The Enterprising and Resourceful Researcher –an insight into immersive learning impact

Jenny Brady & Vicky Mountford-BrownWednesday 4th September 2019IEEC 2019

#ACTIONforImpact

ACTION For ImpactBeing able to generate innovative ideas, implement the solutions and make things happen, sets you apart as an impactful researcher.

Participating in the ACTION For Impact programme provides an opportunity to develop your capabilities as a more innovative researcher.

#ACTIONforImpact

##ACTIONforImpact

• The Research and Researcher landscape• What is ACTION For Impact –

programme, breakdown and rationale• Challenges and successes• Creating impact• Evaluating impact• Future plans

Session overview

#ACTIONforImpact

Need to be impressive and make things happen – PUBLISH!

Imposter syndrome

Only ever existed in a world of success

Articulating the benefits of the research to those who need to know

Time constraints and prioritising

Researcher Challenges

#ACTIONforImpact

• 2018: ACTION for Impact launched (previous iterations date back to 2011) – collaboration between Newcastle and Durham Universities

• Shared learning with PGR and ECR mixed cohorts

• 5 x separate 3 day training events + various rounds of funding pitches culminating in 2 Showcases

• Total of 42 PGRs and 68 ECRs = 110 delegates over 5 training programmes

• Funded by EPSRC, ESRC, NPIF, Wellcome Trust, Project Action internal funding

What is ACTION for Impact?

#ACTIONforImpact

How does this compare with other UK programmes?Standing on the shoulders of giants…

#ACTIONforImpact

• Personal Impact

Day 1

• Pitching and Communication

• Networking for Knowledge Exchange

Day 2 • ACTION Planning and making positive change happen

Day 3

#ACTIONforImpact

Impact Projects

Promo video link: https://www.youtube.com/watc

h?v=v3Pelk2WPN8

Impact

#ACTIONforImpact

Entrecomp and Vitae’s Researcher Development Framework

QAA (2018) Enterprise and Entrepreneurship Education: Guidance for UK Higher Education Providers. Gloucester: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

PP 10 – credit given to HEA

• 69 pre- and post- training event valid responses captured between July 2018-19;• 21% July 2018; 20% Jan 2019; 23% April 2019; 35% July 2019• 42% Female 58% Male• 52% ECR 48% PGR• 19% Durham; 71% Newcastle • Faculty: Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences -31.9%; Science, Agriculture &

Engineering -56.5%; Medical Sciences- 11.6%

Evaluation data

ICURe and ACTION for Impact analysis

ACTION FOR IMPACT

69% to 67% for Commercialisation Intent57% to 65% for self-efficacyPersonal attitudes went from 70% to 71% & Perceived Social Networks from 70% to 74%

FACTOR PRE- POST- DIFFERENCE

Being aware of my specific areas for further development 86.9 98.6 11.7 Networking with academics and senior researchers 69.5 88.4 18.9 Having to communicate with people I don’t know very well 79.7 95.6 15.9 Being able to enthuse a non-specialist in my discipline about my work

78.2 91.2 13 Being able to see opportunities in problems 78.2 91.2 13 Understanding how my and others’ personality-types influence work interactions

76.1 88.4 12.3 Being able to use knowledge imaginatively 78.3 89.7 11.4 Being aware of the different roles within a good team 88.4 98.5 10.1 Understanding the commercial application of research 56.7 66.8 10.1

SKIPI Data analysis

61

86

65

84

97

78

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Communicating Research

Leadership capabilities

Collaborative Creative Thinking

Post-training (% of cohort)

Pre-training (% of cohort)

“This is the best training I have ever attended and that is not an exaggeration! You expose us to life changing ideas without making it look exhaustive. Thank you!”

“This is the best training I have ever followed. Very knowledgeable and professional. I learned a lot about myself and the limitations that I put

on myself. The exercises created awareness and helped us to approach things in different ways and to recognise this.”

“Bringing people from different disciplines has been very interesting. It has given me new ideas for how to develop my research and my own ideas. It made me think about my weaknesses and what to do about them.”

“I have learned a lot and made a great network. There are many challenging actions and exercises like pitching and the communication

strategies, but we had a go and it worked out really well!”

ACTION for Impact: helping to develop resourceful, innovative researchers who make positive change happen

Games, Communication, Social Capital

Qualitative AnalysisWhat were your highlights?

Games 39

Training activities/programme content & resources 38

Networking and contacts 28

Interacting with others 24

Pitching 14

The team 12

Accessing opportunities 7

Creating a plan 6

Self-development, confidence, out of comfort zone 6

Venue 6

Sharing/developing ideas 5

Research impact 2

It’s very helpful on so many levels: planning, pitching, confidence building, network

development (STEM ECR)

Learned a lot – I hated pitching and networking before (Medical Sciences PGR)

“Think like a Creator”Most of us were trained to be very good sponges: we can soak up information and absorb it so that it feels like our own. However focusing on what other people are doing can easily overwhelm your sense of agency. To think like a creator, however, is to keep in mind what it is that you want to do, to build, to create in the world(Natalie Houston – Imposter Phenomenon, 2015: 79-80)

Imposterism and Researcher Identities

The Future of ACTION for Impact

Jenny.Brady@newcastle.ac.uk @jennybiddybradyVictoria.Mountford-Brown@ncl.ac.uk @vgmountford

#ACTIONforImpact

References• Alpay, E. & Walsh, E. (2008) ‘A skills perception inventory for evaluating postgraduate transferable skills development.’ Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education.

33(6): 581-598

• Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P., Punie, Y. and Van den Brande, G., (2016). EntreComp: The entrepreneurship competence framework. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union.

• Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). ‘The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention.’ Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice. 15(3), 241-247.

• Hodge, A; Bownes, M. Burgess, R; Chambaz, J; Dodson, E. & Johnes, G.; Loving, C.; Mcvitty, D.; O'Carroll, C. & Ritchie, E. (2011). Review of progress in implementing the recommendations of Sir Gareth Roberts, regarding employability and career development of PhD students and research staff: A report for Research Councils UK by an Independent Review Panel, October 2010. RCUK: London

• Houston N.M. (2015) ‘Imposter Phenomenon’. In: Semenza G.C., Sullivan G.A. (eds) How to Build a Life in the Humanities. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Pp.73-81

• Ibarra, H. and Ptriglieri, J.L. (2010) ‘Identity work and play.’ Journal of Organizational Change Management. 23(1): 10-25

• Kirkerterp, A. (2011) Entrepreneurship didactics – the push method. ETC Toolkit - https://www.etctoolkit.org.uk/media/28484/kirketerp-entrepreneurship-didactics-the-push-method.pdf

• Knights, D. & Clarke, C. (2014) ‘It’s a Bittersweet Symphony, this Life: Fragile Academic Selves and Insecure Identities at Work’. Organization Studies. 35 (3): 335-357

• Newbery, R., Lean, J. and Moizer, J. (2016), ‘Evaluating the Impact of Serious Games: The Effect of Gaming on Entrepreneurial Intent’, Information Technology and People, 29(4)

• QAA (2018) Enterprise and Entrepreneurship Education: Guidance for UK Higher Education Providers. Gloucester: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

• Vitae RDF: https://www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers-professional-development/about-the-vitae-researcher-development-framework

• Walsh, E.; Hargreaves, C.; Hilleman-Delaney, U. & Li, J. (2015) ‘Doctoral researchers' views on entrepreneurship: ranging from ‘a responsibility to improve the future’ to ‘a dirty word’’ Studies in Higher Education. 40 (5): 775-790

Anything we’ve missed? Get in touch!