Category / Impact

Reminder: Opportunity to get more involved in preparing Social Work and Social Policy REF 2029 submission – impact and engagement

We are looking to recruit an impact champion in UOA 20 (the Unit of Assessment for Social Work and Social Policy) to help support preparations for our submission to REF2029. The deadline for expressions of interest is the Tuesday 30th April 2024.

This role is recruited through an open and transparent process, which gives all academic staff the opportunity to put themselves forward. Applications from underrepresented groups (e.g. minority ethnic, declared disability) are particularly welcome.

We are currently preparing submissions to thirteen units (otherwise known as UOAs). Each unit has a leadership team with at least one leader, an output and impact champion. The leadership team is supported by a panel of reviewers who assess the research from the unit. This includes research outputs (journal articles, book chapters, digital artefacts and conference proceedings) and impact case studies.

All roles require a level of commitment which is recognised accordingly, with time to review, attend meetings, and take responsibility for tasks.

This vacancy is for a joint impact champion for UOA 20 Social Work and Social Policy. This role exists as a job share with an existing impact champion, on the basis of a combined total of 0.2 FTE (split to be decided in discussion with the successful applicant).

Undertaking a UOA role can be enjoyable and rewarding, as one of our current impact champions can testify:

“As a UoA 17 impact champion, I work closely with the UoA 17 impact team to encourage the development of a culture of impact across BUBS. I try to pop into Department / research group meetings when I can to discuss impact, and I’ve enjoyed meeting people with a whole range of research interests. Sometimes it can be tough to engage people with impact – understandably; everyone is busy – so it’s important to be enthusiastic about the need for our BU research to reach the public. Overall, the role is about planting the seeds to get researchers thinking about the impact their work might have in the future (as well as the impact they have already had, sometimes without realising!)”

Dr Rafaelle Nicholson – UOA 17 Impact Champion

How to apply

All those interested should put forward a short case (suggested length of one paragraph), explaining why they are interested in the role and what they believe they could bring to it. These should be clearly marked with the relevant role and unit and emailed to ref@bournemouth.ac.uk by Tuesday 30th April 2024.

Further details on the impact champion role, the process of recruitment and selection criteria can be found here:

Role Descriptor

Process and criteria for selection

For more information, please contact ref@bournemouth.ac.uk, or the UoA Leaders Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Mel Hughes with queries.

Article Processing Charges

Keywords: APC, Open access, REF, Repositories, Journals, Outputs.

APC and subscription-based models have their specific yet intersecting merits. Here in the UK, several aspects of publications have been repositioned during the last REF2021 census period. Lord Stern review led to several key changes, especially in terms of reporting research. Although the costs of APCs are high, HEIs have ringfenced QR funding to support outputs in quartile two and above through an internal review process. Similarly, publishers have institutional partnerships where partial or full waivers are offered. Several reputable publishers have introduced incentives to waive or partially waive APCs, for example, by contributing to the review process, participating as editors, and recommending high-quality manuscripts in terms of originality, significance, and academic depth.

APC route, for example, Creative Commons CC BY, offers many benefits to researchers, academics, and especially early career researchers in terms of flexibility of literature use as compared to traditional publication processes, such as the complexity and costs associated with permission to use or reuse infographics, including authors’ own results and images where copyright transfer has occurred. On the other hand, APCs provide an opportunity for wider availability of research to be read, used, and applied within research contexts where funding for subscription-based models is not generous or sometimes limited. Making preprint peer-reviewed and accepted author version manuscripts available on institutional repositories is a better alternative to APCs.

Traditional and legacy practices could benefit from dialogue and consideration; publishers’ subscription models could be diversified for greater inclusivity by offering variations in subscription fees based on certain metrics such as a country’s GDP or RPI. Revenues generated from both subscription and APCs should be more transparent, with figures available to public and open to stakeholders feedback. Profits should be reinvested in discounted subscription fees for HEIs, funding research through RC UK initiatives and similar programmes, and supporting early and mid-career researchers.

Another aspect which is not usually discussed is that traditionally, journals editorial teams, especially editors and chief editors, serve in their roles for prolonged periods. Although unintended, this inadvertently limits opportunities for diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunities for a diverse community of researchers worldwide. New thinking is needed to change the structure of publishers’ journal editorial teams to meet twenty-first-century needs. Some initial measures could include: (i) open calls for expressions of interest in editorial team roles, including editors and chief editors, (ii) transparent recruitment based on person specifications, and (iii) a maximum two-year tenure in the role. Subscription fees and APC revenue, combined with alternative grants from research councils and charities, could be used to incentivise engagement with the publishing process, from editorial board participation to contributing to the review process.

Zulfiqar A Khan
Professor of Design, Engineering & Computing
NanoCorr, Energy & Modelling (NCEM) Research Group Lead
Email: zkhan@bournemouth.ac.uk

RKEDF Workshop: Impress the Press: How to talk to Journalists – Wednesday 24 April 2-4pm

A practical session covering tips and techniques for speaking with broadcast media (TV and radio) followed by the chance to put it into practice through mock interviews.

This session is open to all academic staff with an interest in engaging with the media. No previous experience is necessary.

By the end of the session, attendees will:

  • Have a better understanding of communicating their work with the media
  • Understand the difference between TV and radio interviews and what is required
  • Feel confident in undertaking media interviews and dealing with difficult questions

Facilitated by: Emma Matthews – Research Communications Adviser & Stephen Bates – Senior Press Officer

Wednesday 24 April, 2-4pm

Talbot Campus

Book your place here under ‘Impress the Press: How to talk to Journalists – 16/04/2024’ in the drop-down menu

New research paper published by PhD student Hina Tariq

PhD student Hina Tariq, currently undertaking the Clinical Academic Doctorate program at the Department of Social Sciences and Social Work (SSSW), published a new paper titled, “The Delphi of ORACLE: An Expert Consensus Survey for the Development of the Observational Risk Assessment of Contractures (Longitudinal Evaluation)” Open Access in the journal of Clinical Rehabilitation.
This paper is co-authored by her academic supervisors, Professor Sam Porter and Dr Kathryn Collins, her former academic supervisor, Dr Desiree Tait and her clinical supervisor, Joel Dunn (Dorset Healthcare University Foundation NHS Trust).

Summary: This paper used the Delphi method to provide expert consensus on items to be included in a contracture risk assessment tool (ORACLE). The items were related to factors associated with joint contractures, appropriate preventive care interventions, and potentially relevant contextual factors associated with care home settings. The promise of a risk assessment tool that includes these items has the capacity to reduce the risk of contracture development or progression and to trigger timely and appropriate referrals to help prevent further loss of function and independence.

The paper has already crossed over 250 reads. The full text can be accessed by following this link: The Delphi of ORACLE: An Expert Consensus Survey for the Development of the Observational Risk Assessment of Contractures (Longitudinal Evaluation)

 

Leveraging the value of ‘capacity-building’ research impact!

The narrative around research impact has quite rightly come to the fore in recent years. With funding organisations looking for a ‘bigger bang for their buck’ and universities emphasising their contribution to societal and economic value, it is no surprise that the words ‘research impact’ are central to researchers activities.

Whilst many researchers develop plans that emphasise ‘conceptual’ and ‘instrumental’ impacts, the long-term effect of their research is more difficult to consider. This is where ‘capacity-building’ impact comes into play. It refers to the positive effects of your research on the ability of individuals and organisations to utilise your research to strengthen their skills and invest resources in new and improved policy, processes and structures.

My work as an advisor to the Horizon Scanning & Foresight Committee in UK Parliament provides a useful example of how to develop this type of impact. My research and expert knowledge on managing uncertainty through horizon scanning and scenario planning is now informing parliaments new horizon scanning and foresight policy which will be used to identify ‘Areas of Research Interest’ (ARIs). ARIs are lists of policy issues or questions that select committees use to inform their work. Importantly, they help UK Parliament prepare for the future by identifying emerging trends and developments that might potentially affect UK Government policy.

A key feature of ‘capacity-building’ impact is that it takes time, resources and commitment to achieve a practical application. It’s not a one-off activity, but it can provide researchers with a powerful argument to leverage the impact of their work.