Engagers Digest - 24/11/10

Dear Colleagues,

Welcome to another edition of the digest, with a range of interesting opportunities in the arts and sciences, and an important update on the REF...


In this issue...

1. REF Impact pilot report [policy update]
2. M-Shed Higher Education event - 1 December 2010 [networking event]
3. AHRC/Radio 3 New Generation Thinkers - deadline 10 December 2010 [media opportunity]
4. Public engagement workshop using Ketso - 10 December (Manchester) and 24 January (London) [workshop]
   
5. Science Communication Conference - 25/26 May 2011 [conference]

Back to contents

1. REF Impact pilot report [policy update]
In 2009/10 Hefce ran a pilot exercise of the proposed 'Impact' sections of the REF. The University of Bristol was one of 27 institutions that made submissions. The submissions have now been analysed by expert panels, and a press release and full report are available from the Hefce site, with recommendations for how research impact, including impact through public engagement, should be assessed in the REF.

Read Maggie's thoughts on how the report relates to public engagement on the CPE REF webpage (PDF, 94 KB) , or leave your comments on this blog post.

Please note that the Centre for Public Engagement is very happy to offer support to researchers in thinking about and describing the impact of their work, particularly in the areas of societal impact and skills. Please contact Philippa or Maggie to discuss.


Back to contents

2. M-Shed Higher Education event - 1 December 2010, 2pm–4pm [networking event]
Join us to discuss what a partnership with Bristol Museums, Galleries and Archives may offer you and your students. Find out more about M Shed, Bristol’s new museum opening in 2011; enjoy an exclusive preview with a guided tour of the building; discover the range of opportunities we offer Higher Education; meet our museum learning team and some of our expert curators; network with professional colleagues from across the region. Light refreshments will be available.

M Shed, Princes Wharf, Harbourside, Bristol BS1 4RN
RSVP by Monday 29 November to Jane Hack, Learning Officer
Tel: 0117 9223619 or E-mail: jane.hack@bristol.gov.uk

Back to contents

3. AHRC/Radio 3 New Generation Thinkers - deadline 10 December 2010 [media opportunity]
The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and BBC Radio 3 have joined forces to find the next generation of public intellectuals. We have launched New Generation Thinkers - a pilot talent scheme for emerging academics with a passion for communicating the excitement of modern scholarship to a wider audience and who have an interest in broader cultural debate.

Up to 60 applicants will have the opportunity to develop programme ideas. More information is available from the AHRC site. In the first instance please contact Dara O'Hare or Hannah Johnson in the University Press Team.

Back to contents

4. Public engagement workshop using Ketso - 10 December (Manchester) and 24 January (London) [workshop]
The developer of Ketso, a hands-on kit for effective group work (Joanne Tippett, University of Manchester) is offering two free workshops, one held at the University of Manchester on 10 December 2010 and one at King's College, London on 24 January 2011. The dialogue will be focussed around 'delivering public engagement, outreach, skills development and enterprise promotion in Universities in a time of budget cuts'.

Please check the Ketso website for further details and for videos of Ketso in Higher Education: http://www.ketso.com/news-events/upcoming-events

Back to contents


5. Science Communication Conference - 25/26 May 2011 [conference]
The British Science Association is working in partnership with the Wellcome Trust to organise this annual event at Kings Place, London. The Conference addresses the key issues facing science communicators in the UK, and each year brings together people who are involved in public engagement - a diverse group of people from a broad range of backgrounds. It is a fantastic opportunity to network, share ideas and good practice. In 2011 there will be a theme of 'online engagement'; submit any proposals for sessions by 26 November via the British Science Association site

Back to contents
Other items of interest:

• Synthetic Biology Science Cafe - 30 November 6pm, Chemistry Department. Details here
• Science Writing Summer School - 18-22 July 2011, Bristol http://sciwriteworkshop.wordpress.com/
• UALL 2011 ANNUAL CONFERENCE - Part Time: the new paradigm for higher education? 20-22 March 2011 at the University of Stirling

That's all for this issue of the Digest. As always we're happy to hear your feedback on the blog or by email.

Best wishes,

Philippa

• Visit bristol.ac.uk/public-engagement


• Read the latest public engagement stories at bristol.ac.uk/publicengagementstories


• Follow us on Twitter

REF Impact Pilot and public engagement

Here are some thoughts from Maggie Leggett in the Centre for Public Engagement about the recent report on the REF Impact Pilot:

Public engagement questions arising from the REF Impact Pilot report

In November 2010, Hefce issued a report of the findings from the Impact Pilot exercise, conducted with 27 institutions (including the University of Bristol) in 2009/10. The full report is available here - http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/hefce/2010/refpilot.htm

In general, from a public engagement perspective this report is positive. There is a recommendation specifically that public engagement should be counted as impact, and looking through the case studies submitted obviously many institutions submitted PE case studies. Features of strong public engagement case studies include:

i. There was a clear link between the department’s research and the engagement activity.
ii. Evidence was provided about dissemination (such as audience or visitor numbers) as well as a clear explanation of the significance or benefits to the audiences.
iii. The activity went beyond ‘business as usual’ engagement (such as public lectures), and attracted widespread interest or involved a programme of activity which was often innovative and was sustainable or created ‘legacy’ resources.
iv. In some cases there were additional, clearly identified benefits to ‘intermediaries’ (such as cultural institutions or curators), local communities or to the economy.

There are, however, some outstanding issues:

1. Evidencing the impact of PE activity. There is an assertion that ‘just activity is not enough’, e.g. ‘Submissions should...make a case for the benefits arising from the public engagement activity. This must go beyond showing how the research was disseminated.’ This seems contradictory with statements elsewhere in the report, where for example media activity with an estimate of audience number is applauded as an end in itself. Assuming activity is not enough, we need clarity on the evidence of the effect of public engagement that is required. It needs to be accepted that in some cases, evidencing the effects of public engagement would require extensive further research to understand what, if any, change in behaviour or knowledge had been prompted by involvement in a public engagement activity. Earlier iterations with HEFCE suggested they had understood this challenge, and would not require that level of evidence. There is mention of satisfaction surveys in the report, and (whatever my personal views are on the value of such things) we need to know if that sort of thing is sufficient evidence, or if they are looking for something more involved (and if so what)

2. Media activity. In the physics feedback there is the following statement which I simply don’t understand: “Care must be taken not to simply reward the efforts of outreach activities themselves as that does not give a clear indication of the quality, and hence societal impact, of the underlying research. Thus, once the issue of ‘sexy’ or media-friendly research topics is factored out it is quite appropriate to assume that greater media interest in a research programme means just that: a greater impact of the research.” I would say media activity is a process, not an impact – but the last sentence of the quote seems to suggest otherwise.

3. Further guidance. There is an assertion from the earth sciences panel that “the panel felt that further guidance on assessing the impact of public engagement would be helpful”. I would suggest we recommend that this guidance is produced in consultation with the HE community, through the National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement (which HEFCE funds and of course which we host in partnership with UWE)

4. Cross over with environment section. There is a comment suggesting that departments should have ‘active, operationalised public engagement activity’ – to show continued engagement with issues rather than one off activity. Whilst I think this is laudable, there may be some inevitable cross over with the environment section

5. What does 4* look like? Finally, I don’t find the report helpful in showing what 4* public engagement case study would look like. I think prompting them to either produce very clear criteria, or mock up examples would be helpful

Some of the pilot case studies have now been published, see http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/impact/. There are public engagement case studies in English and in Physics, and although they are not graded, they were highly rated by the panels and are published as exemplars. It seems to me there is little 'evidence' of behaviour change - panels have been satisfied with media reach/visitor numbers/satisfaction surveys etc. I would argue that's a good thing, as depending on the project it's almost impossible to get that evidence without running a second research project. The prevalence of working with the media is striking - possibly because it is easy to make the reach sound impressive.

Three members of the Impact Working group have attended meetings with Hefce and Pilot panel members. They have raised some of the above issues. Although no specific answers have been forthcoming, there was a sense that in theory engagement ought to be shown to have some kind of transforming effect to count as highly rated impact. On the other hand it is recognized that finding evidence of this is difficult.

Download this document from the CPE Impact site, or leave your comments below:

30 November - Synthetic biology science cafe: science and ethics

Image (c) David Goodsell

Posted on behalf of Zack Mummery, Chemistry:

Synthetic biology: science and ethics

18:00 - 20:00, 30 November 2010, Post-grad coffee lounge, School of Chemistry, Bristol University

Synthetic Biology can be broadly described as the design and construction of new biological systems not found in nature. The field encompasses aspects of biology, biochemistry, chemistry and engineering. This science café aims to explore the science and ethical implications of this fascinating subject, in an informal setting which promotes discussion and debate.

More information: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/scn/news/2010/32.html

Living with global environmental uncertainty - public launch of Bristol University's Cabot Institute

Today (Monday 15 November) sees the launch of a new multidisciplinary research institute focused on living with global uncertainty. The Cabot Institute is a major new venture at the University of Bristol.

It brings together world-leading expertise in the natural, physical and social sciences to tackle the issues society faces in living with global uncertainty - from food and energy security and the supply of clean water to preventing natural disasters and understanding the politics of catastrophes.

To mark the launch of the Institute, a Question Time style event is taking place, open to all, with a panel of leading environmental scientists, policy makers and campaigners. The panel includes: Sir Crispin Tickell, Director of Policy Foresight Programme, and author of Climatic Change and World Affairs; the Hon Sir Jonathon Porritt, Founder Director of Forum for the Future; Julie Hill of the Green Alliance; Brendon Gormley, Chief Executive of the Disasters Emergency Committee; and Professor Ric Parker, Rolls-Royce Director of Research and Technology. The discussion will be chaired by Dr Julian Hector, Head of Natural History Radio at the BBC.


Some of the questions and answers during the evening will be posted here and we invite everyone to continue the conversations after the event by responding to the blog posts.


For further information, see bristol.ac.uk/cabot.
Follow us on Twitter, or tweet about this discussion using #cabot.

If you prefer to send us feedback or comments by email, please use cabot-launch@bristol.ac.uk
.

Question: "What new alliances are needed to address the question 'How should we live with global uncertainty'?"

Discussion round up and conclusions. Living with global environmental uncertainty: What next?

To round up the evening's discussion event, each panelist was invited to outline some areas of future focus.

Ric Parker: Get PhD students doing truly interdisciplinary research. Risk provides a huge area of research. The Cabot Institute could take on communicating this risk.

Jonathan Porritt: We're surrounded by deep-seated problems. We need to support the role of anger in society. It's time for us all to wake up to the injustices currently taking place - it's starting to happen with students today - but it's going to be a very different protest movement.

Crispin Tickell: the first priority would be to try and get a coherent programme so that people can see one problem in terms of another - this is a role for the academic community. Also need to communicate this with politicians and make a coherent case - link the world of academia and politics through improved understanding and clearer language. Need to think differently and communicate about the character of our society and where it's going.

Brendan Gormley: The security debate has a huge impact - it is good that this is part of the Cabot Institute's menu. Need to make links with academic institutions in the most risk-prone parts of the world - so that they can be at the front of change. The world is creating blocks that can reduce the impact of research. Need to improve linkages with other parts of the world, to increase impact/knowledge of research and make it accessible through comprehensive language.