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