Mentoring and why we need it more than ever in COVID times

Recently I have had the privilege of interviewing 186 academics for a research mapping exercise of the entire humanities department of a stellar university. When I say privilege, it is also exhausting; that’s 186 research agendas of an impressively wide range of academics working in a diverse range of disciplines accross the humanities with only 30-45 mins per interview to connect and gauge research needs for each individual and ascertain potential for collaboration across an entire department. And all this at time when we are all struggling or more frankly “spinning out” in a world which is constantly turning on its chaotic head in COVID times. It’s difficult not to say intense not least because we have been in crisis/ survival mode for so long now.

What has been of interest to me and also easily relatable to is the keen value expressed and attached to those I have interviewed for mentoring. We want it; we need it and in these frankly fractious times it is hard to get it. So why do we need it? I can only relate it to my own experience. Over the past 10 years I have delved into various forms of mentoring from action learning sets, having a work coach and even a more informal mentoring arrangement involving a conversation every 6 weeks in a coffee shop. What they all these processes have in common is crucially a sense of “being seen” being given space to articulate, being listened to, being valued and being given a benchmark by which you can be seen and by which you can measure your progress (or lack of without judgement). Even 20 mins being listened to about your research without being measured, judged or instrumentalised into an externally imposed agenda is a breath of academic fresh air. And this is a process we all need, to be listened to on our terms and not some-one else’s. It needs to be structured in some way but it needs not much more than a) what do you want to do? b) what you need/what support you you need to make that happen? c) what will you do before we next meet to make this happen? and THAT’S the crucial bit; you never leave without the next date being agreed. It is being called to account in the best possible way. It works a treat (or has for me anyway). I am excited by our research mapping exercise and the potential it creates for hard working and quite frankly COVID battered colleagues to be heard and valued. And it places the development of a genuinely supportive and research culture and collegiality at the centre of everything. I look forward in excitement to our next steps.

SNLee – Jan 2021

The joy of simplicity: effective writing styles for impact case studies REF2021

Finding an accessible writing style for an impact case study

by Sarah Naomi Lee – impact consultant (January 2020)

With just under 3 months before the REF2021 impact case study deadline, many of us are busy finalising  the last draft of our impact case study. From my own experience of writing impact case studies and “translating” academic language into more accessible prose here are some simple dos and don’ts to help you adopt a writing style which will help you create a winning impact summary and section 4 of your impact case study.  

DO using simple language and short sentences. There can be a tendency in academic writing to overcomplicate and use language which obfuscates unnecessarily. Impact case studies are most definitely not the place for this. On average a reviewer only has 20 mins to review each case study (an academic told me this on good authority and i am assuming this is based on bitter experience!). Having read and also judged BBC writing competitions myself, I can appreciate how tired reviewers eyes will be getting when faced with a mountain of documents to get through . It is fairly obvious that short clear simple sentences are a blessing for tired eyes and make it easier for reviewers to digest your points more readily. Don’t be afraid to use simple, language- it works much more effectively than flowery prose in an impact case study. In my experience some of the best 4 star impact case studies have been those which adopt workaday, almost prosaic language. Keep it simple!

DO focus in your impact summary on clear concrete and measurable differences and benefits being achieved i.e. a new archive has been created…4 new works of art have been created….300 midwives have used this training module etc.

DO consider reach and significance in your impact summary and make sure that they are clearly indicated in your summary even if you don’t use the R and S words…

DO use active verbs. Academic writing often uses the passive tense as a default. Don’t’ be afraid of using instrumental language in the active tense.

DO think first of the stakeholders, the benefits accrued and the impact achieved and not the research. This can be tricky for academics who are naturally focused on the research. Start with the people benefitting as a result of the research and foreground their experience – my sense of it is a shifting of focus from “the horse to the cart ” so to speak. This will help you build a compelling narrative for your case study in which the impact becomes the main focus of the document rather than the research which academics tend to understandably focus on.

DON’T go overboard on superlatives in the impact summary . The most over-used adjective in humanities impact case studies I have come across is “transformative”. After you have read 20 scripts which all claim an exhibition has been “transformative” it starts to pall. Avoid superlatives and effusive claims and stick instead to clear, crisp examples of what has been achieved and why that matters.

DON’T squeeze as much text as possible into the 5 pages  since white space allows the text to breathe. Cramming everything in with over long verbose quotes or sentences which are 2-3 lines long leaves you  at risk of suffocating your reviewer.

DON’T over use acronyms. Whilst in some academic fields acronyms are an inevitability, when you over pepper sentences with acronyms they start to look like morse code and become jolting and uncomfortable to read. Limit them whenever possible so make the narrative flow more easily.

SNLee January 2020