was that the review outcome would tackle loan interest rates and perhaps address maintenance grants. Speaking officially in the session on the Review of Post-18 Education and Funding Philip Augar (Chair of the HE Review panel) set out to bring the audience ‘up to date’ and provide an ‘inking into the panel’s current thinking’. The official word on the HE Review is that it will be much broader than a review of fees, covering far more ground. The review has to fit with the Government’s objectives to reduce the deficit and the national debt, and decisions must be taken based on evidence.
The panel are approaching the review based on two questions:
- What should the tertiary education system be doing for the country (what are its objectives)?
- How does the current system match up to this?
The panel are subdividing the evidence between economic and social objectives.
Economic requirements for tertiary system:
- Innovation (expectation for the tertiary system to create innovation)
- The assertion that FE and HE is crucial for economic dynamism
- Value for money (one of the biggest issues)
- The premise that all must be done transparently and in the most official manner
- There must be a balance of contributions between state and employers
- Improving life chances
- Accessible education and training
- Cultural issues – education fostering good citizenships and interaction
- Excellence – any changes must not risk the sector’s academic excellence
Philip confirmed workstreams matching and measuring against these criteria were currently in progress, including reference and focus groups across the range of students, employers and providers. He stated he felt there was ‘room to improve value and coherence’, and then promptly left the conference for a pressing parliamentary engagement before questions could be asked.
Other members of the panel were:
Rt Hon Lord Willetts, former Universities and Science Minister (Conservative)
Professor John Denham, Professor, University of Winchester and former government minister (Labour)
Each went on to give their opinion of the HE Review.
Willetts presented a supportive stance for Universities and felt the problems and challenges within tertiary education mainly lay outside of the University sector. He felt the review should tackle:
- The underfunding of FE
- Strengthening non-university routes
- Part time and mature HE opportunities
He felt the current fees model was the best way (for young, full time, undergraduates) – but that the grievances over the interest rate should be addressed. He was clear that fees were over-debated and echoed the need to move away from fees to tackle the more pressing above three issues he described. On part time and mature he felt an entirely different funding model (non-loan) is needed.
An interesting point he highlighted is that public spending on apprenticeships now exceeds public spending on Universities.
John Denham presented a range of more complicated messages questioning whether the HE system is actually producing what the UK economy and students need, specifically on graduate underemployment. He felt how an institution responds to the funding system is pivotal – more than what the funding system is.
Although Denham is a Labour party member, and while he conceded that abolishing fees is attractive, he doesn’t feel it’s the answer. He noted if fees are abolished but everything else stays the same the result will be a costly system that delivers exactly as it does already (and doesn’t tackle any of the systemic problems – widening participation, achievement gaps, graduate outcomes). Denham’s argument was that the HE system can be made cheaper. He also noted that the investment in FE is ‘pathetically low’ and requires addressing [although presumably not at the expense of the HE sector – which the current system of direct fee payments from student to institution provides a limited safeguard against].
Quality of Apprenticeships & Skills
On Tuesday the House of Commons Education Select Committee met to consider the quality of apprenticeships and skills training. Witnesses called to provide evidence were:
- Mark Dawe, Chief Executive, Association of Employment and Learning Providers
- Lady Andrée Deane Barron, Group Education and Central Skills Director, Central YMCA
- Petra Wilton, Director of Strategy and External Affairs, Chartered Management Institute
The session focused on apprenticeships and what support could be offered to apprentices who were struggling. There was discussion about entry level requirements to apprenticeships and whether they would be able to recruit the kind of able candidate who could not suit or afford university.
Dawe was sceptical of the idea that everyone should be a level 3 or level 4 apprentice. He stated there was a lack of level 2 apprentices and the UK really needed more of these.
Degree-level apprenticeships were discussed with Lucy Powell (Lab/Co-op, Manchester Central) explaining that the committee had met a lot of degree-level apprentices, and despite the impressive quality of candidate, many had needed an A grade in their maths exam to win a place. She questioned what this meant for social mobility.
Dawe responded that high grades did not necessarily differentiate between different social classes. However, many organisations were considering different ways of assessing potential candidates, e.g. Dyson has an “amazing programme” full of “incredible applications“. Dawe argued the more high-grade students who moved in, the more tertiary education would transform. Petra Wilton presented statistics to argue that apprenticeships were supporting social mobility: 49% of apprentices were aged 30, 52.5% were female, and 51% were from disadvantaged regions. She went on to say the all age process means that those that did not get a degree the first time round, had access now and ‘failed graduates’ found it opened their career prospects in ways “they had never imagined“.
It was also noted that travel cost support for apprentices would particularly benefit those living in rural areas and could improve attendance at face to face delivery sessions.
More generally it was argued that the external evaluation of apprenticeship quality requires improvement to support employer deliver and stronger progression pathways are needed.
Other apprenticeship news
DfE’s Apprenticeship and levy statistics note a drop in apprenticeship starts – down by 31% (25,400 starts in Jan 2018 compared to 36,700 in Jan 2017). The Independent covered the story noting ‘the structure and implementation of the apprenticeship levy has acted as a barrier and brake to skills development’.
The House of Lords Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence has published AI in the UK: ready, willing and able? following their recent inquiry. The inquiry concluded the UK is capable of being an AI world leader and a great opportunity for the British economy. Excerpts:
As soon as it works, no one calls it AI anymore …
Artificial intelligence has been developing for years, but it is entering a crucial stage in its development and adoption. The last decade has seen a confluence of factors—in particular, improved techniques such as deep learning, and the growth in available data and computer processing power—enable this technology to be deployed far more extensively. This brings with it a host of opportunities, but also risks and challenges, and how the UK chooses to respond to these, will have widespread implications for many years to come.
‘Access to large quantities of data is one of the factors fuelling the current AI boom.’ The report describes how balancing data gathering and access with personal privacy needs careful change. To do this means not only using established concepts, such as open data and data protection legislation, but also the development of new frameworks and mechanisms, such as data portability and data trusts. A nod is made to safeguarding amid the recent scandal too: ‘Large companies which have control over vast quantities of data must be prevented from becoming overly powerful within this landscape’.
The report calls for:
- Government and the Competition and Markets Authority to proactively review use and monopolisation of data by big technology companies
- To ensure use of AI does not inadvertently prejudice the treatment of particular groups in society. Government to incentivise the development of new approaches to the auditing of datasets used in AI, and to encourage greater diversity in the training and recruitment of AI specialists.
- Create a growth fund for UK SMEs working with AI to scale their businesses; a PhD matching scheme (costs shared with private sector) and standardisation of a mechanism for spinning out AI start-ups (based on University research).
- Increasing visas for overseas workers with valuable skills in AI.
- An AI Council is formed to rationalise the hopes and fears associated with AI and to inform consumers when artificial intelligence is being used to make significant or sensitive decisions.
- Government investment in skills and training to mitigate the digital disruption to the jobs market that AI is likely to exacerbate. The National Retraining Scheme may be vital, needs to be developed in partnership with industry taking on board lessons learnt from the apprenticeships scheme. More AI in children’s curriculum. Conversion courses (3-6 months) to meet needs of researchers and industry.
- The Presenti-Hall Review (intellectual property management in AI) recommendations be endorsed and the government commit to underwriting, and where necessary replacing, funding for European research and innovation programmes.
- Law Commission should provide clarity regarding the adequacy of existing legislation should AI systems malfunction, underperform or otherwise make erroneous decisions which cause harm.
- AI developers to be alive to the potential ethical implications of their work and the risk of their work being used for malicious purposes. (This was discussed on Monday 16th’s Today programme on Radio 4). Funding applications should demonstrate consequential understanding of how the research might be misused. 5 principles were proposed to form a shared ethical AI framework.
Read the report in full here.
The report has been heavily criticised by the Institute of Economic Affairs (see their press release) who state: The recommendations on how the UK can become a global leader in Artificial Intelligence are off the mark. While the report contains numerous uncontroversial and welcome suggestions on such topics as increased use of AI in the National Health Service, more visas for talented technologists, and the need to make public sector data sets available to the private sector, many of the recommendations would hamper the development of AI domestically and antagonise foreign innovators.
The report acknowledges the need to make it easier for universities to form “spin-out companies,” which are effectively startups with university ownership of intellectual property. Reform of the current spin-out procedure is necessary, though that is only a small part of the large amount of regulatory barriers for startups in the UK. It is not enough to care only about university research when the large American companies criticized for being too large were not university spin-outs themselves.
It is helpful that the UK’s Parliament is examining the opportunities that artificial intelligence creates. However, it would do better to focus on removing the barriers currently in place, rather than developing new ones.
Do read the short press release for critique on other elements of the Lords report if you have an interest in this area.
UKRI – Interim Executive Chair
UK Research and Innovation have appointed Dr Ian Campbell as the new interim executive chair of Innovate UK. Campbell will take over from 4 May until a permanent Executive Chair is appointed. His background is within aging, life sciences, medical devices and diagnostics.
Dr Ian Campbell said: “I am absolutely delighted to be appointed as interim Executive Chair of Innovate UK. Our role as the business-facing arm of UK Research and Innovation is more important than ever as we seek to meet the target of spending 2.4% of our GDP on research and development. Innovate UK, working together with all the research councils has a key role to play in realising that ambition through flagship programmes such as the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund. I am really looking forward to working with and leading our fantastic team to make sure that businesses have the support they need.”
Here is the press release on the interim appointment.
Widening Participation & Achievement
HE’s influence on life and death
Nora Ann Colton (UCL) blogs for Wonkhe to explore the link between lack of HE provision and high rates of mortality within cold spot areas. Excerpt: In 2014, HEFCE published maps that revealed “cold spots” in higher education provision across England. These maps revealed gaps in subject provision, student mobility, and graduate employment. Though this work was significant in providing useful information for higher education providers and local authorities, there is more to the question of educational “cold spots”. There has always been an understanding that a lack of employment opportunities, poverty, and deprivation lead to higher mortality rates, but recent research suggests a link between a lack of higher education provision and high rates of mortality.
Nora highlights Blackpool as an example of ‘death by no higher education’ where demand for professional occupations is increasing and fewer and fewer jobs are available for lower skilled workers. Nora discusses the research demonstrating that better-educated people live in less-polluted areas, tend to be less obese, are more physically active, are less likely to smoke, and do not as frequently engage in risky behaviours. She argues against an economically focussed reductionist approach to HE: A reductionist approach to higher education, its mission, and its impact fails to recognise the profound effect that it can have on an individual in terms of shaping their quality of life, health and life expectancy. Nora calls for the sector to re-consider their messaging:
If a university education is the best signifier of future good health and high earnings, the higher education sector needs to get its messaging right. This approach requires that we recognise that higher education and the missions of universities are more than simply getting a student a job. Institutions must work with the government and the health sector to ensure these life changing outcomes. The higher education sector needs to start adopting this approach to fulfil its role in ensuring that we not only have a better-educated working population, but a healthier one as well.
Q – Sir Mark Hendrick: To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment his Department has made of the effect of the introduction of the £200 self-contribution for disabled students who are in receipt of disabled student allowances on (a) the take-up of the equipment needed to study independently and (b) trends in the level of participation of disabled students; and if he will make a statement.
A – Sam Gyimah: The most recent data show that, for full-time undergraduate students domiciled in England, 4,600 fewer students were in receipt of equipment Disabled Students Allowances (DSAs) in 2015/16 than in 2014/15. The main reason for this fall is that the £200 student contribution to the costs of computer hardware took effect from September 2015.
This government remains committed to supporting disabled students in higher education, both through DSAs and through supporting higher education providers’ efforts to improve the support they offer their disabled students. Alongside this commitment, we are keen to better understand the impact of DSAs on eligible students, including that of recent DSAs reforms. We have commissioned a research project to explore this – we will respond to the research findings when they are available in spring 2018.
6.6% of UK-domiciled full-time first-degree students received Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA).
On the non-continuation rates of part-time first-degree entrants, and rates of resumption of study after a year out – of the 31,155 full-time, first-degree entrants who did not continue into their second year in 2015/16 10% resumed study at the same provider the following year. The release also shows that, two years after entering higher education, around a third (33.5%) of part-time students had terminated their studies. The Open University accounted for 83% of these students.
Lifelong Learning (House of Lords)
On Tuesday the House of Lords debated Lifelong Learning. Baroness Garden of Frognal (Lib Dem) opened the debate by discussing the huge decline in part time degree uptake and stated the higher fee system was “undoubtedly one of the major factors that prevents adults from upskilling or reskilling” She asked the minister to comment on fee changes and its impact on disadvantaged groups. Shadow spokesperson for education, Lord Watson of Invergowrie, agreed that fees were a cause of decline and raised questions on the Government’s target for apprenticeship starts.
The impact of technology creating changes within employment and employment opportunities was raised and the Baroness called on the minister to comment on the Made Smarter review (proposes to digitally upskill 1m people over the next five years through an online platform). Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour) stated a lifelong learning culture was vital as technology will force multiple career changes within an individual’s life. He concluded that radical reform was needed and “not just tinkering with a redundant system“.
The Baroness stated craft and creativity had “been squeezed out” of the school curriculum in favour of academic content and she asked the Government to discuss their engagement on this topic, along with how the Government were encouraging adults to learn languages.
She said that Government should recognise that lifelong learning was critical and explicitly give the recommendation that all universities should “consider how best to support this educational provision, either through developing a more flexible curriculum or producing open educational resources.” Lord Addington (Lib Dem) added the importance of lifelong learning and skills for those with dyslexia and other hidden disabilities.
Baroness Bakewell (Lab), a member of the Artificial Intelligence Committee, asked if the post-18 review of funding would confront the fourth industrial revolution.
Lords Spokesperson for Higher Education, Viscount Younger of Leckie, discussed the points made throughout the debate and stated that ‘lifelong learning was becoming increasingly important due to a number of trends and challenges that are shaping the future of work in the UK.”
He outlined the various Government schemes and initiatives that aided in the development of skills throughout life which included the national retraining scheme, career learning pilots, the flexible learning fund and the outreach and cost pilots. He stated that the response to the T-level consultation would be released “very soon.”
On barriers to part-time learning he said that the review of the post-18 education-plus funding would look at how we can encourage flexible and part-time learning to allow people to study throughout their lives.
Earlier in the academic year some nursing students were overpaid on their student loan.
Helen Jones asked a parliamentary question to follow this up:
Q – Helen Jones: what estimate he has made of the number of nursing students who have received incorrect payments from the Student Loans Company and who have been told that money will as a result be deducted from their future payments.
While the parliamentary question hasn’t been answered yet (due on Monday) the Government have responded on how they intend to recover the funds from nursing students who have been overpaid on their student loan. Additional payments of up to £1,000 and a deferred re-payment scheme have been set up. The Government says affected students can apply for this additional, non-repayable, maintenance support for the rest of this academic year if they are facing hardship. The Student Loan Company will also defer the recovery of the overpaid funds until affected students have finished their courses and can afford to repay. Overpaid students will be eligible for normal support as per usual in the next academic year.
Sam Gyimah stated: “My priority has been to ensure none of the affected student nurses should suffer hardship as a result of an administrative error. These short-term, practical steps will provide immediate help for those who need it so they can concentrate on their studies and their future careers without concern.”
The Royal College of Nursing have responded:
“This is a small but welcome recognition of the problem. But it does not go anything like far enough. Student nurses will still struggle to pay bills and childcare costs and they must not be forced to turn to loan sharks or even quit their studies as a result.
“This was not a problem of their making and we will not let them pay the price. The overpayment mistakes must be written off and they need money this month without a bureaucratic nightmare.
“This announcement lacks detail and we will keep asking the difficult questions until students have the answers.”
Student Loans – Appointment
Q – Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to appoint a new permanent chief executive of the Student Loans Company.
A- Sam Gyimah: The Student Loan Company’s (SLC’s) Shareholding Administrations (the Department for Education, the Welsh Government, the Scottish Government and the Northern Irish Executive) are working closely with the SLC Board on the appointment of a new permanent CEO. This appointment will take place as soon as possible.
Q – Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to appoint the independent chair of the review into the Teaching Excellence Framework.
A – Sam Gyimah: My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State is planning to appoint a suitable independent person to report on the operation of the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework by autumn 2018. The department is currently engaged in a process for identifying people who have both the required experience and can command the confidence of the sector.
Q – Gordon Marsden: what discussions he has had with the (a) Home Secretary and (b) Secretary of State for the Department for Exiting the European Union on universities being able to continue to recruit academics to teach STEM subjects after the UK leaves the EU.
A– Sam Gyimah: The government recognises that the ability to continue to attract Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) academics from across the EU post-exit is a priority for the higher education (HE) sector. That is why departments are working to ensure the interests of the HE sector are represented in EU exit planning, and the government has been clear that the UK will remain open to academic staff and researchers from Europe and beyond.
To help provide certainty to current and prospective EU academics, in December 2017 we reached an agreement with the EU that EU citizens living in the UK when we exit will be able to get on with their lives broadly as now, and enjoy rights such as access to healthcare, benefits, and education. We will extend the December deal to those that arrive during the implementation period, but EU citizens who arrive here during this period must register with the Home Office after three months residence in the UK.
We are considering the options for our future migration system and a crucial part of this work is the government commissioning the Migration Advisory Committee to assess the impact of EU exit on the UK labour market. Their report in September will help to inform our thinking.
Elsewhere, the government is taking steps to increase the supply of important STEM skills, including by supporting new institutions such as the New Model in Technology and Engineering and the Institute of Coding, where a consortium of employers and universities will ensure HE courses meet the needs of the economy.
Q – Stephen Timms: what assessment he has made of the prevalence of fraudulent dissertation-writing services for university students; and what plans he has to address that practice.
A- Sam Gyimah: Higher education providers, as autonomous organisations, are responsible for handling matters of this nature, including developing and implementing policies to detect and discourage plagiarism. To help providers tackle the issue, we asked the Quality Assurance Agency, Universities UK and the National Union of Students to produce new guidance, which was published in October 2017.
This guidance is the first set of comprehensive advice for providers and students on the subject. It makes clear that where providers are working with others to deliver programmes, such as through validation, care should be taken to ensure that partner organisations are taking the risks of academic misconduct seriously. Providers are also encouraged to consider steps to scrutinise potential partners’ processes and regulations when developing validation arrangements. This is in line with the wider expectations set out in the UK Quality Code for Higher Education which all providers must meet. The code establishes the fundamental principle that degree awarding bodies have ultimate responsibility for academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities, regardless of where these opportunities are delivered and who provides them.
Going forward, I expect the Office for Students to encourage and support the sector to implement strong policies and sanctions to address this important issue in the most robust way possible.
2019/20 EU student fee levels
Q – Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether non-UK EU students starting university courses in the UK in academic year 2019-20 will be charged home student fees for the full duration of their course.
A – Sam Gyimah: Applications for courses starting in 2019/20 do not open until September 2018, and we will ensure EU students starting courses at English Institutions in that academic year have information well in advance of this date.
Social Media: a new All Party Parliamentary Group has launched on Social Media and Young People’s Mental Health and Wellbeing. It will be chaired by Chris Elmore MP (Labour).
Disadvantage: An Education Policy Institute report comparing educationally disadvantaged pupils within England with other nations has concluded England needs to double the number of disadvantaged pupils achieving the top GCSE grades to match the performance of the best nations.
Industrial Strategy: Ministers have announced £8 million for innovation to tackle global climate change and prepare for natural disasters as part of the Industrial Strategy for Commonwealth countries.
Transition to work: Stephen Isherwood writes about the stark differences between academic and working life in Communicating the university-to-work transition to students.
He states we underestimate the difficulties of the transition that students have to make when they start full-time work. That it’s a myth that employers expect fully work-ready hires who don’t require any development, but the spectrum of experience ranges from the student who hasn’t even had a bar job, to those with a one-year placement and more. The biggest development need is found in the complex areas of working with others. “Teamwork” is vague – a term used to describe managing up, dealing with conflicts, and working across complex team structures – University group exercises don’t match up to this. Real on the job experience is valued most and graduates with meaningful work experience are more employable. Isherwood states employers think that interns are much more likely to have the skills they seek than those without work experience:
But not all work experience has to be gained via a city internship in a gleaming Canary Wharf skyscraper. Work experience comes in many forms. Pulling shifts in a restaurant often involves dealing with demanding people. A student on a supermarket till can see around them the business decisions that companies make on a day-to-day basis. The fact that fewer and fewer young people are now working part-time during their school years is a problem.
Students who interview well demonstrate how they proactively developed relevant skills. A problem with course-related group work examples is that everyone has them. Employers are more likely to hire the student who has done more than they were told to, and can explain how they overcame difficulties and got stuff done.
It’s in the interests of employers, universities, and the students themselves to improve transitions into work. The more students gain meaningful experiences to develop the skills that will get them started in their career, the deeper their understanding of their strengths, and the easier and quicker they will transition to the world of work.
The Guardian ran a related article this week: Working while you study: a means to an end or a career opportunity.
To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email email@example.com
JANE FORSTER | SARAH CARTER
Policy Advisor Policy & Public Affairs Officer
Follow: @PolicyBU on Twitter | firstname.lastname@example.org
Dr. Pramod Regmi, FHSS Lecturer in International Health has been appointed as an Editorial Board Member for the Journal of Global Health Reports. This journal is affiliated with the Journal of Global Health (www.jogh.org). The Journal of Global Health Reports focuses on “Promoting local research to improve global health” It is open to all local, small-scale, context-specific studies in global health, both qualitative and quantitative, as long as they are conducted in a rigorous and replicable way and report their results properly.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Next week the Dorset Global Health Network will have its inaugural meeting on April 25th. The meeting will focus on Nepal starting at 18.30 with a Nepalese buffet.
There will be three short presentations followed by the film ‘Hospital’.
- Voluntourism in Nepal : A lesson in the grey areas of global health (Dr Emer Forde, Bournemouth University)
- The challenge of perinatal mental health in Nepal (Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, Bournemouth University)
- Supporting Training and innovative solutions to the provision of rural health care in Nepal (Dr Ollie Ross, Consultant Anaesthetist, Southampton General Hospital)
The Film “Hospital” provides a portrait of a state-run hospital in one of the most remote and poor districts of Nepal and how individuals can make a difference to people’s lives. It will be introduced by Dr Ollie Ross, who is a consultant to the Nick Simons Institute working in Nepal.
This will be followed by a discussion about the development of Dorset Global Health Network.
All are welcome. Book your place at www.focusnepal.eventbrite.co.uk
As the controversy over the use of personal data by Cambridge Analytica and Facebook continues to rage, many firms around the world are bracing themselves for further revelations of data privacy infringement.
Conor O’Kane (FMC) was recently asked to provide his expert opinion on the issue of data transparency and privacy. His research examines how provisions in the new General Data Protection Regulation impacts on personal information disclosure.
In a recent US Senate hearing, Mark Zuckerberg, was criticised for the complexity of Facebook’s privacy approach, with Senators asking why the firm couldn’t provide more user friendly information on their disclosure policies. In line with this sentiment, the Daily Mirror asked Conor to write an article summarising the controversy for their readership.
The online version of the article can be found at:
OER18 conference ‘Virtual Reality: the implications for open educational resources’ presentation by BU staff. A conference presentation by Liz Falconer and Denyse King explored the meaning of open educational resources (OER) in relation to virtual reality (VR) technologies used for education. They argued that VR has been overlooked in the OER debate to date, and that the growth of educational VR platforms will require consideration of the many of the issues that arise from the more traditional concerns of open resources.
Liz and Denyse discussed Virtual Avebury and Virtual Urinalysis as two case examples that illustrate the issues that might arise, sharing their experiences of creating these learning environments in collaboration with university colleagues, commercial developers, and other interested parties such as Health Education England and patient representatives. The audience enthusiastically received their presentation and there were a number of interesting questions asked. The OER18 conference was also a valuable networking experience for Liz and Denyse, who met in person with delegates who had travelled from many different countries including America, South Africa and Brazil.
Following on from this successful experience they are hoping to be invited to present at the Future Technologies Conference in November 2018 to present Denyse’s virtual reality learning environments (VRLE) doctorate project – the Collaborative Immersive Learning Virtual Reality Series (CILVRS).
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Update: Please note the change in venue due to high degree of interest in the talk – Shelley Lecture Theatre (Poole House)
We would like to invite you to the latest research seminar of the Centre for Games and Music Technology Research.
Title: Art, War and Peace
Speaker: Nigel Osborne
Date: Wednesday 25 April 2018
Room: Shelley Lecture Theatre (Poole House)
The presentation begins with an overview of the relationship between art, war and peace, from Sun Tzu and Ancient Greek and Chinese celebration of war in art to the war poets and musicians of the First and Second World Wars, and then on to the work of activists such as Janusz Korczak (Henryk Goldszmit) in the Warsaw Ghetto and Friedl Dicker-Brandeisova in Terezin (Theresienstadt).
The presentation then examines three case studies in detail, including film and Audio clips – 1. art as opposition to conflict (The Cellist of Sarajevo, the Obala Gallery) 2. art in reconciliation (the case of a young musician who re-united the young people of a city divided by war) 3. art as trauma therapy (a group of children in Syria, a group of abused women in Bosnia)
Nigel Osborne MBE BA BMus (Oxon) DLitt FRCM FEIS FRSE, Emeritus Professor of Music and Human Sciences at the University of Edinburgh is a composer, teacher and aid worker. His works have been performed around the world by major orchestras and opera houses, such as the Vienna Symphony, Los Angeles Philharmonic, Berlin Symphony, Glyndebourne and the Royal Opera House. He has received, among many awards, the Netherlands Gaudeamus Prize, the Opera Prize of the Radio Suisse Romande and Ville de Geneve and the Koussevitzky Award of the Library of Congress Washington. He also works in popular music, theatre and film and has a special interest in Arabic, Indian and Chinese music.
He studied composition at Oxford with Egon Wellesz, the first pupil of Arnold Schoenberg, and in Warsaw with Witold Rudzinski, and worked in major studios such as the Polish Radio Experimental Studio and at IRCAM in Paris. He has worked as a sailor, school teacher, health worker, aid worker and university teacher, holding a lectureship and Special Professorship at Nottingham University (1978-1987), the Reid Chair and Dean of the Faculty of Music at Edinburgh University (1989-2012), a guest Senior Professorship (C4) at the University of Hannover (1996-98) and Head of Faculty for the Vienna-Prague- Budapest Summer Academy (ISA) (2007-2014). He is currently Professor Emeritus at Edinburgh University, visiting Professor in the Drama Faculty of Rijeka University, Consultant to both the Chinese Music Institute, Peking University and the Royal Conservatoire, Bangkok, and has worked as visiting lecturer and examiner in a wide range of universities, ranging from Harvard, UCLA and CalArts to Oxford, the Sorbonne and Bologna.
As a teacher he has worked at all levels of learning, from nursery education to postdoctoral supervision, and continues to work in special education development in places as diverse as Scotland, Sweden, Croatia and India. He was awarded both the Queen’s Prize and Music Industry Prize for innovation in education, and was recently made Honorary Fellow of the Educational Institute of Scotland.
He has pioneered methods of using music and the creative arts to support children who are victims of conflict. This approach was developed during the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina (1992-95), and since then the work has been implemented widely in the Balkan region, the Caucasus (Chechnya), the Middle East (Palestine, Syria and Lebanon), East Africa and South East Asia. He was also awarded the Freedom Prize of the Peace Institute, Sarajevo, for his work for Bosnian children during the siege of the city.
He has worked actively in many human rights initiatives, including the Committee for the Defence of the Workers in Poland (1970-89), Citizens’ Forum (with Vaclav Havel) in former Czechoslovakia (1987- 89), for Syrian refugee support organisations and directly for the Government of Bosnia- Herzegovina during the genocide.
He is advisor to Oliver Sachs’ Institute for Music and Neurologic Function at Beth Abraham Hospital, The Bronx, NYC, and in 2012-14 served as co-Chair of the Global Agenda Committee for Arts in Society for the World Economic Forum.
In recent months he has been working on an opera/film with Ulysses Theatre and Paradiso Films on the Cambridge spies, a musical/ecological work for Khazanah, Kuala Lumpur, a cantata based on the experiences of refugees and on an orchestral version of the Beatles’ Sgt Pepper, to mark the 50th anniversary of the issue of the album (June 2017).
Nigel is working with Opera Circus on a new chamber opera, Naciketa, with libretto by Ariel Dorfman. The premiere will be at the Queen Elizabeth Hall, Southbank London in May 2020.
In December 2017 Nigel Osborne was presented with the British Composer Award UK for Inspiration (in association with the Music Publishers Association) by Opera Circus Artistic Director, Tina Ellen Lee.
We hope to see you there.
Today on the second day of the 2018 BNAC (Britain-Nepal Academic Council) conference there was a very good representation of Bournemouth University (BU) research at Durham University. BU’s Professor Michael Wilmore presented his paper: Construction of ‘Community’ in Research on Nepalese Commons. In the morning FHSS’s PhD student Jib Acharya had an oral presentation on Impact of Healthy Snacks on Children’s Health: An Overview of a Pilot Study.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen presented joint work between BU, Liverpool John Moors University (LJMU) and the University of Oxford on the topic Skills transfer, employability & entrepreneurship of returnee labour migrants in Nepal. Bournemouth University was involved in this project through Dr. Pramod Regmi, Dr. Nirmal Aryal and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen.
The final talk of the day (and of the conference) was by Prof. Padam Simkhada from LJMU. Prof. Simkhada is also Visiting Professor at the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health at Bournemouth University. He was presenting Debate on Educational Reform in Nepal: Outcomes of the International Conference on Quality of Higher Education in Federal Nepal on behalf of LJMU, Bournemouth University and Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences (MMIHS) in Nepal. Earlier this year BU signed a Memorandum of Agreement with MMIHS in Kathmandu.
Hate crime as a hot topic
Hate Crime on university campus has attracted widespread attention in the media of late, with a spate of high profile incidents targeting Black Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) students in particular in the UK. Despite increased awareness of it, it is estimated that hate crime is considerably under-reported by students (Universities UK, 2016; NUS, 2012). BU’s Equality and Diversity Unit, supported by Dr James Palfreman-Kay, was awarded funding by HEFCE in late 2017 as part of their Catalyst Fund to tackle hate crime and online harassment on campus. This is a joint project, working with partners in SUBU, CPS Wessex, Dorset Police, Access Dorset, the Dorset Police and Crime Commissioner as well as colleagues and academics at BU and from other agencies associated with Prejudice Free Dorset.
What does the project involve?
The objective of the project was to provide students with the knowledge of what a hate crime is, how to respond to it and where to seek support, both on and off campus. This was achieved through the use of a drama based format called Forum Theatre (FT) which uses actors to share scenes of discrimination and hate crime (Dwyer, 2010; Hamel, 2015). FT has previously been used in promoting social change and critical thinking (Boal, 1974) and the value of this approach was that it would enable students to try out courses of action which could be applicable to their everyday lives and provide a gateway for increasing reporting.
The project is funded for the remainder of 2018, and a pilot was run in March with a cohort of social science Level 4 students. Jane Healy, Lecturer in Sociology & Crime & Deviance, worked with James to embed the Forum Theatre process within a learning session with 85 students from across BA Sociology, BA Sociology & Criminology, and BA Sociology & Anthropology programmes. The students were exploring Hate Crime as one element of their Level 4 Social Exclusion and Discrimination Unit, and the FT company were invited into the Wollstonecraft lecture theatre on the Lansdowne site. Four actors created two scenarios based on a fictitious university campus, involving religious and homophobic hate crimes but also acknowledging other, intersecting elements of identity. The scenarios were drawn from examples of similarly reported crimes provided by CPS Wessex. None had occurred at BU, but were designed to engage students and encourage discussion and debate.
The students were thoroughly engaged in the FT scenarios. As the first scenario was played out, silence descended on the room and students (and staff) held their breath as the ‘student’ characters experienced an unpleasant encounter near their halls of residence. The second involved online hate crime and the impact it had on victims, friends and bystanders. Once the scenes were completed, actors returned to the stage in their ‘roles’ and students were able to ask questions of them. The response was at times rambunctious as members of the audience quizzed and at times challenged ‘bystanders’ about their participation. Ultimately, however, the serious message of hate crime as a corrosive and socially divisive aspect of contemporary society was conveyed in a respectful and thought-provoking manner.
In order to evaluate the success of the programme, students were asked about their knowledge of hate crime both before and after the FT event and what impact it has had on them, through an evaluation questionnaire. Initial findings suggest an improved awareness of hate crime, although some students unfortunately had previous experience of hate crimes and incidents. Students are also being invited to do a follow up interview.
The FT event provided a unique method of engaging with and debating hate crimes on campus, in a safe and respectful environment. Embedding it within a Unit enabled the project’s exposure to a large cohort. As a result of positive feedback, it will be rolled out across all three sociology programme year groups over the coming months.
Interested in attending the next Forum Theatre?
There are two further forum theatre open events on Campus before the end of term; 23 April in Lansdowne and 17 May on Talbot. Details can be found at the bottom of this post. However, any interested academics and/or teaching staff can contact James to discuss a bespoke session to suit their student cohort.
By raising awareness and increasing reporting, BU is sending a positive message that hate crime, in all its forms, is unacceptable.
Open Event Dates
Everyone is welcome to the following:
23 April 10-12 open Lansdowne campus session:
17 May 10-12 open Talbot campus session:
Jane Healy has recently completed a PhD in disablist hate crimes and is a Lecturer in Sociology & Crime & Deviance in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences.
New York is the world’s media capital and it is no surprise that American academic institutions dominate the field of Media Management. Fordham University in New York extended an invitation to me as a Visiting Scholar, and as a Santander Universities Network partner, the process of engaging with them was straight forward.
My application to the Santander Mobility Scheme had 3 primary objectives which fused research, education and professional practice. During my visit to the USA, I taught on Fordham’s MSc Media Management programme, had discussions with leading media management scholars and the Editor of The International Journal on Media Management.
I also met with the Managing Director of the Boston Consulting Group to discuss the metrics that are used to measure the level of innovation in firms, as well as their the chronic under performance. I also had a meeting with the Editor of Strategy & Leadership to discuss developing a ‘Masterclass’ paper on Scenario Planning and how best to encourage Early Career Researchers to write for the journal.
All of this activity aims to develop a number of fusion based outputs and impacts into the near and medium term future. Overall, it was a great trip and many thanks to the Santander Staff Mobility Scheme!
We are continuing to recruit for 2 studies involving our Brythm App, designed at BU. Brythm is based on the principles of slow and deep breathing that have been found to lower blood pressure. Our previous research supports the idea that changing the way you breathe has an impact upon your heart rate and blood pressure. We have developed an App (called Brythm) to exploit the beneficial influence of breathing, which guides users to a personalised, optimal breathing frequency.
We are currently conducting one study on healthy women in a laboratory setting to test the cardiovascular responses to slow and deep breathing, which would require approx 2 hours of your time. The other study involves using the App daily at home for 8 weeks to test the feasibility of using the App. For both studies participants will receive information about their current blood pressure.
Lab Based Cardiovascular Responses Study
Participants must be female non-smokers of reproductive age (18-49 years) who are not currently pregnant. They must also have no prior medical diagnosis of cardiovascular or respiratory disease (including asthma). The entire study requires a single visit to the Cardiorespiratory Research Laboratory in Bournemouth House (3rd floor) lasting approximately 2 hours. During this visit you will be asked to undertake a number of 5-minute sets of slow and deep breathing, guided by our App, while a series of non-invasive and painless cardiovascular measurements are made. The App will be installed on our iPad in the lab and you will not be required to use your own device.
At Home 8-week Feasibility Study
Participants must be aged 40 or over and you must have access to an iOS or Android device capable of downloading and running the Brythm App. More details on device specifications available on request. You will be expected to complete daily 10-minute sessions using the Brythm App for 8 weeks and will have an initial meeting with our Project Manager prior to commencing the study, where you will be given a demonstration of the Brythm App and be given an opportunity to try it for a few minutes. You will also receive an automated blood pressure monitor to take home with you for the duration of the study; you will be asked to use it to make two measurements each day, which will be recorded via the Brythm App. Following the intervention we will ask you to attend a focus group where you will be invited to share your experiences of using the App.
For more information, and to receive a participant information sheet outlining either study in more detail, please contact Malika Felton at email@example.com or 01202 961845.
#TalkBU is a monthly lunchtime seminar on Talbot Campus, open to all students and staff at Bournemouth University and free to attend. Come along to learn, discuss and engage in a 20-30 minute presentation by an academic or guest speaker talking about their research and findings, with a Q&A to finish.
Often our New Year resolutions involve changing unhealthy habits in the coming year. But how many of us have actually managed to change our unhealthy lifestyle and maintained it? Changes can be stressful, but how one manages the change can potentially ease that stress and make the change more achievable, which can potentially impact our physical and psychological well-being.
In this talk, Dr Fiona Ling will discuss her research that centres around physical activity behaviour change, and the extended implications on changing other health habits and public health promotions in order to encourage a healthy lifestyle.
When: Thursday 19 April at 1 – 2pm
Where: Room FG04, Fusion Building
Click here to find out more about our future and previous #TalkBU events.
Every year the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES) organise the student conference, as an opportunity to discuss and exchange views on contemporary issues in sport and exercise science (including clinical exercise, biomechanics, performance, physiology and psychology).
This year the venue is Northumbria University, and the programme includes international speakers from the applied and research worlds.
The conference started with the lecture “not all that can be counted counts – why we should listen to Einstein?” by Mrs Esme Matthew & Miss Laura Needham, who brought they experience as members of English Institute of Sport (EIS) and their work with the UK Olympic team.
It was particularly inspiring to see how the lab works moved into the field of applied science and the relationship that bound researchers and athletes.
Next, after the usual coffè break, it was the time of free communications and oral presentation, where I had the opportunity to attend to the following:
Mr Dray, and his work on the effect of high-intensity interval training on obese men.
Mr Parmar about the difference in maximal aerobic speed in filed-based tests compared to laboratory-based treadmill tests.
Miss McNulty on low-volume, high-intensity priming activity.
Miss White and his work on plyometric training team gym gymnasts.
Mr Addey about the effect of unilateral strength training on recreation runners.
Then, it was the time for poster exhibition, where I presented my research titled: “The effects of 8 weeks of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on the balance of healthy older people: a randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled trial”.
I was excited, and most important the comments and feedback collected satisfied my expectations.
In particularly I had the chance to discuss IMT with a couple of students from Portsmouth, that today are going to present their works on IMT in athletes.
I also met Mr Tahmosybayat, and his research on 6 weeks of exergaming compare to OTAGO exercise training in healthy older adults and we discussed the outcomes, methods and methodologies of our research.
After there was a range of workshops available from which I chose “a demonstration of how exergaming is used to improve postural control” by Dr Gill Barry at the sport central physiology lab.
Here members of the lab staff showed us their facilities in particular exergame, Kinect, and Biodex BioSway and how they measure balance in frail populations.
At the end of the conference, there was still time for the lectures on “contemporary recovery: translating research to application” by Dr Jonathan Leeder, Dr Jess Hill & Mr Luke Gupta. Who discussed how to optimising recovery following exercises, the efficacy of compression garments on recovery from strenuous exercises and sleep management in elite sports.
Then we moved to the home of Newcastle United FC, where before dinner we had a motivational/inspiring speech by Mr Nick Grantham specialist in athletic preparation, combat sports and strength training.
Concluding, it was a very productive day and I am looking toward tomorrow where there are going to be more lectures, oral presentations and posters oriented on frail populations and nutrition.
If you would like to follow the conference live use the Twitter Wall: http://bases2018.tweetwally.com/
Thank you for reading.
An exciting new research project will be launched this Saturday and the team is getting ready. Last November during the ESRC Festival young people told us what they liked doing outdoors. Next Saturday the research team from across BU will be releasing the top ten favourite things that young people enjoyed outdoors on a rock drop in partnership with Bournemouth Rocks. Young people can find out the results of our research and help develop our study by logging their finds and sharing their use of green space with the research team – Dr Holly Crossen-White, Dr Nathan Farrell and Dr Angela Turner-Wilson. The Rock Drop site will be released on Friday on social media (more…)