Castles and Coprolites

This week, reports emerged that the Department for Education (DfE) intends to remove teaching grant support for creative and performing arts courses in English universities as part of a wider reprioritisation of the Strategic Priorities Grant (SPG) . The rationale is that scarce public funding should be concentrated on subjects considered most critical to national skills needs, particularly healthcare and high-cost STEM provision (though, grants for nursing are also being cut). At first glance, this may seem like the familiar debate about the relative value of arts and sciences. In reality, it raises a much bigger question, that is how coherent is government policy across higher education, skills, research, innovation and economic growth? Just over a year ago, the UK Government's Modern Industrial Strategy identified the Creative Industries as one of eight priority growth sectors . The accompanying Creative Industries Sector Plan described a sector contributing £124 billion in GV...

One of the most formative aspects of my academic career has been my involvement in grant assessment. Like many researchers, I began by reviewing journal articles - once you have published a couple of papers, you find yourself being asked to review others on similar topics. Over time, I started to take up opportunities to review grant proposals, and this has become a central and enriching part of my professional life. The first grants I reviewed were for a European programme in 2014, where I was invited by recommendation from a colleague - they needed someone with environmental archaeology experience who could review a handful of proposals with a quick turnaround. I was still very much an early career researcher, just a couple of years out from finishing my PhD. I was thrilled that my expertise was being recognised in this way, and it is a responsibility I took very seriously. Over the years, I’ve had the opportunity to work with a wide range of funders, both in the UK and international...

Over the past few years, the Résumé for Research and Innovation (R4RI) has emerged as an alternative to the traditional academic CV in research funding applications, and has been adopted by major funders such as UKRI and the Wellcome Trust. This format is intended to rethink how we present our careers and contributions, with the idea being that the R4RI format is more inclusive and allows us to demonstrate a wider range of contributions. I have mixed feelings around it. I certainly agree that we need to value a wider range of experience and contributions, but I have some reservations about the format’s effectiveness and accessibility. The R4RI is basically a narrative-based CV that encourages researchers to describe their work across four key areas: contributions to the generation of knowledge, development of individuals and teams, contribution to the wider research community, and contribution to broader society.  It is designed to recognise a broader range of contributions, inclu...