On research identity, meaningful work and funding (solo)

Geri: 00:00:05

Welcome to Changing Academic Life.

2

: 00:00:08

I'm Geraldine Fitzpatrick, and this is

a podcast series where academics and

3

: 00:00:12

others share their stories, provide

ideas, and provoke discussions about what

4

: 00:00:17

we can do individually and collectively

to change academic life for the better.

5

: 00:00:29

Hello and welcome.

6

: 00:00:31

In this short episode, I'd like to take

some time to reflect on the tensions

7

: 00:00:36

that I've experienced and that I've been

hearing lately around the autonomy and

8

: 00:00:42

freedom that we have as academics to

shape our researcher identity and work on

9

: 00:00:49

things that we love, that we care about,

where we think we can make a difference.

10

: 00:00:55

And the tension of recognizing that

we're trying to pursue that in a system

11

: 00:01:00

that we're not fully in control of.

12

: 00:01:03

In a system that values what gets funded

and defines for us in some ways, what

13

: 00:01:10

topics are worth exploring and what is

going to get CV value in terms of funding.

14

: 00:01:18

And consequent papers and success for

promotion or appointments and so on.

15

: 00:01:25

And I've been thinking about

this triggered by something that

16

: 00:01:29

Katta Spiel said in part one of

our conversation recently, About

17

: 00:01:34

their surprise at getting funded.

18

: 00:01:36

Despite being very uncompromising in

what they wanted to do and deliberately

19

: 00:01:41

not playing the strategic game of

doing all the right things that

20

: 00:01:44

were supposedly getting the ticks.

21

: 00:01:48

And I'll replay an edited extract where

Katta can explain this in their own words.

22

: 00:01:54

Katta: And the funny thing about

that is because I did write a

23

: 00:01:57

proper proposal, like it wasn't a

joke proposal or anything, but I

24

: 00:02:00

wrote one that made no compromises

in terms of what I wanted to do.

25

: 00:02:05

Like, it didn't try to

pander to reviewers.

26

: 00:02:08

And then that was what

surprised me so much then that

27

: 00:02:11

I got it because I was like.

28

: 00:02:13

I was not trying to do any

of the strategic things.

29

: 00:02:17

Geri: It's interesting to think about if

it would have been, as successful if you

30

: 00:02:20

weren't as authentic and uncompromising.

31

: 00:02:23

Katta: Yeah.

32

: 00:02:23

That is like then what I keep

telling people sometimes, like if

33

: 00:02:27

you dare to then just do the thing

that you want to, but I know also

34

: 00:02:30

that it's really difficult and.

35

: 00:02:33

And even I can only get there when I'm

not that afraid of like how it could work

36

: 00:02:38

Geri: And interestingly not long after

this, I came across a post from Mark Reed.

37

: 00:02:45

You may remember that.

38

: 00:02:46

I also spoke to mark

very recently as well.

39

: 00:02:49

And one of Mark's passion areas for

research and for activism is about

40

: 00:02:55

engagement and impact and in this.

41

: 00:02:58

Post, and I will put a link to it in the

show notes is where he draws together

42

: 00:03:04

what he calls nine good practice

principles for engagement and impact.

43

: 00:03:08

That's drawing on his impact

culture book and some papers they've

44

: 00:03:12

written and, and his experience

in training people about impact.

45

: 00:03:17

And I was really struck by principle

number one, which talks about.

46

: 00:03:24

To read directly, "Understand your purpose

and pursue impacts you find intrinsically

47

: 00:03:31

motivating rather than allowing extrinsic

incentives to drive your engagement".

48

: 00:03:39

And that's interesting, isn't it?

49

: 00:03:41

Because that in some way reflects

what Katta just talked to us about.

50

: 00:03:46

About being uncompromising in pursuing.

51

: 00:03:50

What they found intrinsically motivating.

52

: 00:03:56

So Mark then elaborates in these

principles, what that might mean for

53

: 00:04:00

institutions and for researchers.

54

: 00:04:01

So I'll just read what he says this

principle means for researchers.

55

: 00:04:06

So again, just to read directly.

56

: 00:04:10

"Researchers need to

clarify their purpose.

57

: 00:04:14

And to understand if and how

engagement and impact might express

58

: 00:04:21

important identities and values.

59

: 00:04:24

And contribute to the meaning

they derive from work."

60

: 00:04:28

And of quote.

61

: 00:04:31

But let's return again, to

those words for researchers.

62

: 00:04:36

Researchers need to define their purpose.

63

: 00:04:40

About how their work might

express their identities.

64

: 00:04:45

And values.

65

: 00:04:46

And contribute to the meaning

they derive from work.

66

: 00:04:52

And that just sounds wonderful.

67

: 00:04:54

Doesn't it?

68

: 00:04:55

And all of the research across many

domains and disciplinary areas would

69

: 00:05:00

talk about how we're going to be

much more creative and engaged and

70

: 00:05:06

effective and have better physical and

mental health and wellbeing when we

71

: 00:05:11

can deliver on that identity, work to

our values, do work that's meaningful

72

: 00:05:17

that we feel like it has an impact.

73

: 00:05:22

And then there's the tension that arises

when you're hit with the realities.

74

: 00:05:29

The tension between what our values are.

75

: 00:05:32

And what we want to shape our

research identity to be where we

76

: 00:05:36

derive meaning from our work and

where we want to have impact.

77

: 00:05:42

And then how this might hit up against.

78

: 00:05:46

How we practically are able to get

research done these days, which is

79

: 00:05:50

often through having funded projects

and shaped by other people's notions

80

: 00:05:54

of what's good research or what are

reseaerchable and fundable topics.

81

: 00:06:00

Towards this, then I'm also reflecting

on some various social media posts I've

82

: 00:06:06

also happened to have seen recently.

83

: 00:06:09

From colleagues who talk about getting

rejected yet again yet again yet

84

: 00:06:14

again, despite excellent reviews for

the research they'd been passionate

85

: 00:06:19

about for many, many, many years.

86

: 00:06:22

Research topics that are at

the core of how they define

87

: 00:06:25

themselves as a researcher.

88

: 00:06:28

And in some of these posts.

89

: 00:06:30

You can almost hear the grieving

at having to let go of those

90

: 00:06:35

topics that they really care about.

91

: 00:06:38

And then just the uncertainty

about what to focus on next and.

92

: 00:06:42

and how they should redefine

their research identity or not.

93

: 00:06:45

And it brings to life for me very

much that what we get to define

94

: 00:06:51

as our own research topics is so

core to our identity and purpose.

95

: 00:06:55

As Mark says, in that principle.

96

: 00:06:59

About feeling alive and feeling like

it makes a difference in our work.

97

: 00:07:05

But the facts of life are that not

fitting with funding calls or government

98

: 00:07:10

grand research challenges happens.

99

: 00:07:15

A lot of the funding proposals that

we need to write, depending on the

100

: 00:07:19

scheme, we need to often frame very

closely to what the funders are needing.

101

: 00:07:25

And when we go to training courses,

they'll often tell us about reusing

102

: 00:07:29

their words back to them and making

sure we frame the proposals to

103

: 00:07:33

deliver exactly what the call is

asking for that may or may not fit

104

: 00:07:37

with what we actually want to do.

105

: 00:07:39

Or what we think is the right thing to do.

106

: 00:07:44

And then there's the question of not just

having an excellent research project as

107

: 00:07:47

some of those social media posts have

said, but even getting excellent reviews.

108

: 00:07:52

What is deemed as fundable within current

priorities of the funding organization

109

: 00:07:57

or the government body or whatever.

110

: 00:08:01

And what is fundable also seems to be

changing as well as in many places in

111

: 00:08:07

many schemes is getting harder and harder

it seems to have more open exploratory

112

: 00:08:13

research or to ask more complex questions.

113

: 00:08:17

Again, social media posts that I can

reflect on talk about the challenges

114

: 00:08:20

of even moving to a different country

where research that was acceptable

115

: 00:08:24

more in one country is less so

in this new country where there's

116

: 00:08:28

more of an emphasis on industry

collaborations and applied research.

117

: 00:08:34

And then some other tensions that we

can feel that particularly, I guess, go

118

: 00:08:39

towards values . Sometimes the funding

comes with very strict conditions.

119

: 00:08:46

There's some funding schemes that I've

been part of that are more applied

120

: 00:08:52

where we have to define very clearly

what our phases are going to be?

121

: 00:08:58

What particular activities we're going

to do and exact deliverables and exactly

122

: 00:09:03

when they're going to be delivered.

123

: 00:09:06

And at the same time, this was a

scheme where we were encouraged to have

124

: 00:09:09

more participatory approaches and to

engage with the people for whom we were

125

: 00:09:14

designing new technologies in this case.

126

: 00:09:18

But it felt like that engagement and

that participation was really lip

127

: 00:09:22

service because it would have been

almost impossible to go back to the

128

: 00:09:28

funding body and say the funding

that you've given us to deliver X.

129

: 00:09:33

It's not what our participants want.

130

: 00:09:35

They want something very different.

131

: 00:09:37

That's Y.

132

: 00:09:41

And the fear I know in the

discussions that we would have

133

: 00:09:45

as a project team would be.

134

: 00:09:48

How the funding body might pull the

funding, or we would have to pay back

135

: 00:09:51

the funding we'd already received, how it

would impact people's contracts and jobs.

136

: 00:09:56

And so on.

137

: 00:09:58

And so there's that tension between what

we need to say we're doing, what funding

138

: 00:10:04

bodies expect and what are the principles

and values that guide our research.

139

: 00:10:09

So for us, really engaging with

participants very closely was a

140

: 00:10:13

really closely held principle.

141

: 00:10:15

And that created a lot of internal

tension for us individually and as

142

: 00:10:19

a team in not being able to properly

respect the participant's wishes.

143

: 00:10:27

And then there's the issue of playing

the game where you are told you need

144

: 00:10:32

funding for your CV for promotion,

for moving onto different jobs.

145

: 00:10:38

But not all research actually needs

big funding projects and Stuart Reeves.

146

: 00:10:43

Again, another earlier podcast

conversation that I had talks about the

147

: 00:10:48

fact that a lot of the research that

he wants to do just really needs him

148

: 00:10:53

and maybe one or two people to help.

149

: 00:10:56

And yet that sort of research isn't

deemed as CV worthy or promotion

150

: 00:11:00

worthy research in terms of the brownie

points and the ticks we need to do.

151

: 00:11:06

And to hear Stuart in his own words.

152

: 00:11:10

Stuart: I've also thought about,

people's different research styles, and

153

: 00:11:13

sometimes I feel like the kind of style

of research I do, firstly, doesn't tend

154

: 00:11:18

to cost that much money, and secondly,

is, I don't know, It feels like it's not

155

: 00:11:25

necessarily, going to lead to or work

well with sort of massive, massive grants.

156

: 00:11:31

Or maybe I'm just not understanding how

to frame stuff or spin stuff in such a

157

: 00:11:36

way that it could be seen as doing that.

158

: 00:11:38

So some people's research in

HCI seems to be tailored more

159

: 00:11:43

towards getting large research

grants, whereas others maybe less.

160

: 00:11:48

I mean, I feel like, sometimes

there's a lot of research you can

161

: 00:11:50

do from stuff I kind of do, which

you could do with very little, very

162

: 00:11:55

little resources and get similar kind

of results in terms of publications

163

: 00:12:00

and all those kinds of things.

164

: 00:12:04

Geri: And that was from Stuart Reeves.

165

: 00:12:06

Episode part one at about 11 minutes,

if you did want to go in and try to

166

: 00:12:10

listen to it because he does talk

more about the challenges of trying

167

: 00:12:14

to frame a grand vision and so on.

168

: 00:12:18

So It just seems to me like there's

an ongoing challenge and negotiation

169

: 00:12:24

around identifying who we are.

170

: 00:12:29

What our research identity

is, what we care about.

171

: 00:12:34

What our values are, what's

meaningful work for us.

172

: 00:12:38

What difference we want to make?

173

: 00:12:39

What impact we want to have.

174

: 00:12:42

And negotiating with how we navigate

the current structures and processes.

175

: 00:12:47

And.

176

: 00:12:48

At what currently counts as research

and what currently counts as project.

177

: 00:12:54

And I recognize in all this, our ability

to negotiate those tensions changes,

178

: 00:13:00

depending upon what stage of career, where

at what institution we're in and so on.

179

: 00:13:08

So what are our choices?

180

: 00:13:09

I don't have any answers here.

181

: 00:13:11

I'm just sort of more reflecting

on the experiences, maybe just to

182

: 00:13:15

normalize that you may be not the only

one trying to navigate these tensions.

183

: 00:13:22

So we could choose just to play the

game because when we weigh the trade

184

: 00:13:26

off it may be more important for

us to be able to advance our career

185

: 00:13:30

or to be able to get access to the

funding to at least do something.

186

: 00:13:35

And indeed, Katta did talk about

being more strategic in one proposal

187

: 00:13:41

than they were in a previous one.

188

: 00:13:44

Because for them the weighing

of risks change because this new

189

: 00:13:48

proposal entailed three years, four

years of funding for jobs for other

190

: 00:13:53

people that they cared about.

191

: 00:13:55

And so they weren't just playing

a game individually in not being

192

: 00:14:00

strategic, but needing to play the

game and be strategic because they

193

: 00:14:04

cared about these other people.

194

: 00:14:09

Another way we can choose to play

the game is in reframing the story.

195

: 00:14:16

And I often talk to people about

your leading actors and supporting

196

: 00:14:21

actors in a research story.

197

: 00:14:24

I remember a colleague many years

ago, who submitted a research funding

198

: 00:14:28

proposal to a particular funding body.

199

: 00:14:31

And it got desk rejected.

200

: 00:14:34

They said that it wasn't fitting to,

to their strand of research funding.

201

: 00:14:43

And with much thinking and discussion

what this person ended up doing

202

: 00:14:49

was retelling the story of exactly

the same work, but foregrounding,

203

: 00:14:55

backgrounding, different aspects,

making something that was more of the.

204

: 00:14:59

Uh, supporting actor now, the

leading actor and so-and-so.

205

: 00:15:03

An example was where they were really

foregrounding the participatory

206

: 00:15:07

approach that they were going to

take with their target audience in

207

: 00:15:12

order to come up with a new system.

208

: 00:15:15

And the emphasis was on the development

of the methodology and the learning

209

: 00:15:20

and thinking skills that their

participants would gain in that process.

210

: 00:15:23

And they just reframed it to say this

project was about the technology.

211

: 00:15:27

Oh, and by the way, we'll do it by

participatory engagement with our

212

: 00:15:31

participants and as a coincidental

impact they will learn something

213

: 00:15:35

So you can see the same pieces are

there, but they were just reframed.

214

: 00:15:40

It's totally playing the game.

215

: 00:15:42

And that proposal went through got

excellent reviews and got funded.

216

: 00:15:48

And for that person that game cost

the effort of rewriting reframing the

217

: 00:15:53

proposal, but they were still lucky enough

to be able to still basically talk about

218

: 00:15:59

doing exactly the same work that they

really cared about doing . Just telling

219

: 00:16:03

a different story about it, that fitted

someone else's agenda for that time.

220

: 00:16:09

And then there's the game that we

can play that's just about getting

221

: 00:16:13

projects for the sake of it.

222

: 00:16:16

And it could be for the sake of

the tick, because that's what

223

: 00:16:19

we need right now for our CV.

224

: 00:16:22

Or it could be for the sake of a

colleague and wanting to be supportive.

225

: 00:16:27

Or it could just be about hedging,

our bets in the funding lottery.

226

: 00:16:31

But that can be risky as well.

227

: 00:16:33

So, We may all have had experiences

of saying yes to be on someone else's

228

: 00:16:38

project that we don't necessarily really

care about, but we may be care about

229

: 00:16:43

that person and what does support them.

230

: 00:16:45

And.

231

: 00:16:46

It gets funded.

232

: 00:16:47

And then we're committed to that work.

233

: 00:16:50

And if you're conscientious, then you

will take that commitment seriously.

234

: 00:16:55

At a cost of time and effort and energy.

235

: 00:16:57

And you can almost feel your lack

of energy when you talk about it.

236

: 00:17:01

I'm reflecting on some of

my own project experiences.

237

: 00:17:04

And similarly, I've worked in some places

where say a post-doc isn't able to be

238

: 00:17:10

a PI on a project in their own, right.

239

: 00:17:12

So in wanting to support them and

their career progression and their

240

: 00:17:17

development and them being able to

do research that they own and drive.

241

: 00:17:21

I am happy to go onto their project

proposal as the PI and support them

242

: 00:17:26

in that, of course not just in name,

but trying to say, what do you need

243

: 00:17:30

a support from me in writing it up

and framing the research and so on.

244

: 00:17:35

But it's someone else's meaning

and purpose, and it's reflecting

245

: 00:17:38

someone else's research identity.

246

: 00:17:40

And normally when they get funded and

the person's doing it, I would be playing

247

: 00:17:44

much more of a supportive role, a coach

type role in, helping them deliver

248

: 00:17:50

on the work, but letting them own it

because it's their passion project.

249

: 00:17:54

And I've had the experience of

that happening and then that

250

: 00:17:57

person leaving for another job.

251

: 00:18:00

And not being able to take

the project with them.

252

: 00:18:02

And then I'm left with actually

delivering on the details of that project.

253

: 00:18:07

And it's not a project

that I really care about.

254

: 00:18:09

It's work.

255

: 00:18:10

I can do it.

256

: 00:18:11

But it doesn't light me up in that

same way as it would, if it was

257

: 00:18:16

a project that was my project.

258

: 00:18:18

That connected to my values,

to the impact I wanted to have.

259

: 00:18:24

And similarly I've also had the experience

of having a number of projects under

260

: 00:18:28

review at the same time, including my

passion projects, that I really care

261

: 00:18:34

about my identity projects and the other

ones that I may have gone on just to

262

: 00:18:39

be part of a collaboration or to support

someone in their career and getting

263

: 00:18:43

their research identity sort of shaped.

264

: 00:18:46

And that the disappointment of your

own project not getting funded and the

265

: 00:18:51

only one or ones that do get funded

are the ones that you care less about.

266

: 00:18:57

And again, it's that cost of

time and energy and effort.

267

: 00:19:00

And not having the impact that you would

really want from your research efforts.

268

: 00:19:04

And I know that as I've got more senior in

my career, I've been much more strategic,

269

: 00:19:10

I guess, and careful about those

sorts of projects that I've taken on.

270

: 00:19:15

Having been, burnt sounds

like the wrong word, but.

271

: 00:19:19

Having paid the cost for some of that.

272

: 00:19:23

And I recognize the privilege

of maybe not needing to play

273

: 00:19:27

that game as much as you go on.

274

: 00:19:32

Especially when you

have a secure position.

275

: 00:19:36

Although, I also recognize that there's

always the ongoing tension of trying

276

: 00:19:41

to get more funding because you care

about the people that you're working

277

: 00:19:45

with and that they have next short-term

contract to move on to where we don't

278

: 00:19:50

have long-term contracts for them to get.

279

: 00:19:54

Whole lot of interesting

tensions and trade offs.

280

: 00:19:59

So we could also choose

not to play the game.

281

: 00:20:02

And that could just mean going ahead and

doing the research that we want to do.

282

: 00:20:07

Maybe drawing in one or two others

or seeking out collaborations

283

: 00:20:12

of people who we know would

also care about the same topics.

284

: 00:20:16

And we don't get the CV tick

in the box as an extra funded

285

: 00:20:20

project that's prestigious.

286

: 00:20:23

But we do get to carry on and

do the work we care about.

287

: 00:20:27

So gain costs and trade-offs.

288

: 00:20:31

And.

289

: 00:20:31

Maybe for another time, we could

also talk about other sorts of

290

: 00:20:34

funding mechanisms, like crowd

funding, or other sources of funding.

291

: 00:20:38

That may be a, not so.

292

: 00:20:40

Uh, recognized or held in esteem

by our institutions, but enable

293

: 00:20:45

us to get on and do the work we

want and have the impact we want

294

: 00:20:51

.

And in all of this, where we still want to get funding for projects

295

: 00:20:58

that we care about, whether it's for

CV value or helping someone else's

296

: 00:21:03

career, or just because we love

working in collaborations with people.

297

: 00:21:07

When is it time to stop playing the game?

298

: 00:21:11

Or When is it time to change directions?

299

: 00:21:15

And I think one of the advantages of

the research area that I'm in, which

300

: 00:21:19

is human computer interaction research

is because we're really focused on

301

: 00:21:24

the impact of technology and design

on people and contexts and how do we

302

: 00:21:30

design better technologies and so on.

303

: 00:21:33

We do have the opportunity to pivot.

304

: 00:21:36

Quite a bit.

305

: 00:21:37

In terms of latest technologies that

may help redefine some challenges or

306

: 00:21:43

being able to take similar technologies

and explore them in different domains

307

: 00:21:47

and still asking similar questions.

308

: 00:21:50

And maybe not all research areas

can have some of that flexibility.

309

: 00:21:56

I'd like to finish off here by providing

some reflections about how we could

310

: 00:22:01

engage in some of that reframing.

311

: 00:22:04

In a way that still connects to the

intrinsic motivation that Mark talked

312

: 00:22:08

about earlier in his first principle.

313

: 00:22:12

Because it is fundamentally

going to our research identity.

314

: 00:22:17

It's about expressing our values,

who we are, what we care about.

315

: 00:22:23

Enabling us to do work that we

find meaningful that will have

316

: 00:22:26

the impact that we want to have.

317

: 00:22:30

And maybe there are multiple ways of doing

that retelling of our research identity.

318

: 00:22:36

Or reframing our research stories.

319

: 00:22:40

And also recognizing that our identity

will necessarily evolve with time

320

: 00:22:45

and experience and circumstance.

321

: 00:22:51

So can we give ourselves the gift

of some deliberate time and effort

322

: 00:22:56

to actually step back and stop.

323

: 00:22:59

And reflect on questions that might help

us explore who we are when we're most

324

: 00:23:05

alive and at our best as researchers.

325

: 00:23:08

.

Those questions might be things like.

326

: 00:23:11

What's the red thread or red

threads across all of the

327

: 00:23:15

research that you've done.

328

: 00:23:18

Like, what are the common

or recurring themes?

329

: 00:23:22

What are the deeper underlying

questions that you're asking?

330

: 00:23:27

Maybe it's about how you've

been developing methods.

331

: 00:23:30

Or evolving your concepts over time.

332

: 00:23:35

Or maybe there are particular types

of impacts that you're trying to seek.

333

: 00:23:41

One approach to this is to draw

out a map of the last X years,

334

: 00:23:47

X being as relevant for you and

where you're at with your career.

335

: 00:23:52

And think about all the different

projects and research that you've

336

: 00:23:58

been involved in over that time.

337

: 00:24:01

And for each of them reflecting about

when were the times you felt most alive?

338

: 00:24:08

When you felt like you could really

get into the flow when you were really

339

: 00:24:12

excited about what you're working on.

340

: 00:24:16

What were you doing then?

341

: 00:24:17

Who with where?

342

: 00:24:20

What questions were you asking.

343

: 00:24:23

What values did it connect to?

344

: 00:24:25

What strengths were you drawing on?

345

: 00:24:29

And you could also look for the opposite.

346

: 00:24:31

Like when were the times and the projects

and the work where you felt most like

347

: 00:24:35

a drag and it just felt like hard work.

348

: 00:24:38

Or you felt 'meh'.

349

: 00:24:40

Yeah.

350

: 00:24:40

It's okay.

351

: 00:24:41

But not that excitement or that energy.

352

: 00:24:46

So in this sort of mapping

and reflection, you're looking

353

: 00:24:49

across these for the patterns.

354

: 00:24:51

For the elements that might help

you reframe your research identity.

355

: 00:24:56

Looking for the actors

in your research story.

356

: 00:24:59

And it may help point you in new

directions that are grounded in

357

: 00:25:03

when you're really at your best,

doing your most impactful work.

358

: 00:25:09

So that we're not just trying

to compromise and reframe our

359

: 00:25:12

research identity to fit in with

someone else's notion of what's

360

: 00:25:16

the current research priority.

361

: 00:25:18

But we're looking for ways

to navigate the tensions.

362

: 00:25:22

So that we can find that sweet spot of

what we love doing and how that can be

363

: 00:25:27

shaped to meet maybe what others need.

364

: 00:25:31

And as a final thing.

365

: 00:25:34

Just a reminder that it's okay to be you.

366

: 00:25:37

And to do you, and to be your sort

of researcher, we're all different.

367

: 00:25:43

And recognizing that there are always

going to be trade offs in every choice

368

: 00:25:47

we make in navigating these tensions.

369

: 00:25:51

So wishing you wisdom in the navigation.

370

: 00:25:55

. And clear insight into what lights you up.

371

: 00:25:58

So that you can keep having fun and having

impact in the work that you're doing.

372

: 00:26:06

You can find the summary

notes, a transcript and related

373

: 00:26:10

links for this podcast on www.

374

: 00:26:13

changingacademiclife.

375

: 00:26:15

com.

376

: 00:26:16

You can also subscribe to

Changing Academic Life on iTunes,

377

: 00:26:20

Spotify and Google Podcasts.

378

: 00:26:22

And you can follow

ChangeAcadLife on Twitter.

379

: 00:26:26

And I'm really hoping that we can

widen the conversation about how

380

: 00:26:29

we can do academia differently.

381

: 00:26:32

And you can contribute to this by rating

the podcast and also giving feedback.

382

: 00:26:36

And if something connected with

you, please consider sharing this

383

: 00:26:40

podcast with your colleagues.

384

: 00:26:42

Together, we can make change happen.