Strategic Forum for Research in Education

How are researchers, policy-makers, practitioners and other appropriate stakeholders engaged in the identification, development, application and evaluation of national priorities for applied research and for development?

This question was addressed throughout the work of the SFRE, but in  particular at Forum II (held on 17th and 18th June 2009 in Reading). We would like to thank the contributors to this section at the Forum – namely, Adrian Alsop (ESRC), Chris Owen (WAG), Stuart Fancey (Scottish Funding Council), Karen Whitby (CfBT Education Trust) and David Pye (LGA).

Research priorities

To a certain extent research priorities for many UK-wide and country-based organisations are influenced by governments as they are in one sense the intended audience or ultimate funder of much education research. Non-Departmental Government Bodies and associated agencies, and related lobby bodies such as the LGA  base their research priorities closely on those dictated by central government. To a lesser extent charitable bodies and foundations are likely to be influenced in part by political priorities as in order to have impact (at least in terms of policy impact) research needs to be attuned to government priorities. (Although this is less important for the considerable amount of research aimed at improving practice directly – e.g. work on pedagogy development). The funding councils are at arm’s length from government and whilst the government does not have a direct role in their priority setting, each country’s education department sets the overarching agenda through their remit letter to their country’s council.   

a)      Funding councils

Funding councils constitute one side of the dual support funding system operational in UK HEIs. Much of the funding delivered through the funding councils is distributed on the basis of individual institutions’ scores in the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) (now REF) (see SFRE Forum I Report). However there are also other (smaller) funding streams available through funding councils based around strategic priorities.

In Scotland for example the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) distributes approximately 10 per cent of its annual funding through its Horizon Fund for Universities. This funding is competitive and specifically for delivery aligned to Scottish Government priorities which includes ‘World Class Research’ (Fancey, 2009).

‘Research pooling’ is being developed in Scotland in various fields. In the twilight of the AERS programme with its existing intra-institution research groups, research pools could spread to the education field. In an economic recession where investment in research is under pressure it is going to become increasingly important to collaborate across HEIs to maintain standards. Funding pressures will necessitate partnerships and this is a central theme of the Scottish Funding Council’s strategy. At the Forum Stuart Fancey highlighted the importance of collaboration and partnership (with funders, researchers, users and practitioners) in what he described as ‘demand-led user engaged collaboration’ in order to maximise value and innovation (Fancey, 2009).

b)      Research councils

Research councils provide the other side of the dual support system in the UK through funding specific projects, programmes and centres. Adrian Alsop from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) presented at the Forum (Alsop, 2009). The ESRC is the main research council for education research in the UK. The ESRC is currently encouraging interdisciplinarity, innovation and impact. Perhaps more than other funders, research councils traditionally have had a greater interest in theory and pure research. Alsop sees the fact that education research draws on a range of disciplines as a strength and notes that funders rarely see priorities in disciplinary teams. In terms of innovation it is important to note that different funders are attracted to different types of innovation. The ESRC are interested in innovation concerning theory, methods, data sources and international comparisons (Alsop, 2009). The ESRC strategic challenges identified for 2009-2014 are:

• Global Economic Performance, Policy and Management
• New Technology, Innovation and Skills
• Understanding Individual Behaviour
• Health and Well-being
• Social Diversity and Population Dynamics
• Environment, Energy and Resilience
• Security, Conflict and Justice (ESRC, 2009b).

Their strategic priorities for the same period are:

• impact through world class research
• impact through skilled people
• impact through world class infrastructure
• impact through international leadership
• impact through partnerships

Previously education had been a theme for ESRC, exemplified not least through its significant contribution to the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. Education as a specific challenge is notably missing from the list of ‘key challenges’ above, however arguably it has a role in each of them.  

c)      Government departments

Government departments are a key funding body particularly for applied and evaluative research. Education departments, and other smaller organisations closely involved in the political process (such as the LGA) through lobbying activities, are significantly influenced by politicians and the political context as well as by the departments’ strategic priorities, specific country issues and the international context. Research priorities are outlined in strategic forward looking research/evidence plans published by the department.

Alongside the strategic department priorities there is a need for a certain amount of responsive funding in order to cater to changing external circumstances (such as the current economic downturn) and interests driven by ministers (highlighted by Chris Owen in the Welsh context at the Forum, see: Owen, 2009). It is important that these shorter terms investments do not impinge on longer term, more strategic priorities either financially or through competing policies. One area which has been increasingly important in terms of government priorities in an era of globalisation and the ‘skills race’ has been international benchmarking studies such as PISA.

d)  Charitable foundations other funding bodies

Charitable foundations and other funding organisations often work in similar ways to the commissioners described above in that they identify priority areas of interest in terms of the research they want to fund for the forthcoming period. The decisions regarding priorities are often taken by trustees or a committee. For Karen Whitby from CfBT Education Trust, who presented at the Forum, criteria such as user engagement, potential for real impact, and innovation are considered important.

 “Excellence with impact”

‘Excellence with impact’ is the RCUK strap line and was a phase used at the Forum by Stuart Fancey from the Scottish Funding Council and Adrian Alsop from ESRC and it is increasingly applicable across all commissioners of research. Oancea’s audit of assessment criteria used across the UK found that criteria around quality, relevance and impact are considered important for a range of different assessment practices (Oancea, 2009).

The recent HEFCE consultation on the proposals for the Research Excellence Framework (REF) has stirred strong feelings from the academic community due to the inclusion of ‘impact’ as a key criterion in the assessment of research quality in HEIs. The proposals allocate 25 per cent weight to demonstration of ‘impact’ of research. Whilst previous consultations and research have dissuaded the use of quantitative metrics as measures of impact, there are still several key challenges and concerns regarding this use of impact criteria. The proposals for the REF are clear in emphasising that quality comes before impact and that impact for its own sake is not useful (Gorard, 2008). A potential positive benefit of the REF proposals could be to better align quality and impact as there will be incentives to effectively disseminate high-quality research.

Impact is historically very hard to define let alone measure and often much of the impact is indirect and long-term – i.e. contributing to shifting thinking in a particular direction rather than having a direct and immediate impact on policy. Whilst particular types of research are likely to have more direct and transparent impact than others, it is important for stakeholders to be aware of the roles which the broad spectrum of social science research play in influencing debates (Bridges et al, 2009). Perhaps researchers need to be more active and vocal about getting this across to users and other parts of the system.

It is clear that the media is an important medium for increasing impact through both influencing policymakers and practitioners. Researchers have little reprieve regarding what happens once research is in the public domain but should they take more responsibility regarding the use and dissemination of their work? There is a broad consensus that the majority of researchers are not particularly skilled in dealing with the media and do not exploit its full potential (see the capacity section of the report for SFRE I). Is there a need for stronger media and PR units in universities especially in the growth of and growing potential in online media (i.e. blogs)?

Excellence in research quality was discussed in detail at Forum I (2008, Harrogate – see Forum I Report) and impact is a key focus at Forum III  (March 2010, Edinburgh).

Further reading

Gorard, S (2008) ‘Research impact is not always a good thing: a re-considerantion of rates of ‘social mobility’ in Britain’ British Journal of Sociology of Education 29(3) 317-324.

Oancea, A (2009) Quality Criteria for the Assessment of Education Research in Different Contexts Teaching and Learning Research Brief No. 80. TLRP: London.

 Outstanding issues

• What is understood as ‘impact’ by different stakeholders?
• How can excellence and impact be streamlined?
• Is there a more strategic role for commissioners of research in the knowledge management system in terms of developing the knowledge base and connecting/building on existing knowledge (knowledge accumulation)? What is their role in terms of encouraging a range of different ‘types’ of research but also ensuring a balance between small timely responsive work and long-term programmes of investment exploring strategic issues?