Connecting Research with Communities
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Bristol
Department Name: Education
Abstract
Abstracts are not currently available in GtR for all funded research. This is normally because the abstract was not required at the time of proposal submission, but may be because it included sensitive information such as personal details.
People |
ORCID iD |
| Keri Facer (Principal Investigator) |
Publications
Smith, G
(2015)
Co-operatives, Democracy and Education: A Critical Reflection
Strauss, P
(2014)
MOBILISING A CITY FOR LEARNING: Lessons from the 80by18 Project
| Title | Utopias Artwork |
| Description | A series of pictures to illustrate the conversations at the Utopias, Futures and Temporalities: Critical Considerations for Social Change Symposium. |
| Type Of Art | Artwork |
| Year Produced | 2015 |
| Impact | This work has been disseminated to the public through the Connected Communities Website, and to researchers and practitioners through the mailing list. Selected pieces have also been displayed at the University of Bristol. |
| URL | https://connected-communities.org/index.php/project_resources/utopias-futures-and-temporalities-conf... |
| Title | Utopias and Temporalities Artists Intervention |
| Description | As part of the Utopias, Futures and Temporalities Conference we collaborated with an artist to create a participatory arts piece on the coach to encourage conference delegates (a mix of academics, community partners, and practitioners) to fully engage with ideas around utopia in the 21st Century. |
| Type Of Art | Performance (Music, Dance, Drama, etc) |
| Year Produced | 2015 |
| Impact | The conference delegates engaged with the art work and used it as the basis for discussions throughout the conference. |
| Description | The final report from this project focuses on the lessons that might be learned from the Connected Communities Programme for the current impetus in both universities and the wider policy and public spheres to bring together expert and public knowledges - a trend that we might call the 'participatory turn'. It is based on a two year study of the programme conducted by Professor Keri Facer (Leadership Fellow for Connected Communities) and Dr Bryony Enright (Connected Communities Post-Doctoral Researcher). The study involved 100 interviews with programme participants, a questionnaire completed by 309 participants, workshops with 60+ community partners, collaboration with seven projects in which university-community collaborations were used to analyse the legacy of specific elements in the programme, and two 12 month case studies of individual projects. Findings have been developed iteratively throughout the study with programme participants. Motivations - One of the first questions the study was interested in is - who is attracted to this sort of collaborative project between community and university partners, and why? Participants' motivations can be clustered into 6 broad characteristic groups: generalists and learners (who are interested in new ideas and connections), makers (who are interested in getting something tangible made or changed), scholars (who are interested in finding opportunities to pursue specific interests), entrepreneurs (who are attracted by the funding opportunities), accidental wanderers (who end up in the programme by happenstance), advocates for a new knowledge landscape (who are explicitly looking to experiment with new ways to create knowledge). These motivations are characteristic of both university and community partners. 98% of survey respondents reported they would do this sort of collaborative work again. Participants - The Community Partners participating in the programme are highly diverse, with groups ranging from large national organisations and charities with established research capabilities, to smaller precarious and voluntary organisations, to individual community activists and artists. An important reason for many community partners to participate was the perception that this funding would allow them to take a step back, address fundamental questions and develop new insights about their work. For many groups, this was a unique opportunity as they often find themselves on a constant treadmill of activity and evaluation, often working to different and sometimes conflicting evaluation frameworks. Purposes for practical collaboration - The university and community partners tended to work together for practical reasons (it was impossible to conduct the research any other way), for personal reasons (they had shared interests, commitments and ideas), and for symbolic reasons (university partners sought the 'authenticity' offered by collaboration with communities, and community partners sought the 'legitimacy' offered by collaboration with universities). Accountability issues - There are competing accountabilities on projects - these are internal to the project teams: to community partners, to university partners, to community members; and external to the project teams: to disciplinary fields, to the wider public good, to personal social networks. These internal and external accountabilities require careful articulation and the tensions between them have to be carefully addressed. Deep traditions - While the idea of 'co-producing' research may only recently have come into vogue in the research councils, the CC programme demonstrates the longstanding and highly diverse traditions that project teams draw upon when invited to conduct 'collaborative research'. The different traditions at play in the programme include but are not limited to: traditions of participatory, collaborative and community engaged research; people's history; environmental activism; participatory ethnography; traditions of responsible innovation and public engagement; particpatory/action research; co-design and user-centred design approaches; civil rights, feminist and disability rights traditions; crowd/commons and open innovation approaches. Competing logics - These traditions bring very different rationales and methods for the processes of collaborative research. There are key differences, for example, between those traditions that seek university-community collaboration for reasons of equity and democracy, and those that see it primarily as a means of improving the quality of research and practice. Indeed, the idea of 'community' is framed very differently in different traditions - with some partnerships particularly concerned with capacity building amongst grassroots communities and others with building policy-level knowledge with representative organisations. The fantasy of 'community' and 'university' - Project partnerships are often formed on the basis of inchoate ideas about what 'the university' and 'the community' might offer to projects. A central part of the work of collaborative research, therefore, requires treating these fantasies seriously. Such questions can require project teams to reflect upon their own claims to authority: to what extent do community partners really represent 'the community'? To what extent do university partners represent the only or most appropriate way of producing meaningful knowledge? Such work is necessarily unsettling and can be disruptive of existing identities. Expertise required - Negotiating different traditions, different motivations for participation and different relations of accountability requires expertise. To make projects work requires a highly diverse set of roles within the team, these include: the catalyser (who prompts and disrupts), the integrator (who synthesises), the designer (who connects and creates a plan), the broker (who negotiates relationships), the facilitator (who enables conversations), the project manager (who addresses progress and risks), the diplomat (who handles inter-institutional relations), the scholar (who connects the project with existing knowledge and ensures rigour), the conscience (who asks how the project is benefiting communities), the accountant (who manages the money), the data gatherer (who conducts the empirical/archival research), the nurturer (who keeps an eye on all participants), the loudhailer (who promotes the work). Notably, these roles are taken in these projects by both university and community partners. Funding benefits - Funding for collaborative research that enables community partners to be remunerated for expenses and time is essential in introducing new and diverse experiences into the research process. Civil society, community and cultural organisations simply are unable to access resources to participate in reflective projects without funding. As a consequence, economically marginalised communities are effectively shut out of the landscape of research production without such resource. The money matters significantly. The funding has significantly enhanced the capacity of projects to learn from the experiences and perspectives of economically marginalised communities. It has enabled investment in people, materials, equipment and institutions which has in turn supported further investment in collaborative research by some universities. The funding also plays an important symbolic role in signalling that this sort of research is valued and valuable. Funding issues - The form that funding takes, however, matters significantly - short term projects are significantly less beneficial than longer term support of partnership working. The relationship between individuals and groups committed to collaborative long term partnerships can be significantly negatively impacted and rendered instrumental if the consequences, politics and implications of project-based funding are not discussed from the outset. At the same time, for small organisations, significant sudden project based funding can cause difficulties in terms of longer term sustainability of activities with volunteers. The unintended consequences of 'success' in gaining research funding have to be carefully considered by all parties. Time and money - There is also often a discrepancy between formal allocation of time and resources and the lived experience of individuals working on such projects. Participants report that such research requires significantly more time than is usually budgeted for. As a consequence, research assistants, who are junior members of the team but who tend to have the most time formally allocated to projects, tend to take a disproportionate responsibility for the success of these collaborations. Managing project finances through university systems that are often highly bureaucratic can also have negative impacts on community-university relations. Reframing impact - In the area of research 'impact' these projects are leading to a reassessment of how we might understand the idea of what counts as a positive legacy from research partnerships. Indeed, they are troubling the linear and popular model of research impact as a simple process that runs from 'paper' through to real world 'application. Instead, they are demonstrating that more sustainable, embodied and transformative legacies are produced through ongoing interactions between publics and universities throughout the development of projects and partnerships. Multiple legacies - Project teams are working with plural notions of legacy, and the programme as a whole is developing significant impacts in six areas: the creation of new products (websites, guidelines, toolkits, academic papers, software, exhibitions, booklets, artworks, reports, performances); the creation of new networks and relationships; the development of new theories, ideas and concepts (relating to communities, histories of community and means of researching community); the strengthening and evolution of institutions (community partners are developing new services and strengthening their research capacities, universities are adapting their systems and developing greater capacity for collaboration). Embodied legacies - The most significant and sustainable legacies, however, are embodied. Participants in projects are developing new skills, knowledge and understanding as well as the confidence to put these into action in the networks, organisations and partnerships they are involved with beyond the project itself. At the same time, the programme has nurtured the development of a new generation of community and university researchers who have 'grown up collaborative' and who take for granted the value and potential benefits of interdisciplinary community-university partnerships. Limitations to funding models - There are some limitations to Connected Communities/research council funding as a model of creating powerful collaborations between universities and communities. First, those groups who are under-represented within University faculty demographics, in particular both visible and invisible minorities, may find it harder to create connections and collaborations with universities leading to research that is impoverished by losing these sets of expertise and insight. Second, investment in partnerships through a project based approach does not easily facilitate the slower participatory forms of research that require commitment over time. Third, the relatively short timescales of the majority of projects (6-18 months) militates against the relationship building that would produce better outcomes. Work still to do - There remains a need for research and scholarship, therefore, that is explicitly accountable to a wider public good; for more explicit and targeted attempts to diversify both faculty and the range of groups who partner with universities; and for ongoing community-university relationships to be sustained and nurtured through core and partnership funding rather than project based research funding. Key recommendations - The following are the top level recommendations arising from this study of the Connected Communities Programme a. Recommendation 1: Take the simple steps needed to enhance the infrastructure for high quality collaborative research partnerships, In particular by addressing the following priorities: i. Extending Connected Communities funding models ii. Investing in research assistants for the long term iii. Capacity building for early career researchers, doctoral students and peer reviewers iv. Developing University professional services b. Recommendation 2: Recognise that time is to collaborative research what a supercomputer is to big data. In particular, through the following three priority areas: i. Extending (the same) funding over longer time scales ii. Rebalancing funding for partnerships and projects iii. Creating connections between teaching and research c. Recommendation 3: Take explicit steps to mitigate the risk of enhancing inequalities through collaborative research and partnerships. In particular, through addressing the following priorities: i. Funders should develop a more nuanced lexicon of types of community partners and the forms of funding and support that might be offered to or requested from different groups. ii. Explicit efforts need to be made to understand and address the barriers that prevent different minority groups from contributing to research projects. iii. Research investment needs to be considered in the wider context of the university as a whole. d. Recommendation 4: Invest in civil society's public learning infrastructure through one key priority: i. The establishment of a new funding programme open to civil society organisations resourced by a combination of RCUK and the larger Charitable Trusts and Foundations To conclude. The Connected Communities programme demonstrates that 'public value' from research is not about creating short term, instrumental partnerships in which universities offer quick evaluations or specialist inputs in exchange for communities offering access to a 'real world'. Rather, it is about creating substantive conversations between the different sets of expertise and experience that university and community partners offer, and in so doing, enabling the core questions that both are asking to be reframed and challenged. Such a set of relationships is far from the naïve economic model that would see the value of research judged by its immediate utility. Instead, it is about the creation of a new public knowledge landscape where communities, and the universities that form part of those communities, can collaborate to question, research and experiment to create new ways of understanding, seeing and acting in the world. |
| Exploitation Route | The findings from the Connected Communities Programme have already been used in a number of ways by the Research Councils. 1. The findings were presented to the ESRC Whole Staff meeting, then they were summarised and used in the ESRC Impact Guide. 2. I was asked to advise NERC on the design of their public engagement awards, and the project was referenced as part of the guidance. I provided this advice through meetings, through sitting on the panel, through presentation at an event designing the engagement awards 3. I drew on the findings to advise EPSRC on the design of an award, and the project was used as guidance. |
| Sectors | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Education,Environment,Government, Democracy and Justice,Culture, Heritage, Museums and Collections,Other |
| URL | https://connected-communities.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Creating-Living-Knowledge.Final_.pdf |
| Description | The research has had an impact on the UK Research Councils' funding, informing large funding calls, and new, ongoing funding programmes in the charitable sector, affecting millions of pounds of research funding nationally. This funding is in turn having an impact, leading to greater engagement of low income, excluded and community groups in the early stages of the research process and the formation of new partnerships between academic institutions and community partners. Insights from the project directly led to or informed national funding calls issued by the UK Research Councils, associated with over GBP 5,500,000 in awarded grants. Funding calls from the AHRC, the EPSRC and NERC have all cited the Creating Living Knowledge project's findings, noting the benefits of public engagement to both researchers and the public. The research has also been embedded in the ESRC's Guidance for Collaboration, which applicants are encouraged to follow. As well as this new Research Council funding, the Creating Living Knowledge research has also had an impact on NGO funding programmes. The Community University Partnerships Initiative (CUPI) run by the National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement directs research funding to communities to support partnerships with universities, and is funded by Power to Change (an independent charitable trust) and the AHRC. It has funded 28 partnerships, including 37 community partners. Meanwhile, the Common Cause Research project has had an impact challenging universities' lack of engagement with Black and Minority Ethnic Communities, as well as funding practice at the AHRC and UKRI. The AHRC's 2019 Strategic Delivery Plan cited the project, and noted its "recommendations, for example on how to generate trust between universities and their partners and on principles to make sure research partnerships are fair and mutual". One of the AHRC's actions, to "challenge ourselves and our communities to establish more equitable partnerships with those we work with", was directly "informed by the Common Cause report". Responding to the challenges raised in the Common Cause Research (CCR), in 2019 the AHRC appointed Dylan Law as Head of Cultural Value and Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) to draft a strategy for the AHRC's approach to EDI and represent EDI on the UKRI Implementation Group. This post, which Law says "began life in the Common Cause Research", is the AHRC's first dedicated EDI staff member. In 2020 the AHRC is establishing EDI Engagement Fellowships to allow academics working on EDI to take their research outside the academy; these will build directly on the recommendations of the Common Cause research, and guidance about engagement outside the academy will, Dylan Law says, be "based on guidelines from Common Cause Research". The AHRC is also working to embed EDI within the Doctoral Training Partnerships and Collaborative Doctoral Awards (CDAs), and Law says this will "broaden the range of organisations students can undertake placements and CDAs with, to include smaller and more local ones, as championed in Common Cause Research". As well as these changes at the AHRC and UKRI, the findings from this research are also being implemented through collaborations with charities, funders and network building, with impacts on increasing the extent and depth of university partnerships with BME communities. Working with the Runnymede Trust (the leading equality and rights organisation in the UK) the Common Cause Research enabled the formation of a network, initially around 300 people, which has now become established as an independent project - the Common Cause Networks - led by the Runnymede Trust to develop leadership and research capacity within BME community and cultural organisations. These networks have helped the Runnymede Trust to build its own capacity and, crucially, to enable people to form networks who may not otherwise have been able to do so. A conference for network members will take place in late 2020. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2014 |
| Sector | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Education,Culture, Heritage, Museums and Collections,Other |
| Impact Types | Cultural,Societal,Economic,Policy & public services |
| Description | Bristol City Council Co-Design Process for Third Sector |
| Geographic Reach | Local/Municipal/Regional |
| Policy Influence Type | Influenced training of practitioners or researchers |
| Impact | We helped to redesign the processes by which the city council commissions its third sector activities, by helping them to develop a process for engaging third sector organisations in the process of designing that process. |
| Description | Cabinet Office Speed Dating Event |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Implementation circular/rapid advice/letter to e.g. Ministry of Health |
| Description | Cabinet Office/ AHRC networking event |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Influenced training of practitioners or researchers |
| Description | Doncaster Education Committee |
| Geographic Reach | Local/Municipal/Regional |
| Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
| Description | Harvard/OECD 21st Century Curriculum |
| Geographic Reach | Multiple continents/international |
| Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
| Description | Unesco Futures Knowlab |
| Geographic Reach | Multiple continents/international |
| Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
| Description | Future Cities Catapult Funding |
| Amount | £20,000 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Future Cities Catapult Limited |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | |
| Description | NESTA R&D Fund |
| Amount | £20,000 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Nesta |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | |
| Title | Community University Partnership Initiative |
| Description | In collaboration with the National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement and Power to Change, the Connected Communities Programme has developed a funding initiative that directly funds community partners and businesses to develop collaborative research rather than universities and IROs |
| Type Of Material | Improvements to research infrastructure |
| Year Produced | 2017 |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | This initiative begins to address some of the issues that have become apparent during the Connected Communities Programme relating to power and financial imbalances between research project partners. Funding is now available and a series of match events hosted by the NCCPE will bring together interested parties to develop research bids. |
| URL | https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/nccpe-projects-and-services/nccpe-projects/community-university-p... |
| Title | 80by18 Research Data |
| Description | This data was collected to develop the 80by18 webtool for young people in Bristol. It consists of data gathered at five workshops took place in three different primary schools, interviews at a youth club (aged 12-15), a workshop with and three subsequent visits to a group of nine 16-17 year-olds and a web survey which received 100 responses. There is also data gathered through directly approaching individuals on the street and public submissions to a website. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2014 |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | The data was used to create a webtool to engage young people in Bristol. Well over 100 people attended the pilot launch in November 2013 and we sent out emails and tweeted extensively promoting it. Four weeks after launch, the website had attracted 1,927 sessions from 1,392 unique users. |
| URL | http://www.bristol80by18.org.uk/ |
| Title | Researching in Public: Learning and Legacy in the Connected Communities Programme |
| Description | This database holds the results of a study into the Connected Communities Programme, it comprises interviews with over 100 (university and community-based) participants in the programme; a survey of over 300 participants; workshops with community partners; in-depth case studies of two projects. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2015 |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | This database has contributed to the Creating Living Knowledge report and several other publications on the relationships and individuals involved in the Connected Communities Programme. It was the basis for the development of the Common Cause Research project examining the low number of Black and minority ethnic participants in the data. |
| Description | 80by18 'offers' |
| Organisation | Bristol Bike Project |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | The 80by18 project researched and created an online tool for the use of young people in the city of Bristol. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The partners offered resources and experiences to young people engaging with the tool:The BBC offered 50 places on a young filmmaker's master-class, for the first 50 young people who made and uploaded to YouTube a film about their 80by18 experiences. Oxfam committed to work around developing campaigning skills with any young people who started their own campaign that resonated with global poverty issues in some way and gained an initial 200 indications of support (eg signatures or Facebook 'likes'). The Bristol Bike Project agreed to open their weekly drop-in bike repair sessions to all Bristol young people who arrived and mentioned the 80by18 list. |
| Impact | This partnership contributed to the list of activities available on the 80 by 18 web tool. Well over 100 people attended the launch in November 2013. In the weeks and months that followed, we promoted the project to schools, youth centres, and any organisation working with young people. Four weeks after launch, the website had attracted 1,927 sessions from 1,392 unique users. |
| Start Year | 2013 |
| Description | 80by18 'offers' |
| Organisation | British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Public |
| PI Contribution | The 80by18 project researched and created an online tool for the use of young people in the city of Bristol. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The partners offered resources and experiences to young people engaging with the tool:The BBC offered 50 places on a young filmmaker's master-class, for the first 50 young people who made and uploaded to YouTube a film about their 80by18 experiences. Oxfam committed to work around developing campaigning skills with any young people who started their own campaign that resonated with global poverty issues in some way and gained an initial 200 indications of support (eg signatures or Facebook 'likes'). The Bristol Bike Project agreed to open their weekly drop-in bike repair sessions to all Bristol young people who arrived and mentioned the 80by18 list. |
| Impact | This partnership contributed to the list of activities available on the 80 by 18 web tool. Well over 100 people attended the launch in November 2013. In the weeks and months that followed, we promoted the project to schools, youth centres, and any organisation working with young people. Four weeks after launch, the website had attracted 1,927 sessions from 1,392 unique users. |
| Start Year | 2013 |
| Description | 80by18 'offers' |
| Organisation | Oxfam GB |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | The 80by18 project researched and created an online tool for the use of young people in the city of Bristol. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The partners offered resources and experiences to young people engaging with the tool:The BBC offered 50 places on a young filmmaker's master-class, for the first 50 young people who made and uploaded to YouTube a film about their 80by18 experiences. Oxfam committed to work around developing campaigning skills with any young people who started their own campaign that resonated with global poverty issues in some way and gained an initial 200 indications of support (eg signatures or Facebook 'likes'). The Bristol Bike Project agreed to open their weekly drop-in bike repair sessions to all Bristol young people who arrived and mentioned the 80by18 list. |
| Impact | This partnership contributed to the list of activities available on the 80 by 18 web tool. Well over 100 people attended the launch in November 2013. In the weeks and months that followed, we promoted the project to schools, youth centres, and any organisation working with young people. Four weeks after launch, the website had attracted 1,927 sessions from 1,392 unique users. |
| Start Year | 2013 |
| Description | CUPI |
| Organisation | National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | The findings of the Connected Communities programme suggested that alternative funding methods were needed in community-university partnerships. Using the research from the Connected Communities Fellowship Keri Facer brokered conversations between the partners to create a new funding initiative. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The initiative has been funded and administered by the partners. The NCCPE is hosting match making workshops to kick start collaborations to apply for the funding. |
| Impact | The partnership has resulted in a new funding model that addresses issues around power, ethics and funding in community-university partnerships. |
| Start Year | 2016 |
| Description | CUPI |
| Organisation | Power to Change |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | The findings of the Connected Communities programme suggested that alternative funding methods were needed in community-university partnerships. Using the research from the Connected Communities Fellowship Keri Facer brokered conversations between the partners to create a new funding initiative. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The initiative has been funded and administered by the partners. The NCCPE is hosting match making workshops to kick start collaborations to apply for the funding. |
| Impact | The partnership has resulted in a new funding model that addresses issues around power, ethics and funding in community-university partnerships. |
| Start Year | 2016 |
| Title | 80by18 Project Website |
| Description | An online web resource for young people, youth workers and educators in the city of Bristol. Comprising a searchable and user friendly database of all informal learning opportunities available in the city. As well as formal reports on the project and guidance for educators |
| Type Of Technology | Webtool/Application |
| Year Produced | 2014 |
| Impact | This website has been used by South Bristol Youth Consortium to inform their curriculum design and planning and by a cohort of schools to support parental engagement activities. A full report on the project impact is available on the website. The website and model are also being used by the Doncaster Education Commission. |
| URL | http://www.bristol80by18.org.uk/ |
| Title | Connected Communities Fellowship Website |
| Description | This is a searchable online database of all the 300+ Connected Communities Projects that was designed and developed as part of the fellowship. It includes information about all projects, is organised around key programme themes, and includes lists of events and activities past and upcoming. It provides the core archive for the programme. |
| Type Of Technology | Webtool/Application |
| Year Produced | 2014 |
| Impact | The website is regularly used by programme participants and the media to find out information about what is going on in the programme. |
| URL | http://www.connected-communities.org |
| Description | 80by18 Project |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | radio interview with BBC Bristol about the 80by18 Project. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | 80by18 Workshops and Public Engagement |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | A range of workshops with schools and local organisations, as well as a public launch, were used to promote the 80by18 webtool for young people in Bristol. The tool has been integrated into the activities of primary schools, South Bristol Youth Consortium and Girl Guides units, and is being used by Doncaster Council to develop a similar tool. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | AHRC Advisory Board |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Presentation on the CC programme to the AHRC Advisory Board |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Baltic States University-Campus Talk |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Presentation on the future of university-community collaborations to the Baltic States Network looking at Campus Design. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | British Council Going Global Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Undergraduate students |
| Results and Impact | Talk to the British Council Going Global event - promoting engaged and collaborative research. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Cabot Annual Lecture |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Major Annual Lecture for the Cabot Institute - Environmental Change Institute. Focused on the long term role of universities in society. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | http://www.bristol.ac.uk/cabot/events/2016/annual-lecture-2016.html |
| Description | Connected Communities and IROs workshop |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
| Results and Impact | This workshop was convened to provide critical reflection on the role of independent research organisations within the Connected Communities programme. This event brought together staff from IROs, project participants and other interested parties to share experiences of working within the programme, to promote more intensive involvement and to exchange ideas on the scheme's future and legacy. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://connected-communities.org/index.php/project_resources/connected-communities-and-iros-a-criti... |
| Description | Creating Living Knowledge Press Release |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | A press release accompanied the launch of the Creating Living Knowledge Report and focused on the workshop with policy makers and practitioners that happened alongside the report launch. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Engage Conference (Bristol) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Undergraduate students |
| Results and Impact | Keynote for the Engage Conference, which outlined findings from the CC programme, were used as part of a discussion in the groups, and taken up afterwards. Have since been contacted with positive feedback on impact from conference organisers and approached for further talks |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Keynote - Education and Open Futures, Swedish Educational Technological Association |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | This keynote addressed an audience primarily of teachers and other education professionals. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| Description | Keynote - GEMS Museum Education Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | This conference keynote addressed those working in the museum sector, the conference looked at ways the museums sector can engage with communities. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Keynote Higher Education Academy |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Undergraduate students |
| Results and Impact | Keynote on engagement and collaboration as core elements of University future trajectories. Positive discussions and feedback noted via Social media. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Keynote National Union of Students Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Undergraduate students |
| Results and Impact | Keri Facer delivered a keynote at the annual NUS conference to an audience of key figures from the national and local branches of the National Union of Students. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Nav Society Stockholm Public Lecture |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Public Lecture given to a mixed audience of public policy makers, schools, designers and developers on the future of education - schools and universities |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Oxford Annual Lecture |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Oxford Education Network Annual Keynote Lecture |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | http://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/what-are-universities |
| Description | Royal Opera House - Culture Counts Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Keri Facer was invited to speak at this conference organised by the Royal Opera House Bridge Project to discuss 'connecting children and young people with great art and culture' |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://www.roh.org.uk/learning/royal-opera-house-bridge |
| Description | UNESCO workshop on Innovation Futures |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Keri Facer was invited to participate in the workshop led by UNESCO. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | UNESCO/ Rockefeller Bellagio Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Participation as educational expert in a Rockefeller/UNESCO workshop on developing futures literacy. The workshop led to the design (which I developed) of a research method for a set of Futures literacy activities with policy makers globally, and has formed the foundation for a new set of tools to support international futures capability development. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | World Academy of Art and Science |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Member of a three day working party for the World Academy on a 'new paradigm in higher education'. Feedback after the event reported that the findings from the CC programme have been used to inform their next set of discussions. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | World Innovation Summit for Education |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | The WISE summit brings together decision makers, influential experts and practitioners to explore groundbreaking innovations and take concrete steps to make significant improvements to worldwide education. The annual World Innovation Summit for Education is the premier international platform dedicated to innovation and creative action in education where top decision-makers share insights with on-the-ground practitioners and collaborate to rethink education. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |