Category / Guidance

Changes to Peer Review at BU

poor-review-and-peer-reviewBack in July, I Chaired a Pre-Award Review meeting to discuss a number of recommendations put forward by DDRPPs and as a result of feedback received through the pre-award surveys that are sent to academics who have submitted applications within the last year.  The meeting included Professor John Fletcher, Professor Christine Maggs, Professor Vanora Hundley, Dr Richard Berger, Dr Richard Shipway, Deborah Wakely, Kelly Deacon-Smith, Zita Lovaszy and Kerri Jones.  Professor Robert Britton also contributed written feedback on the recommendations.

One of the recommendations was to change the way we carry out peer review at BU.

There was a strong message from academics that it should be their responsibility to ensure that their application is of the highest quality before it is submitted to an external funder.  Therefore, it was agreed that faculties would manage their own peer review and determine at what level this will be provided.  Whilst there may now be slight differences to the peer review options available in each faculty, they all have quality approvers, some have mentors available, and all of them emphasise that RPRS is still available through RKEO, as is the use of a RKEO Research Facilitator to assist with development of an application.  It is now the responsibility of the Principal Investigator to ensure that a form of peer review/ quality approval is carried out on their application.  Through an APF request sent by RKEO, the Principal Investigator will be asked to confirm what type of peer review has been undertaken and by whom and to confirm that the content is correct (including costs agreed with RKEO).  An application cannot be submitted until the PI has confirmed that it is ready to go.  Applicants applying through e-submission routes (such as Je-S, e-GAP, etc.) should note that they still have to submit a final application to RKEO five working days before a call closing date.  This enables RKEO to carry out thorough checks in line with funder guidance to ensure that your application isn’t rejected due to a technicality.

To clarify, this means that it is no longer mandatory for any applications to go through the internal peer review process known as RPRS.  However, as said above, this service is still available through RKEO.  Also, RKEO will no longer administer the quality approval process as this will be the responsibility of the PI.

RKEO have been working over the summer to finalise new Intention to Bid forms with each Faculty, which sets out the peer review options for applicants and provides a list of quality approvers for that faculty.  Please contact your RKEO Funding Development Officer for the new Intention to Bid form:

More information on the other recommendations will be publicised in due course.  If you have any queries about the new process then please contact Jo Garrad, Funding Development Manager, RKEO.

Research Funders’ Guide is even better!

Imap of science previously posted about the new Research Funders’ Guide available on the Research Blog under the Research Toolkit.  This introduced the major funder pages, which include a wealth of information about their research strategies, what they fund, impact reports, funder guides and success rates.

These pages have now been expanded to include:

Don’t forget, we also have the Research Lifecycle on the blog where you can see how RKEO can support you with your research plans.

 

Open Access publishing does not have to be expensive!

Nepal J Epid Open AccessAs it is Open Access Week I would like to clarify one of the Open Access publishing myths.  One of the common replies I receive from academics colleagues when raising Open Access publishing is that it is (too) expensive. This is, of course, true for many academic journals, but not all are expensive.  Some don’t even charge a processing fee at all.  Infamously, The Lancet Global Health charges an article processing fee of US $4750 upon acceptance of submitted research articles.  More moderately priced scientific journals still charge anything up to about £1,500 per article.

Open-Access-logoAcademic publishing has been big business for decades, and Open Access has rapidly become part of that business.  While traditional book and magazine publishers struggle to stay afloat, research publishing houses have typical profit margins of nearly 40%, according CBCNEWS who quote Vincent Larivière from the University of Montreal’s School of Library & Information Science.

At the same time we see a sharp increase in so-called Predatory Publishers who have set up business for the sole reason to make money from Open Access publishing.  They have not established or taken over academic journal for the greater good of the discipline or the dissemination of research findings to the widest possible audience.  Unscrupulous publishers jump on the Open-Access bandwagon BU librarian Jean Harris recently shared an interesting article about Predatory Publishers (click here to read this!).

J Asian MidwHowever, there are other format of Open Access. One of our more recent papers on research ethics was published in the Nepal Journal of Epidemiology which is an online Open Access journal that does not charge authors for publishing!  Also the Journal of Asian Midwives, where FHSS PhD student Preeti Mahato recently had her article accepted, is hosted in Pakistan by Aga Khan University through its institutional repository eCommons.  Publishing in this Open Access online journal is also free of charge.  In other words, Open Access publishing does not have to be expensive!

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Government discussions around spending review

spending-review1Research Professional have been following several discussion threads around the impending government spending review and the possible implications for the science budget.  The latest article is centred on the science minister, Jo Johnson’s assurance that the results of the Sir Paul Nurse review of research councils will be considered by government.

By following the link above, you will also find various other discussions about potential mergers of government departments that may have a knock-on effect on future research resources.

New BU Guide: Open Access and Depositing your Research

To support academic colleagues in depositing their research open access the BURO Team in Library and Learning Support have produced a brand new guide – Open Access and Depositing your Research.  Colleagues will find this guide particularly useful if you are…

  1. New to depositing your full text research in BURO via BRIAN
  2. Depositing your work as part of the Mock REF/internal review exercise

Guidance is provided in the following key areas:Open access and depositing your research

Please note: this guide is in development and more sections will soon be added. The guide will shortly appear on the deposit page in BRIAN.  The BURO Team welcome any feedback.

Please note: during this short period around the Mock REF/internal review exercise increased levels of deposit mean the BURO Editorial Team may take a little longer than usual to make your research open access and respond to any queries about your outputs. In recognition of this the online nomination form provides an option to indicate that you have submitted the your full text to BURO via BRIAN even if you are unable to provide a BURO web link for each of your outputs at the time of form completion.

Mock REF – depositing your research outputs: BURO UPDATE

The first internal Research Excellence Framework (REF) preparation exercise invites academic colleagues to submit one to four outputs (published since 1 January 2014), which will be reviewed by a panel of internal expert reviewers.  You can find the Individual Outputs Nomination Form here.

Where possible all nominated outputs (specifically journal articles and conference contribution with ISSN) should be made available Open Access, by uploading them to the institutional repository Bournemouth University Research Online (BURO) via BRIAN.  The SHERPA RoMEO website will help you to upload the correct open access version of your work.  You will need to provide the BURO web link (e.g. http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/xxxxx) for each output in the nomination form.

Please note: during this short period of increased levels of deposit the BURO Editorial Team may take a little longer than usual to make your research open access and respond to any queries about your outputs. In recognition of this the online nomination form provides an option to indicate that you have submitted the your full text to BURO via BRIAN even if you are unable to provide a BURO web link for each of your outputs at the time of form completion.

Looking ahead you should aim to make your research outputs open access as an integral part of you publication process and deposit your full text within 3 months of acceptance.

For more guidance about the mock REF:

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/ref/mock-ref-internal-light-touch-review-exercise-autumn-2015/

Have you been involved with an event designed for the external community?

Then we want to hear from you! 🙂

The University is currently compiling the data for the annual Higher Education – Business & Community Interaction survey (HE-BCI) due to be submitted to HESA shortly. Data returned is used to calculate our HEIF grant.

We are asked to submit details of social, cultural and community events designed for the external community (to include both free and chargeable events) which took place between 1 August 2014 and 31 July 2015.

Event types that should be returned include, but are not limited to:

  • public lectures
  • performance arts (dance, drama, music, etc)
  • exhibitions
  • museum education
  • events for schools and community groups
  • business breakfasts

We cannot return events such as open days, Student Union activity, commercial conferences, etc.

All events that we ran as part of the Festival of Learning, ESRC Festival of Social Science and Cafe Scientifique series are likely to be eligible for inclusion and we will collate this information on your behalf centrally.

If you have been involved with any other event which could be returned, please could you let your contact (see below) know the event name and date, whether it was free or chargeable, the estimated number of attendees, and an estimate of how much academic time was spent preparing for (but not delivering) the event:

  • SciTech – Norman Stock
  • FoM – Rob Hydon
  • HSS – Deirdre Sparrowhawk
  • FMC – Mark Brocklehurst
  • Professional Service – Julie Northam (RKEO)

The data returned is used by HEFCE to allocate the HEIF funding so it is important that we return as accurate a picture as possible.

Congratulations to CMMPH Professor Edwin van Teijlingen on his publication !

Congratulations to CMMPH Professor Edwin van Teijlingen on his latest publication about why researchers do not always seek ethical permission for health research conducted in low income countries. The authors in this paper have identified and explained five possible reasons; a) approval not needed: b) not familiar with the ethics committee: c) applying the wrethicsong committee; d) resource constraints; and e) assumption that non-clinical research are exempted, which are of course overlap and interact each other, for not applying ethical approval in low income countries. They have also provided examples of ethical approval taken from other countries than the host countries and further go on to stress that junior researchers and students should be encouraged to be familiar with research ethical approval. In their paper, they encourage journal editors and peer reviewers to ensure ethical approval beinProfessor Edwin and Professor Padamg granted for manuscripts based on empirical studies. This paper was co-authored by BU visiting faculty Professor Padam Simkhada and recently published in  Nepal Journal of Epidemiology. The paper is freely available through the journal’s website http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/issue/view/919

Reference:

van Teijlingen E, Simkhada P. Failure to apply for ethical approval for health studies in low-income countries. Nepal J Epidemiol. 2015;5(3); 511-515

 

Pramod R Regmi, PhD

Post Doctoral Research Fellow, Faculty of Health and Social Science

Procedures for late submission of external R&KE applications

procedure-wwThere has been quite a steep rise in the late notification of applications for external R&KE funding. Although it is always pleasing to see bids going in, the late bids cause a number of issues, not only for Faculty/UET approvers, quality assurance, but also in terms of RKEO resources.  Also it often puts unnecessary pressure on all involved, including the Principal Investigator.

All applications should normally be prepared in good time, informing RKEO (normally by the submission of an intention to bid form) at the beginning of the application process.  For major funders, applications should start to be prepared at least four months in advance of the closing date to ensure that a quality application is submitted.  There is a mandatory internal deadline of five working days for any (finalised) applications that are submitted to funders who have an e-submission process.  This is on advice from those funders as they require the research office to approve submissions.  This is to allow time for applications to be checked by RKEO in line with funder guidance and allow for any iterations required by the PI.  Research Councils are now office rejecting any slight errors rather than returning applications for amendment and so the checks that RKEO carry out are vital to ensuring that academics don’t fall at the first hurdle.

If a PI contacts RKEO at short notice or in the case of an e-submission, close to the five working days’ notice (please bear in mind that all costs and approvals must be in place beforehand), the decision may be made that they cannot submit the application.  This is particularly likely during busy periods where RKEO resources are already fully committed to support those applicants that have contacted us early.  Jo Garrad, RKEO Funding Development Manager, will discuss such cases with Faculty DDRPP’s before making a decision.  A full procedural document can be found on the staff intranet under the ‘Research’ section – Procedures for late submission of external R&KE applications.

Vitae and the Researcher Development Framework

Vitae logoVitae is an organisation set up to promote career development in both postgraduate researchers and academic staff. Their Researcher Development Framework is intended to help people monitor their skills and plan their personal development. At BU we will be using this framework to format the training on offer for the postgraduate research students and academic staff.

The Vitae website is an excellent resource and the organisation regularly runs free training events for researchers, PGRs and those involved in research development. Upcoming events include Vitae Connections: Supporting Open Researchers.

The Researcher Development Framework (RDF) is the professional development framework to realise the potential of researchers. The RDF is a tool for planning, promoting and supporting the personal, professional and career development of researchers in higher education. It was designed following interviews with many successful researchers across the sector and articulates the knowledge, behaviours and attributes of a successful researcher.

There is a planner available on the Vitae website to help you assess which stage you are at with your skills and a tutorial providing guidance on how to use the framework.

Top 10 tips from researchers on using the Researcher Development Framework (RDF):

1. You might choose to use the RDF for short term as well as long term development. The RDF can be used in planning for your long term career ambitions but also to make a feasible short term plan. It can be useful to imagine your long term ambitions in order to focus your career path however the reality of progressing through to the higher phases may be more difficult to plan. In the short term, making decisions about how to progress to the next phase or what sub-domains are most important for you will be easier. Try to be realistic when setting these short term goals.

2. Use the RDF to highlight your strengths and areas for development and how these might be used to benefit/influence your personal, professional and career development.

3. Use the RDF to highlight your applicable and transferable skills. This is important for career progression within or outside academia.

4. Prioritise those areas which are most relevant. You don’t have to try to develop in all the areas of the RDF at once. There may be some sub-domains/descriptors where there is less relevance in progressing through the phases for you.

5. Draw on experiences outside of work to evidence your capabilities.

6. Progression to the highest phase in a descriptor will not be applicable to everyone but being aware of the possibilities can aid personal and career development.

7. Talk to others to get their views about your strengths and capabilities. Your supervisor, manager, peers, family and friends are a great source of information to find out more about yourself. Talk to them about how they perceive your capabilities. By understanding how others view you, you will be able to make more informed choices about your future.

8. To move from one phase to the next why not explore attending courses. These courses may be run at a local level (within your University) or may only be run nationally or internationally so awareness of opportunities for training is important. Vitae also run a wide range of courses which address many aspects of personal and career development.

9. Some phases may only be reached through experience and practice however good self-awareness and professional development planning will aid the process.

10. Networking is likely to enable you to reach more experienced phases.

Research Funders’ Guide

The Research Funders’ Guide was launched last week on the Research Blogs ‘Research Toolkit’ (hover over the link to see what is available to assist you with your external application for funding).map of science

This has since been updated to include success rate data and past awards for the Research Councils.  These are a good indication of what the Research Councils are interested in and what they’re prepared to invest in.  If you’re interested in applying to a Research Council then do have a look around.

In addition, we’ve tidied up the charities so that the major funders are now shown at the top and also contain links to past awards and some have the quick guides that RKEO have produced to help internal applications understand the process at BU.

Do also have a look at the Research Lifecycle on the blog to see how RKEO can support you with your research plans.

MRC refreshed Guidance to Applicants

MRC have launch a refreshed Guidance for Applicants, published in a new and improved format on their website: logo_mrcwww.mrc.ac.uk/funding/guidance-for-applicants.

To improve communication with their community (applicants and research offices) they have been investigating ways of making the guidance more interactive and intuitive.

The main improvements to the guidance are:

* Hyperlinks from content pages

* Relevant forms made easier to find and download

* The option to print a PDF copy of the document

* More tables to make information easier to read

* Special considerations split into:

* Ethics and approvals

* Proposals involving animal use

New and revised sections:

* Research council facilities updated to include Ion Beam Centre, University of Surrey (section 2.9)

* New guidance added on common reasons for returning applications to research offices (section 2.10)

* Updated guidance on application costing: please be aware that some historical data may have been removed (section 3)

* Updated guidance on costing of applications involving MRC units and institutes (NOT university units) (section 3.2)

* New guidance for eligible individuals from MRC University Units and the Francis Crick Institute who wish to apply for MRC grants as either a lead or co-applicant (section 3.3)

* New section: Research involving cohort resources (section 3.5)

In addition, a new ‘Updates’ section on the main page will inform you of any major changes made to the guidance and allow MRC to keep the guidance fully up-to-date. These updates will be linked to the relevant section in the guidance to help you navigate to the relevant page. Copies of historical changes will also be available from this section.

Please have a look through the pages to familiarise yourself with the refreshed format and the new and revised sections: www.mrc.ac.uk/funding/guidance-for-applicants.

MRC would welcome your feedback on the new guidance. Please send any comments to the Research Funding Policy and Delivery team:  RFPD@headoffice.mrc.ac.uk.

Import your publications to BRIAN

If you are new to BRIAN – Bournemouth Research Information and Networking system, there is an option for you to easily import your list of publications from a previous system onto BRIAN.

All you need is a list/ lists of your publications in either a Bibtex(.Bib) or Reference Manager/ EndNote (.RIS) format which you can easily generate from an existing publication system. It is therefore vital that you would have generated a list of all your publications either in a .Bib or .RIS format before you leave your previous institution to join BU. Please note that if you have stored previous publications in an institutional repository or subject repository, there may be an option for you to export your publications lists.

Different institutions may have adopted their current research and information system differently. Using BRIAN as an example, you can generate the file and import the file via these steps:

Step 1 :

Go to your ‘Home’ page on BRIAN, click on ‘export’ next to any publication type

My Publications

Step 2:

Choose either the ‘RIS’ option or the ‘BibTex’ option from the drop down list

My Publications 2

Please note that for staff who are unfortunately leaving BU, steps 1 and 2 should be followed in order to generate lists of publication which you can take along to your next institution. For staff who are new to BU, steps 1 and 2 above may not be exactly the same, depending on the current system you are using. Once you have obtained the relevant publication lists in either .Bib or .RIS file, you can then follow steps 3, 4, 5 and 6 to upload your publications. (Please check with your current research office if you are unsure about extracting your publications lists).

Step 3:

Expand the ‘Elements’ option on the left hand panel, and expand on ‘Publications’ by click on the ‘+’ sign

Elements

Step 4:

You will see the ‘Import’ option – click on it and you will be guided to this page

Upload

Step 5:

Locate the .Bib or .RIS file you’ve created, choose the appropriate format and click ‘Upload’

Step 6:

The system will then allow you to choose whether to import the publication, supplement existing record, or not to import as seen in the example below and please choose an option as appropriate to your situation.

Upload options

Please note that these are publications which already exist within the system, therefore it’s providing three different options. You  may encounter a different set of options with new publications currently not on the system.

If you have further queries, please direct them to BRIAN@bournemouth.ac.uk.

Uploading your full text to BRIAN – 3 easy steps!

If you are unsure of how to upload the full text of your publication onto BRIAN to be deposited in BURO, these are the three easy steps you can follow!

Step 1 – Ensure publication record already exists in your BRIAN account. If it does not, click on the ‘+’ sign next to it –

Screen Shot 2015-09-19 at 21.46.29

You will see a search box on the following page. Enter the title of your publication in the search box. If the record of your publication already exists within BRIAN, you simply need to scroll to it and ‘claim’ it. Otherwise, scroll to the bottom of the page and click on ‘create manual entry’. You can then populate all relevant information of your publication on the following page. Don’t forget to scroll to the bottom to ‘save’ your record!

Step 2 – Once the publication record exists within BRIAN, click on the the blue arrow up icon, and you will be taken to the deposit page

Screen Shot 2015-09-19 at 21.50.50

Step 3 – Locate the correct version of your full text in accordance with the policy advice from Sherpa romeo; and then click ‘upload’.

Screen Shot 2015-09-19 at 21.53.49

When the upload is complete, you will be notified on the screen that your full text is under review by the BURO team. Once approved by the BURO team of its legality, the link to the full text in BURO will be created and the link will also appear on your Staff Profile Page. If at any point you are unsure of this process, please send an email either to BRIAN@bournemouth.ac.uk or BURO@bournemouth.ac.uk for assistance and advice.

 

 

From research proposals to job applications: Writing tips from the European Research Council (ERC) Starting Grants workshop

Yesterday I attended an ERC Starting Grants session at the London School of Economics. Although I may never reach the heady, research heights of submitting a proposal to the prestigious, ERC Starting Grants Call (let alone progressing past Step 1, with 9% success rate!), the workshop provided a range of advice equally applicable to preparing: i) funding proposals and, ii) job applications. From the background search to the interview presentation, in many ways job applications are similar to research funding applications.

Firstly, the background search: if possible, find out who has recently received funding in your field. If applying for a position, identify previous successful candidates. What skills and experience did they have? Appreciating these will allow you write your application accounting for your own capabilities, whilst also identifying how the project or position can further your professional and personal development. Awareness of how the project/position can create opportunities to turn your weaknesses, to strengths, is an important advantage at the interview stage. Next, what are the priorities of the funder, company or institution? Does your CV fit the job roles and responsibilities? Does your project proposal satisfy the call?

Secondly, the writing: be ambitious, but avoid sounding unrealistic. Adhere to the application criteria and submission guidelines (even font-size, line-spacing, etc). Provide evidence of how your project is innovative, what makes you stand out, or what specific skills you can contribute. These should relate to the criteria of the position advert or the research call. Preparation is key; start writing as soon as possible, and expect multiple drafts. Build your proposal (or Personal Statement) logically, based on your previous research (or experiences and skills). Make the application a pleasure to read, but stick to the specific guidelines. If preparing a research proposal, use data and graphs; if preparing a Personal Statement, tell a story expanding on your CV. Ask friends and/or colleagues for comments on your application – informal peer-review in preparation for formal peer-review (the same applies when practicing your interview presentation). Importantly you want to convince those outside of your field how you (or your study) can provide a long-lasting difference.

If you are invited to interview, do your research, again. What are the values of the funder, institution or company? Who is on the panel? What is their background? Next, structure a convincing presentation aligned to your application; support each claim with an example, but be succinct and to-the-point. Maintain focus and momentum, but communicate your enthusiasm. Once finished, expect a range of technical and non-technical questions. Ultimately, interview questions will relate to the application criteria, and range from your subject-specific knowledge to transferable skills (i.e., project management skills). Finally, use questions as an excuse to show your audience what you know; view your ‘weaknesses’ as opportunities. If successful, celebrate; if unsuccessful, view as an opportunity. As the ERC Officer mentioned ‘many successful applications come from investigators who were unsuccessful with a previous application and subsequently improved their submission’.

So regardless as to whether you are an undergraduate looking to secure a placement/ postgraduate position, or a Senior Lecturer applying for research funding, translate what you have learnt from previous writing experiences to the opportunities presenting you here and now.

ERC Starting Grant Call

ERC Starting Grant – Funded Projects

EU Funded Projects – Host Countries

James Gavin, Lecturer (Exercise Physiology) – Faculty of Management

Academic and Researcher Induction to Research and Knowledge Exchange at BU

The Research and Knowledge Exchange Office (RKEO) invite all ‘new to BU’ academics and researchers to an induction. The purpose of the induction is to inform you of the following:

Signpost with the words Help, Support, Advice, Guidance and Assistance on the direction arrows, against a bright blue cloudy sky.
  • how we can support you when planning your research career;
  • how to apply for funding (the policies and processes around costs and approvals);
  • how to manage your successful research applications (including ethics, governance, risks and finance);
  • how we can support you on impact, public engagement, outputs and open access, case studies, and a whole lot more.

The third induction will be held on 28th October 2015 on the 4th floor of Melbury House. The format of the day is as follows:

9.00-9.15 – Coffee/tea and cake will be available on arrival

9.15 – RKEO academic induction (with a break at 10.45)

11.25 – Organisational Development upcoming development opportunities

11.30 – Opportunity for one to one interaction with RKEO staff

12.00 – Close

There will also be literature and information packs available.

If you would like to attend the induction then please contact Charmain Lyons, clyons@bournemouth.ac.uk for an official invitation. We will directly contact those who have started at BU in the last five months.

We hope you can make it and look forward to seeing you.

Regards,

The RKEO team