The University of Nottingham's 2009 school-level survey to review implementation of The Concordat identified examples of good practice as well as gaps in provision.
Good practice
The School of Nursing’s approach to supporting the career development of new members of research staff
- Research staff meet with the Director of Research to discuss their career and support
- Research staff have a research-focussed activity review with a senior academic to decide how the School can best support them.
The Arts Faculty’s mentoring of research staff
- In English Studies and American & Canadian Studies research staff have a mentor who is not their Principal Investigator (PI)
- In Modern Languages and Cultures research staff have mentors for both research and for teaching.
The ways in which research staff are valued and recognised
- In Pharmacy and Community Health Sciences the Researchers’ Forum comprises research staff representatives and feeds into the School Management Group
- In Molecular Medical Sciences the School Plan incorporated a proposal for improving career development of research staff
- The School of Physics & Astronomy implemented Project Juno Code of Practice. Launched by the Institute for Physics in 2007, it sets out practical ideas in the form of five key principles to address the under-representation of women at all levels in university physics.
Gaps in provision
- Lack of knowledge and understanding of university policies and procedures, and variations in practices by principal investigators
- Low awareness and uptake of training and development opportunities amongst research staff
- Uncertainty regarding the implications and implementation of the fixed-term working directive.
The gaps in provision are addressed in the University's Concordat Action Plan 2011-2014.
Return to the main Concordat page