research at lancaster: excellence and sustainability trevor mcmillan apc, march 2008
TRANSCRIPT
Research at Lancaster:Excellence and Sustainability
Trevor McMillan
APC, March 2008
Overall aim:
Increase volume and quality of research that is world leading in
academic terms and has an impact on regional, national and
international social and economic issues.
What is seen as research excellence in 2008-2014?
• The production of novel thoughts and analyses that are highly respected by global peers.
• The production of novel thoughts and analyses that are highly respected by potential users and funders of the research.
• The attraction of high quality research staff and students that receive a stimulating and effective “apprenticeship”
• A research governance framework that is fit for purpose
Key elements of sustainability of high quality research?
• Academic staff at the leading edge of their discipline
• A vibrant research community
• Research staff and students that are capable and well motivated
• A world class infrastructure (library, IT, laboratories, equipment) and research support (RSO, contracts)
• Active collaboration with world class researchers
• Active engagement with users of research
• Full engagement with public, private and voluntary sector research funders regionally, nationally and internationally
• Diverse funding streams that provide the “appropriate” financial security and strategic direction.
General questions for today?
• Are we clear how we want to position Lancaster with respect to research?
• What are we getting right?• Is our subject portfolio appropriate?• Is our “blue skies/applied” ratio appropriate?• Are their elements of our central and faculty
research support that could be improved?• Does our physical infrastructure match our
ambitions?
Absolute numbers of postgraduate students, 2005/06
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Other UK
Comparators
Lancaster
Absolute numbers of postgraduate students, 2005/06
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Other UK
Comparators
Lancaster
Loughborough University 5,714
The University of Bath 5,026
The University of Exeter 4,618
The University of Kent 4,523
The University of Reading 4,025
The University of East Anglia 3,621
The University of Lancaster 3,608
The University of Sussex 3,300
The University of Essex 2,902
Royal Holloway and Bedford New College 2,135
The University of St Andrews 1,885
The University of Manchester 11,073
The University of Warwick 10,050
The University of Leeds 8,900
The University of Sheffield 7,302
The Manchester Metropolitan University 5,995
The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 5,412
University of Durham 5,296
The University of York 4,195
The University of Central Lancashire 4,176
The University of Liverpool 3,699
The University of Lancaster 3,608
POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS
PhDsGraduating
2006
PhDs Graduating/FTE
Sector 1 (Russell Group)
PhDs Graduating/FTE
Sector 2 (1994 Group +)
PhDs Graduating/FTE
LU
Clinical medicine
0.24 0.1
Biological Sciences
0.68 0.62 0.72
Physics and maths
0.55 0.39 0.44
Engineering 0.38 0.21 0.15
Performing arts
0.22 0.14 0.11
Humanities and languages
0.29 0.21 0.36
Social sciences
0.25 0.18 0.27
Health and medically related
0.20 0.09
How to increase the PGR community?
• Develop the “package”: A Lancaster University Graduate School
• Find more student funding
• Consider different formats e.g. the Professional Doctorates
• Advertise well with our own students
• Ensure we have processes that facilitate completion
Funding of research through the dual support system as a percentage of all income, 2005/06
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Other UK
Comparators
Lancaster
Funding of research through the dual support system as a percentage of all income, 2005/06
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Other UK
Comparators
Lancaster
The University of Sheffield 24%
The University of Manchester 22%
The University of York 21%
University of Durham 21%
The University of Lancaster 19%
The University of Leeds 18%
The University of Liverpool 18%
The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 17%
The University of Warwick 16%
The Manchester Metropolitan University 3%
The University of Central Lancashire 1%
The University of St Andrews 27%
The University of Sussex 26%
The University of Reading 22%
The University of Essex 22%
The University of Bath 21%
The University of East Anglia 21%
Royal Holloway and Bedford New College 21%
The University of Lancaster 19%
Loughborough University 17%
The University of Exeter 14%
The University of Kent 10%
QR income
Grant income
UK Higher Education Research Yearbook,
2007Comparison against
1994+
Research grants and contracts as a percentage of Funding council Research grant
0%
200%
400%
600%
800%
1000%
1200%
Other UK
Comparators
Lancaster
Research grants and contracts as a percentage of Funding council Research grant
0%
200%
400%
600%
800%
1000%
1200%
Other UK
Comparators
Lancaster
The University of Liverpool 266%
The University of Central Lancashire 250%
The University of Warwick 219%
The Manchester Metropolitan University 214%
The University of Manchester 213%
The University of Sheffield 197%
The University of York 195%
The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 189%
The University of Leeds 180%
University of Durham 157%
The University of Lancaster 132%
Loughborough University 221%
The University of St Andrews 209%
The University of East Anglia 187%
The University of Bath 159%
The University of Essex 156%
The University of Kent 147%
The University of Lancaster 132%
The University of Sussex 130%
The University of Exeter 128%
The University of Reading 121%
Royal Holloway and Bedford New College 71%
Leverage of QR
Success rates with Research Councils
NERC
Overall
BBSRC
Responsive mode
STFC
Overall
EPSRC
Overall
06/07 06/07 04/05 05/06
Lancaster 37% 20% 40% 36%
Overall 29% 26% 47% 28%
Current EPSRC Research Grants per I nstitution, by Number of Grants and Value
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
£0K £20,000K £40,000K £60,000K £80,000K £100,000K £120,000K £140,000K £160,000K
Value of Current Portfolio (£ 000's)
Nu
mber
of
Gra
nts
in
Port
folio
Lancaster University54 Grants totalling £13,433K value.
Annex 1
NOTES: 1. Data in this Annex includes all current Research Grants, but excludes: J I F, Fellowships, Training Grants (including DTGs), J EFI , PPA (PUSET), and grants that have been transferred into or are being transferred out of Institutions.2. Includes Grants that have been 'Announced' by EPSRC even though they may not yet have been 'Started' by the University
DATA from EPSRC MIS (13 February 2007) Caution: The introduction of Full Economic Costs for research projects submittedfrom 1st September 2005 will affect the disribution of portfolio values in this chart.
Lancaster University : EPSRC Funding Decisions by Number and Year
14
95
3 3 22 1 4
9
2
7
7
22
1424
20 19 20
11 13
19
21
14
27 17
20
15
1525 26
22
25 24
15
21
14
17
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Calendar Year in which Funding Decision made
Nu
mb
er
of
Pro
posals
Proposals Withdrawn Propopsals Rejected Prior to Panel Proposals Not Funded Proposals Funded
Annex 2
NOTES: 1. Data in this Annex includes all current Research Grants, but excludes: J I F, Fellowships, Training Grants (including DTGs), J EFI , PPA (PUSET), and grants transferred into Institutions.2. Proposals Rejected Prior to Panel includes Office and Sift Rejects
DATA from EPSRC MIS (13 February 2007)
Increasing research income?
• Follow the funding? Short term and longer term through positioning ourselves for specific initiatives (Especially National Centres) and adapting our portfolio.
• Increase staff mentoring and grant “screening”
• More resource in RSO to aid applications
• Better research council intelligence
Citations per publication and number of patents don’t compare well with this group.
Library House 2007
Increasing citations?
• Fully functional institutional repository for outputs and data
• Support publication in open access journals
• Improve international profile of the University
• Examine publication strategies (multiple “short” v single “long”)
All universities interact in proportion to their income with industry. There is no correlation whatsoever between the quality of research being conducted at a university and the extent of the industrial interaction of that university. All universities appear to have a similar level of industry interaction, regardless of the quality of the research being conducted.
However, the type of interaction differs. High quality research universities have a higher propensity to interact with large companies, whilst lower quality research universities focus more on the SME market.
An Analysis of the UK University Technology and Knowledge Transfer
Activities.Library House
Institution HEIF 3 2007-08Indicative HEIF 4
2008-09
Indicative HEIF 4 2009-10
Indicative HEIF 4 2010-11
University of Bath 1,218,392 1,520,801 1,740,367 1,900,000
University of Central Lancashire 603,125 1,004,507 1,295,933 1,507,811
University of Durham 873,953 1,329,179 1,659,700 1,900,000
University of East Anglia 672,182 1,007,106 1,250,281 1,427,078
University of Essex 865,087 1,324,247 1,657,623 1,900,000
University of Exeter 840,000 1,310,290 1,651,748 1,900,000
University of Kent 825,000 1,171,980 1,423,907 1,607,067
King's College London 1,500,000 1,677,468 1,806,320 1,900,000
Lancaster University 900,000 1,343,670 1,665,800 1,900,000
University of Leeds 1,500,000 1,677,468 1,806,320 1,900,000
University of Leicester 511,725 852,281 1,099,544 1,279,313
University of Liverpool 958,501 1,376,216 1,679,501 1,900,000
Royal Holloway, University of London 1,060,125 990,630 940,173 903,489
University of Salford 693,615 1,155,218 1,490,369 1,734,036
University of Surrey 1,350,249 1,594,157 1,771,248 1,900,000
University of Sussex 614,307 1,023,130 1,319,960 1,535,766
University of Warwick 1,175,410 1,496,889 1,730,301 1,900,000
University of York 1,181,250 1,500,138 1,731,669 1,900,000
HEIF 4 Allocations
Industrial income
Our industry income is small compared with our research income
Our current portfolio probably doesn’t help in terms of industry
income
Enhancing KT activity?
• Individual/institutional
• Knowledge
• Experience
• Advocacy
So what do we need to do to make a step change in the impact of our research?
• Recruit and support high quality research staff (including giving enough time for research)
• More funded and prestigious fellowships
• Develop the concept of the Lancaster Graduate School
• Review our research portfolio
• Ensure that we have high quality research infrastructure and governance
• Enhance our user friendliness
• Maximize the international profile of our research
RESEARCH IMPACTBreakout Questions.
• Is our current research portfolio sustainable?
• How do we increase volume of grant applications without sacrificing quality?
• How do we recruit more PGRs?
• How do we develop more institutional level international research partnerships?
• How do we increase activity with industry and other non-government sources organisations?
• How do we maximise the perception of our research within HE and outside?
• Inclusive
• Knowledgeable
• Empathetic
• Ambitious