Category / Uncategorized

Contemporary Thought in Higher Education Colloquium, 27th April.

The Academy of Marketing SIG Marketing in Higher Education.

Bournemouth University

Wednesday 27 April, 2016.

Faculty of Management academics, Dr Chris Chapleo and Helen O’Sullivan (both from the Department of Marketing) are organising a one day colloquium titled ‘Contemporary Thought in Higher Education’ This colloquium will initiate discussion, drive collaboration and grow networks amongst marketing academics and HE marketers, which will promote, advance and disseminate current practices and developments in HE marketing.

Professor Jane Hemsley-Brown, University of Surrey has been confirmed as a keynote speaker.

There will be an associated special edition of ‘The Journal of Marketing in Higher Education’.

Submission We welcome Abstracts of up to 300 words for papers that relate to the theme around ‘Contemporary Thought in Higher Education Marketing’.

Please email Abstracts (300 words maximum) to: HEcolloquium@bournemouth.ac.uk  by 25 January, 2016.

Find out more To register interest and for more details, go to http://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/academy-of-marketing

 

 

More events at the IRW

As well as the lectures, debates, films and music at the Interdisciplinary Research Week 2016, we have even more events that are of interest to all. These include:InterdisResWeek2

Monday 25 January 2016

Ashley Woodfall

Researching with Children and Young People: Method and Mayhem

EB708, Executive Business Centre, 16:00-18:00

This ‘catalyst’ event is an opportunity for anyone with an interest in research with children and young people to:

  • meet BU researchers from across the university
  • share experiences and future research ambitions; and
  • develop future research partnerships

Operating in a ‘bring and buy’ spirit, this event recognises the benefits of sharing knowledge and expertise across different disciplines. The event is open to all those interested in research with children and young people whatever their research interests, affiliation or tradition.

Thursday 28 January 2016

Professor Matt Bentley

Interdisciplinary Research Training Session

KG03, Talbot Campus, 09:30-11:00

This 90-minute training session will give attendees the opportunity to find out more about interdisciplinary research including:

  • What is interdisciplinary research?
  • What counts as a discipline?
  • The reasons why it is becoming increasingly important both inside and outside the university (e.g. by funders, policy makers etc.).
  • How it might impact on your research practice?
  • The potential and the challenges of this type of work.
  • The role it has in institutions and careers.

Click on the links above to book on to the events.

What would Marty McFly need in 25 years’ time? EB705, Executive Business Centre – For BU academics and researchers only, we also have on Tuesday 26th January (10.00 – 17.00) and Wednesday 27th January 2016 (morning only) an interactive workshop session designed to tackle a big question for modern day life – how digital technology affects different aspects of our daily lives. The session will create a collaborative space for researchers to share ideas, challenge assumptions and develop future research proposals.

To take part in this exciting opportunity, BU academic and research staff should complete the Sandpit Application Form and return this to Dianne Goodman by Tuesday 12th January. Places are strictly limited.

BU helps secure Wellcome Trust Seed Award

The heart of an insect.

The heart of an insect.

A £100,000 Wellcome Trust Seed Award has been granted to fund a project using fruit flies (Drosophila) to examine an important yet poorly understood aspect of human heart physiology.

The heart senses and adapts to its own highly dynamic mechanical environment. This environment changes beat-by-beat, as well as over longer timescales, due to altered physiology or as a consequence of disease. Failure to detect and adjust cardiac performance accordingly is associated with arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. The mechanism for this adaptation is not known.

The goal is to study the cellular and molecular basis of this mechanism using the Drosophila heart as a simple model. Preliminary data obtained for an Honours project suggests that stretch-activated mechanosensitive ion channels are key components.

Research supported by Paul Hartley’s lab here at Bournemouth University and led by Dr Barry Denholm (University of Edinburgh) will investigate the hypothesis that these channels provide a direct link to convert physical force (stretch of the cardiac tissue) into biochemical signal (ion flux), which in turn regulates heart physiology and function (contractility).

British Library Doctoral Open Days for PGRs

Have you just started your PhD?  The British Library hosts Doctoral Open Days enabling new PhD students to discover the British Library’s unique research materials. From newspapers to maps, datasets to manuscripts, ships’ logs to websites, our collections cover every format and language and span the last 3,000 years.

You will learn about their collections, find out how to access them, and meet our expert staff and other researchers in your field. The events are aimed at first year PhD students who are new to the Library.

  • Asian & African Collections – 18 January 2016British Library_newsmedia
  • News & Media – 25 January 2016
  • Pre 1600 Collections – 01 February 2016
  • Music – 05 February 2016
  • Social Sciences – 12 February 2016
  • 17th & 18th Century Collections – 19 February 2016
  • 19th Century Collections – 22 February 2016
  • 20th & 21st Century Collections – 26 February 2016

Find out more here

A fantastic public engagement opportunity!

Puzzles and ambassadors

Get involved in the Festival of Learning 2016! Applications open now!

You have until 31st January to submit your application to be get involved and run an event at the The Festival of Learning. In its fourth year now -the dates for 2016 have been set as Saturday 25 – Wednesday 29 June for a shorter and more compact 5 day festival.

What kind of events could I put on?

We’re open to ideas and willing to support a wide variety of events, you could run anything from a professional development workshop to an art exhibition or you could just have a stool with some hands on activities for passers-by.

Some examples:

  • Gaming, computing and coding
  • Everyday professional skills
  • Health and fitness
  • Topics involving real-world issues
  • Media workshops

I’m keen to run an event! What do I do now?

You have until 31st January to submit your application to be considered as part of the festival of learning. Please click here to find the proposal form and instructions on how to submit. If you would like support in developing an event idea or for any further information then please get in touch with Naomi Kay (nkay@bournemouth.ac.uk), Public Engagement Officer.

Fair Access Research – an update

Learning together to promote opportunity, equality and achievement

Bournemouth University’s pioneering Fair Access Research is a practice-led, collaborative research project which aims to develop and expand knowledge and expertise in the field fair access to higher education.

This large collaborative research study is being led by Dr Vanessa Heaslip and Dr Clive Hunt and forms part of the research being undertaken in the Centre for Excellence in Learning.

The Fair Access Research project seeks to understand more fully, the complex intersections that are at play when it comes to participation in higher education, and to develop ways to enhance positive student experiences.

Underpinned by an ethos of inclusive education, a commitment to student engagement and practice-led research, our Fair Access Research team will learn from the expertise and experiences of students and colleagues to understand what issues arise across the student journey for disadvantaged and marginalised learners.

We are undertaking research in the areas of admissions and enrolment, attainment, retention and student experiences, as well as developing innovative ways of doing research and evaluation in widening participation.

Student experiences:

One of our key areas of focus lies in understanding how students conceive of their experience and to analyse how students from different backgrounds experience being a student at BU differently. To find this out, we are going to use an institutional-wide survey that’s been developed in partnership with SUBU and pilot tested over the summer.

Key findings from the pilot study include:

  • Factors influencing first in family to attend university are different from those in second or subsequent generation. Students who are first in family prioritised getting a good job whereas second generation students prioritised the more social side of higher education
  • Whilst differences in attainment were small, first generation students achieved on average higher degree outcomes
  • When we compared the experience of first and second generation students at BU, a stark difference in the key influencers for participation at university could be seen
  • It is not yet known whether the key influence of parents experienced by second generation students follows through to increased external, emotional and financial support during university.

Findings from the pilot phase have been submitted to Studies in Higher Education and a paper based on the development of the questionnaire has been submitted to the international Open University Widening Participation biennial conference. Findings from the pilot have also been shared on the British Education Research Association blog.

At the heart of our Fair Access Research project is an awareness that it is through learning together – as students, practitioners, policy makers, academics and wider communities – that we can best achieve an HE culture that promotes opportunity, equality and achievement for all students. With this in mind we are always keen to hear from colleagues and develop collaborative ways of working. Some areas interest include:

  • Developing effective and replicable models of WP evaluation and research
  • Understanding the pedagogical implications of WP
  • Surveying staff involved with admissions and enrolment
  • Understanding staff perceptions’ of student support

If you want to know more about the project as a whole or any area of the research, feel free to email awardrop@bournemouth.ac.uk

FMC narrative research seminar: Weds 6th 4pm – Food and Foucauldian Power (Dr Francesco Buscemi) – ALL WELCOME!

Communicating Research: FMC Cross-Departmental Seminar Series 2015-16

Venue: The Screening Room W240, Weymouth House, Talbot Campus, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, Poole, Dorset, BH12 5BB  When: Wednesday 6 January, 4pm

A Narrative Research Group Guest Lecture

 Dr Francesco Buscemi, Bournemouth University

 ‘Passing on Recipes or Passing an Examination? Food and Foucauldian Power on Two Web Forums in Italy and Britain’

This paper analyses the representation of the social practice of passing on recipes on two popular Italian and British web forums, and the power relationships that they produce. It draws on Foucault’s category of examination; on Rosello’s links between Foucault’s examination and writing recipes; and on Appadurai theory that recipes are fundamental in the construction of national culture. Moreover, specific studies on Italian and British food culture highlight similarities and differences between the two countries.

Qualitative textual analysis is applied to the forums La Cucina Italiana and BBC Good Food. They have purposely been chosen because they represent two ‘food institutions’, and this research wants to analyse mainstream food media. The results show that the two forums generate different examples of Foucault’s examination. The Italian users (all women, or at least using female names) undergo their examination not on the forum, but at home or among friends, before or after writing the posts. The forum is seen either as a place of resistance, in which they ask help to the other users before being examined by relatives, or as a place in which they may show off that they have passed the exam. In Britain, the examination occurs within the forum, and users (man or woman hierarchically relating to each other) are both examiners and examined; the user is examined when posts a recipe, and examines the others when comments on the recipes of the others.

Francesco Buscemi is Lecturer in Creative Communications at Bournemouth University. Moreover, he teaches media studies at both undergraduate and postgraduate level at the Catholic University of Milan, where he also supervises degree theses. His PhD, gained at Queen Margaret University, is a Bourdieusian and semiotic analysis on how representations of food in the media support national ideologies in Italy and Britain. Another strand of research involves meat, cultured meat and their links to the living animal, death, religion, blood, gender and the relationships between Nature and Culture. 

 

About the series

This new seminar series showcases current research across different disciplines and approaches within the Faculty of Media and Communication at BU. The research seminars include invited speakers in the fields of journalism, politics, narrative studies, media, communication and marketing studies.  The aim is to celebrate the diversity of research across departments in the faculty and also generate dialogue and discussion between those areas of research.

Contributions include speakers on behalf of 

The Centre for Politics and Media Research

The Centre for the Study of Journalism, Culture and Community

Promotional Cultures Communication Centre

Public Relations Research Centre

Narrative Research Group

Journalism Research Group

Advances in Media Management Research Group

New Public Health paper on Christmas Eve

Douglas 2015 Men healthOur latest paper and the last one for 2015, published the day before Christmas.  The paper ‘Implementing Health Policy: Lessons from the Scottish Well Men’s Policy Initiative’ appeared in AIMS Public Health [1].  The paper draws on evaluation research led by Dr. Flora Douglas (University of Aberdeen).  This was a set of evaluations of the Well Men’s Health projects which were part of an initiative running in many health regions (or health boards as they are called in Scotland).

 

The focus of this particular paper centres around the fact that little is known about how health professionals translate government health policy into action [2]. Our paper examines that process using the  Scottish Well Men’s Services policy initiative as a ‘real world’ case study [1]. These Well Men’s Services were launched by the Scottish Government to address men’s health inequalities. Our analysis aimed to develop a deeper understanding of policy implementation as it naturally occurred.  We used an analytical framework that was developed to reflect the ‘rational planning’ principles health professionals are commonly encouraged to use for implementation purposes.

Our analysis revealed four key themes: (1) ambiguity regarding the policy problem and means of intervention; (2) behavioral framing of the policy problem and intervention; (3) uncertainty about the policy evidence base and outcomes, and; (4) a focus on intervention as outcome. This study found that mechanistic planning heuristics (as a means of supporting implementation) fails to grapple with the indeterminate nature of population health problems. A new approach to planning and implementing public health interventions is required that recognises the complex and political nature of health problems; the inevitability of imperfect and contested evidence regarding intervention, and, future associated uncertainties.

 

The paper is published in an Open Access journal, so it is easily and freely available to public health professionals, policy-makers and health workers across the globe.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen 

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Douglas, F., van Teijlingen, E., Smith, W.C.S., Moffat, M. (2015) Implementing Health Policy: Lessons from the Scottish Well Men’s Policy Initiative, AIMS Public Health 2 (4): 887-905. http://www.aimspress.com/article/10.3934/publichealth.2015.4.887/fulltext.html
  2. Killoran, A., Kelly, M. (2004) Towards an evidence-based approach to tackling health inequalities: The English experience. Health Education Journal;63: 7-14.

Mixed methods: not without its downside?

Prof Edwin van Teijlingen

Conducting mixed-methods research has become very popular over the past decade especially in the health research field.1-4 This development ties in with the growth in inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary research. Many grant applications, PhD project and the resulting papers especially in the health field apply a mixed-methods approach, where in the past a single approach would have dominated.   This interest in combining methods seems to be the case even in the more traditional quantitative field of clinical effectiveness and randomised controlled trials. Whilst I find this development encouraging as a mixed-methods social scientist, it also makes me wonder whether the applicants putting forward a mixed-methods project have thought about the disadvantages or at least the opportunity costs of using such approach.

A mixed-methods approach is ‘simply’ combining two or more research methods to address a research question, i.e. what the label suggests. It is often perceived as the combining of qualitative with quantitative methods, but it can technically also be a mix of quantitative methods or a combination of qualitative methods. The advantage of a mixed-methods approach is that the different methods in the mix address different aspects of the research question and that combining these methods offers a synergetic effect. So what are the possible limitations of or barriers to mixed-methods research?

First, using a mixed-methods approach means you need an understanding of two different philosophies and how to bring the findings of these two different methods together.4-6   One requires expertise in two different research approaches, either as individual or in the team as well as someone who can do the combining of the findings. For the latter you really need someone in the team who understand the pragmatic approach commonly used in mixed-methods approaches. Otherwise there is a great risk that the original mixed-methods study will be analysed and reported as two or more separate papers each based on data from one of the methods applied in the mixed-methods study.

Secondly, you can spend your money only once, hence there are opportunity costs. Thus if the maximum grant is £200,000 or £300,000 you can’t spend the full amount on the designing a large-scale quantitative study/survey, as you need to spend a proportion of your money and your attention and time on your qualitative study.

Thirdly, and related the above, both quantitative and qualitative methods have ‘rules’ about sampling and sample-size.5 Just because you have two methods this does not mean you can necessarily do a study with a smaller sample. The sample size calculations will still say you need at least xxx participants. Similarly, although perhaps not so rigidly you need a certain number of interviews or focus groups to do you qualitative study appropriately.

Fourthly, a common mistake seems to be to add a bit of qualitative research to a larger quantitative study, perhaps a bit tokenistic.7 Often it is so obvious in a grant application that the qualitative research is an add-on, an afterthought perhaps from a reviewer in the previous failed grant application.

Finally, not all mixed-methods studies are the same, in fact each mixed-methods study is more or less unique in the way in the way it mixes and matched individual research methods.3 So although mixed-methods may be the best way to address a particular research question, your particular proposed mixed of quantitative and qualitative research might not be the most appropriate to answer the overall research question.8

As with all research methods and research proposals my recommendation is if in doubt go and find an expert for advice.6 If necessary get an expert on your team of researchers to strengthen your application.

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1.  Barbour, R.S. (1999) The case of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in health services research. Journal of Health Services Research Policy, 4(1): 39-43.
  2. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Wasti, S.P., Sathian, B. (2014) Mixed-methods approaches in health research in Nepal, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(5): 415-416.
  3. Plano Clark, V.L., Anderson, N., Wertz, J.A., Zhou, Y., Schumacher, K., Miaskowski, C. (2015) Conceptualizing Longitudinal Mixed Methods Designs: A Methodological Review of Health Sciences Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9: 297-319.
  4. MacKenzie Bryers, H., van Teijlingen, E. Pitchforth, E. (2014) Advocating mixed-methods approaches in health research, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(5): 417-422. http://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/12018/9768
  5. Bryman, A. (1988) Quality and Quantity in Social Research, London: Routledge
  6. Bazeley, P. (2003) Teaching mixed methods. Qualitative Research Journal, 4: 117-126.
  7. Maxwell, J.A. (2016) Expanding the History and Range of Mixed Methods Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10: 12-27.
  8. Brannen, J. (2005) Mixing methods: The entry of qualitative & quantitative approaches into the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8(3): 173-85.

 

Congratulations to Dr. Caroline Ellis-Hill

NIHRDr. Caroline Ellis-Hill  has just been accepted as a qualitative methodologist on the NIHR (National Institute for Health Research) panel for Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR).  Caroline from the Centre for Qualitative Research (CQR) in FHSS is the second BU academic to join a NIHR panel this year.  Earlier this year Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen was invited to be a member of the NIHR’s HTA Clinical Evaluation & Trials Board ( http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/our-people ).

Congratulations!

Professors Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

COP21: a summary of the Paris Agreement and the implications for BU

As we move into an era where the emphasis on carbon reduction will come to the fore, we are sharing with you a brief summary of the Paris Agreement and the implications for Bournemouth University. This is an extract from a longer paper that includes the implications for Industrialised and Developing Nations as well as  policy implications. Aplologies but it was just too long for a blog post.

At Bournemouth we have achieved much to reduce carbon and to develop iniatives to secure more sustainabel development. In the light of the Paris Agreement, we need to do more in 2016!

Main Points of the Paris Agreement:

  • The main difference between this treaty and others that have gone before it is its scope. In particular, the draft lays out plans to limit temperature rises until at least 2050 – this is much longer term than has ever been agreed before.
  • 187 countries have put forward plans to cut and curb carbon emissions to 2020, and beyond.
  • Within the agreement, the targets are known as Intended National Determined Contributions (INDCs). All 187 countries have submitted their INDCs.
  • Developed and developing countries are required to set targets to limit their emissions to levels which would see warming of 2°C, with an aspiration of limiting warming to 1.5°C. Vulnerable countries – like the Marshall Islands in Micronesia – pushed for a 1.5°C limit but the draft deal only promises to make it a target rather than a pledge.
  • However, observers have calculated that all of the targets, if delivered, will not keep warming to 2°C but to 2.7°C above pre-industrial levels. Above this 2°C threshold, effects of climate change such as droughts, floods, heat waves and sea level rises are likely to become catastrophic and irreversible.
  • Additionally, emissions targets are not legally binding and are determined by individual countries. However, it promises to hold countries to account if they fail to meet the targets they set out in their plans to reduce emissions during the 2020s.
  • Countries are required to review and submit their emissions targets every five years with the “first global stocktake in 2023 and every five years subsequently”. The review process is to ensure that targets are in line with the latest scientific advice. This review process is legally binding.
  • The agreement covers “loss and damage”: finance will be provided to poor nations to help them cut emissions and cope with the effects of extreme weather. The agreement makes some concessions to developing countries, acknowledging “urgent need to enhance the provision of finance, technology and capacity” and promote “universal access to sustainable energy” – particularly in Africa – with a focus on renewables. There will be a $100 billion fund from developed economies to help emerging and developing nations decarbonise their energy mix. Countries affected by climate-related disasters will gain urgent aid.
  • The agreement also requires a limit on the emissions of greenhouse gases from human activity to the same levels that trees, soil and oceans can absorb naturally, beginning at some point between 2050 and 2100.
  • IMPLICATIONS FOR BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY
  • In the aftermath of the Paris Agreement, it is more important than ever that BU makes a commitment to reduce its carbon emissions as much as possible, as quickly as possible. However, commitment alone is insufficient if it does not translate into effective action.
  • The EU is one of the top greenhouse gas emitters accounting for 9% of global emissions.
  • As a large organisation, we emitted 7,680 tonnes of carbon in 2014. BU needs to play its part in helping the UK meet its reduction targets.
  • With social and environmental responsibility at the heart of the BU ethos, we must take our role in curbing global warming seriously.
  • BU2018 states: “We will consider corporate social responsibility as we develop policies and procedures across all relevant areas for example corporate governance, environmental management, stakeholder engagement, employee and community relations, social equity, and responsible procurement.” This is directly in line with the Paris Agreement, with regards to ensuring the poorest people in developing nations are protected from the worst effects of climate change.
  • BU is committed to “ensuring we operate an affordable, sustainable and secure estate”. It is quite possible that in order to control UK greenhouse gas emissions, we will see higher energy prices and increased taxation on emissions in the future. From a financial standpoint, BU needs to do everything it possibly can to reduce its emissions as a business as usual scenario is likely to seeing spiralling costs over the coming years and reduce the competitiveness of the University as a whole.
  • Embedding sustainability into the culture of BU will be important to secure further reductions; technological solutions alone will not suffice.
  • BU aims to “ensure that graduates develop a global perspective and understand the need for sustainable development by seeking to embed sustainable development across the curriculum”. If sustainable development is more fully embedded within the curriculum and across the extra-curricular sphere the impact will be to reduce unsustainable behaviours (with reductions of carbon and utilities) but also BU graduates will be better prepared for an employability context where carbon reduction is a key focus.

Thanks to Victoria Penson (for starting the paper) and  Dr. Neil Smith for their contributions. Please contact me if you would like to read the other sections.

 

 

Policy Update

Monday

Green Paper

The independent reports that Oliver Letwin, David Cameron’s policy advisor, thinks that green paper reforms, such as increasing tuition fees, could be introduced as secondary legislation rather than as an Act of Parliament. Government trying to ‘sneak’ tuition fee increases into controversial reforms (Independent).

State School Access

The latest Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission report has revealed that Oxford and Cambridge recruit a much lower proportion of state school pupils than their calculated benchmark suggests. Oxford and Cambridge condemned over failure to improve state school access (Guardian).

Tuesday

TEF

The president of the Higher Education Policy Institute has claimed that English universities are “not very good at teaching”. He said he welcomed the TEF because universities needed “a counterweight to the imperative to do research”. English universities ‘not very good at teaching’, says Hepi president (THE).

NHS Student Funding

The Guardian looks at the impact of replacing student nurse bursaries with loans, including the idea that this move will reduce the diversity of those able to access a career in healthcare. George Osborne considers axing student nurse bursaries (The Guardian).

Wednesday

University Research Funding

Baron Stern of Brentford, president of the British Academy, will lead a review into university research funding. The review will look at how to cut the “administrative burden” on academics and will also “strengthen the focus on excellence”. REF sceptic to lead review into research assessment (THE).

Thursday

UCAS

Following the publication of the UCAS 2015 End of Cycle Report, women are 35% more likely to start a degree course than their male counterparts. Among those from disadvantaged backgrounds, the report reveals that young women were 52% more likely to go into higher education than their male counterparts.  Women take record number of university places (BBC News).

Friday

Curriculum Design         

THE looks at the different ways in which students are helping to shape curriculum, teaching and assessment – leading to better teaching, more effective learning and graduates who are better prepared for the workplace. Should students be partners in curriculum design? (THE).

Funding for training or teaching in the EC – professional services and academic staff – is Erasmus right for you?

Did you know that our Erasmus funding is available for those who want to take training abroad as well as those who want to teach?

Every year our academic staff visit European institutions to teach, exchange ideas and build their networks.

What’s less well known is that both academic and professional services staff can apply for funding to go to a European Higher Education institution, or enterprise, to train, learn new techniques, share best practice and widen your horizons. Would you like to find out how your job or department works in other European institutions? Explore new ways of working? Come back with ideas to enhance your role?

Erasmus provides up to €1,000 towards your travel and subsistence costs when travelling to another EU member country.

Priority will be given to staff who have not previously received funding from this strand so, if you’ve never considered it before, now might be your chance!

Want to find out more?

Well, hurry! Funds are limited so do get your application in as soon as possible. Visit the FIF website for further details and for information about how to apply. You can also contact us by email with any queries.

Erasmus staff mobility – maybe it’s for you after all?!