Tagged / BU research

BA Small Grants – call open 5th Oct 2018

Funding opportunities, Guidance, Training

The call for the next round of BA/Leverhulme Small Research Grants will open 5th October 2018 and close 5pm on Wednesday 7th November 2018 and is aimed at Early Career Researcher and/or pump priming purposes.

It is strongly advised that you attend the British Academy small guidance session on 9th October 2018, where the Funding Development team will go through:

  • The British Academy scheme notes for applicants
  • The British Academy  FAQs
  • The British Academy  Assessment Criteria
  • As well as a chance to ask questions from recent British Academy award winners

After the session you will have the chance to sit with a Research Facilitator and Funding Development Officer, to go through costs and your draft proposal.  As well as the opportunity to have your proposal reviewed by an external application reviewer.

If you can’t attend this session, then we ask you to submit your intention to bid form to your Funding Development Officer by 9th October 2018, after this date applications will be moved to the summer round.

The British Academy have provided updated guidance on the small grants – BA scheme notes for applicants and BA FAQs . They have asked that all applicants read the documentation carefully before starting their application.

Timeline

The call closes at 5pm on Wednesday 7th November 2018.

Date Action
5 October 2018 Scheme Opens
9th October RKEO British Academy Guidance session and/or

Intention to bid forms to be submitted to your faculty funding development officer
4th November midnight Nominated referee supporting statement to be completed via FlexiGrant
4th November midnight Your final application must be submitted on FlexiGrant  by this date at the latest
5th – 7th November 2018 Institutional checks to take place by RKEO
7th November 2018 Submission

Any queries please contact Alexandra Pekalski 

BA Small Research Grants opens 5th Oct 2018

Funding opportunities, Guidance

The call for the next round of BA/Leverhulme Small Research Grants will open 5th October 2018 and close 5pm on Wednesday 7th November 2018 and is aimed at Early Career Researcher and/or pump priming purposes.

It is strongly advised that you attend the British Academy small guidance session on 9th October 2018, where the Funding Development team will go through:

  • The British Academy scheme notes for applicants
  • The British Academy  FAQs
  • The British Academy  Assessment Criteria
  • As well as a chance to ask questions from recent British Academy award winners

After the session you will have the chance to sit with a Research Facilitator and Funding Development Officer, to go through costs and your draft proposal.  As well as the opportunity to have your proposal reviewed by an external application reviewer.

If you can’t attend this session, then we ask you to submit your intention to bid form to your Funding Development Officer by 9th October 2018, after this date applications will be moved to the summer round.

The British Academy have provided updated guidance on the small grants – BA scheme notes for applicants and BA FAQs . They have asked that all applicants read the documentation carefully before starting their application.

Timeline

The call closes at 5pm on Wednesday 7th November 2018.

Date Action
5 October 2018 Scheme Opens
9th October RKEO British Academy Guidance session and/or

Intention to bid forms to be submitted to your faculty funding development officer
4th November midnight Nominated referee supporting statement to be completed via FlexiGrant
4th November midnight Your final application must be submitted on FlexiGrant  by this date at the latest
5th – 7th November 2018 Institutional checks to take place by RKEO
7th November 2018 Submission

Any queries please contact Alexandra Pekalski 

Ouch! Missing reference

international, Publishing, writing

One of the first rules of drafting a scientific paper is that one cites the key literature in the respective field.  So as someone who teaches people how to write and publish in this week’s experience of getting a paper rejected was not great, if not disheartening!   Earlier this week we submitted a research paper to the Journal of Travel Medicine on a study of the health and well-being of female migrant workers in Nepal.  This is high quality journal in which we have published before, including one paper on migrants’ health [1-3]. 

Two days later the journal editor emailed us to say: “”We feel that the scope of your paper would not justify a full original article in the Journal of Travel Medicine”, which is, in our opinion, a fair judgement.  My co-authors and I between us have over 300 papers published and most have been rejected or at least we have been asked for a resubmission, so nothing new here. What was more upsetting than the rejection itself was the additional comment.  The editor added:

“The authors should ideally include the two following references:

……(first reference omitted)   …. +

Identifying the gaps in Nepalese migrant workers’ health and well-being: a review of the literature.

Simkhada PP, Regmi PR, van Teijlingen E, Aryal N. J Travel Med. 2017 Jul 1;24(4). doi: 10.1093/jtm/tax021. Review.

 

We agree with the editor that we should have included the two listed key papers. Crucially, it is more than a little mistake to have missed the second paper since we wrote it ourselves.  There are many lessons to be learnt from this: (a) check you have covered the key literature in your paper, either in the Background section and/or the Discussion; (b) don’t underestimate the importance of your own work; (c) you’re never too old to make mistakes (and to learn from them); (d) be thankful for good editors and reviewers; (e) do what you advise others to do; (f) etc. ………………

 

In shame,

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1. Hind, C., Bond, C.M., Lee, A., van Teijlingen E. (2008) Needs assessment study for community pharmacy travel medicine services, Journal of Travel Medicine 15(5): 328-334.
  2. Bhatta, P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen E., Maybin, S. (2009) A questionnaire study of VSO volunteers: Health risk & problems encountered. Journal of Travel Medicine 16(5): 332-337.
  3. Simkhada, P.P., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, E., Aryal, N. (2017) Identifying the gaps in Nepalese migrant workers’ health and well-being: A review of the literature, Journal of Travel Medicine 24 (4): 1-9.

Publishing systematic and scoping reviews to improve your research profile

Centre for Excellence in Learning, Fusion themes, PG research, REF Subjects, Research assessment, Training, writing

With the forthcoming REF 2021 in mind we would like to encourage both staff and postgraduate students to consider writing up their literature reviews as journal articles. Systematic and scoping reviews are a great way of publishing quality publications. They are highly valued as REF submissions, especially, but not only, in the health field.

There is plenty of support at Bournemouth University: from academic colleagues, with vast experience in writing reviews, to the library team, who can advise on, for example, developing your systematic search strategy and which databases to search.

 

You can start with publishing your review question and research strategy on PROSPERO, international prospective register of systematic reviews. We would like to highlight just one BU example in the field of the social sciences.  FHSS PhD student Orlanda Harvey published her proposed review ‘Support for people who use anabolic androgenic steroids: an investigation into what they want and what they currently access’ late last year on PROSPERO [1].

You might like to have a look at reviews published by Bournemouth University staff, which can be found by searching BURO, our institutional repository of research outputs. Moreover, BU academics have published several methods papers on the doing and writing systematic reviews [2-4].

 

Information about searching the literature for systematic reviews is available on this guide by the library team.

 

Other pages with useful information include:

 

Hopefully we have encouraged you to think about publishing your literature reviews as separate articles, and to seek help early in that process!

 

José López Blanco & Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

For further information, please contact:

José López Blanco, Faculty Librarian (Health and Social Sciences), Library & Learning Support, Academic Services at tel 67350 or email:  hsslibteam@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

References:

  1. Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E., Keen., S. (2017) Support for people who use anabolic androgenic steroids: an investigation into what they want and what they currently access. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017075199 Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017075199
  2. van Teijlingen E., Napper, M., Bruce, J., Ireland. J. (2006) Systematic reviews in midwifery, RCM Midwives Journal 9(5): 186-188.
  3. van Teijlingen, ER, Simkhada, B., Ireland J., Simkhada P., Bruce J. (2012) Evidence-based health care in Nepal: The importance of systematic reviews, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 1(4): 114-118.
  4. Stewart, F., Fraser, C., Robertson, C., Avenell, A., Archibald, D., Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen, E., Boyers, D. (2014) Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase, Systematics Reviews 3,78.

Congratulations on timely editorial in Nepal

international, open access, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to FHSS academics Dr. Pramod Regmi and Dr. Nirmal Ayral who published an editorial yesterday in a scientific journal in Nepal.  The paper ‘Experts warn Nepal Government not to reduce local Public Health spending’ [1] was co-authored by Dr. Bibha Simkhada who has just been offered a post as Lecturer in Nursing in the Department of Nursing & Clinical Sciences, she shall be starting with us on November 1st.  Further co-authors include FHSS Visiting Professor Padam Simkhada and Dr . Sujan Marahatta, the journal’s editor.  He is based at Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences (MMIHS) in Kathmandu, Nepal.  Bournemouth University has a long-standing research collaboration with MMIHS.

The editorial warns about the risks of losing the focus on public health and its wider national and global perspective in the recently changed political arena of Nepal.  Since 2015 Nepal has moved from a central state to a federal republic, whereby the seven new Provinces have gained much more power and control in the decentralisation process.  Moreover the first local elections for two decades in 2017 meant a lot of new and inexperienced local politicians were voted in.  Many of these local people had little prior experience of political processes, governing health systems, the notion of priority setting, running sub-committees of elected representatives, political decision-making at local level, etc.  The paper argues that Public Health can easily disappear of the radar.  The untrained newly elected representatives with no political experience are most likely to be drawn into proposing and supporting popular measures including developing new buildings, black-top roads, hospitals, etc., rather than measures that increase the local or regional budget for teachers, Continuous Professional Development (CPD) for community health workers, and preventative public health measures in general.  Buildings and roads are immediate demonstration to voters that politicians have done something useful, reducing maternal mortality by 2.6% or employing two additional health workers doesn’t give politicians neither the same publicity, nor do such policies have immediate signs of success, and hence are unlikely to be vote winners.

The Journal of Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences is part of the Open Access publishing of Nepal Journals OnLine (NepJOL) supported by INASP.  The editorial also illustrates the kind of work conducted in Bournemouth University’s Integrative Wellbeing Research Centre (iWell).

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

Simkhada, P., Teijlingen van, E., Simkhada, B., Regmi, P., Aryal, N., Marahatta, S.B. (2018) Experts warn Nepal Government not to reduce local Public Health spending, Journal of Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences, 4(1): 1-3.

Applying for grants is great!

Awarded & submitted bids, Funding opportunities, innovation, Knowledge Exchange, Women's Academic Network

I recently had the opportunity to apply for a grant as principal investigator. The reason for writing this post today is to say thanks to everyone involved, including the RKEO staff, the Co-investigators (Paula Callus in particular), the partner institutions but also all colleagues who gave us suggestions, supporting and helping also if not involved (Isabella Rega and Richard Berger were some of these).

On reflection, I would have done all of it differently. More time was needed (possibly not when on Annual Leave and not night time), partners need to be in place well before the call is out, reference letters cannot be asked for last minute, etc. I made all (or almost all) the mistakes above, but I had a very clear idea about the project and I felt surrounded by enthusiastic colleagues who were happy to share their expertise with me. I now know I have still a lot to learn and I can’t wait for the next opportunity.

A good point was to take notes which will be used for next grant applications. Somehow it does not matter if we will get the funding at this first attempt, we are looking forward to improving the application and the project itself, which will require more research. Yes, applying for grants is not a boring task, there is a lot of research involved which brings new ideas and opens up opportunities, whether you get the funding or not.

I hope this post will be read as a positive gentle push to apply for grants and not only because it’s the Institution in need of more grants applications but because the process itself is incredibly enriching. I hope my colleagues enjoy their future grant applications as much as I did.

a+

New paper by recent BU Sociology graduate

international, open access, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing

Dr. Andrew Harding and his BU PhD supervisors just published a new paper from his Ph.D. research [1].   This interesting paper ‘Suppy-side review of the UK specialist housing market and why it is failing older people’ reviews the supply-side of policies and practices that impact on the shortage of supply in the contemporary specialist housing market for older people in the UK.  Andrew is currently based at Lancaster University.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Harding, Andrew, Parker, Jonathan, Hean, Sarah & Hemingway, Ann (2018) Supply-side review of the UK specialist housing market and why it is failing older people. Housing, Care and Support

 

New BU publication on maternity care & culture in Afghanistan

international, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing

Congratulations to Dr. Rachel Arnold on the acceptance by Social Science & Medicine (published by Elsevier) of the second paper based on her PhD on maternity care in Afghanistan [1].  This interesting ethnography explores the experiences, motivations and constraints of healthcare providers in a large public Afghan maternity hospital. Arnold and colleagues identify barriers and facilitators in the delivery of care. Under the surface of this maternity hospital, social norms were in conflict with the principles of biomedicine. Contested areas included the control of knowledge, equity and the primary goal of work. The institutional culture was further complicated by pressure from powerful elites. These unseen values and pressures explain much of the disconnection between policy and implementation, education and the everyday behaviours of healthcare providers.

Improving the quality of care and equity in Afghan public maternity hospitals will require political will from all stakeholders to acknowledge these issues and find culturally attuned ways to address them.  The authors argue that this notion of parallel and competing world-views on healthcare has relevance beyond Afghanistan.   The paper co-authored by (a) Prof. Kath Ryan, Professor of Social Pharmacy at the University of Reading and Visiting Professor in FHSS, and BU’s Professors Immy Holloway and Edwin van Teijlingen.

 

References:

  1. Arnold, R., van Teijlingen, E., Ryan, K., Holloway, I. (2018) Parallel worlds: An ethnography of care in an Afghan maternity hospital, Social Science & Medicine 126:33-40. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.09.010.

 

Dr Gavin or: how I stopped worrying and learned to love research

PG research

A lesson on patience

It apparently took J.D. Salinger 10 years to write his first novel, The Catcher in the Rye. J.K. Rowling spent about 6 years writing and re-writing Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (I suspect publisher pressure accelerated things thereafter). As an early career researcher, I feel that since graduating from my doctorate and becoming independent, I can be less patient and eager for instant results – a feeling encouraged by social media and continuous metricisation.

My own current project, inspiratory muscle training for care home residents at risk of falling, can’t be compared to great achievements like those novels. But it is my ambition to undertake my own research project as principal investigator – and so I intend to savour the experience (i.e. be task oriented), rather than just chasing the outputs (i.e. being outcome oriented). I have learned to value iterative research designs, in that, the initial study’s outcomes inform the subsequent study’s methodology, and so on. However, this method presents its own uncertainties, as the researcher has to relinquish their control over the study.

Several lessons on managing myself

That said, I am beginning to see the need to set regular targets to keep the momentum on a project like this going. Taking my research beyond the controlled ‘safety’ of the physiology laboratory (satisfying internal validity), into a brave new world of the care home setting (satisfying external validity), requires working with research ‘end users’, be it: service managers, staff or residents. I’m finding the process: i) slow, care providers have additional administrative requirements, ii) essential, in laying trusted foundations for a long-term project, and iii) rewarding, by implementing research into the real world and establishing impact from the outset.

Since being awarded ACORN funding, my summer has been spent: writing for ethical approval, satisfying HR admin, recruiting care home partners, revising protocols, creating Plan B, writing Plan B ethical approval, piloting testing, revising participant selection criteria, and being trained by my PhD student (a lesson in humility, if nothing else). Even supported by an industrious research assistant this has felt a slow journey, with weekly peaks and troughs. I have even begun an 8 week period of inspiratory muscle training myself, to understand how care home residents can improve, feel challenged, and require further support. This has been equally useful to highlight practicalities – my challenges have been fitting 30 breaths, morning and night, into my daily routine; in contrast care residents’ challenges are likely to relate to effort, guidance, and motivation for training.

 

 

 

 

 

Research is an intellectual and logistical marathon

My initial participant selection criteria excluded all people with: dementia, COPD and respiratory difficulties, and cardiovascular diseases. My journey has presented three worries thus far: i) the funding expenditure deadline, ii) recruiting care homes and, iii) the selection criteria. In academia, the deadlines, targets and metrics are omnipresent, arguably more so since the increase in tuition fees.

Following the joy of being awarded research funding, comes the deadlines of expenditure (simple, if it were not for standard processes – ethical clearance, securing HR contracts, recruitment, and piloting) and the deliverables. I’m highly grateful of the ongoing support I receive, however I strongly believe that HE institutions must be realistic when financing projects and staff. Research is a slow process; outcomes cannot always be constrained to exact dates, as much as quality research cannot be established in rushed expenditure.

Mostly recently my challenge has been in recruiting care homes, particularly due to my selection criteria. This presents the methodological conflict between internal validity (i.e. the controlled laboratory) and external validity (i.e. the unpredictable care environment). Should I maintain my exclusion criteria, even though the majority of care home residents have dementia and/or COPD? Or relax the criteria to reflect the real environment and achieve recruitment? The former would make for more publishable data; the latter would support a Research Council funding bid (ah, I nearly forgot…must submit one of those by April 2019). Again, tempus fugit.

Self-experimentation

In this this social media age, time can appear condensed; two days can seem like an age, an afternoon of no replies, an epoch. A study in the 2017 Altmetric Top 100 provides compelling evidence that regular Smartphone use impairs cognitive performance by re-orienting attention. I’ve ‘disconnected’ from using a Smartphone and Facebook; this works for me. Regardless, I still have to exercise discipline in unnecessary email checking and now time-block my diary for: education, research or practice. I seriously recommend, as an academic, experiment on yourself. J.B.S. Haldane was a notable and prolific example of a self-experimenting physiologist. Yet whether it’s inspiratory muscle training or reducing Smartphone use, experiment on yourself – assess how you respond, identify influential variables and intervene if you wish.

 

 

 

 

How my ACORN grows

The simple truth is I don’t have a study finish date. The logic is if I am flexible on time, and put lots of my own effort in, then I will ultimately be able to generate both output and impact. There’s the psychological advantage too: by not having a finish date, I also stop the project becoming ‘work’. Pressures, missed opportunities, worrying others are publishing – these would stop research being fun. Academic success is not proportional to effort alone, however developing partnerships beyond academia is.

Being an academic is great – relative freedom, interesting colleagues, working with students, and contributing to societal value. Personally I’m not sure I’ll ever stop worrying, nevertheless, I have learnt to expect challenge on a near daily basis. This is notably relevant for the early career researcher looking to develop into an independent researcher, capable of sustaining their own work. Academia will always have a mountain to climb. I learnt to relax, stop worrying and love research by:

  1. Indulging in ‘quiet time’ – think, talk and share ideas
  2. Accepting failure
  3. Avoiding perfectionism
  4. Prioritising – day by day, week by week, time-block based on what tasks arise
  5. Avoiding distraction – e.g. social media detox / only read emails after late morning

Dr James Gavin

Dept. Sport & Physical Activity

Faculty of Management

Email jgavin@bournemouth.ac.uk

Phone 012029 66303

REGISTER NOW: 18th September 2018 – Sixth Annual Wessex CRN Research Meeting & Regional BGS

conferences, HSS Our 9 Research Entities, Knowledge Exchange, Knowledge Transfer, NHS, PG research

Click links for programme and registration form, spaces limited!

Programme for SIXTH Annual Wessex CRN and Regional BGS 18 Sept 2018 with sponsors v3

REGISTRATION FORM for 6th annual Wessex CRN Research BGS MEET

ING 18 09 2018

Congratulations to FHSS Visiting Faculty

international, NHS, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to two members of Bournemouth University’s Visiting Faculty Minesh Khashu and Jillian Ireland on the publication of their paper ‘Fathers in neonatal units: Improving infant health by supporting the baby-father bond and mother-father co-parenting ‘ which has been accepted this week by the Journal of Neonatal Nursing. [1]  Prof. Minesh Khashu is the lead Consultant Neonatologist and Jillian Ireland is Professional Midwifery Advocate and both are based at Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.

This position paper has been co-authored by a wide-range of international experts from The Family Initiative (based in London), Edith Cowan University in Australia, McGill University in Canada, Northwestern University in the United States of America, the University of Toulouse in France, Luleå University of Technology in Sweden, Lillebaelt Hospital in Denmark, the Scientific Institute IRCCS Eugenio Medea in Italy, the University of Melbourne in Australia and Bournemouth University.

This is second paper in this field by these BU Visiting Faculty members after the 2016 publication of a literature review. [2]

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

 

 

References:

  1. Fisher, D., Khashu, M., Adama, E., Feeley, N., Garfield, C., Ireland, J., Koliouli, F., Lindberg, B., Noergaard, B., Provenzi, L., Thomson-Salo, F., van Teijlingen, E. (2018) Fathers in neonatal units: Improving infant health by supporting the baby-father bond and mother-father co-parenting Journal of Neonatal Nursing (accepted).
  2. Ireland, J., Khashu, M., Cescutti-Butler, L., van Teijlingen, E., Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2016) Experiences of fathers with babies admitted to neonatal care units: A review of the literature, Journal of Neonatal Nursing 22(4): 171–176.

Researching with students: The challenges and opportunities of BU2025 for students and staff

Fusion

A first year BA Television Production student, Rowan Prosser and Lecturer, Annie East share their thoughts on a pilot research project using 360-degree filming technology.

Fusion BU2025 looks to ensure that students are informed in the ‘latest thinking in practice and research’ it also looks to ensure graduates are ‘innovative’ and ‘have research skills’. The doctoral research that Annie East is engaged with seeks to discover the ways in which students are working with health and safety risk management processes on their location film shoots. The pilot study looked to test the use of a 360-degree camera on a student shoot as a Virtual Reality (VR) elicitation tool for data gathering . Here Annie East and first year student, Rowan Prosser, reflect on his role as student research assistant, working with the 360 degree camera on a second year student film shoot.

Thoughts on student/lecturer collaboration.

Rowan Prosser: As a first year student the opportunity to work on academic research was both intriguing and a great opportunity to learn. The project gave me a chance to see how research is carried out in an academic way, seeing the correct processes of it all. It was all carefully considered and planned accordingly, my needs and any questions I had were answered immediately; something you don’t get when working with other students. When planning for the pilot project, the meetings that took place were well informed. In contrast, when I work with fellow students, there is sometimes difficulty in getting to the point of the discussion or the heart of the problem.

Annie East: Finding a student keen to work on research that was testing relatively new technology was key for this pilot. Meeting with Rowan for the first time as a researcher rather than as lecturer was a turning point. The power dynamics of student/lecturer dissolved with Rowan becoming more of an equal in our journey to master the technology and workflow of the camera. I chose to work with a student to lessen the power dynamic on the student film shoot; taking myself physically away from their shoot and allowing a student to operate the 360-degree camera.

360-degree camera

Reflections on the approach.

Rowan Prosser: It was an interesting scenario to be surrounded by second year BA Television Production students. Due to the role I had (responsibility for the 360-degree camera) they all tried to adhere to my needs and requests throughout the shoot. This allowed me to make sure that my camera work was achieved. If I was in the way, they would politely ask me to move the camera. The kit used really interested me; 360-degree video is something that is slowly coming into the fold – people (including the 2ndyear students I was working with) are very interested in the camera and how it works. This allowed me to educate and show them.

Annie East: Interestingly it is not just the power dynamics of lecturer/student that are changing with this work but also student-to-student interactions. The collaboration gave Rowan a new perspective and a window into the world of a second year student film shoot, levelling the inter-year dynamics somewhat. Silently it also afforded him institutional power; he became the educator and sage.

Reports from the field.

Rowan Prosser: Observing second-year students on their film shoots gave me the ability to blend in since I was a fellow student.  We were able to talk about the course, topics we enjoyed thus allowing the presence of a camera filming their every movement less uncomfortable. It was interesting to observe the similarities of 2nd-year students to 1st years on the shoot. The classic way in which clear leaders can sometimes emerge and take over other people’s role was seen, this being an issue with student filmmaking, when someone isn’t happy with how someone else is conducting their role.

Annie East: Rowan’s reflections display some of the key tensions in setting up this research project; how do we observe students in the field and in what ways does that change the way they behave. This pilot confirmed going forward that the data to be captured is not the footage itself but the conversation about the footage when each crew member put on their VR visor to re-immerse themselves back into their field. This shifts the research focus away from behaviour and towards reflections on action and reflections in action.

Moving forward

Rowan Prosser: I really enjoyed the experience, as the opportunity to carry out research for an academic is not something that happens a lot. It gave me a clear insight into the future on how I can carry out future research and also taught me a lot about 360 cameras which I have not previously used. The group of second year students responded very well to me being around, and in the group, so it would be interesting to see how other groups would react to my involvement.

Annie East: These reflections suggest a shift in student identity and changing power dynamics between researcher and student and between student-to-student. The confidence that this work appears to have afforded Rowan sets him on the path of the lifelong learner; someone thirsty for new challenges. The challenge for BU2025 is the possible perception that working on academic research is a rare experience. Going forward Rowan can choose to be part of the full study and be more experienced for it; a scaffolded approach to collaborative research rather than a siloed one. The vision of fusion in BU2025 features a strong sense of inclusivity which we can promote to our students creating not only rounded academics but also fully rounded students, confident to take on ‘intriguing’ research projects.

References 

Bournemouth University BU2025 Strategic Plan 2018 (online). Available from: https://www1.bournemouth.ac.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/bu2025-strategic-plan.pdf (Accessed 10 August 2018)

Foucault, M., 1991. Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison. London: Penguin.

Schön, D. A., 1983. The reflective practitioner. [online] : how professionals think in action. New York : Basic Books.

Vygotsky, L. S. and Cole, M., 1978. Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes / L. S. Vygotsky ; edited by Michael Cole … [et al.] Cambridge : Harvard University Press.