Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

An artful deposit - When 3D becomes 2D: Supporting creative arts researchers through the REF and beyond

97 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Sarah Beighton Staffordshire UniversityMuch of the onus currently focussed around outputs for REF 2021 is placed on ‘traditionally’ published research, but this raises the question, how will physical outputs, such as the work produced by creative arts researchers, be measured? The anticipation is that a range of outputs will be accepted, so it is important to facilitate the inclusion of creative arts research imaginatively and in a timely fashion. The presentation will be conducted in two parts: The first part will discuss the varied solutions we have come up with at Staffordshire University as well as some of the barriers encountered along the way. During the second part attendees will work in small groups to discuss existing practice, the challenges faced and potential solutions with respect to creative arts deposits. Ideas will be gathered from the workshop and collated into ‘best practice guidelines’ including a ‘top 5 tips’ to supporting researchers from this background. An informal network will be set up for those who want to stay in touch to share further ideas or to have any future questions answered. Attendees will leave the session with a better idea of how to support researchers from a creative arts background.

Publicado en: Educación
  • Sé el primero en comentar

  • Sé el primero en recomendar esto

An artful deposit - When 3D becomes 2D: Supporting creative arts researchers through the REF and beyond

  1. 1. An artful deposit - When 3D becomes 2D: Sarah Beighton Research & Digital Resources Librarian Tuesday 9th April 2019 Supporting creative arts researchers through the REF and beyond
  2. 2. What is non-traditional research? • Artefacts • Devices and Products • Performance • Exhibition • Composition • Design • Software • Website content • Digital or visual media Practice based research
  3. 3. Quick survey Or and use code: 92 31 43
  4. 4. The problem • Real differences between Practice based research and ‘traditional’ research • Staff within areas of Practice based research struggling to see how their research can be added to the repository. • Guidance not clear on the criteria to be used for judging outputs – confusion • Collaborators • Time!
  5. 5. Discussion What are the requirements for upload? How can the context of my work translate into REF/STORE format? How do I use STORE? The way we work is not currently supported by STORE Which category do I use? What is the REF criteria? I don’t feel like this is research?
  6. 6. Solutions Current solutions • Foster good relations with relevant departments • Encourage staff to utilise our STORE team • Meet with staff - one-one • Abstract or descriptor – showcases work • Utilise lists • Using information from STORE for PDRs • Using information from STORE to back up Professorial applications • Have good examples to show staff In the Pipeline • Clear descriptions of different formats for submission • Offer services such as turning exhibition catalogues into PDFs • Encourage documentation of work - portfolios • Informal support groups
  7. 7. Solutions - Lists
  8. 8. Anything else? Or and use code: 92 31 43
  9. 9. Except where otherwise noted these slides are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 International License.