Although I'm not involved with the RAF, RAC, RSM or whatever it is, I too
think a pygywg response is appropriate.
I hate the word 'impact' and have an ontological aversion to measuring
anything other than distance away from bureaucracy (in metres per second),
but I would be prepared to 'defend' activist/community research from a
citizenship/public domain perspective...
Dr Kelvin Mason
Distance Learning Tutor
Graduate School of the Environment
Unit 7 Dyfi Eco Parc
Machynlleth
SY20 8AX
[log in to unmask]
01654 703065 ext. 29
Centre for Alternative Technology Charity Limited (CAT), Machynlleth, Powys,
SY20 9AZ, Wales, UK.
Centre for Alternative Technology Public Limited Company; a company limited
by shares. Company no. 1459589, registered in Wales. Registered office:
Llwyngwern, Machynlleth, Powys, SY20 9AZ.
Centre for Alternative Technology Charity Limited; a company limited by
guarantee. Charity no. 265239; Company no. 1090006, registered in Wales.
Registered office: Llwyngwern, Machynlleth, Powys, SY20 9AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list on participatory geographies
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of North, Peter
Sent: 06 October 2009 09:23
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Demonstrating the "impact" of your research
I think we should comment
what about having this as a theme for discfussion at the geography and
policy seminar next month and putting together a puiggy submission from that
(as well as congoing web discussions?)
Peter North
Department of Geography
School for Environmental Sciences
University of Liverpool
0151 794 2849
________________________________________
From: Discussion list on participatory geographies [[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Rachel Pain [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 October 2009 08:57
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Demonstrating the "impact" of your research
This one is for UK academics, and only those interested in the REF - the
next incarnation of our research audit machine (thats about 3 of you
then...)
I wondered if as PYGYWG we want to respond to the current consultation on
the shape of the REF (See http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2009/09_38/)
Especially relevant for us as piggies here are the suggestions about
"impact" (which they suggest will make up 25% of the assessment - which,
taken at face value, i guess many of would welcome).
To cut a long story short they want to be quite open about what impact is,
and attempt to conceptualise it as non-linear in time (post research
projects/outputs), though other parts of the document are contradictory. So
maybe there is mileage in having some input given University research will
be judged by this. No doubt it'll mould activities just like its
predecessor.
But in particular note the emphasis on industry/policymaking, and relative
absence of working with the voluntary sector / counter-policy / activist and
co-produced research with grassroots groups - it would be good to see these
visible and different kinds of impacts valued.
There are also intriguing questions about how to evaluate and demonstrate
the impact of research - the main solution the document suggests at present
seems to be surveys - how many lives saved, environments made sustainable,
wellbeing indicators ticked...
My questions are
i) Does anyone care? Is it worth responding?
ii) Can anyone comment on how to demonstrate or argue for
the "impact" of community based / activist research?
rachel
Rachel Pain
Department of Geography
University of Durham
Durham DH1 3LE
England
tel. +44 (0)191 3341876
website:
www.dur.ac.uk/geography/research/researchclusters/?mode=staff&id=352
Co-Director, Centre for Social Justice and Community Action
www.dur.ac.uk/beacon/socialjustice/<http://www.dur.ac.uk/beacon/socialjustic
e/>
Editor and Book Series Editor: Antipode
www.antipode-online.net<http://www.antipode-online.net>
|
