Category / Guidance

Coming soon….The BU Grants Academy

On Monday, 2nd April we will be launching a brand new training programme – the BU Grants Academy – to sustain research and invest in early career researchers to boost BU’s collective research output. 

Every day this week there will be blog posts focussing on different aspects of the Grants Academy.  Today its The Overview.  To find out more, please read on………

What is the Grants Academy?

It is a development programme for academic staff, with three distinct strands:

  • Strand One:    BU-wide development and training programme linked in 2012/13 to external grant writing support in the form of a contracted bid advisor.
  • Strand Two:    Bespoke intervention for key research groups and clusters (e.g., Research Centres, BU Research Themes, etc.) based on a bespoke version of Strand One.
  • Strand Three:  Post-Award support in the form of direct mentorship for new investigators with limited experience of research management and project delivery.

How will the scheme benefit acadmic staff?

Membership of the Grants Academy will enable academic staff to:

  1. improve their understanding of the research funding environment;
  2. increase the quality of their research funding proposals;
  3. unlock staff potential, confidence and motivation;
  4. enable staff to develop the skills required to design, write and structure a competitive, fundable research proposal; and
  5. to then manage awarded contracts, effectively leading to further funding.

Want to find out more?

If you would like to find out more please contact Caroline O’Kane

On the blog tomorrow, we’ll be telling you all about Strand One.

You reap what you sow? The importance of seed-corn funding

Obtaining ‘seed-corn’ funding to get a new research idea off the ground can be crucial in developing your work, especially for early-career researchers. Whilst the initial ‘seed’ may be a relatively small amount of money, if spent wisely then watch it grow! This is particularly relevant at the moment due to the internal funding opportunities currently open for BU academics.

To show how seed-corn money could work for you, here’s an example of where it helped me. Back in 2009, the then School ofConservation Sciences (CS) ran an internal research funding scheme where the maximum amount awarded per project was £3000 and priority was given to applications with match funding. So I firstly had to formulate my research question and obtain some match-funding. After much reading and thinking I finally settled on my question (in a relatively new area for me but related to my other research) and successfully approached the Environment Agency for a modest amount of match-funding. The subsequent application to the CS scheme was successful.

Given the limited amount of money available, it had to be spent very carefully. A part-time researcher was used to complete the data collection and as the work progressed, further seed-corn funds were secured from external sources. These enabled us to expand the work and resulted in the subsequent publication of several journal articles. These were important in underpinning further funding applications as we could now show the work was relevant and we were competent in doing it! Inevitably, a number of these funding applications failed but through perseverance and refining the ideas (reading, discussions with colleagues etc), we have recently been awarded two separate PhD studentships by external funders. This includes a NERC CASE studentship, where the industrial partner is the same Environment Agency collaborator I first approached in 2009. Looking ahead, as these PhDs deliver their research then this should enable the development of more ambitious projects ideas that enable larger grant applications to be submitted.

So – hopefully- this example of showing how seed-corn funds can quite literally grow has motivated you to take advantage of those open internal funding schemes. Remember, the process of then turning seed-corn funds into something more substantial and long-term may not be easy: I have not mentioned the long hours spent putting together the funding applications that were turned down. But as a collaborator put it when I recently asked him how he managed to increase his NERC standard grant application success rate from 0 to 40 %:

‘…….the more I practised, the luckier I got’.

‘Consensus statement’ on research integrity released

The UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) has welcomed calls for it to be placed at the centre of a toughened research integrity oversight regime in the UK.  Agreed at a high-level meeting organised by the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and the Committee on Publication Ethics and attended by a variety of senior figures from journals, funders and institutions, the Consensus Statement calls upon institutions and research funders to do more to prevent and detect misconduct.

According to a recent BMJ survey, research misconduct is “alive and well” in the UK; 13 percent of UK-based scientists and doctors claimed they had witnessed colleagues fabricating or altering research data ahead of publication in peer-reviewed journals and of the 2,700 scientists and doctors who responded, 6 percent admitted misconduct themselves when preparing or presenting research papers.  Research misconduct is important as it wastes resources, damages the credibility of science, and can cause harm (for example, to patients and the public). 

As part of my role as the Conduct Officer in the RDU, I’m currently undertaking a University-wide ethics review, which will (among other things) actively promote a high level of research integrity in all BU endeavours.  Within this review, I will ensure that the University is compliant with the guidelines agreed in the Consensus Statement and that we are doing our part to educate and inform staff and students on the importance of good research conduct.

Below is an abbreviated list of points agreed at the meeting:

  • The UK’s mechanisms for ensuring good research conduct and investigating research misconduct need to be strengthened.
  • Research misconduct is defined as behaviour by a researcher, intentional or not, that falls short of good ethical and scientific standards (Edinburgh 1999).  Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, suppression, or inappropriate manipulation of data; inappropriate image manipulation; plagiarism; misleading reporting; redundant publication; authorship malpractice such as guest or ghost authorship; failure to disclose funding sources or competing interests; misreporting of funder involvement; and unethical research (for example, failure to obtain adequate patient consent). 
  • Primary responsibility for good research conduct rests with individual researchers.  However, institutions have direct responsibility as employers to ensure good research conduct, and funders have a duty to hold institutions to account.
  • Research funders should require research institutions to appoint a senior named person as a research integrity officer and to adhere to an agreed code of conduct for research.
  • The code of conduct should mandate the setting up of effective systems to prevent and detect misconduct and proper investigation of allegations of research misconduct.

UKRIO is an independent body which provides expert advice and guidance about the conduct of research.  They cover all subject areas and help all involved in research, from research organisations, including universities and the NHS, to individual researchers and members of the public.

REF Panel Criteria summaries by UOA

The final REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods documentation was released by the REF Team (based at HEFCE) at the end of January.

As a handy guide to the information the RDU has summarised the headline information for the UOA in the documents listed below:

Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy – UOA 3 panel criteria summary

Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience – UOA 4 panel criteria summary

Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences – UOA 7 panel criteria summary

Computer Science and Informatics – UOA 11 panel criteria summary

General Engineering – UOA 15 panel criteria summary

Geography, Environmental Studies and Archaeology – UOA 17 panel criteria summary

Business and Management Studies – UOA 19 panel criteria summary

Law – UOA 20 panel criteria summary

Social Work and Social Policy – UOA 22 panel criteria summary

Sports and Exerise Sciences, Leisure and Tourism – UOA 26 panel criteria summary

Art and Design – UOA 34 panel criteria summary

Communication, Cultural and Media Studies – UOA 36 panel criteria summary

Happy reading! If you have any questions about the REF then please do let me know.

New service available to BU staff – Requesting a Virtual Server

The “Collaboration Tools for Academics” project has been looking to deliver a useful set of services to the academic community. 

The requirements gathered identified the need for a service that would provide an academic the ability to quickly try out different software.

We are pleased to inform you that we now have a service in place, that will allow academics to request a virtual platform on which to install (or have installed) any server based software they wish to evaluate.

It is intended that that Windows 7 project will deliver a solution for desktop based applications at a later date.

This new service is available to all BU academic staff as of now and will continue to run as a pilot until Feb 2013.  Please note that there is no cost to the service user during the pilot period.

You are able to make requests for this service via the SNOW request form.

Further user guidance can be found HERE; alternatively you may call the IT Service Help Desk for further information on ext 65515 and ask for assistance on “virtual server requests”

Want to find out how to turn a proposal into a winning proposal?

Then attend the Missenden Centre’s excellent ‘Winning Research Funding’ workshop on Friday 16 March in London.

Attendees are invited to take a draft or previously unsuccessful application to the workshop for advice on how to turn it into an award-winning proposal!

Further details are available from: www.missendencentre.co.uk/s1

If you are interested in attending then we have funds in the RDU budget to cover your course fees and travel. Let me know if you are interested! 🙂

Twitter has a lot to offer academics!

We’ve previously added posts about the benefits of using Twitter in academia (you can read theme here: Twitter posts). A recent post by Mark Carrigan on the LSE’s Impact of Social Sciences Blog outlines what academics can get out of using Twitter and why the academic twittersphere is no different from presenting to an audience.

Mark asked his Twitter followers “why do you find Twitter useful as an academic?”, and responses included:

  • Quick answers to questions on things like … where do I find this tool or that tool ..  (@rjhogue)
  • We discuss concepts (@Annlytical)
  • There are people who are practicing what I’m researching academically and give me a reality check (@Annlytical)
  • Twitter is brilliant for keeping up with things, networking, finding new ideas, people’s blogs and publications (@BenGuilbaud)
  • meeting new people (in all disciplines), academic support, public engagement, increased visibility, filtered news (@Martin_Eve)
  • What Martin said. I think you already saw this but it’s the Prezi I made for grad students http://bit.ly/uK05VM (@qui_oui)
  • Also, I’ve found Twitter useful for augmenting F2F academic conferences, extending the conversations (@JessieNYC)
  • Twitter is incredibly useful 2 me as an academic 4 many reasons, perhaps chiefly curating the ideal academic dept  (@JessieNYC)
  • Twitter’s unique advantage is that very quickly allows me to spread word of my work to non-academic audiences (@elebelfiore)
  • Keeps me up-to-the-minute with news in my field ie; policy issues, and connects me to conferences/other academics (@DonnaBramwell)
  • connects me to other delegates at conferences, allows me to interact with students in lectures, keeps me uptodate (@timpaa)
  • We trade references for research (@annlytical)
  • great source of information & resources wouldn’t have found otherwise (@nicklebygirl)
  • Twitter makes it possible for me to engage with global community even though I now live in Australia & am #altac (@katrinafee)
  • a PhD can be very isolated so I think twitter is a great way to meet people who can help and give advice (@CET47)

Academics all over the world are turning to Twitter to support their research and are finding the service extremely useful. Read Mark’s full story and our previous Twitter posts to find out how to start using Twitter, meeting new people, estblishing / joining networks, promoting your research and increasing its visibility, and keeping ahead of the game.

You can read Mark’s full story here – Support, engagement, visibility and personalised news: Twitter has a lot to offer academics if we look past its image problem

If any of you are already using Twitter to enhance your research and knowledge exchange activities, we’d love you to share your experiences with your colleagues via the Blog!

Towards ‘Impact’ – promoting research online

As the spectre of “Impact” looms before us in REF 2014, I’d like to share a case study on developing interest in research in academic and practitioner communities. I don’t claim that it’s best practice but there may be some ideas for others to consider.

Two of my related areas of research in the public relations field are measurement and evaluation of campaign effectiveness and the history of public relations. Over the past two years I have brought them together in historical research into the evolution of public relations measurement and evaluation. This has already resulted in conference papers and a publication in the leading impact factored journal, Public Relations Review.

 My most recent research has been into a controversial measure called Advertising Value Equivalence (AVE). It is widely used but has been effectively banned by leading public relations professional bodies. Next month, I will be presenting a paper on the history of AVE at the International Public Relations Research Conference in theUS. That paper will later be revised and submitted for a leading journal.

 Knowing there is a world-wide interest the debate over AVE, I prepared a short “popular” version of the paper and targeted it at the Research Conversations blog of the US-based Institute for Public Relations, which is well-regarded and widely read.

It appeared on February 15 as ‘So, Where Did AVEs Come From, Anyway?‘ and immediately started an online discussion.

Taking the article’s URL, I then placed it with introductory text on three relevant LinkedIn groups for PR history, media measurement and theUK’s lead professional body. Online discussions have taken place on two of these groups. The URL was also sent out via my two Twitter accounts (@historyofpr and twatson1709). Each has resulted in retweets of the URL, including some by leading social media commentators. There have also been positive comments.

Within just two days, the use of social media has enabled the summarised research to reach potentially interested, relevant audiences around the world. And I have still to present the paper next month. Only time will tell whether “Impact” has been created but social media has help pave the way for knowledge transfer and industry engagement.

 Any feedback on how I could have organised the social media dissemination more efficiently would be welcomed.

Prof Tom Watson, The Media School

Weetabix & the Art of the Studentship Proposal

It is a while since I last posted anything on the blog having been busy working on our new strategic plan currently out to consultation. With this in mind and the imminent deadline for the PhD Studentships competition I thought I might share some ideas about writing the perfect proposal. There is nothing very special about this insight, just a few reflections which might help or at the least may amuse.

In my experience research grants tend to fall into two broad categories, namely: (1) concise bids often consisting of just one or more pages like the BU Studentship competition; and (2) complex bids, with longer cases of support. The art of writing each type of proposal is different and we will concern ourselves here with the former rather than the latter. The aim is answer a series of specific questions with a few carefully selected words making a cogent case.

You may remember if you are of a certain age the cereal box competition “paint a picture or design a box lid and then in just eight words explain why you love Weetabix!” These types of competitions always used to frustrate me because irrespective of how good your artwork was, and your mum would always tell you that it was super, you still had to write something snappy! And as a kid I didn’t like writing much and snappy has always alluded me. I view short, one page bids in the same way and with distaste. You get just 300, or at most 500, words to make your case. Slightly more than eight but I am sure we will all agree not enough! Writing such proposals is a skill and like all skills needs practice, but in the hands of a master becomes an art. Now I don’t claim to be a master but the process starts like most things with a great idea, and complete clarity as to how it should unfold and be delivered. It is the clarity of thought that is the key to being concise and I suppose is the real test of art.

The current competition for BU Studentships is a case in point and with the deadline imminent I thought I would share a few personal reflections on the art of the concise bid. You have a generous 500 words with which to make the case for a studentship plus various supplementary opportunities to clarify specific points. The starting point for me in writing such a bid is clarity around what the aims and objectives of a project are, and ultimately its tractability. Having a clear understanding is critical and I personally start by writing it all down in note form, or talking it through with a colleague in order to have a good grasp of the arguments one could deploy. Test it, view it from all angles and select your pose and line of attack with care. When I start to write I try to stick with the: wow, what, why, now, how and impact scheme of things. Now if I had a way with words I would be able to turn this into some form mnemonic but I haven’t so we will have to stick with ‘WWNHI’. The wow matters and starts with the title because you want to entice your reader to read on. Most assessment panels of this sort consist of learned academics or lay readers without necessarily having your subject specialism. If you turn them off in the first line, they won’t read on. It is like the headline and lead sentence of a newspaper article; its got to grab the reader and compel them to read on, so they do in fact read. So should your title and opening few lines, so with this in mind the wow factor matters! The what then follows in order of priority. What is that you propose to do and how can you say this in a few concise words or a sentence or two at most? You might propose a major problem in the ‘wow’ and the ‘what’ is your solution for example. Some academic like to state this as an aim others as the answer to a question, but however you do it you need to be clear about what it is that you will deliver. Avoid lengthy lists of objectives and goals and remain focused on the primary goal.

The why and the now tend to collide thereafter. Why is it important and why must it be studied now rather than at some point in the future? Why is timely, topical or urgent? Again a few concise lines should be sufficient to serve, cross referenced to a few key references. Now there is no need to show off your erudition by citing the whole of your library, but a few choice references help assure the reader that you are a master of the relevant literature and that it has not all been done before! You want to always avoid the idea that it has all been done before at all costs, but also you need to be authentic to the reality of research in your chosen area. We are on a roll now and have probably used up may be 150 to 200 of our words at most and we are ready for the how. The key issue here is to demonstrate that a problem is tractable and in the case of a studentship, that you have access to the resources or data required. That above all else it is deliverable by your chosen student and in three years not a life time of servitude! This is not another place, however, to show off your erudition and understanding of research philosophy or approach; save it for that great methods paper you wish to write sitting in the garden this summer. The key here is to demonstrate that your approach is well tried or novel/original and will address the questions posed in a timely manner.

We probably have used up another 100 or 150 of our precious words and are ready to deliver the final punch – fund this and you will deliver the earth! What will the return on the investment be? What is the impact of the proposed research? How will it change the world for the better? Now your research may only have academic impact, but if you can demonstrate societal impact so much the better. The key is to be specific, concise and not to promise the impossible but be authoritative about the return on investment you will and can provide. In the case of the BU Studentship form there are specific sections later in the form for you to document this in more detail, so confine yourself to a few well-chosen sentences that complete your case and compel the reader to give the funding you seek.

All of the above can be done in as little as 300 words, you have 500 on the studentship form so use them wisely and whatever you do don’t use them for the sake of it. This is definitely one of those case where less can be more. One final piece of advice ‘you should not be able to see the brush strokes in the final piece’. What I am saying is that if you use WWNHI well, no one should be aware that you have followed the magic formula at all. My final parting shot is to say that unless you have clarity of thinking you won’t have clarity in your prose so don’t start to write until you have it all worked out and have viewed it from every angle and worked out the best way to sell your idea. And yes it is about selling your idea to the assessment panel. They won’t just recognise your genius. Like any art its needs practice and careful work and I for one don’t profess to be an expect. Whatever your colleagues may say in bravado a proposal is not something that can be dashed off the night before the deadline whatever you may think and assessment panels are never understanding or willing to cut you slack. Write it, hone it, re-write it, seek comments on it, re-write it some more and perfect it and then send it in with a wink and a prayer. Good luck!

Matthew

Ethics and Conduct and Governance….OH MY!!

Similar to Lions and Tigers and Bears, these nasty words often send a chill down the spine of researchers across the globe!

“More roadblocks to delay my research?!” 

“Hinder-full, not helpful!” 

“Once you think you’ve ticked all the boxes, read all the policy/procedure and signed your life away, SMACK – the conduct officer hits you with a new hurdle!”

Sound familiar?  These are just a few examples of the misconception towards my full-time job.  Hello, my name is Julia Hastings Taylor and I am the University’s Research Development Officer responsible for ethics and conduct.  Prior to joining BU I received my Masters in International Political Economy from LSE and before moving across the pond, I worked for the US Intelligence Community tracking down drug lords in SW Asia, Europe, and Africa.  Drug traffickers—as opposed to university researchers—tend to not concern themselves with ethics or conduct, so I’m pleased to be part of an organization that takes compliance seriously!

My first mission—as impossible as it may seem—is to change the way researchers view ethics and conduct (and me, for that matter).  I’m not the Big Bad Wolf and I don’t plan to ‘blow your research down’; on the contrary, I am here to support you, and strengthen the University’s research governance structure.  Leave the scary ethics maze to me – I know the way and I will point you in the right direction.  Struggling to understand and/or comply with funder regulations – don’t fret, it’s my job to ensure all regulations are clear and we have an easy-to-follow framework for compliance!  I plan to streamline processes and procedures, outline ‘best practices’ in both ethics and conduct and ensure that the University’s policies are not only robust but also flexible

While we’re on the topic, here are a few of my thoughts: while I wouldn’t consider myself to be a ‘tree hugger,’ I am sensible…so come on folks…this is 2012…let’s move away from printing off reams and reams of forms to fill in and sign when we can simply create online forms with digital signatures.  I like processes to be efficient, straightforward and simple and that’s what I hope to bring to the University’s ethics and conduct role.  As the next handful of months will bring change—and we all know how much everyone loves change—please give me your feedback and suggestions for improvements, and be honest about your views on research ethics and conduct; I’d like for this process to be as inclusive as possible, but I can only knock on so many doors, invite you to so many meetings/forums and ask so many questions.

So, if you happen to see me lurking around your School in the coming months, please don’t assume I’m the secret police looking for my next victim….I’m probably lost and simply trying to find the loo!

Bid-writing clinic in London – an RDU-funded place available

The Missenden Centre is holding a bid-writing clinic on the 16th March, in London.

The RDU will fund a place (fees and travel costs) for an academic to attend.   This is on a first come/first served basis – so please contact Caroline O’Kane  if you would like to attend.

If you are currently working on a funding proposal then this session will be extremely useful.  Bring a draft or previously unsuccessful application to the session and receive advice on how to turn it into an award-winning bid.

  • Date: 16th March
  • Location: Woburn House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9HQ

 

To book your place contact Caroline O’Kane 

The Blog is 10 months old! Celebrate by finding out how you can get involved!

To celebrate the Blog’s birthday we’re inviting all staff at BU who have an interest in Research to get more involved with the Blog to make it more exciting, interactive, collaborative and beneficial to academic staff. There are a number of ways you can get involved:

  • To subscribe to the Blog to receive the daily digest emails; this is the best way to keep up to date with research and knowledge exchange information at BU. Find out more here: Subscribe to the Blog!
  • To comment on Blog posts to share further information, resources, and perspectives, and to make connections with your colleagues. Find out more here: Interact with the Blog!
  • To add posts to the Blog to share information, experiences, successes, advice, news, etc with colleagues, and to promote your research both internally and externally. We’re strongly encouraging all staff involved in research at BU to sign up for access to add posts to the Blog and to start blogging! Using the Blog is really easy – you need no prior knowledge of blogs or websites, just an interest in research. Contact Susan Dowdle if you’d like to be set up with access to add posts.
  • To share Blog posts, either via Facebook, Twitter or email. Find out more here: Share posts from the Blog!

The Research Blog is unique in the sector and in its first ten months of existence it has been a huge success in improving research communications at BU. Be part of something cool and get more involved in the Blog! 🙂

Happy 10 month birthday, Research Blog!

Reflections on a conference – challenging your own assumptions

In January I presented at the Eighth International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability which took place in Vancouver. The conference focuses on the idea that sustainability is best understood in a holistic way. 

When you go to a conference it is too easy to get caught up in anxiety about delivering your own paper, at this conference I was determined to maximise my learning opportunities (and be relaxed about my paper) so crammed in as many sessions as I could.  I made a lot of contacts; I also learned so much which challenged my own thinking, even more so because the conference is multi –disciplinary and very inclusive. I attended sessions ranging from economic models for sustainability, campus initiatives, social and cultural implications, and perspectives from art, sociology, engineering and literature. 

It was great to have my assumptions challenged about US perspectives in relation to carbon and the environment (it is too easy to see the USA as a carbon guzzler). It was also interesting to see the ‘political’ arise in academic debate (Republican views v Democratic) with subsequent falling out!

Many USA and Canadian universities are aiming for zero carbon by 2050. Some are aiming for zero waste by 2020. They all want to grow by up to 30% so new buildings are being conceptualised which are carbon neutral from the outset. Canada may have pulled back from Kyoto but their universities are forging ahead with SD. There were some exciting presentations and lots of new things to think about. 

What struck me particularly, apart from ‘we need to up our game here’  was learning what sustainable development means from a Southern perspective and the impossible task confronted by developing countries who are trying to secure economic sustainability but struggling with climate change, and struggling with the pollution  left as a result of western activities and needs. In the Niger Delta it will take 25-30 years to clean up the pollution left by oil companies and cost 1bn (UNEP, 2011). Oil accounts for 80% of Nigeria’s revenue but the benefits are not being felt – the region is characterised by conflict. I did not know that they flare off their gas for starters. I had not realised the extent to which the wetland and coastal marine eco-system was being contaminated. I also had not realised that so many water projects have been abandoned in Nigeria, that individuals are often forced to drill their own bore holes (and fight for water). In Sub Saharan Africa 4000-6000 children die each day as a result of water born diseases. 

I came away from the conference fired up to take action but wanting to share a couple of points:

  • Don’t be so focused on your own perspective that you forget to really listen to others.
  • Don’t be so focused on getting your own paper over, to the extent that you reduce the opportunity to learn and develop networks
  • A multi-disciplinary focus really stimulates new thinking – while we are each working in our respective disciplines and research themes, it is important to seek opportunities to share with those who may seem different/more difficult to work with than those who have a similar world view- you might learn more from the challenge and develop new ideas.

Please contact me if you would like to hear more about the conference.

Chris Shiel, Associate Professor, Centre for Global Perspectives

Share posts from the Blog!

If you’d like to share any of the posts on the Blog with colleagues, friends, the public, you can do this quickly and easily via Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, email (plus many more!) using the Share This function at the end of each Blog post.

Simply:

  1. Click on ‘Click here to share this blog post’ at the end of the post you wish to share
  2. This will open the post in your browser, giving you the option to share the post via Twitter, Email or Facebook (as per the picture below)
  3. To share via Twitter or Facebook simply click on the icon and the post will be added to your Twitter feed / Facebook profile
  4. To share via any other media (such as email, LinkedIn, Yahoo, Delicious, etc) simply hover the cursor over the Email icon and a new window will open displaying all of the ways you can share the post. Clicking on LinkedIn, for example, will share it via LinkedIn! Easy 🙂

Sharing posts this way helps to promote the excellent work going on at BU and can also help you to establish networks with likeminded people.

                                  

Make your research freely available to a global audience via open access!

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceThe BU Open Access Publication Fund was launched in August 2011 with the aim of making BU research freely accessible to a global audience.

Since then the open access publication costs for eight papers have been met by the Fund, including papers authored by Professor Mark Hadfield, Professor Adrian Newton, Dr Julie Kirkby, and Professor Jonathan Parker.

The fund is available for use by any BU author ready to submit a completed article for publication who wishes to make their output freely and openly accessible.

For further information about the Open Access Publication Fund and how to get involved, see our previous Blog post – Launch of the BU Open Access Publication Fund.

Grant Writing Workshop 26th January – Early Career Researchers

Are you at an early stage in your academic career and need some help in perfecting your grant writing skills?  Dr Martin Pickard is coming back to BU on 26th January to run a full day workshop. 

The day is designed for early career researchers with no, or very little, experience in preparing research applications. It  covers the fundamental structure and arguments inherent within any research proposal and initially develops the principle ways to achieve this – whilst at the same time encouraging the necessary overarching approach.

The workshop will take place on Talbot Campus and run from around 9.30am until 4-5pm.  Lunch and refreshments will be provided.  There are a limited number of spaces on the workshop so if you would like to come to the event please email Susan Dowdle to book a space as soon as possible.

 

Structure of the Day

 

Session 1: Introduction and general approach to the funding mechanisms

These sessions are individually tailored to the session theme. They evaluate and present key insights into the fundamental approach principles behind a successful grant application in the respective research area and develop the essential common elements of a successful bid.

Break – Coffee – Includes 10 minute assignment exercise

Session 2  – Theory and practice – optimising the approach

This builds from session 1 detailing the “in depth” structure of a successful bid, the need to present and optimise the supporting arguments and justifications required and how to achieve this.

Break  – Lunch – including further assignment exercise

Session  3 – Building the case for funding – case studies and examples

Using the assignment exercises, and worked illustrations, this puts theory into practice covering most of the common pitfalls and provides the tips, tricks and techniques for optimising your proposal within minimum space.

Break – Coffee – including 10 minute assignment exercise

Session 4 – Theory into practice – interactive assignment analysis and workshop discussion

With analysis and reworking of both previous cases and current applications this primarily “Q & A” workshop session provides an important consolidation taking live examples through the optimisation process using the skills and techniques acquired throughout the day.