Monitoring Meetings

My PhD is part of the AHRC/EPSRC-supported Science and Heritage Programme. A few weekd ago I received an e-mail from the Programme Coordinator that the Programme Director wanted to meet up with me and my supervisors from UCL and the TNA to see how the research is progressing and any problems etc.

The monitoring meeting was set for the 12th of June. For this meeting I had to prepare a presentation focussing on the research which has been carried out. I was a bit apprehensive about the presentation, because following my short presentation at the 1st research meeting, I knew my supervisor thought that my presentation skills were quite appalling. I think I however was more apprehensive about the mock presentation scheduled with my supervisor and another research assistant, than with the actual one (possibly because after the second one it would be all over ).

The day of the mock presentation arrived, and I was slightly nervous. Now normally I don’t mind presentations much (possibly cos I enjoy that the attention is on me? O:)), but this time round I really wanted to make some kind of decent impression! Everything set up and off I go! It went quite well, and happily my supervisor said that my presentation skills have improved…phewww! He suggested a number of changes to my presentation, which I was happy to oblige with seeing as they were very valid, and back to my offices I went to finalise the presentation.

Friday arrived…monitoring meeting day! I went up to the meeting room early to set up the desk-projector and make sure that everything was working well. After a while my supervisors arrived, and then the programme director.

Meetings: started!

First I gave my presentation, followed by a general discussion all together and a number of questions. Then, the programme director talked to my supervisors alone (wish to have been a fly on that wall ) and then me alone, as had been planned.

How do I think it went?

I think it went OK. I was asked some questions which I think I answered quite well, but then was asked about my ‘research hypothesis’, and just couldn’t think what that was! I kept on thinking about research questions, and then just gave up and gave my answer as research questions (after stupidly asking: emm…what’s the research hypothesis?) Oh well!

Other than that, my supervisors seemed happy, the programme director seemed happy…so I’m happy…won’t hit myself over the not-so-bright things I said, and hope to improve for the next time

All in all however I think that one important thing hopefully sunk into my brain now: not everyone in the heritage field is from chemistry! I always approach presenting my work as though the people have my background. But after the research meeting presentation, and more so after this one, I realise that my approach is completely wrong! I approached these meetings as me ‘showing off’ what I have been doing. Now that I realise that in front of me when I rpesent I will have people from a wide variety of disciplines, from architects, to conservators, to archaologists, and conservators, I realise that the most important thing is not the details what I have been doing (even if I have been told to speak about my research), but to give them the overall picture of the project, with limited if any specific details. Then, if they are interested in a specific part, they can ask me further questions after the general idea has been obtained.

Wish me luck for my next one, whenever that is

Filed under: Events and Activities, AHRC, EPSRC, heritage research, monitoring meeting, presentation, presentation skills, Science and heritage, supervisor

Research Meeting: 2

When I joined my department, our research group was quite small. However, with time we have been growing, with two research assistants joining the group since I joined in September. Now that the group is growing (the research group is still quite small, with around 10 people linked to it in some way, and not all based at UCL, so not all can attend) my supervisor has started research meetings. Today was the second one we’ve had, with the first one being held around a month ago.

But what is a research meeting?

Well, in the sense of what we are doing in these meetings, they allow the people in the group to come together around once a month, to discuss what they have been working on, giving the opportunity for discussion on the work being done, and insights from others to be inputted. Last time being the first one, everyone prepared a short explanation of what their work is about (since though we’re all in the same centre, and we’re a small group, most people are working on different projects, and are coming from quite varied backgrounds, so this was essential). Today however it was slightly different. First off everyone said a bit about what they have been working on in the past month. However, the meeting also gave the opportunity for people working on one project to ask for some serious input from the others in the group. Since we all have different areas of interest (though interlinked in the field of cultural heritage), this meant that people could bring to the table their knowledge and ways of thinking.

What do I think about these meetings?

I think they’re great! The first time I was involved in any kind of research meeting was during an internship I had done at the University of Konstanz in Germany on Microbiology, where the whole research group (which in this case amounted to quite a lot of people) met (I think) once a month, for updates about what is going on, and one or two people to present what they were working on. Up to now most presentations I have seen have involved either no one asking any questions (since you don’t want to cause any problems to your fellow students), or the questions being asked being more as a form of one-upmanship rather than a genuine interest in the work. However, in both the current research meeting, and the one I attended in Konstanz, I have been impressed that there actually is space in the academic world for some decent discussions with colleagues in an open forum, without the feeling of you being criticised (destructively).

In the current research group I am sure these meetings will become very useful and important. The main reason for this is that there are people in the group who have been in the field for quite some years, and who are well involved in it. This means that they know the work that is out there, what is being done, and who is doing it. This is very important in a situation where, as was said today, the work is published in a wide range of specialised journals that you would be probably hard-pressed to find unless you know it is there and look for it. Also as I said, the different backgrounds of the people (from chemists to architects to archaeological conservators, electronics engineers and building engineers amongst others). In an interdisciplinary field like heritage research it is good to have these different people around the table giving their input.

Filed under: Events and Activities, discussion, heritage research, input, internship, research assistant, research group, research meeting, University of Konstanz