Presenter: Ann Grand, NCCPE, Jenni Chambers, STFC, Clare Harvey, Ogden Trust
Theme: Planning for the long term
Reporter: Helen Featherstone
One sentence summary: As we prepare for REF2029, what can we learn from REF2021 about public engagement with physics?
Description
The National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE) was recently commissioned by The Ogden Trust and the Science and Technologies Facilities Council (STFC) to undertake research to find out how public engagement (PE) with physics was presented in past Research Excellence Framework (REF) exercises. This was done to identify how to better support public engagement with physics in the upcoming REF2029. This session presented some of the data, but the report (see link below) provides a lot more detail.
The research comprised analysis of all REF2021 Impact Case Study (ICS) statements that featured any form of public engagement with physics (77 ICS, which is nearly half of all physics ICS). This was expanded to include engineering. Most of the ICS included a range of pathways to impact with 31 of 44 institutions who submitted ICS having at least one that focused on PE alone. Alongside the data analysis, there were also focus groups with staff in physics departments (researchers, academics and professional services) and conversations with panel members were also conducted.
The analysis looked at the purposes of the PE, the public groups, when the PE was undertaken, what modes were used, what the impact was, and how the impact was evidenced.
The research demonstrated that there was a lot of ‘awareness raising’ and ‘increasing understanding’ activity in order to ‘close the STEM skills gap’ and ‘inspire the next generation of physicists.’ The public groups were often teachers and students and unspecified groups marginalised or under-represented in physics. There were a lot of schools’ workshops, public events, festivals, fairs and media described in the modes. Evidence of impact was thin, with ICS authors relying heavily on numbers reached alongside indicators of esteem, rather than presenting evaluation evidence that featured the voices of those who benefited from the PE (only six of the 77 ICS reviewed provided strong evidence of evaluation and impact). Some ICS included changes in strategy or culture, and occasionally a change in curriculum.
From the evidence, Ann reviewed what is needed to support effective PE.
- Long-term support for strategic planning of engagement and evaluation
- Drawing on insight from previous practice
- Sustained funding
- Adequate resources
- Stable and secure staff so they can make long-term plans
- PE takes place throughout the research process
- Aims, purposes and publics for engagement clearly identified
And suggestions for what a robust Impact Case Study looks like:
- Contribution of PE is categorised
- Publics are identified and described
- The relationship between the engagement and the underpinning research is clear
- Aims clearly described
- Evaluation methods are described and results included
- Qualitative data is attributed to a participant
- Claimed impact is identified, described and evidenced
Discussions in the session covered:
- the differing levels of institutional support for writing ICS, with some universities having people to write them, while others leave the academics to it
- the types of institutional support that need to be put in place now
- what the panel members understand by high-quality PE and how this could differ to what we present
- the financial value of a good PE ICS and therefore why it’s worth investing now
- how the People, Culture and Environment pilots for REF2029 will help
- how the NCCPE is continuing to work with Research England to ensure criteria are appropriate.
Key messages
- There is room for improvement for physics-based public engagement Impact Case Studies but there is not consistent understanding across panel members of what good PE looks like.
- There is a need for long-term investment in PE to ensure high-quality and rigorous PE, including the evaluation and evidencing of long-term change.
- NCCPE is continuing to work with Research England to ensure criteria are appropriate.
Resources
Report of the review of Public Engagement with Physics in REF2021
Symposium Partners
