the content of which is largely laid out in this earlier article from 2018<\/a>. One of the key motivations for establishing these events was to help provide and foster a sense of research community within the University, where researchers from different disciplines could feel comfortable sharing ideas and practice with one another. <\/p>\nSince the first Research Caf\u00e9 in 2019, we have had dozens of Post Graduate Researchers and academic staff present their research and over one hundred different students and staff members have registered to attend at least one session. We have also had to adapt to the Covid-19 pandemic. Whereas the original Research Caf\u00e9 events were held on \u2018The Grass\u2019 on the third floor of the Lanchester Library, since May 2020 they have been hosted online. <\/p>\n
The Summer felt like a good opportunity to take stock of how these events have been viewed by the research community at the University, with a view to identifying how they can evolve in the future. To this end, a survey was launched across June and July to elicit feedback. <\/p>\n
Nineteen responses to the Survey were received, the majority of the responses, 14, were from PhD candidates, with 4 responses from academic staff. Responses were received from Post Graduate Researchers and academic staff from across the University\u2019s Research Centres and Faculties, though the highest response rates came from the Centre for Global Learning (GLEA) with 5 responses, with 4 apiece from the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences and the Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations. <\/p>\n
Feedback on the current state of Research Caf\u00e9s<\/h4>\n
One of the purposes of the Survey was to assess how suitable the current Research Caf\u00e9 format has been since we were forced to move them online. <\/p>\n
Respondents were asked a series of questions about the platform being used and the timings of the event. <\/p>\n
Since moving to online delivery, the majority of sessions have been run over the Big Blue Button platform. Respondents how suitable this platform had been for the running of these events. Of the 14 respondents who answered this question, 10 indicated that it was \u2018very\u2019 or \u2018quite\u2019 suitable. The accompanying comments though did indicate a certain degree of nervousness about utilising an unfamiliar system, with one respondent commenting that there are \u2018too many different [online] platforms used by the University\u2019. It\u2019s appreciated that during the past 18 months there has been a sense of \u2018digital overload\u2019, which we don’t want the choice of online Research Caf\u00e9 platform to add to. <\/p>\n
The survey then welcomed suggestions for alternative platforms we might consider using. Twelve responses were received to this, with over half of the responses arguing for Zoom. A smaller number advocated for Teams, with one particularly impassioned dissenter arguing against!<\/p>\n
In terms of session length, Research Caf\u00e9s, assuming a full cohort of three presenters, last up to two hours. Respondents were asked about timings, with 16 out of 19 feeling the current timings are about right, and 2 feeling the events last too long. None felt that two hours was not long enough – from a hosting perspective I’m inclined to agree!<\/p>\n
Seven respondents indicated that they had previously presented at a Research Caf\u00e9. These respondents were asked a supplementary question to check how beneficial they had found the experience to be; six of the seven indicated they found presenting at a Research Caf\u00e9 to be either a very or somewhat positive experience, with one neutral response. All seven respondents also indicated that they would recommend presenting at a Research Caf\u00e9 to anybody else who may be interested. <\/p>\n
Considerations for the Future<\/h4>\n
Now that we have confirmed that Research Caf\u00e9s can run effectively online, one of the big questions is whether we continue with an online format or whether we revert back to in-person events. <\/p>\n
Respondents were given three options to choose from: whether to opt for exclusively in-person events (as was the case pre-March 2020), exclusively online events or whether to alternate between online and in-person events. Results were as follows: <\/p>\n