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