ABSTRACT

The measurement and evaluation of the nonacademic impact of publicly funded university research have been important components of the funding model that has existed in the UK higher education sector since 2014, the year in which “research impact” was incorporated into the Research Excellence Framework (REF) as a key performance indicator. Chief among the methodological challenges created by the impact agenda is the need to develop mechanisms to capture and evaluate the longer-term impact of research findings beyond the academy. This paper responds to this need by offering a case study of the positive role a combined life-history and narrative analysis methodology can play in capturing the deeper subjective impacts of public engagement activity. Drawing upon the authors’ experience of public engagement and an analysis of semistructured interviews with nonacademic partners, the paper demonstrates how research impact reception functions as a plural and differential process that is personally and socially mediated. Based on this finding, it argues that research evaluation mechanisms need to be sensitively calibrated to facilitate a fuller appreciation of the emotional, situational, and historical dynamics that shape the impact of public engagement activity.

摘要

自2014年以来，英国高等教育界就一直存在对公立大学研究的非学术影响进行衡量和评估的重要组成部分，该年是“研究影响”被纳入卓越研究框架（REF）的那一年。 ）作为关键绩效指标。影响议程所产生的方法学挑战中的主要挑战是需要开发一种机制，以捕获和评估学院以外研究成果的长期影响。本文通过提供一个案例研究来回应这一需求，该案例研究结合了生活史和叙事分析方法在捕捉公众参与活动的更深层次主观影响方面可以发挥的作用。借鉴作者的公众参与经验以及对非学术合作伙伴的半结构式访谈的分析，本文证明了研究影响接受是如何作为个人和社会媒介的多元差异过程起作用的。基于这一发现，它认为需要对研究评估机制进行敏感地校准，以促进对影响公众参与活动影响的情感，情境和历史动态的更全面的了解。