1. Moving Forward with Public Engagement - Solutions
Paul Manners, NCCPE
Julie Worrall, CUE East
Gillian Squirrell, SEARCH
Our focus today is solutions... And alter there will be five workshops for you to choose from where practical, positive steps are being taken to embed public engagement.
Firs, a bit of background to the two projects which have generated these workshops – the beacons for PE and the Search project. Shortly, you’ll hear from both Gillian and Julie – but first just a bit of scene setting from me

2. What’s the problem?
We’re aiming to be very positive today – but to offer solutions you need to know what the problems are you’re trying to solve and this is a good place to start – I’m sure all or nearly all of your are aware of this hugely influential report which identified a whole host of issues ... In particular the research-driven culture – including pressure to publish, attract funding for and build careers on ‘hard research’ – means that public engagement is not a priority within many HEIs. Public engagement is also seen as not well regarded by peers, and is difficult to undertake as it does not bring in significant funding.

3. CUE east @ UEA Edinburgh Beltane
Manchester
North East
UCL
Wales
NCCPE
This initiative aims to create a culture within UK Higher Education where public engagement is formalised and embedded as a valued and recognised activity for staff at all levels, and for students.
The Royal Society report was an important platform for the launch of the beacons initiative – a £9.2 m project funded by Research Councils the HE Funding councils and Wellcome. Shortly Julie will talk in detail about the work going on at the UEA beacon, CUE East
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust 3

4. Science Engagement and Researching Change
SEARCH is a two part project focusing on science and engineering engagement activities undertaken by university staff, and the impacts of these activities on the perceptions of engagement work and the culture in universities.
Same factors influenced the setting up of SEARCH – Gillian will tell us more shortly

5. 12 months ago we came to the same conference
12 months ago we came to the same conference. This slide is a word ‘map’ of the comments we took away - lots of feedback and questions and it feels right to revisit that now, briefly: people told us what they wanted and expected – and where they thought we might focus our energy most productively. It was resolutely practical in focus... Looking for solutions! Recognition – reward – evaluation -

6. One of the things we’ve achieved at the NCCPE is to build on that feedback – and on conversations with lots of people across the sector – to launch a new website which tries to connect up some of the best and most useful resources and practice across the sector. Research, toolkits, case studies...
What’s common between search and the beacons is the focus on culture change... How to make that happen.
Something we’re launching on our website is a very simple framework to try to make sense of this – and to provide us all with a common language to describe what we’re doing and try to join it up.
But also a draft framework to synthesise and simplify the challenges of embedding engagement: having reviewed lots of frameowroisk and toaked to lots of people an d read olots of evaluation reports – these five key areas...
Now working towards ‘solutions’ under these different headings

8. Embedding engagement: six triggers
MISSION
Embed in strategy and promote through leadership
REWARD
Recognize, reward and support staff involvement 
COORDINATION
Coordinate delivery to maximise efficiency, learning, impact
PUBLIC
Involve the public in governance and through ongoing dialogue
STUDENTS
Include and involve students
COMMUNICATION
Celebrate and champion success, inside and outside

9. Science and Engineering and Researching Change
Gillian Squirrell, University of Bristol
University of Bristol -

10. Science and Engineering and Researching Change
A two part project: Sizeable empirically based research project to scope engagement activities, barriers, motivations, benefits at individual and system levels Development and research programme over 15 months, 17 universities and 26 academics, real time engagement work and exploring how it might be embedded within universities
University of Bristol -

11. Headlines - The Empirical Study
118 interviews scientists and engineers, 21 pvcs and operational managers, 52 universities. 13 individuals not engaged. 3 universities not engaged. High volumes of engagement - stimulus policy/funding. Defining engagement - 3 categories – a continuum. Differences in institutional/subject drivers. Impacts of difficulties with definitions - individual and institutional insecurities; metrics; evaluation; persuasion of the others [Royal Society ’06 Factors ]. Discrepancies - motivations/interests and actualities - differs from Wellcome’s ‘00 Role in Public Debate.
University of Bristol -

12. More headlines... Changes in engagement practices over time
Benefits – academics, students, technicians and wider communities
Barriers – back to the BA 2004 conference, Royal Society Reports ‘06 Factors and Science and the Public Interest – importance of rewards, support from funders, training, media fears
Emergent themes led to Phase 2 research and development issues
University of Bristol -

13. Phase 2
Meta questions: Engagement, Change in Universities and the process of learning Specific questions: diverse groups, evaluation, sustainability and two way engagement The format: 2 groups, 4 sets, 4 meetings, additional meetings (eg communications training – Factors 06 Role of Scientists ‘00) Concepts: Culture, Change, Agency Skills: Action and reflection; communication Delivery: Action Learning, process consultancy, transformative learning events
University of Bristol -

14. Outcomes - Individuals
Confidence and esteem - networked and sharing experiences and practices - evidence for arguments, confidence to open conversations Strength - experience of alternative “virtual organisation” self-revelations and common ground Impacts of action learning and conceptualisations of change, reading under the surface - personal authority, responsibility, autonomy National project - legitimacy and use of leverage; project/site visits Mastery - reflection on engagement & role, taking action and pride Leadership roles - within organisation; international events Analytic thinking - the organisation, cultures and how they work
University of Bristol -

15. Outcomes - Institutional
Rewards - promotion, prizes Recognition - administrative support, engagement counts Training - staff, students, researchers, ESOL and engagement Home page - institutionalising it Audits Departmental sharing of responsibilities – asking and organising Research bids Chairing and rebranding committee function
University of Bristol -

16. Embedding engagement: six triggers
MISSION
Embed in strategy and promote through leadership
REWARD
Recognize, reward and support staff involvement 
COORDINATION
Coordinate delivery to maximise efficiency, learning, impact
PUBLIC
Involve the public in governance and through ongoing dialogue
STUDENTS
Include and involve students
COMMUNICATION
Celebrate and champion success, inside and outside

17. Julie Worrall, Project Director Community University Engagement East (CUE East)
Julie will now talk about how one beacon – CUE east at UEA
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust 17

18. Is baseline information being gathered and if so, how?
Reflect and build upon two questions from the Beacons session at last year’s Conference
Is baseline information being gathered and if so, how?
How would public engagement be built into promotions criteria and awards for excellence?
Share the CUE East experience, thoughts on progress so far and on what lies ahead
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

19. 2008 Conference: Measuring the culture change in universities
Is baseline information being gathered and if so, how?
‘A qualitative baseline report on the perceptions of public engagement in University of East Anglia academic staff’
Lisa McDaid, Beacons Researcher, City College Norwich, December 2008
55 semi-structured interviews with academic staff
Sample 1 - targeted individuals (n=24)
Heads of Schools
Associate Deans for Enterprise & Engagement
Associate Deans for Research
Pro Vice Chancellor
Sample 2 - randomly selected academic staff by faculty & grade (n=31)
Four faculties – Science, Social Science, Health, Arts & Humanities
Four grade levels – Snr Academic, Academic, Snr Researcher, Researcher
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

20. The importance of public engagement
2008 Conference: Measuring the culture change in universities
Is baseline information being gathered and if so, how?
The importance of public engagement
“It’s difficult to say because it almost comes into a different category because it is not part of my job description or one of the measures against which I think I will ever be measured…it’s more like deciding do I want to go for a run today? It’s something I enjoy and it’s important but I don’t really see it as a part of my paid job” (Senior Researcher)
Recording public engagement
“Nobody knows whether it counts towards their work time, so it dissuades people from doing it or telling people they are doing it because they might be called upon to fill up those hours somewhere else” (Researcher)
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

21. CUE EAST QUALITATIVE SURVEY KEY FINDINGS
CUE EAST AND ALIGNED UEA STRATEGIES
84% involved in ‘self defined’ PE, but lack of a shared understanding.
CUE East devised ‘working’ typology, shaping new promotions criteria at UEA.
PE not as important as research and teaching and for some, admin.
New promotions criteria links PE to teaching & research.
Barriers include time, career progression, peer approval, research-led culture, funding & challenges of engaging people.
CUE East developing infrastructure dedicated to building capacity at all levels.
Lack of strategic support: “Support is personal rather than organisational”
New UEA Corporate Plan with ‘Enterprise & Engagement’ a corporate priority.
Very little recording happening & no institutional mechanism in place
CUE East devised ‘Engagement Tracker’
PE was not rewarded in any formal way.
New promotions criteria and individual awards.
Evaluation of PE was minimal. Most had not even considered evaluating their activities.
Beacon’s Researcher advising individuals & projects on evaluation techniques & methodologies.

22. 2008 Conference: Measuring the culture change in universities
CUE East evaluation approach
An independent ‘Beacons Researcher’ employed by City College Norwich,
embedded in the programme and providing continuous feedback on aspects of
the programme delivery.
Key evaluation research activities in Year 1 have included:
Qualitative baseline research on perceptions of public engagement
CUE East team interviews including Steering Group Chair and NCCPE interview
Individual event evaluations
Steering Group feedback
Partner Perceptions Survey
Document analysis – e.g. Project Director reports to Steering Group, Funders, Beacons Coordination Group & UEA’s Enterprise & Engagement Executive, Operations Manager Monthly Reports, consultation responses e.g. DIUS Science & Society and correspondence
Observation at meetings e.g. team, project & steering group meetings
Observation at training & analysis of evaluation feedback
Annual Evaluation Review published April 2009
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

23. 2008 Conference: How would public engagement be built into promotions criteria and awards for excellence?
Step one
1 WAY
TALKS &
DISSEMINATION
2 WAY
LISTENING & DIALOGUE
3 WAY
POLICY MAKING
THE PRACTITIONER
Providing evidence of contributions to Public Engagement
Informing Notifying
Advising
Informing
Listening
Learning
Exchange
Partnership
Personal Change
Consulting
Evaluating Reporting
THE PRACTITIONER communicating knowledge e.g.
Public lectures
Media work – press, TV & Radio
Writing for the non-specialist
THE PRACTITIONER AND THE PUBLIC in dialogue e.g.
Public seminars, debates & forums / Exhibitions & interactive events / Mobile laboratories / Volunteering / Drama outreach / Museum education / Translation workshops / CRed / TSN / SCVA
THE PRACTITIONER (THE EXPERT), THE PUBLIC AND POLICY-MAKERS shaping government policy e.g.
Sciencewise
Science Horizons
Expert panel /Committee member
LEVELS OF PARTICIPATION & MEASURES
EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE, EVALUATION AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
Quantitative
e.g. attendees
Quantitative e.g. visitors
Qualitative e.g. evidence of impact via evaluation & feedback / securing funding for engagement projects & community based research / curriculum development
Quantitative e.g. committees attended
Qualitative e.g. evidence of impact via evaluation & feedback /impact on changes to government policy / transformation of research agendas on public policy / institutional change / securing funding
A MODEL TO AID DISCUSSION ON ASSESSING THE PRACTITIONER’S IMPACT & PERFORMANCE
KT Executive Committee
16th April 2008
J Worrall, CUE East
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

24. 2008 Conference: How would public engagement be built into promotions criteria and awards for excellence?
Step two
CUE East Foundation for UEA Promotions Criteria on Engagement
THE ENGAGED PRACTITIONER
Communicating knowledge and enriching cultural life
One-way e.g. public lectures, media work, writing for the non-specialist, exhibitions, show casing academic know-how
Providing a service and being in dialogue with the public and communities
Two-way e.g. volunteering, user involvement in research, forums, focus groups, pro-bono schemes, drama outreach, museum education
Being in dialogue with the public and policy-makers
Three-way engagement e.g. governmental committees involving the academic as the ‘expert’ e.g. expert panel, government led public consultation, task forces
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

25. Promotions Committee Rules and Procedures
2008 Conference: How would public engagement be built into promotions criteria and awards for excellence?
Step three
UEA Green Book 2009
Promotions Committee Rules and Procedures
ENTERPRISE AND ENGAGEMENT AND
RELATED ADMINISTRATION
Examples of engagement activities and of evidence that will help to demonstrate and verify impact on the community, on the applicant and on the institution in relation to teaching and research
CUE East Individual Awards
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

26. The CUE East experience
Thoughts on progress so far and on what lies ahead
Funded by the UK Funding Councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust

27. Workshops
MISSION
REWARD
COORDINATION
PUBLIC

28. Workshops MISSION REWARD
1. Working with Resistance in Organisational Change
MISSION
REWARD
COORDINATION
PUBLIC

29. Workshops MISSION REWARD
1. Working with Resistance in Organisational Change
MISSION
REWARD
COORDINATION
PUBLIC
2. Involving Researchers - skills training, development and practical opportunities

30. Workshops MISSION REWARD
1. Working with Resistance in Organisational Change
MISSION
REWARD
COORDINATION
PUBLIC
2. Involving Researchers - skills training, development and practical opportunities
3. Action Learning in practice

31. Workshops MISSION REWARD
1. Working with Resistance in Organisational Change
MISSION
REWARD
COORDINATION
PUBLIC
2. Involving Researchers - skills training, development and practical opportunities
3. Action Learning in practice
4. Evaluation and impact assessment

32. Workshops MISSION REWARD
1. Working with Resistance in Organisational Change
MISSION
REWARD
COORDINATION
PUBLIC
2. Involving Researchers - skills training, development and practical opportunities
3. Action Learning in practice
4. Evaluation and impact assessment
5. Engaging objects: the British Museum and its work with new audiences

33. What next?
Written up today and shared with the conference via powerpoint and posters
Uploaded to NCCPE website next week
‘Triggers’ remain a core focus for us – please stay in touch
Feedback at the end of the session
Will be written up and shared here
The outputs will be shared on the web
The Themes will reamin open – we want to continue to share...
Now got 40 mins
Please take time at the end to reflect – really useful for us

34. Feedback What have you learned from this session?
What (if anything) will you be following up on?
What (if anything) would you like us to follow up on?