Achievements and Outcomes - Knowledge Transfer Partnerships

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Knowledge Transfer Partnerships In 2011-12 knowledge base partners continued to confirm that they were experiencing a high level of benefits from participating in a KTP – once again, these figures are consistent with previous years. Outcomes and benefits for the knowledge base How KTP helped the knowledge base: 97% benefiting through staff development 91% reporting benefits to teaching 89% reporting benefits to research. In addition to these benefits, knowledge bases reported an average of: 3 new research projects 1 research paper published in refereed journals and 2 other articles published as a result of participation in a KTP. * The figures quoted on this page are derived from final reports produced at the end of KTPs: on average one additional research project and one additional paper are attributed to KTPs post-completion, above and beyond the numbers quoted above. Participation by UK academic and research institutions In total, 437 departments from 104 Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) were involved in classic Knowledge Transfer Partnerships: only four HEIs less than during the previous year (108) but 86 fewer departments, reflecting the lower number of partnerships in the portfolio. There were 15 Further Education Institutions (FEIs) involved in classic KTPs in the year, compared with 16 the previous year. Three knowledge base organisations which were neither HEIs or FEIs participated in the programme, two less than in 2010-11. There were 32 knowledge base departments which became involved in KTPs for the first time in 2011-12, compared with 77 the previous year. As in previous years, the grade point average score, based on the national Research Assessment Exercise, was captured as a measure for participating university departments. The following table shows the research ratings of those university departments involved in KTPs newly established during 2010-11 and 2011-12. There is an increase in the relative grade point averages reported for departments participating in new KTPs in 2011-12, perhaps reflecting the change in the quality threshold for approval of new partnerships in this year. Figure 7: Proportion of KTPs established in 2011-12 by grade point average of academic department Grade point average** % of Partnerships (March 2012) 3.50 to 4.00 0 3.00 to 3.49 10 2.50 to 2.99 49 2.00 to 2.49 33 1.00 to 1.99 4 0.01 to 0.99 0 Not rated 5 Total 100 ** Based on the Research Assessment Exercise ratings, last conducted in 2008. Ratings around 1 reflect quality that is recognised nationally in terms of originality, significance and rigour; 2 reflects internationally recognised quality; 3 international excellence and 4 world-leading. 12 | Technology Strategy Board
Achievements and Outcomes | Impact Report 2011-12 The subject range of the departments is illustrated in figure 8, which also shows figures for the previous year, and includes all the non-HEI organisations in the category of ‘Other’. Engineering continued to dominate in 2011-12 with 35% of all partnerships, slightly up from 31% in 2010-11. Management was still a strong player but fell from 18% in 2010-11 to 13%. Departments of Medicine continued to increase year-on-year, representing 10% of the portfolio of partnerships in 2011-12. Computing remained static at 14%. Figure 8: Knowledge Transfer Partnership by academic department 2011-2012 Academic department % of 1,025 % of 792 Partnerships Partnerships (March 2011) (March 2012) Agriculture & Food 1 2 Biology 3 3 Chemistry 2 2 Chemical Engineering 2 2 Civil Engineering 4 3 Computing 14 14 Design 5 4 Electrical Engineering 3 5 Engineering & Technology 17 18 Management 18 13 Material Technology 1 2 Medicine 9 10 Mathematics
Page 1 and 2: Technology Strategy Board Driving I
Page 3 and 4: Achievements and Outcomes | Impact
Page 11: Achievements and Outcomes | Impact

Achievements and Outcomes - Knowledge Transfer Partnerships

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?