Tagged / proposal writing

Media coverage of BU workshops in Nepal

Awarded & submitted bids, Featured academics, international, Publishing, Uncategorized, writing

Earlier this week the Chitwan Post Daily in southern Nepal reported on our Writing Workshops conducted in Pokhara and Kathmandu.  The headline photo of this newspaper article focuses on the keynote speech delivered by Prof Dr Prem Narayan Aryal, Vice Chancellor of Pokhara University. He highlighted many key issues around gender and development in Nepal and the importance of academic writing and publishing.  This British Academy funded series of BU workshops is is led by Dr. Shovita Dhakal Adhikari (Dept of Sociology & Social Work), Dr. Pramod Regmi (Department of Nursing Sciences) and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen (Department of Midwifery & Health Sciences), Dr. Emma Pitchforth from the University of Exeter UK, and Dr. Rashmee Rajkarnikar from the Central Department of Economics at Tribhuvan University (Nepal’s oldest and largest university) with the support of local partners in Nepal, namely Social Science Baha and Green Tara Nepal.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

BU Systematic Review Masterclass starting tomorrow

BU research, Events, Featured academics, Publishing, Research assessment, Research news, Uncategorized, writing

Looking forward to our annual Systematic Review Masterclass at Bournemouth University which will be starting tomorrow February 14th.  This year for the first time we have renamed it a ‘Systematic Review to Inform Clinical Practice’ as it is not only a free-standing masterclass but also a level 7 unit of Continuing Professional Development and Training .  This year we aim to provide students with the opportunity to choose an area of interest and undertake an in-depth, independent study in the form of a systematic review, focusing on a negotiated aspect of clinical practice.  Prof. Vanora Hundley and I had published over twenty systematic reviews (or papers about systematic reviewing) over the past two decades. [1-21]  The unit will have input from BU’s Academic Liaison Librarian, Caspian Dugdale, and BU academics such as Dr. Bibha Simkhada, Lecturer in Nursing.

Professors Vanora Hundley and Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen E, Wilson, B, Barry, N, Ralph, A, McNeill, G, Graham, W, Campbell, D. (eds.) (1998) Effectiveness of interventions to promote healthy eating in pregnant women & women of childbearing age: a review, London: Health Education Authority www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/documents/effect_eatpregant.pdf  [ISBN: 0752110977].
  2. van Teijlingen ER, Bruce, J. (1999) Systematic reviews of health promotion initiatives: the Smokebusters experience, Health Education, 99: 76-83.
  3. Ryan M, Scott DA, Reeves C, Bate A., van Teijlingen E, Russell E, Napper M, Robb C (2001) Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: systematic review of techniques. Health Technology Assessment 5(5)
  4. Simkhada, B., van Teijlingen E., Porter, M., Simkhada, P. (2008) Factors affecting the utilisation of antenatal care in developing countries: a systematic review of the literature, Journal of Advanced Nursing 61(3): 244-260.
  5. Paul-Ebhohimhen, V.A., Poobalan, A., van Teijlingen E. (2008) Systematic review of effectiveness of school-based sexual health interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa, BMC Public Health, 8(4). www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/4
  6. Robertson L, Douglas F, Ludbrook A., Reid G., van Teijlingen E. (2008) What works with men? A systematic review of health promoting interventions targeting men, BMC Health Services Research 8(141). www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/8/141
  7. Acharya, D.R., Bhattarai, R, Poobalan, A, van Teijlingen E.R., Chapman, G. (2010) Factors associated with teenage pregnancy in South Asia: a systematic review. Health Sciences Journal 4(1): 3-14. www.hsj.gr/volume4/issue1/402.pdf
  8. Hundley V, Avan B, Braunholtz D, and Graham WJ (2012). Are birth kits a good idea? A systematic review of the evidence. Midwifery 28(2): 204-215
  9. Wasti, SP, van Teijlingen E., Simkhada, P., Randall, J., Baxter S, Kirkpatrick P, Vijay Singh Gc. (2012) Factors influencing adherence to antiretroviral treatment in Asian developing countries: a systematic review, Tropical Medicine & International Health 17(1): 71-81. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-3156.2011.02888.x/pdf
  10. VA Hundley, BI Avan, CJ Sullivan, WJ Graham. (2013) Should oral misoprostol be used to prevent postpartum haemorrhage in home-birth settings in low-resource countries? A systematic review of the evidence. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 120:277–287DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12049
  11. 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.
  12. Robertson, C, Archibald, D, Avenell, A, Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen E, et al. (2014) Systematic reviews of & integrated report on quantitative, qualitative & economic evidence base for the management of obesity in men. Health Technology Assessment 18(35): 1-424. http://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/118180/FullReport-hta18350.pdf
  13. 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 & Embase, Systematics Reviews 3,78
  14. Gyawali, B., Neupane, D., Sharma, R., Mishra, S.R., van Teijlingen, E., Kallestrup, P. (2015) Prevalence of type 2 diabetes in Nepal: Systematic review & meta-analysis from 2000 to 2014 Global Health Action 8: 29088 www.globalhealthaction.net/index.php/gha/article/view/29088/pdf_189
  15. Boyers, D, Stewart, F, Fraser, C, Robertson, C, Avenell, A, Archibald, D, Douglas, F, Hoddinott P, van Teijlingen E. (2015). A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of non-surgical obesity interventions in men, Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 9(4), 310-327.
  16. Robertson, C, Avenell, A, Boachie, C., Stewart, F., Archibald D., Hoddinott, P, Douglas, F, van Teijlingen E, Boyers D. (2016) Should weight loss and maintenance programmes be designed differently for men? Systematic review of long-term RCTs presenting data for men & women: The ROMEO Project, Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 10: 70-84.
  17. Simkhada, P.P., Sharma, A., van Teijlingen, ER., Beanland, R,L. (2016) Factors influencing sexual behaviour between tourists and tourism employees: A systematic review. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 6(1): 530-538. www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/14735/11952
  18. Symon, A., Pringle, J., Cheyne, H., Downe, S., Hundley, V., Lee, E., Lynn, F., McFadden, A., McNeill, J., Renfrew, M., Ross-Davie, M., van Teijlingen, E., Whitford, H, Alderdice, F. (2016) Midwifery-led antenatal care models: Mapping a systematic review to an evidence-based quality framework to identify key components & characteristics of care, BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 16: 168 http://rdcu.be/uifu  
  19. Hanley GE, Munro S, Greyson D, Gross MM, Hundley V, Spiby H and Janssen PA (2016) Diagnosing onset of labor: A systematic review of definitions in the research literature. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 16: 71 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0857-4
  20. Robertson, C., Avenell, A., Stewart, F., Archibald, D., Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen, E., Boyers, D. (2017) Clinical effectiveness of weight loss & weight maintenance interventions for men: a systematic review of men-only randomised controlled trials (ROMEO Project), American Journal of Men’s Health 11(4): 1096-1123.
  21. Symon, A., Pringle, J., Downe, S., Hundley, V., Lee, E., Lynn, F., McFadden, A., McNeill, J., Renfrew, M., Ross-Davie, M., van Teijlingen, E., Whitford, H., Alderdice, F. (2017) Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 17:8 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3
  22. Pitchforth, E, Nolte, E, Corbett, J, Miani, C, Winpenny, E, van Teijlingen E, et al. (2017) Community hospitals and their services in the NHS: identifying transferable learning from international developments – scoping review, systematic review, country reports and case studies Health Services & Delivery Research 5(19): 1-248.
  23. Ochillo, M., van Teijlingen, E., Hind, M. (2017) Influence of faith-based organisations on HIV prevention strategies in Africa: a systematic review. African Health Sciences 17(3): 753-761.
  24. Mahato, P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Angell, C. (2017) Determinants of quality of care & access to Basic Emergency Obstetric & Neonatal Care facilities & midwife-led facilities in low & middle-income countries: A Systematic Review, Journal of Asian Midwives 4(2):25-51. https://ecommons.aku.edu/jam/vol4/iss2/4/
  25. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Sharma, A., Bissell, P., Poobalan, A., Wasti, S.P. (2018) Health consequences of sex trafficking: A systematic review, Journal of Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences, 4(1): 130-149.

 

Do you need help with your research application?

BU Challenges, BU research, policy, pre-award, Research news, RKE development framework

If you need help with your research application and can meet certain criteria, then you may be eligible to receive support from one of our External Application Reviewers (EARs).

With a new and simplified process, you can request this when you submit your Intention to Bid form, and you meet at least one of the following conditions:

  • The application is to a prestigious funder (UK research councils, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust, British Academy, Royal Society, NIHR and EU Horizon 2020)
  • The application is to a strategically important funding call, including those in the BU2025 Strategic Investment Areas
  • NERC Standard Grants
  • One-off calls for multi-million pound bids (such as AHRC’s Creative Clusters Programme and Research England’s E3 call)
  • The applicant is a member of the BU Research Council Development Scheme and is applying to a UK Research Council call
  • The applicant is an ECR and is applying to a prestigious funder

Your Research Facilitator will then be in contact to discuss your needs. Approval will need to be given both by RKEO and your department before an EAR is appointed to support you.

If you do not meet the above conditions, help may still be available in certain circumstances. Additionally, certain calls may be eligible for external support from other sources. – please discuss these with your Research Facilitator.

Please note that this is an application reviewing service; the EARs will not write your bid for you.

 

Experiences of an early career researcher: developing international collaborations

Fusion themes, international, Research Training

Saturday 9th June, 17.00. Standing at Platform 1 in Southampton Central station waiting for the 16.30 to Heathrow Airport. 17.10. Begin to panic and call the UK co-ordinator. 17.28. Begin to panic and call my wife. Taxi number on stand-by. 17.29. My train arrives.

So began my week-long sojourn to Sao Paulo for a British Council international Researcher Links workshop.Two hours later and safely through security, I begin to relax and meet a group of the UK delegates. Sunday arrived at 05.00 with a sense of excitement and exhaustion, as our mini-bus took us to the hotel. 11.10. Arrived at the hotel. It felt like 15.10. The OPAL workshop (a.k.a. ‘Identifying and addressing shared challenges in conducting health and social care research for older people’)  was an international collaborative ECR ‘sandpit’ between the UK and Brazil, with the aim of developing international research projects in ageing healthcare between the countries. OPAL was so much more than this; here is some of what I learnt:

1. Coming to an understanding

Otherwise known as ‘breaking down international barriers’. It is important that as you group-work, particularly with new partners, you listen to what they have to say, their perspectives, and adopt an open-mind. Consider their priorities, current research commitments and their personality. It is a skill in itself to recognise and motivate different individual personalities towards a common goal. But also respect that your colleagues will have other work (and life) commitments outside the project.

2. Identifying the problem

My group comprised a: physiologist, geriatrician, physiotherapist and clinician. Our topic: healthcare in frailty. On larger multidisciplinary projects, put aside your specific research interests and focus on identifying a worthy research question. This will allow you to build the project on current knowledge and challenge a ‘real world’ problem worth answering. ‘The whole is greater than the sum of its parts’. Keep in mind, there will always be ample opportunity for you to flex your specific technical abilities in a project; there may be a sub-study, a related side-study or an opening up of subsequent opportunities.

3. Benefits of teamwork

As always some of the most impactful and lasting partnerships are built after hours. Class-based activities lay foundations in knowledge; group work builds relationships; socialising (or networking) develops understanding and empathy. I’m no socialite, but be present, listen and give your potential partners your undivided attention. Not only is this crucial when building partnerships, but also professionally good etiquette. This may seem difficult with other deadlines/priorities looming, but DO NOT get out your phone/laptop/mobile device in social situations. This shows disinterest and poor manners.

4. Be realistic

…and be patient. ‘He who knows only his side of the case, knows little’ (John Stuart Mill). Appreciate the workload demands of others; by the time Monday comes you will all have a fresh list of priorities. For collaborations beyond your institution think what platforms you can use to keep momentum. For example: Dropbox, webinars, educational partnerships and/or Skype meetings. Also use collaboration-working as an excuse to write travel grant proposals.

5. How to create momentum and impact

Keeping things moving is a must, I think. Commit and schedule time into your diary, as you would for your teaching. Similar to research writing, if you do not prioritise the time, it will quickly be filled with other duties. Our group created a Dropbox folder (containing a new systematic review on our project idea), circulated a Doodle poll, and then arranged for a follow-up Skype call to share our independent reviews and discuss funding opportunities. Relationships are always more important than the project; there will be many opportunities for projects, not always for trusted and like minded research partners. Oh, and understand that each member has the right to withdraw from the group at any point. Our group began the week with seven, and by Friday’s Dragon Den presentation we had four (looking glamorous below). Oh well.

What next?

It’s now one week since I returned, and keeping momentum with the FIBULA project (a.k.a. ‘Frailty in the Brazil and the UK: Learning across Borders’) I have arranged to visit my UK partner and senior researchers at the University of Nottingham in July-August to begin a scoping review. Later in Autumn, through RKEO Acorn funding I will host our other group partner(s) from the University of Sao Paulo at BU to conduct a systematic review and develop our partnership, and proposal further.

These suggestions are based merely on a research neophyte’s experiences in exercise physiology, partnering with the healthcare sciences. Although I impart advice, for everything I have discussed, I am still striving to master these skills. After all, the research process is learning from knowledge of what came before and evaluation of what we find out.

Dr James Gavin

Department of Sport & Physical Activity

Email jgavin@bournemouth.ac.uk

Twitter @JGavin85

LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/jgavin1

Migration research at BU: New migrant workers’ paper published

BU research, humanities, international, open access, PG research, Publishing, Research communication, Research news, student research, Uncategorized, writing

Two days ago saw the publication of the latest paper on migration research here at Bournemouth University. The journal Health Prospect published ‘Risky work: Accidents among Nepalese migrant workers in Malaysia, Qatar and Saudi’ [1]. This new paper is based on the PhD research project conducted by Dr. Pratik Adhikary. Health Prospect is a peer-reviewed Open Access journal, part of Nepal Journals Online (NepJOL) which offers free access to research on and/or from Nepal. The paper is co-authored by former FHSS staff Dr. Zoe Sheppard and Dr. Steve Keen as well as Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen of the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH).

Previous academic papers by BU scholars included, amongst others, work on migrant workers from Nepal [2-6], relatives of migrant workers [7], migrant health workers [8-9], migration and tourism [10-11], migrant workers from Eastern Europe [11-13], migration and the media [14] as well as migration in the past [15]. The various strands of work link very well to BU’s application for Leverhulme Doctoral Scholarships.

 

References:

  1. Adhikary, P., Sheppard, Z., Keen, S., van Teijlingen, E. (2017) Risky work: Accidents among Nepalese migrant workers in Malaysia, Qatar and Saudi, Health Prospect 16(2): 3-10.
  2. Adhikary, P., Simkhada, P.P., van Teijlingen E., Raja, AE. (2008) Health & Lifestyle of Nepalese Migrants in the UK BMC International Health & Human Rights 8(6). Web address: www.biomedcentral.com/1472-698X/8/6.
  3. van Teijlingen E, Simkhada, P., Adhikary, P. (2009) Alcohol use among the Nepalese in the UK BMJ Rapid Response: www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/339/oct20_1/b4028#223451
  4. Adhikary P., Keen S., van Teijlingen, E. (2011) Health Issues among Nepalese migrant workers in Middle East. Health Science Journal 5: 169-175. www.hsj.gr/volume5/issue3/532.pdf
  5. Aryal, N., Regmi, PR., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Adhikary, P., Bhatta, YKD., Mann, S. (2016) Injury and Mortality in Young Nepalese Migrant Workers: A Call for Public Health Action. Asian-Pacific Journal of Public Health 28(8): 703-705.
  6. Simkhada, PP., Regmi, PR., van Teijlingen, E., Aryal, N. (2017) Identifying the gaps in Nepalese migrant workers’ health & well-being: A review of the literature, Journal of Travel Medicine 24 (4): 1-9.
  7. Aryal, N., Regmi, PR., van Teijlingen, E., Dhungel, D., Ghale, G., Bhatta, GK. (2016) Knowing is not enough: Migrant workers’ spouses vulnerability to HIV SAARC Journal of Tuberculosis, Lung Diseases & HIV/AIDS 8(1):9-15.
  8. Scammell, J., 2016. Nurse migration and the EU: how are UK nurses prepared? British Journal of Nursing, 25 (13), p. 764.
  9. Sapkota, T., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2014) Nepalese health workers’ migration to United Kingdom: A qualitative study. Health Science Journal 8(1):57-74.
  10. Dwyer, L., Seetaram, N., Forsyth, P., Brian, K. (2014) Is the Migration-Tourism Relationship only about VFR? Annals of Tourism Research, 46: 130-143.
  11. Filimonau, V., Mika, M. (2017) Return labour migration: an exploratory study of Polish migrant workers from the UK hospitality industry. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-22.
  12. Janta, H., Ladkin, A., Brown, L., Lugosi, P., 2011. Employment experiences of Polish migrant workers in the UK hospitality sector. Tourism Management, 32 (5): 1006-1019.
  13. Mai, N., Schwandner-Sievers, S. (2003) Albanian migration and new transnationalisms, Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies 29(6): 939-948.
  14. Marino, S., Dawes, S., 2016. Fortress Europe: Media, Migration and Borders. Networking Knowledge, 9 (4).
  15. Parker Pearson, M., Richards, C., Allen, M., Payne, A. & Welham, K. (2004) The Stonehenge Riverside project Research design and initial results Journal of Nordic Archaeological Science 14: 45–60

External Application Reviewers Available

BU research, RKE development framework

We are delighted to confirm that as part of the Research Knowledge Exchange Development Framework, we now have funds available for external application reviewers.

A reminder of the process has been outlined below, and all documentation is available on MyBU here.

Who decides when an external application reviewer may be used?

The permission of academics to use the faculty tied budgets will be under the control of the Deputy Deans of Research and Professional Practice (DDRPP) of each faculty.  This is to keep strategic control under the charge of each DDRPP for their respective faculty. 

How will academics access this support?

Academics who wish to access external support need to consult with their faculty DDRPP.  Please read the “Appointing an External Expert- Procedure” documents and complete the “External Support Checklist” along with an “Intention to Bid” form and send this to the relevant DDRPP.  If the request is approved, the DDRPP will send the approved paperwork to RKEO who will then contact the external consultant and the academic to work on a service specification.  All contracts and legal/financial arrangements will be dealt with by RKEO.

Who provides the External Support?

We currently have several external application reviewers available, details of which can be found on MyBU.  This process is still open so additional providers may be added at a later date. 

What do academics need to do?

Those interested in making use of an external expert should allow at least four weeks to work on an application before a funding call closing date. Shorter notice would not allow sufficient time for the experts to 1) make room in their schedules for working on a new application and 2) provide an appropriate level of in-depth advice with enough time to incorporate changes and suggestions.

Applicants will be asked to send a copy of an Intention to Bid form as well as a completed checklist to their DDRPP which will explain the background to their proposal and why they would find support helpful.

BUCRU – not just for Writing Week

BU research, writing

We’re coming to the end of Writing Week in the Faculty of Health and Social Sciences and by now you will have made a good start or have put the finishing touches to your academic writing projects. Over the last week, we have given you some tips on writing grant applications and highlighted some of the expertise within BUCRU. If you didn’t get the chance to pop in and see us we thought it would be useful to remind you what we’re about and how we can help.

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) supports researchers in improving the quality, quantity and efficiency of research across the University and local National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. We do this by:

  • Helping researchers develop high quality applications for external research funding (including small grants)
  • Ongoing involvement in funded research projects
  • A “pay-as-you-go” consultation service for other work.

How can we help?

BUCRU can provide help in the following areas:

  • Study design
  • Quantitative and qualitative research methods
  • Statistics, data management and data analysis
  • Patient and public involvement in research
  • Trial management
  • Ethics, governance and other regulatory issues
  • Linking University and NHS researchers

Our support is available to Bournemouth University staff and people working locally in the NHS, and depending on the support you require, is mostly free of charge. There are no general restrictions on topic area or professional background of the researcher.

If you would like support in developing your research please get in touch through bucru@bournemouth.ac.uk or by calling us on 01202 961939. Please see our website for further information, details of our current and previous projects and a link to our recent newsletter.

Interreg Visit BU

RKE development framework

interreg

On Tuesday the 21st February 2017 Interreg will be visiting BU 10.30-16.00 at the EBC.

Interreg is an economic development programme that funds innovation, low carbon, climate change and resource efficiency projects which take place across EU countries and regions. These projects aim to find common solutions to common problems which exist in multiple countries. BU has been awarded and is involved in projects from the Channel, 2 Seas and Atlantic schemes.

This event is aimed at people in the Dorset, Hampshire, Wiltshire and Isle of Wight areas and nearby cities that are new to the Interreg programme, who are confused about which programme is which, or who are just beginning to develop a project idea.

For people who are drafting an application, or who want feedback on an application they have submitted, the programmes offer other workshops. For example the 2Seas cross border programme will run a Step 1 applicants’ workshop on 27th January 2017 in Bristol, and a step 2 applicants’ workshop on 13th February, also in Bristol. These are open to all applicants in the eligible area. See www.interreg2seas.eu for further information.

Our event will be split into two parts.

The first part will include;

  • An introduction to Interreg: The Interreg programmes, how they are different from each other and from other EU funds. This will also cover the types of project that are funded.
  • Tips on how to develop a good Interreg project: Lessons from the selection process by Sallyann Stephen from The Department for Communities and Local Government, based on her experience on the Interreg project selection panel.
  • How to apply: the two stage process going through the selection criteria and the key documents involved.

The second part will have a more informal set up with interactive exercises to get you thinking, collaborating and developing project ideas.

Throughout the afternoon there will also be one to one appointments on specific project ideas with one of the Interreg facilitators. This is an excellent opportunity to develop a project and get feedback from the experts. If you would like to book a one to one session you will need to email Dianne Goodman at dgoodman@bournemouth.ac.uk. Places will be allocated on a first come first served basis, if you have specific preferences on the time we recommend you contact Dianne as soon as possible so your request can be accommodated.

Please note that to attend the one to one session you are required to send a 1 page project summary to Paula MacLachlan, 2 Seas Territorial Facilitator p.maclachlan@interreg2seas.eu no later than 14th February. Apologies, without this ahead of time they will be unable to prepare adequately for your personal one to one session.

The presentation is open also to the regional university network, known as the M3 group, which includes: AUB, Bournemouth, Brighton, Portsmouth, Reading, Southampton, Southampton Solent, Surrey, Sussex and Winchester. All academics and research offices are welcome to attend. BU will host a networking lunch for all attendees. This is a great opportunity to learn about Interreg and how you can strengthen your applications for funding. If you would like to attend, then please book through Eventbrite.

For further information on this event please contact: RKEDevFramework@bournemouth.ac.uk

*Please note as Interreg programmes operate in set geographical areas you must check the programme websites to ensure eligibility.

From research proposals to job applications: Writing tips from the European Research Council (ERC) Starting Grants workshop

BU research, EU, Funding opportunities, Guidance, Research communication

Yesterday I attended an ERC Starting Grants session at the London School of Economics. Although I may never reach the heady, research heights of submitting a proposal to the prestigious, ERC Starting Grants Call (let alone progressing past Step 1, with 9% success rate!), the workshop provided a range of advice equally applicable to preparing: i) funding proposals and, ii) job applications. From the background search to the interview presentation, in many ways job applications are similar to research funding applications.

Firstly, the background search: if possible, find out who has recently received funding in your field. If applying for a position, identify previous successful candidates. What skills and experience did they have? Appreciating these will allow you write your application accounting for your own capabilities, whilst also identifying how the project or position can further your professional and personal development. Awareness of how the project/position can create opportunities to turn your weaknesses, to strengths, is an important advantage at the interview stage. Next, what are the priorities of the funder, company or institution? Does your CV fit the job roles and responsibilities? Does your project proposal satisfy the call?

Secondly, the writing: be ambitious, but avoid sounding unrealistic. Adhere to the application criteria and submission guidelines (even font-size, line-spacing, etc). Provide evidence of how your project is innovative, what makes you stand out, or what specific skills you can contribute. These should relate to the criteria of the position advert or the research call. Preparation is key; start writing as soon as possible, and expect multiple drafts. Build your proposal (or Personal Statement) logically, based on your previous research (or experiences and skills). Make the application a pleasure to read, but stick to the specific guidelines. If preparing a research proposal, use data and graphs; if preparing a Personal Statement, tell a story expanding on your CV. Ask friends and/or colleagues for comments on your application – informal peer-review in preparation for formal peer-review (the same applies when practicing your interview presentation). Importantly you want to convince those outside of your field how you (or your study) can provide a long-lasting difference.

If you are invited to interview, do your research, again. What are the values of the funder, institution or company? Who is on the panel? What is their background? Next, structure a convincing presentation aligned to your application; support each claim with an example, but be succinct and to-the-point. Maintain focus and momentum, but communicate your enthusiasm. Once finished, expect a range of technical and non-technical questions. Ultimately, interview questions will relate to the application criteria, and range from your subject-specific knowledge to transferable skills (i.e., project management skills). Finally, use questions as an excuse to show your audience what you know; view your ‘weaknesses’ as opportunities. If successful, celebrate; if unsuccessful, view as an opportunity. As the ERC Officer mentioned ‘many successful applications come from investigators who were unsuccessful with a previous application and subsequently improved their submission’.

So regardless as to whether you are an undergraduate looking to secure a placement/ postgraduate position, or a Senior Lecturer applying for research funding, translate what you have learnt from previous writing experiences to the opportunities presenting you here and now.

ERC Starting Grant Call

ERC Starting Grant – Funded Projects

EU Funded Projects – Host Countries

James Gavin, Lecturer (Exercise Physiology) – Faculty of Management

An Early-Career Academic’s Experiences: How Grants Academy supported me to supervise an Undergraduate Research Assistant?

Awarded & submitted bids, BU research, Featured academics, Grants Academy

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to enrol on the Grants Academy, working to develop a draft proposal for what would be my first research study at BU. Having been taught the art of ‘craftsmanship’, ‘free writing’, and then developing the proposal(s) over time, allowed me to reflect upon and begin realising my research idea. This led to a cross-faculty research partnership and a Grants Academy Small Grant award, to fund a preliminary study to determine whether leg position influences the effects of an electrostimulation device used to prevent deep-vein thrombosis. The pilot study aimed to monitor leg muscle activity and balance ability in healthy, older adults, to provide a foundation for the future study focusing on post-operative, older adults. Not only did the Grants Academy develop my proposal writing skills and an understanding of research funding acquisition, but also supported me to establish my research profile at BU. Shortly after the internal-award, I applied for the Undergraduate Research Assistant (URA) scheme, which would allow me to supervise a student for six weeks during the research study. The project was successful in supporting a URA, who sadly finished earlier this month.

Once a URA myself (albeit at Manchester Metropolitan University), I felt was it important to involve the assistant throughout the research process, including: protocol design, recruitment, laboratory testing, as well as data collection, archiving and early analysis. The URA proved to be mature, diligent and self-motivated, and also a great laboratory partner. After an induction week, she quickly familiarised herself with the lab equipment and was soon able to contribute to refining the study protocol. Partly due to her enthusiasm, partly due to Grants Academy funding, the URA worked hard: achieving NHS Good Clinical Practice training, co-presenting findings at Festival of Learning (Research Reflections event) and co-authoring the study protocol for Clinical Trial Register recognition. She also worked closely with academics from the Faculty of Management, and Faculty of Health and Social Care. Based on the URA’s performance and commitment, my co-investigator and I have invited her to continue working on the project to disseminate the study findings (with conference abstracts and two articles in preparation).

12

Early data suggests healthy, older adults benefit more from electrostimulation with the leg bent (seated position), than having the leg straight (typical hospital-administered, lying position). These findings will provide the basis for the future study examining the impact of leg position in clinical patients recovering from surgery. So thanks to Grants Academy, BU and my URA, I’ve been able to establish a sustainable, cross-faculty research plan that will promote co-creation and co-production with students, end-users and research partners into the future. Regardless of where you are in your career, Grants Academy and the URA Scheme offer boundless opportunities for professional and personal development – much recommended!

 

Dr James Gavin

Lecturer (Exercise Physiology)

Department of Sport and Physical Activity

Faculty of Management

Next Grants Academy – Apply now!

BU research, Grants Academy, Training

The Grants Academy has been described by members as ‘brilliant’, ‘excellent’, ‘extremely educational and stimulating’ and ‘very beneficial’. It has also increased bids submissions from members acting as a Principal Investigator by 41% and 20% as a co-Investigator. Members have significantly increased their funding successes too and obtained funding from organisations such as the AHRC, European Commission, ESRC, British Academy, English Heritage and Burdett Trust for Nursing.

How does the Academy work?  Members attend an initial two day training course off campus, facilitated by an external expert bid writer with a well-developed draft proposal. The training days will cover the art of proposal craftmanship, the rules of the writing game and other invaluable information to help you perfect your proposal during the days. Feedback on these days from existing members have been very positive, ‘the workshop was the best I have ever attended’. 

Members can then further develop their proposal over a couple of weeks, gaining unlimited support from the external facilitator in doing so and the cohort re-gathers for a mock peer review panel of each other’s applications. This gives a unique insight into this process in a supportive environment and helps further refine the proposal. One member has described this session as ‘[I now have] profound insights in[to] how the system works…and to realize how that must be for professional reviewers’.  The cohort will also receive guidance about BU’s processes for applying for grants, to make sure they are aware of the support available.

What other support is given? Throughout the 18 month membership of the Grants Academy, members benefit form UNLIMITED support from the external facilitator (and in some cases additional external reviewers) which has been invaluable in helping members secure external funding ‘[His] input enabled me to produce a clearer, more logical and convincing proposal. He also alerted me to issues I had not previously considered and encouraged me to think about ‘impact’ and value for the UK in new ways’.

Members also have bespoke assistance from R&KEO in finding funding and collaborators. They also have access to a library of successful proposals from BU, a travel grant (£250), guaranteed places on Funder visits organised for them and surgeries with external facilitators. Funder visits coming up include the British Academy in early 2015.

How do I apply? To apply for a place, please contact your DDRE in the first instance.  The first cohort dates are: January 26/27 and follow up day February 16.  There will then be a second cohort: March 11/12 and follow up day April 1.

What’s the small print? When making your application, you must ensure that you are available for the 3 dates in their entirety. Membership is only obtained once all training days have been attended. Obligations of membership are that at least one proposal for external funding must be submitted within the first six months of membership. As the training days are attended with a draft proposal, this should be obtainable. Within 18 months at least three proposals for external funding must have been submitted. Failure to meet these obligations will lead to membership being revoked.

If you have any questions about the Grants Academy please contact Giles Ashton (scheme administrator) or Jennifer Roddis (scheme manager).

September: A good month for CMMPH publications

Publishing, Uncategorized

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health started well this September with four publications in academic and practitioners’ journal.  Starting with final-year student midwife Joanna Lake who just had an article published in The Practising Midwife.1

Secondly, BU midwifery staff Jen Leamon and Sue Way together with HSC Visiting Fellow Suzie Cro also have had an article published this month in the same journal.2

Susanne Grylka-Baeschlin, a midwife from Switzerland who spent time at BU as an international visitor (see http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/2014/07/02/latest-hsc-midwifery-paper-in-open-access/) had her paper published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth this month.3

And last, but not least, Wendy Marsh, based in HSC’s Portsmouth office had a paper in the September issue of the British Journal of Midwifery.4

 

Congratulations,

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

References:

  1. Lake J., 2014. Witnessing the art of woman-centred care by and exceptional mentor. The Practicing Midwife. 17(8), 24-26.
  2. Leamon J, Way S. & Cro S., 2014. Supervision of midwives and the 6Cs: exploring how we do what we do. The Practicing Midwife. 17(8), 41-42.
  3. Grylka-Baeschlin  S., van Teijlingen,  E. & Mechthild, G.M., 2014. Cultural differences in postnatal quality of life among German-speaking women: a prospective survey in two countries. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 14:277    www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2393/14/277
  4. Marsh, W. 2014. Removing babies from mother’s at birth: Midwives experiences. British Journal of Midwifery. 22(9):620 – 624.

Grants Academy to the Rescue! Last chance until the Autumn!

BU research, Grants Academy, Research news, Training

The Grants Academy has been described by members as ‘brilliant’, ‘excellent’, ‘extremely educational and stimulating’ and ‘very beneficial’. It has also increased bids submissions from members acting as a Principal Investigator by 41% and 20% as a co-Investigator. Members have significantly increased their funding successes too and obtained funding from organisations such as the AHRC, European Commission, ESRC, British Academy, English Heritage and Burdett Trust for Nursing.

How does the Academy work?  Members attend an initial two day training course off campus, facilitated by an external expert bid writer with a well-developed draft proposal. The training days will cover the art of proposal craftmanship, the rules of the writing game and other invaluable information to help you perfect your proposal during the days. Feedback on these days from existing members have been very positive, ‘the workshop was the best I have ever attended’. 

Members can then further develop their proposal over a couple of weeks, gaining unlimited support from the external facilitator in doing so and the cohort re-gathers for a mock peer review panel of each other’s applications. This gives a unique insight into this process in a supportive environment and helps further refine the proposal. One member has described this session as ‘[I now have] profound insights in[to] how the system works…and to realize how that must be for professional reviewers’.

What other support is given? Throughout the 18 month membership of the Grants Academy, members benefit form UNLIMITED support from the external facilitator (and in some cases additional external reviewers) which has been invaluable in helping members secure external funding ‘[His] input enabled me to produce a clearer, more logical and convincing proposal. He also alerted me to issues I had not previously considered and encouraged me to think about ‘impact’ and value for the UK in new ways’.

Members also have bespoke assistance from R&KEO in finding funding and collaborators. They also have access to a library of successful proposals from BU, a travel grant (£250), guaranteed places on Funder visits organised for them and surgeries with external facilitators.

How do I apply? To apply for a place, please contact me Dianne Goodman and I will send you a Membership Agreement Form that will need to be signed by you, your line manager and your DDRE.

The next training sessions due to take place on the: 12th and 13th of May and the 9th of June 2014 and will be the last until the Autumn

Due to our Grants Academy scheme’s success you may be added to a waiting list if no spaces are available on this training session. We are hoping to announce further Grants Academy sessions in the Autumn. You are welcome to apply and register for these Grants Academy sessions and we are happy to put your name on our list.

What’s the small print? When making your application, you must ensure that you are available for the 3 dates in their entirety. Membership is only obtained once all training days have been attended. Obligations of membership are that at least one proposal for external funding must be submitted within the first six months of membership. As the training days are attended with a draft proposal, this should be obtainable. Within 18 months at least three proposals for external funding must have been submitted. Failure to meet these obligations will lead to membership being revoked.

If you have any questions about the Grants Academy please get in touch with Dianne Goodman (scheme administrator) or Rebecca Edwards (scheme manager).

Grants Academy Next Workshops – get yourself booked in today – I have only a few spaces left!!

More about academic writing

BU research, Publishing, Uncategorized

Earlier this year (13th Jan. 2014) we wrote a BU Research Blog under the title ‘Writing about academic publishing’.  We can now add two further contributions this body of work.  The first article in Nepal Journal of Epidemiology offers some advice on how to construct a title for an academic article.  The authors (BU Professors Edwin van Teijlingen and Vanora Hundley; BU Visiting Faculty Ms. Jillian Ireland and Dr. Padam Simkhada and international collaborator Dr. Brijesh Sathian) have a wealth of experience reviewing papers and all have experience as editor board members and/or editors.  The authors are associated the editorial boards of the many journals, including: Birth, BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth, Medical Science, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, Essentially MIDIRS, Sociological Research Online, Hellenic Journal of Nursing Science, Midwifery and Asian Journal of Health Sciences.  In our joint capacity as reviewers and editors we have seen some great and some awful titles.  The paper in Nepal Journal of Epidemiology is an attempt to improve the appropriateness and usefulness of titles chosen by budding authors.

Editorial Midwifery 2014

Editorial Midwifery 2014

The second addition is an editorial in the international journal Midwifery published by Elsevier.  Together with HSC Visiting Faculty Prof. Debra Bick we address the question: ‘Who should be an author on your academic paper?’   Still too often we hear about worrying stories from fellow academic s and postgraduate students about inappropriate behaviour related to authorship of academic journal papers.  The Midwifery Editorial advises academics to discuss authorship and authorship order early on in the writing process.  At the same time, it highlights that authorship ‘rules’ or ‘traditions’ can vary between different academic disciplines.  Thus when working in a multidisciplinary team, issues of authorship of any papers which arise out of the study should be discussed before problems or concerns arise.

 

We would like to take this opportunity point our readers to another interesting and useful BU Research Blog written by Shelly Maskell under the title: ‘How to design a completely uninformative title’ (7th Feb. 2014).

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen & Prof. Vanora Hundley

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Bournemouth University

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2014) Finding the right title for your article: Advice for academic authors, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(1): 344-347.
  2. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Bick, D. (2014) Who should be an author on your academic paper? Midwifery 30: 385-386.

 

HSC Writing Retreat: Freedom to write

Publishing, Uncategorized

Today saw the first of two Writing Retreat workshops organised by HSC.  The intensive writing day was led by Ms. Caroline Brimblecombe.  Caroline is a Norwich-based training consultant and project manager, who leads workshops in the technique of freewriting, as well as on academic writing.  She holds an MA in Public Policy from the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, and spent many years as a public sector manager and policy analyst.  She used a combination of exercises based on notions of creative writing and free writing.  The Writing Retreat offered advice and a dedicated space and time to practice academic writing.  Today’s intensive session was attended by the first cohort of HSC academics, who considered some of their challenges to writing and some of the rewards.  Not surprisingly there were more challenges than rewards, and the former included lack of time, high workload and interruptions.   Personal satisfaction and a sense of achievement scored high on the list of rewards.

Caroline suggested the participants considered ‘Serial Writing’.  This is the notion that you write regularly, hence the ‘serial’.  The idea is to create a flow of writing to help you generate content as well as a habit of writing. This will be a valuable tool for workshop participants who have committed to working with a mentor to produce a manuscript for submission by the end of July.

For those motivated staff members who would like to have a go at this.  The next session is planned for the 28th of May and there are still a few free places available.  Please contact Jo Temple if you would like to sign up.

We both participated ourselves and we would highly recommend this Writing Retreat!

 

Edwin van Teijlingen & Vanora Hundley

CMMPH

Deadline! Panic. Click Submit: Grants Academy Diary Part 3

BU research, Grants Academy, R & KE Operations, Training

Email flurries. Cut-and-paste frenzies. Forgetting if draft v3.1.5 is most recent despite diligent attempts to effectively dropbox. Sound familiar? Grant deadline time demands we are at our sharpest, but more often finds us high on caffeine and flung headlong into chaos. Whether one clicks submit with confidence, hesitation or blind faith, when the closing hour comes, we breathe a sigh of relief. It’s out of our hands and into the 1 in 12 success rate abyss.

Like many colleagues, I’ve been on grant teams where ‘click submit’ was done with varying shades of satisfaction. But this time, something felt different. This wasn’t any ordinary bid. This was my Grants Academy bid. A bid that had gone through three days of extensive surgery via R&KE OP’s staff development programme on bid writing run by expert consultant Dr. Martin Pickard. It benefited from Martin’s expertise, as well as the critical eyes of five interdisciplinary BU colleagues also attending the workshop. Further developed by two CI collaborators,  two external peer reviewers,  BU Quality Approver Richard Berger and the devoted attention of my research officer Pengpeng Ooi, never before had I been on a grant handled with so much personalised and professional care.  This time when I clicked submit, there wasn’t a sentence worth changing.

In two earlier diary posts I discussed the daunting task of getting started with bid writing and my (somewhat unfounded) fears of impact agendas. After the first two workshops we each went off, brains buzzing with new tips and tricks, to independently work on our bid drafts. But rather than spend hours crafting confident cases for support, those two weeks during the start of spring semester saw little time to devote to redrafting. Like the students we sometimes bemoan, most of us ended up in a last minute ‘meet the deadline’ whirlwind, turning in work we were only half proud of.

Building on session one’s tips about project formulation and session two’s insights on expressing the wider value of our research, session three provided a simulated peer review process to help us better understand how bids are evaluated and scored.  This final stage of the Grants Academy began with a discussion of review criteria, followed by a tally of the scores we gave fellow academy members, and then individual rounds of feedback on each of our six draft bid submissions. While none of us broke most research funder’s thresholds of 70% approval, few of us felt we deserved to, at least not yet.

Offering a supportive environment to watch our work get torn apart — a necessary if uncomfortable part of the bid enhancement process — day three of Grants Academy proved as beneficial as the first two. Rather than disheartening, the patterns and repetition of criticism shared across our cross-disciplinary colleagues’ reviews helped us to hone in on what desperately needed fixing. This peer review process was topped off with one-to-one feedback from Martin on where to go next with our bid’s development.

After the session a few of us stayed behind, manically typing away, not wanting to forget any of our colleagues’ sage advice. I knew my deadline was only a few weeks away and I wanted that 60 up to a 90, to fill the gap of the 1 in 12 success rate with sure-fire reasons why we deserved funding. Over the next two weeks my CIs and I racked up 57 emails, 3 hours of skype meetings and 5 budget drafts — all for just a £10,000 bid. In the words of our Grants Academy Guru, “To compete, we train.”

My biggest takeaway tip for colleagues registered in an upcoming Grants Academy session, or those thinking about enrolling, would be to come with a bid in the early to mid-stages of development. (NOT something either brand new or nearly finished.) This will allow you to get the most out of the developmental process of the workshops. Attending the sessions forces you to make time for drafting by providing structured deadlines and feedback to carry forward. I chose to develop a small Fusion Funded pilot project. 

Anna Feigenbaum is a Lecturer in CMC group at the Media School. As part of her CEMP Fellowship she created this diary of her time at the Grants Academy.  You can read her Day One Diary post here and Day Two here.