Vitae policy forum 201006 January 2010 - 07 January 2010

Details

Programme Date/time

Thursday 07 January 2010

Start time

09.35

End time

09.50

Programme Rooms

George 1

Presenters

Dr Tony Bromley - Senior Training and Development Officer, Vitae Yorkshire and North East Hub Coordinator, University of Leeds, IEG

Info

Presentation outcomes

Dr Tony Bromley - Senior Training and Development Officer, Vitae Yorkshire and North East Hub Co-ordinator, University of Leeds

Tony illustrated the sector's significant progress in evaluating the impact of researcher development activity. An important body of evidence now exists. However, it is crucial that the sector continues with a high level of engagement in evaluation. If we have a strong body of evidence in place -- whoever...we need to influence in future - we will be in a better position... Ongoing activity across the sector will achieve a significant body of evidence for presentation at the national Vitae Conference in September 2010. As before, this evidence will be sought and/or organised using the Rugby Team Impact Framework (RTIF).

Evaluation by institutions is part of a comprehensive and collaborative approach, supported by the Rugby Team (soon to be renamed the Impact and Evaluation Group) in partnership with stakeholders. Other contributions include the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES), the Careers in Research Online Survey (CROS), the RCUK Cohort study, Concordat Benchmarking activity and Vitae Career Stories.

The Rugby Team Impact Framework, launched in 2008, has several functions. It is: an evaluation model for training and development activity specifically tailored to the context of training and development of researchers in higher education (HE); a methodology; and a national framework against which evaluations can be mapped. At the Vitae 2009 conference The Rugby Team Impact Framework: one year on report [URL] illustrated 27 examples of researcher development evaluation by HEIs. Impacts identified ranged from programmes shown to improve research outputs, grant writing and fellowship success to those that enhance and increase public understanding and outreach activity of researchers.

The priority now must be to continue to collate impact information at scale to make the funding case to national decision-makers. It is important to increase the number of studies and size of data sets, including further longitudinal studies and independent studies, to continue to enhance ‘rigour' in evaluation and gain more evidence of direct attribution. A target of 54 new examples would make a total of over 80 examples for the September 2010 report. After this period, it will probably be too late to influence national policy: crucial decisions are likely to be made early in the new government. Examples of evaluation impact can be sent via the Vitae Database of Practice or the dedicated JISCmail list. A forum workshop will explore gaps in the impact evidence to date that institutions might address, and focus on the priorities for making the case for core funding to HEI senior management.

When asked in the question and answer session, what gaps do we know exist from the RTIF; one year on report that HEIs should address in their impact evaluation, Tony urged participants to focus on what is most important to you to evaluate in order to convince the people you need to influence in your organisation:  that will still be valuable for everybody else to share.