Naomi Segal
UCML Vice-Chair Research
report for
UCML Plenary meeting, 16 January 2015
I was abroad from 2 March to 11 July 2014 and I would like to begin by conveying my very warm
thanks to Executive & Steering Group members, especially Paul Rowlett, Jocelyn Wyburd and Ulrich
Tiedau, for taking over various meetings and communications on my behalf during that period
(including the last Plenary on 4 July).
There have been two main actions since then: responding to the HEFCE Expert Reference Group
consultation on Open Access, chaired by Prof Geoff Crossick, and collecting responses from the AHRC
DTPs/CDTs about their policies or attitudes to recruiting research students in modern languages.
Updates below also on AHA (formerly AHUG), other AHRC events I attended as UCML Vice-Chair for
Research and, last but not least, REF.
Details on the UCML website: http://www.ucml.ac.uk/languages-research
I
Open Access: HEFCE ERG
In January 2014, HEFCE set up an Expert Reference Group chaired by Geoff Crossick to look into the
specific problems of monograph publishing and open access for humanities & social sciences; see
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/newsarchive/2014/news85292.html: ‘The monograph and other book
publications have long been a key way for academics in many humanities and social science disciplines
to communicate their research. We know that both digital publication and open access will become
increasingly prominent over the next decade, and it is essential that the implications of these trends
are considered for those disciplines where the book holds an important place. This means
understanding the current situation of the monograph. Is it in crisis, as some claim? And what are the
scholarly and cultural forces that make it so important? Only if we set consideration of open access
and monographs in that context can we think about the future, and think about the different
publishing and business models that are being proposed for open access monographs’.
After consultation, I drafted a reply, which can be viewed on the UCML website. The main five points
made are:

The definition of ‘monograph’ which is used by the ERG is extremely broad, including – as well as
the traditional meaning of a single-authored book covering a single topic in a series of chapters –
an edited collection and a scholarly edition; this raises various problems, not least in relation to
edited collections of essays, since these, which represent a major outlet for authors in our field,
can be a version of ‘conference proceedings’ (which are included in HEFCE’s OA condition for the
future REF, whereas ‘monographs’ are not).

Monographs are indeed extremely important to researchers in our field, as both authors and
readers.

Particularly important in our field is publication in languages other than English & outside the UK.

When taking comparative soundings we particularly recommend international comparisons.

Guidance is welcome in the maze of emerging new publishers and modes of OA publication.
II
AHRC: ML strategy of DTPs/CDTs
On 12 August, following the July 2014 Plenary Exec Committee meeting, Paul Rowlett wrote to
directors of all the AHRC Doctoral Training Partnerships [DTPs] and specialised Centres for Doctoral
Training [CDTs] asking them:
In the context of the current severe national crisis around participation in modern languages across
secondary and tertiary education, UCML has played a significant role in several initiatives currently
being developed or implemented to increase take-up. […] The AHRC’s network of DTPs is also relevant
in that they support PGR study across the breadth of its subject remit, including modern languages.
UCML understands that the AHRC will be monitoring the disciplinary distribution of DTP awards
annually, and that they reserve the right to question DTP directors about the support (or lack of it)
UCML Executive Committee 24 October 2014
Vice-Chair Research report
2
provided for vulnerable subjects such as modern languages, or where awards are not made across the
subject range.
UCML appreciates that the DTP scheme does not provide for ring-fenced awards, and that the
expectation will therefore quite rightly be that awards are made exclusively on the basis of the quality
of the applications received, irrespective of disciplinary focus. However, we take this to place a
responsibility on DTPs to encourage applications from gifted students in areas such as modern
languages to ensure that they are represented. In this context, and as you would expect, UCML will on
behalf of our constituencies also be monitoring the distribution of awards across the DTPs. Meanwhile,
we would welcome hearing from you about the strategies you are pro-actively implementing to ensure
that gifted students in modern languages are aware of the funding opportunities you are offering on
behalf of the AHRC, and are encouraged to engage with the scheme and to apply.
After a chaser in early September, replies were received from all DTPs/CDTs. Most of these were
positive, and a digest can be found on the UCML website. Key main points:

A number emphasised their support for ML and reported successes in recruiting excellent ML
students already;

Others – including one that specialises in design – stressed their support and interest in recruiting
interdisciplinary students with an ML angle;

Several emphasised that they encouraged their students to take up research training in
languages;

Two (South, W & W and WRoCAH) have an ML Open Day and an ML ‘cluster’, respectively, and are


III
particularly interested in this field;
Several suggested it would be useful for UCML to run their adverts (each year in the autumn) on
our website, in the Funding Sources section: to be discussed;
A couple put the ball back in our court, asking ‘We would be interested in hearing from your
organisation about what strategies you are developing to ensure the vitality of postgraduate
studies in modern languages. If there are opportunities for us to work together on this, so much
the better’ (North-west) and – more vaguely – ‘It would be a very good idea for UCML to keep [LAHP
and other DTCs] posted about any developments in this area that we can support’; to be discussed.
AHRC: new Leadership Fellowship Scheme
UCML joined other member organisations of AHA (Arts & Humanities Alliance; formerly AHUG: Arts &
Humanities User Group; chair Prof Peter Mandler, President of the Royal Historical Society) in signing a
letter to AHRC about their new Leadership Fellowship scheme; see http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-andEvents/News/Pages/AHRC-Fellowships-Scheme-to-be-renamed-the-Leadership-Fellows-Scheme.aspx
Main points made:

The term ‘leadership’ remains unclear (even or especially on the AHRC video:
http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-and-Events/Watch-and-Listen/Pages/Why-is-Research-LeadershipImportant.aspx ).

The privileging of leadership is yet another shift of emphasis away from quality of scholarship
towards entrepreneurship and management in the allocation of research funding.

The emphasis on leadership is particularly worrying in relation to ECRs.
A response from Mark Llewellyn to Peter Mandler, dated 17 Nov 2014, includes this paragraph:
I think the mistake is the attempt to separate leadership from research, which is not what we are
looking for at all. We state in the guidance to both applicants and reviewers that leadership is not an
“add on” to the research process. Instead, what researchers are proposing to undertake by way of the
activities involved in research should be looked at in the context of intellectual leadership within a
field, a discipline or the arts and humanities more broadly. Our guidance states that an applicant must
“clearly articulate a set of research leadership activities which demonstrate how you will develop or
enhance your leadership role, and make clear how these activities enhance the transformational
potential of your research and its broader influence and importance.” This is why the leadership aspect
of the Fellowships scheme is an opportunity for arts and humanities researchers in all their diversity,
not a threat to their scholarly potential or its development.
UCML Executive Committee 24 October 2014
IV
Vice-Chair Research report
3
AHA meeting 14 Nov 2014
A meeting of AHA, attended by ca 15 representatives of Subject Associations in the AH field. There
was a presentation from Stephen Anderson, Executive Director of the Academy of Social Sciences.
Other agenda items included Trends in Undergraduate Recruitment, Open Access, AHRC Leadership
Scheme (see above) and REF issues.
In relation to Open Access, Helena Djurkovic, CEO of the Political Studies Association, raised a concern
about copyright issues. A letter sent by HEFCE to Vice-chancellors noted that Impact case studies
submitted to REF 2014 would be published under CC-BY licence, which allows users to ‘adapt, remix,
transform, and build upon the material for any purpose’. This is a concern not only in principle but also
as an indication that CC-BY remains HEFCE’s default licence.
Under AOB Greg Woolf of the Council of University Classical Departments raised the issue of the
conditions experienced by recent PhDs without consistent academic employment, as discussed recently
in the report commissioned by AHRC from Oakleigh Consulting (www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-andEvents/News/Documents/Support%20for%20Arts%20and%20Humanities%20Researchers%20PostPhD.pdf
In relation to this I highlighted the recommendations of a meeting for all Modern Languages Subject
Associations held at the IGRS in October 2010 three of which were:
i.
ii.
iii.
Encouragement of all Subject Associations to discuss the creation of postdoctoral/early-career
researcher groupings;
Encouragement of MFL depts/Schools to offer their graduated research students the option to
remain affiliated with them until they find posts.
Encouragement of MFL depts/Schools to offer Fellowships (stipendiary or non-stipendiary),
especially to early-career researchers or those who are between jobs in MFL, so that the latter
can continue their research in a mutually beneficial environment.
This document was also sent by me on request to AHRC following the meeting described below (VI).
This is something UCML may wish to reopen with its constituent Subject Associations.
V
PRC Introduction to AHRC Commons 17 Nov 2014
Dr Richard Clay, the AHRC Commons Fellow, presented the aims and terms of the AHRC Commons.
For more information see http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News-and-Events/News/Pages/AHRC-CommonsFellow-announced.aspx.
VI
AHRC: event for PRC & ECRs 28 Nov 2014
On 28 November at Warwick University AHRC held an event for its Peer Review College members and
Early Career Researchers, which has two aims: (i) to understand the current position of Languages
and Linguistics from a peer reviewer’s perspective; and (ii) to support ECR development in respect of
applying for grants.
After consultation with UCML colleagues, I gave a 5-minute presentation on a Research Focussed
Panel on these four aspects:
 Hot topics in Languages and Linguistics
 Topics in decline
 Changing culture in the Languages and Linguistics discipline community?
 The balance between individual scholarship and team working
The powerpoint can be found on the UCML website.
The afternoon’s break-out groups with ECRS were lively and fruitful.
UCML Executive Committee 24 October 2014
VI
Vice-Chair Research report
4
REF
The REF results were published on Thursday 18 December 2014. As the website
(http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/newsarchive/2014/news99318.html)
notes,
there
were
1911
submissions, with 52,061 academic staff submitted, and three-quarters of submissions received a 4*
(30%) or 3* (46%) ranking. Within Modern Languages & Linguistics a total of 57 UoAs were returned,
of which five HEIs returned two submissions each.
A number of documents have been appended to the UCML website:




Doc
Doc
Doc
Doc
1:
2:
3:
4:
REF
REF
REF
REF
2014
2014
2014
2014
grade point averages for all fields all aspects;
full information
Brief Guide
summary data for 28 MML average profiles
Because of the changed parameters of submission, it is not possible to compare the numbers of
returns or success rate to those in RAE 2008. But it can be noted that Languages & Linguistics have
held their own well in relation to ‘cognate’ fields in the Arts & Humanities (see table below):
GPA (grade point average)
overall
output
impact
Languages and Linguistics:
2.96
2.86
3.12
English Language & Literature
3.03
2.94
3.15
History
3.04
2.96
3.18
Classics
3.08
2.97
3.27
NB Some UoAs in our field submitted their return to Area Studies.
In the next few months, HEFCE will publish the submissions on the REF website. For each submission
they will publish: a separate list of staff and outputs; the submitted case studies and impact template;
and the submitted environment data and template. They will remove personal and contractual details
of staff, and any other data that the HEI has indicated should not be published for commercial
sensitivity or other reasons. HEIs have had the opportunity to provide redacted versions of case
studies, impact templates and environment templates for the purpose of publication.
At the same time HEFCE will publish panel overview reports. A report by each main panel, including
sections from each sub-panel, will detail how the assessment was carried out, provide an overview of
the panels’ observations about the state of research in the areas falling within its remit, and general
reflections on the submissions and their assessment.
In a future event, UCML will be looking at both REF 2014 and the future of REF. We are also keeping
an eye on developments in BIS funding reform planning, in relation to +both research in the regions
and
research
in
lower-impact
HSS
subjects
such
as
our
own;
see
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/dec/21/university-funding-reform-brain-drain-london.
Naomi Segal
9 Jan 2015