Next Wednesday 17th June 1-1.50pm in R301 will see Dr Carol Clark and Dr Jon Williams presenting the journey the physiotherapy team have taken over the last ten years in terms of research, education, and professional practice and will challenge colleagues to explore how the impact might be measured (abstract below). Please join us!
Category / Research assessment
The social sciences at BU
In response to an open email invitation, a group of social scientists from across BU met on Tuesday 17 March to discuss prospects for inter-Faculty collaboration. As in previous meetings between FMC and HSS colleagues, it was apparent that there were opportunities for more collaborative work than currently exists, and that there is considerable enthusiasm for developing links. A growing presence of the social sciences in BU, and of BU in the social sciences, was felt to be essential to BU’s development as a university with a rich intellectual community. If you haven’t received the report from this meeting by email, and would like to do so, please email Prof. Barry Richards (brichards@bmth.ac.uk)
Open Access and the research lifecycle: a guide for researchers


With recent requirements imposed by major research funders, researchers are presented with both opportunities and challenges – opportunities to re-use and re-purpose published outputs and datasets, and challenges in making one’s own work legally and ethically available to others.
Last year, thirty Northampton researchers contributed to focus groups looking at open access publications and data, with a particular focus on compliance with funder requirements. From the outcome of the focus groups, University of Northampton developed an Open Access and the research lifecyle guidance, which has been adapted to fit in with BU’s institutional policies.
This guide, which is part of a JISC-funded Open to Open Access project, is intended for researchers who wish to engage with the open access agenda, but aren’t entirely sure how best to achieve this. This short guide highlights some of the issues to consider at each stage of the research lifecycle and the tools that are available to support you.
Please click here – Open Access and the research lifecyle guidance to access a printable version of the guidance. For further queries, please get in touch with Pengpeng Hatch (pphatch@bournemouth.ac.uk) at RKEO.
CEMP / CEL Research Bulletin April 2015


The latest CEMP bulletin, now combined with the Centre for Excellence in Learning, is now available as a PDF CEMP CEL bulletin April 15 or word doc CEMP CEL bulletin April 15
The bulletin provides a ‘top 20’ of research funding opportunities related to education, learning and pedagogy research and grouped into the the three BU learning research sub-themes: Media and Digital Literacies, Practitioner Enquiry and (Higher) Education Dynamics.
To follow up any of these opportunities, please contact Julian or Richard in CEMP or Marcellus Mbah in CEL.
Impact of fatigue management research in Multiple Sclerosis – FACETS, IMSPIRE and beyond
Lunchtime Seminar with Peter Thomas, Wednesday 15th April 1-1.50pm, R303
Please come to listen to Professor Peter Thomas present on the impact that his research into fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis is having, noting the importance of research with strong potential for patient benefit, and the importance of the research funder.
Further information on this Seminar series can be found by clicking on the link below.
There is no need to book – just turn up. Contact Zoe on zsheppard@bournemouth.ac.uk for more information.
We look forward to seeing you there.
Presentation on Achieving and Demonstrating Research Impact from Leading Sociologist!
Organised by Professor Ann Brooks, Bournemouth University hosted a workshop on Thursday 26th March 2015 around ‘Achieving and Demonstrating Research Impact’ from Professor John Scott, a leading figure in British Sociology. The PowerPoint presentation is available here as well as the Flyer for the day here.
REF update: HEFCE’s REFlections event, 25 March 2015
I went to HEFCE’s (rather cleverly named) REFlections event on Wednesday to hear about the review of REF 2014 and plans for the future of research assessment.
The key points were:
- Collaboration and multi-/interdisciplinary research are likely to be important for the next REF
- HEFCE have commissioned Elsevier to undertake a project on measuring multidisciplinary research to inform the next REF
- The REF impact case studies database went live yesterday and is an excellent resource
- Dual support system is likely to stay
- Impact case studies are likely to stay, however, the impact template may change/become obsolete
- Peer review will stay, informed by metrics in some disciplines (akin to REF 2014)
- Metrics are not yet robust enough to have a metrics-driven REF. In particular, this is not yet possible for the assessment of outputs or impact. It is possible, however, to rely more heavily on metrics for the environment assessment and there could be changes to this part for the next REF.
HEFCE plan to consult with the sector on future plans for the REF this coming autumn.
Further information:
- REF Manager’s Report was published this month, available here: http://www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/REF%20managers%20report%20-%20final.pdf.
- Report of the nature, scale and beneficiaries of research impact in REF 2014, available here: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/HEFCE,2014/Content/Pubs/Independentresearch/2015/Analysis,of,REF,impact/Analysis_of_REF_impact.pdf
- Report on the REF 2014 impact preparation and assessment, available from: http://www.rand.org/randeurope/research/projects/evaluating-impact-component-ref2014.html
- Information on HEFCE’s independent review on the role of metrics in research assessment, available from: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/rsrch/metrics/
UNCLASSIFIED
Picture the scene… it’s 2016 the 1st April 2016 to be precise and you’ve had an article you have been working on for the past 6 months accepted by your first choice journal – well done you – you spend the next 3 months eagerly waiting to read your hard work in print. When it finally it is published you are ecstatic, it is well received by your colleagues, peers, journalists and the public – your research is out there and making a real impact to society, you couldn’t have imagined a better reception. Well done you again!
Now fast-forward to submission of the next REF where you enthusiastically submit your lovingly crafted, well received, well cited article for submission with the full expectation that it will certainly be assessed as a 4* publication but then the bomb drops… the article is “UNCLASSIFIED”. Why I hear you cry?! Well back in 2016 when your article was accepted you did not make it open access – simple.

HEFCEs decision on non-compliance of their Open Access Policy really couldn’t be clearer in this aspect:
“Any output submitted to the post-2014 REF that falls within the scope of this policy but does not meet its requirements or exceptions will be treated as non-compliant. Non-compliant outputs will be given an unclassified score and will not be assessed in the REF.”
We have 12 months to get ready for to comply with HEFCEs Open Access policy and we have to start now. Only the author and the publisher know when an article is accepted and this is the key point for the policy. So, if you want to have the full benefit of all your hard work, then make sure that when an article is accepted by a publisher you upload it to BRIAN – simple.
For further information on how to you go about making your outputs open access, please see the guidance here. Email openaccess@bournemouth.ac.uk with queries or attend one of our Open Access Workshops over the next few months.
Further information on HEFCEs policy can be found here
Learning Research Group / UoA25 workshop this week

Reminder – the next Learning Research Group / UoA 25 workshop is this Thursday (5th March), 1-3pm in PG30a (the CEL space).
All are welcome, but to receive the documents for the workshop in advance, please email Julian McDougall (julian@cemp.ac.uk).
Working towards research impact in Nepal
BU’s Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health has a long history of working Nepal. Last month (January 7th) BU’s partner Green Tara Nepal led the dissemination of the findings of our evaluation of key health promotion initiatives in Nepal. The evaluation was conducted in collaboration with the Government of Nepal, Green Tara Trust, a UK-based charity, several national and international non-governmental organisations and three UK universities, namely Liverpool John Moores University, Bournemouth University and the University of Sheffield. The evaluation identified key government, bilateral, UN agencies national and international non-governmental organisations working in health promotion in Nepal. Their health promotion activities and approaches were documented and gaps were identified.
As a follow up to both the evaluation and dissemination event we were asked by the journal Public Health Perspectives to write an editorial on our work.1 Our editorial ‘Health Promotion: A review of policies and practices in Nepal’ highlights the research we conducted and the state of health promotion we uncovered. We also used our editorial to explain the UK notion of impact as formalised in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF). To explain to our non-academic readers the REF is a nation-wide system to assess the quality academic research in all academic disciplines. 2-4 One key part of the REF is measuring the ‘impact’ that a UK university has on society and/or the economy. This REF requires UK universities to write and submit a number of case studies that show societal impact.5 The dissemination of the health promotion research in Nepal is the beginning of a REF impact case study for Bournemouth University and our UK partner Liverpool John Moores University. The editorial is a further stepping stone in the dissemination especially since it was co-authored between UK academics, health promotion practitioners as well as a member of the Constitutional Assembly (the Nepali equivalent of Parliament). Working with policy-makers at an early stage increases the chances of our research being incorporated in national policy-making in Nepal.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH
References:
- Sharma, A, Tuladhar, G., Dhungel, A., Padmadharini, van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P. (2015) Health Promotion: A review of policies and practices in Nepal, Public Health Perpective 5(2): http://phpnepal.org/index.php?listId=941#.VO4Qvn9tXkd
- Parker, J., van Teijlingen, E. (2012) The Research Excellence Framework (REF): Assessing the impact of Social Work research on society, Practice: Social Work in Action 24(1): 41-52. http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/20511/2/REF%20paper%20JPEvT.pdf
- van Teijlingen, E., Ryan, K., Alexander, J., Marchant, S. (2011) The Research Excellence Framework (REF): new developments to assess research in higher education institutions and its impact on society. MIDIRS 21 (3): 298-301.
- Hartwell, H., van Teijlingen, E., Parker, J. (2013) Nutrition; Effects of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) Nutrition & Food Science 43 (1): 74-77.
- Research Councils UK (2015) RCUK Review of Pathways to Impact: Summary http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/RCUK-prod/assets/documents/documents/PtoIExecSummary.pdf
US Funding Opportunities – videos
For one month only (expiry: 6th March 2015), we have access to the following ARMA* videos:
ARMA Introduction to US Funding
In this video, Dr Stephen Conway, Senior Assistant Registrar at the University of Oxford, delivers an essential introduction to US funding. Dr Conway covers strategic priorities and the current drivers. He goes on to exemplify a case study from the University of Oxford. Outputs of the project are examined and conclusions are drawn.
ARMA – Applying for US Funding
Speakers: Patricia Hawk – Director of Sponsored Programs, Oregon State University and Vivian Holmes, Director of Sponsored Research Operations, The Broad institute of MIT and Harvard.
Patricia Hawk and Vivian Holmes deliver essential information to support US applications for funding. The process from the initial search, to proposal preparation and specifics such as allowances for salaries, equipment and travel are examined.
ARMA – Managing US Awards
Speakers: Patricia Hawk – Director of Sponsored Programs, Oregon State University and Vivian Holmes, Director of Sponsored Research Operations, The Broad institute of MIT and Harvard.
Patricia and Vivian deliver this essential guide to managing US awards which includes the types of grant, shared responsibilities, management of project costs, performance issues, project reporting, federal payment methods, close-out responsibilities, audit and VAT.
* Associate of Research Managers and Administrators
You can access a short trailer on the ARMA website and an excerpt, giving the top ten tips for US funding opportunities. The latter also discusses why a service such as RKEO is the essential partner in developing and managing your bid, regardless of the funder’s location.
To access these resources, please contact Charmain Lyons (mailto:clyons@bournemouth.ac.uk) and she will send you the code and joining instructions.
Leading Sociologist to Present Workshop on Achieving and Demonstrating Research Impact!
Professor John Scott, a leading figure in British Sociology, is visiting the University to present a workshop on ‘Achieving and Demonstrating Research Impact’ 9am to midday on 26th March in S202, Studland House, Lansdowne Campus. The workshop will consider both the achievement and demonstration of impact and will comprise three linked sessions:
- What is ‘impact’ and how can it be achieved?
- How can impact be demonstrated?
- The future of the REF
Hope you can make it as this will be of cross-University interest!
In metrics we trust?
Back in May HEFCE launched a Call for Evidence on the role of metrics in research assessment. The Independent review chaired by by Professor James Wilsdon, University of Sussex and supported by an independent steering group, is tasked with building on the previous 2008/9 pilot exercise to explore the current use of metrics for research assessment, consider the robustness of metrics across different disciplines, and assess their potential contribution to the development of research excellence and impact.
HEFCE received 153 responses (44% from HEIs, 27% individuals, 18% learned societies, 7% providers, 2% mission groups, 2% other). With the majority – 57% – of those who responded expressed overall scepticism about the further introduction of metrics into research assessment.
As part of the review three stakeholder workshops have been held/scheduled on key areas of interest and debate:
- In metrics we Trust – 7th October, University of Sussex. Prospects and Pitfalls
- Metrics for All? – 2nd December 2014, University of Sheffield. Equality and Diversity
- Metrics – Arts and Humanities – 16th January 2015, University of Warwick.
To date, all have been well attended and very lively. I was able to attend the I workshop in Sussex with some 150 odd other delegates including members of the metrics review panel, metrics developers and providers, researchers, university managers, and a range of stakeholders from across the research and HE community.
The day contained many thoughtful contributions from a range of speakers including: Dr Philip Campbell, Editor-in-Chief, Nature; Professor Stephen Curry, Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College; and Dr Steven Hill, Head of Research Policy, HEFCE. There was lively discussion about the value, potential role, and unintended consequences of metrics in research evaluation. If you are interested in the future role of metrics in research assessment, I would particularly recommend reviewing the presentations from David Colquhoun, Emeritus Professor of Pharmacology at UCL and Dorothy Bishop, Professor of Developmental Neuropsychology, the University of Oxford.
For further insight you could also check out the Twitter discussion, which has over 1000 tweets tagged with #HEFCEmetrics, Impact story have also helpfully encapsulated much of the story/discussion via Storify.
The results of the review will be announced at the end of March and published in the summer. The report will make recommendation againsts three time horizons:
(1) What can HEIs do to improve research management now;
(2) Suggestions for the next REF;
(3) The longer term, including identification of programmes for further work.
New Scientist Yawns! – Dr Simon Thompson
Why do we yawn? Dogs and cats make us yawn. We even yawn in the womb.
The first yawn of the day is usually when we awake to stretch our intercostal muscles surrounding our lungs to bring in more oxygen. Many of us recognise yawning as a sign of tiredness or boredom yet we also yawn before that important job interview. We contagiously yawn when our pets yawn and because we are empathetic towards another yawning human being. We even yawn in the womb.
As a member of the International Association for Research on Yawning, I have presented at the first international conference of neuroscientists and neurologists on yawning in Paris in 2010. Since then, I have been conducting research into this intriguing area and proposed the Thompson Cortisol Hypothesis (1;2) to explain why the naturally produced stress hormone cortisol is released during yawning – a phenomenon never reported before.
Recently, I was delighted to be invited by the prestigious New Scientist to write a piece about this curiosity that affects all of us (3) and have received so much international interest that it has encouraged me to continue this pursuit with a view to its medical application.
I am also a member of the International Scientific Committee on Research into Multiple Sclerosis (MS) which is particularly relevant to yawning as people with MS often include fatigue and excessive yawning in their reported symptoms. Meeting in Paris recently with international collaborators from Paris X Ouest University and the French Multiple Sclerosis Society, I am conducting research into induced fatigue and MS and how these variables affect cortisol levels.
It is hoped this may point towards the development of a new diagnostic tool for the early diagnosis of MS using cortisol as a biomarker.
References
- Thompson SBN. The dawn of the yawn: is yawning a warning? Linking neurological disorders. Medical Hypotheses 2010;75:630-633;doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2010.08.002.
- Thompson SBN. 2011. Born to yawn? Cortisol linked to yawning: a new hypothesis. Medical Hypotheses 2011;77:861-862;doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2011.07.056.
- Thompson SBN. This will make you yawn. New Scientist 2014;224(3000/3001):38-39.
- Inset photo: Pynq Thompson, aged 28 days old.
Contact: simont@bournemouth.ac.uk
The REF results are in! BU’s research recognised as world leading
After many years of preparation, numerous mock exercises and thirteen long months of waiting, the REF results are finally published today! And the news for BU is excellent!
62% of BU’s research has been recognised as internationally excellent, with 18% rated as world-leading. This is a significant uplift on our RAE 2008 scores and has been achieved whilst also submitting considerably more staff to REF 2014 (161.8 FTE, an increase of 45.5%). This highlights the growing research volume and quality at BU and is testament to the significant investment that has been put into research over the past decade. The assessment recognised BU as a leading university in both the UK and south west region.
Key achievements for BU overall include:
- BU was in the top half of all institutions that submitted to the REF (69th out of 154) based on the proportion of research rated of international standard
- BU was 11th out of the 69 post-1992 universities based on the proportion of world-leading research
- BU was fourth in the south west based on the proportion of world-leading research, behind Bristol, Bath and Exeter
- 30% of BU’s research impact was rated world-leading
- 58% of BU’s research outputs were rated internationally excellent or world-leading
- 63% of BU’s research environment was rated internationally excellent or world-leading
- The THE has ranked BU 69th overall, an increase from 75th in 2008, and 69th for impact – http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/ref-2014-results-table-of-excellence/2017590.article
Key achievements for our research areas include:
- Tourism (UOA 26) was rated as joint-first in the UK (out of 51 institutions) based on its internationally-recognised research
- Art and design (UOA 34) is in the top quartile in the UK for its world-leading research, and is ranked first in the south west (out of 7 institutions)
- Communication, Cultural and Media Studies (UOA 36) is in the top third of institutions in the UK (17th out of 67) for its world-leading research, and 7th in the UK for its world-leading impact
- Psychology’s (UOA 4) outputs scored particularly well with 73% rated as internationally excellent or world-leading, placing BU 27th out of 82 institutions in the UK
- Research impact was rated highly in General Engineering (UOA 15) which scored 73% internationally excellent, placing it fourth out of 29 post-1992 institutions.
- BU submitted considerably more staff to Allied Health Professional, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy (UOA 3) than in the last assessment exercise (9.2fte in 2008 and 21.4fte in 2014) and achieved a significant uplift in the proportion of its research that was rated internationally excellent and world-leading (40% to 54%).
- Geography, Environmental Studies and Archaeology (UOA 17) is in the top quartile in the UK (joint-17th out of 74 institutions) based on the proportion of research rated of international standing, making it also 1st out of 20 post-1992 universities
- Business and Management Studies (UOA 19) scored particularly well in terms of impact, resulting in it ranking 9th in the UK (out of 101 institutions) for its world-leading impact
HEFCE, on behalf of the four funding councils, publish the results of the REF today. You can browse the results here: www.ref.ac.uk.
Congratulations to all – this is a milestone achievement 🙂
Symposium Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education on LSE Blog
The LSE Impact Blog reports a piece by BU’s Zoë Sheppard, Vanora Hundley, Edwin van Teijlingen & Paul Thompson.
The LSE Blog presents the challenges of impact in healthcare recently discussed at a symposium held by the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education at Bournemouth University. As the results of the Research Excellence Framework 2014 are ut this week, the LSE Blog raises some timely issues on the implementation of impact point to further collaborations needed on the impact agenda in medicine and health care more generally.
The LSE Blog can be found at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/12/15/the-impact-agenda-in-healthcare/
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH
Helping men to lose weight
High quality research from a collaboration of three UK universities has been turned into practical advice. The ROMEO project (Review Of Men and Obesity) by the University of Aberdeen, the University of Stirling and Bournemouth University found that men are more likely than women to benefit if physical activity is part of a weight-loss programme. Also although fewer men joined weight-loss programmes, once recruited they were less likely to drop out than women. The perception of having a health problem, the impact of weight loss on health problems, and the desire to improve personal appearance without looking too thin were motivators for weight loss amongst men. However, the type of reducing diet did not appear to affect long-term weight loss.

The charity Men’s Health Forum linked up with Public Health England and published a ‘How to’ guide based on the evidence of our ROMEO study. This ‘How to make weight-loss services work for men’ guide offers advice for local authorities, commissioners and weight management providers, who are trying to attract men to weight-loss programmes. The guide highlights, for example that:
- Programmes that include exercise and behaviour change components as well as dieting are more successful in helping men to lose weight.
- Men respond well to programmes that have a higher degree of personalisation, such as setting individual goals, as it increases their sense of control.
- Weight-loss programmes based in the workplace or associated with professional sports clubs have been particularly successful.
- Using humour and encouraging camaraderie makes programmes more attractive to men as does knowing that there will be other men there.
Furthermore, this ‘How to’ guide includes, amongst other advice, a list of Ten Top Tips.
This is an excellent example how research conducted between three different universities has been turned into easy to understand advice for man who are overweight. The past decade or so has seen an increasing interest in making academic research ‘useful’ to society. Creating and measuring the impact of research conducted at universities has been introduced as key element on the REF, the Research Excellence Framework. The REF assesses the quality of research in, and affects the amount of government money each university in the UK receives.
For a traditional academic publishing the HTA report would be a success in itself. Which, of course, it is to culmination of a large-scale and extensive review, well conducted, published through Open Access, which also attracted considerable media attention from across the globe when it came out. However, ROMEO did not stop there. Due to the involvement of the Men’s Health Fora right from the start of ROMEO, the Men’s Health Forum in England linked up with Public Health England to create and publish ‘How to make weight-loss services work for men’ guide is published today.
The ROMEO project, led by Prof. Alison Avenell (University of Aberdeen), examined the evidence for managing obesity in men and investigated how to engage men with obesity services. The evidence came from trials, interviews with men, reports of studies from the UK, and economic studies. ROMEO was funded by the National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR HTA Project 09/127/01). Our full report is Open Access and can be freely downloaded here.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
School of Health & Social Care
Bournemouth University
HEFCE are looking for views on a potential international REF in future…
HEFCE has published a survey inviting views on an internationalised system of research assessment.
This survey forms part of a project exploring the benefits and challenges of expanding the UK’s research assessment system, the Research Excellence Framework (REF), on an international basis. At the broadest level, this means an extension of the assessment to incorporate submissions from universities overseas.
This follows an invitation earlier this year from the then Minister of State for Universities and Science, David Willetts, for HEFCE to provide an opinion on the feasibility of an international REF. The project belongs in a wider context of international interest in the exercise, on which HEFCE frequently provides information and advice to higher education policymakers and university senior management from overseas.
The THE ran a story about this in April 2014: HEFCE looks at overseas links for research excellence
Responses are invited from any organisation or individual with an interest in higher education research or its assessment. The survey will be open until Wednesday 12 November 2014.
The survey only has four questions –
1. What do you think the key benefits would be of expanding the REF internationally?
2. What do you think the key challenges would be in expanding the REF internationally?
3. In view of the potential benefits and challenges overall, how supportive would you be of further work to explore the issues in more depth?
4. Have you got any further comments relating to internationalisation of REF?
To complete the survey visit: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/refinternationalisation