|
The ability of the US ‘critical mass support’ scheme for centre formation to draw in new contributors to an existing multidisciplinary research group, and to give essential infrastructure funding. <up><top> |
|
At the suggestion of a US Engineering Research Centre Director :A one-off award with perhaps £2m spread unevenly over 5 years scheme should suffice to start a modest centre. There would not be any repeat funding under the this scheme. This would allow restricted funds to set-up multiple centres which is important to allow diversity of ideas in some of the priority areas. Scientific excellence of the proposed work is of greater importance than track record so that new faces and ideas can perhaps try to improve our interdisciplinary success.<up> |
|
The judging of grants by research outcomes (refereed publications, patents etc.) and not against the deliverables which are set out at the beginning of the project. Such fixed arrangements seem more appropriate to contracts such as LINK.<up> |
|
The NSF Career Award. The EPSRC (and other Research Councils) could institute an open competition for a prestige award for say 15%, of new engineering lecturers in 3A-5* departments (whether electrical, mechanical, chemical or civil etc.) The relevance of the project to currently defined priorities should not be a criterion, as this might delay the implementation of novel ideas. Perhaps £30K-£50K gross p.a. (perhaps incorporating a studentship) for 4 years could be awarded. The EPSRC might encourage universities, and industry to add funds through a matching funds provision (with a ceiling).<up> |
|
‘Blue-Sky’ feasibility studies with two years (not one) of funding, made available on basis of referee’s reports (with at least one ‘excellent’ assessment). Programme managers have the authority to deal with this independently. <up> |
|
The requirement for the automatic studentship given by the EPSRC to new lecturers to be a CASE award, should be relaxed.<up> |
|
If the EPSRC automatic studentship for a new lecturer is CASE, then it could be supplemented by matching funds to any industrial money acquired above the minimum of £2500. bench fee. This could allow a rapid acquisition of sufficient funds to purchase necessary equipment.top> |
|
Active encouragement be given to chemical engineers (and others) to undertake postdocs in non-native departments. This could be achieved by giving individuals a personal grant to go to another department. This will greatly enhance multidisciplinary work in the UK.top> |
|
Universities should fund substantial start-up grants for new staff. This will demonstrate a true commitment to the future of their new member of staff and their research. Some of this funding may come from industry on a ‘no-strings’ basis (except for the opportunity to access the academic) as the money is intended to establish the individual as a productive and effective academic researcher. top>
In return for offering start-up packages, the university would expect to have a longer probation period - by the end of which, the person should have generated national/international impact. We propose a system of evaluation based on the US model i.e. using letters of recommendation from other respected and established researchers in the individual’s field (both national and international). The university could bar them at lecturer level if they failtop> |
|
UK universities should set up schemes to encourage joint appointments, particularly between chemical engineering and science (biosciences, chemistry and physics) departments. Such appointments might be honorary in the second department. For example, a physicist appointed into a chemical engineering department and paid by them, might have a joint appointment in Physics, which formally recognises and nourishes the maintenance of their identity as a Physicist.top> |
|
Special attention should be given to the travel component of a grant: perhaps allowing travel to a major international conference outside the main field of study, as well as to the appropriate specialist meetings.top> |
|
Postgraduate students should be expected to do six advanced courses as part of their Ph.D, some of which should be non-core courses. These courses could be intensive one week or traditional term/semester long courses, and should be assessed.top> |
|
To assist all departments in providing suitable courses (particularly the intensive ones), a ‘Virtual Graduate School’ should be established. In this way, resources may be saved by offering intensive courses at a single location to the benefit of the whole community. This would also provide important networking opportunities for postgraduates. Supplemental support should be provided by appropriate use of web-based computer aided instruction and learning techniques.top> |
|
Accommodation needs to be made for students, required to take final year undergraduate courses as part of their postgraduate programme at semestered universities. The Research Councils must allow a flexible (September/October) start date. Such students would therefore finish correspondingly early.top> |
|
The four-year cut-off for Research Council programmes be relaxed - this is vital where multidisciplinary coursework is being taken.top> |
|
In order for this to be feasible, there should be an opportunity for studentships and the training of postgraduates to be linked to research grants which can continue to fund students who have already received RC funding. This is particularly important for multidisciplinary projects, where a student cannot be expected to finish in less than four years.top> |
|
Funds should be made available to allow for small equipment/consumable purchase, and for supporting undergraduate students over the summer as a feasibility study for new ideas. This will act as an attraction for good undergraduate students. Alternatively, an exchange student from anywhere in E.U. could use funds for a one-semester research programme.top> |
|
A programme should be established for undergraduate students to undertake work as part of a departmental research group. This would be for an extended period, say one or two summer vacations, and perhaps extending part-time into term-time. Staff would be expected to use the students as true research assistants for example to undertake exploratory projects. Funding should be possible from research grants as well as from University sources.top> |
|
The undergraduate curriculum should be reviewed and developed to reflect the changing nature of what is expected of chemical engineering graduates in both research and industry, by the inclusion of more basic science which underpins the new industries in which chemical engineers will be employed in the future.top> |