Podcasts about professorial

What is psychological harm, and can we really regulate it? Should an AI-companion app be allowed to dump the person who is using it? 

When NBC won the rights to broadcast the Premier League starting in 2013, it seemed like just another TV contract for a professional sports entity with a new broadcast partner. But there were unique attributes of that deal and the the way NBC approached the partnership gave Americans a better platform on which they could invest in and become attached teams in the Premier League. By earning exclusive rights to show all 380 games, it became possible for fans in the US to spend enough time with each team truly understand the nuances of their cultures and histories and find ways to identify with teams authentically. Brett Bebber has spent his professional life studying various elements of historical British culture. As an American that grew up playing soccer, he was always fascinated by the Premier League, but fell in love with it differently like so many when NBC's coverage began. He has a unique understanding of why based on his academic research. Bebber joined Founding Fubtol to talk about how the culture of leisure and the intersection of British and American histories truly accelerated with when the partnership between NBC and the PL began. Visit our website for more information: ⁠FoundingFutbol.com. Email us at kent@foundingfutbol.com Subscribe to Founding Futbol on your platform of choice. Host: Kent Malmros Guest: Brett Bebber (Associate Professor of History, Old Dominion University) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This piece comes from Melbourne, Australia, at the World Congress of Prehabilitation and Perioperative Medicine, held alongside the Australian ERAS+ Conference. Hear about the significance of multidisciplinary collaboration in prehabilitation and research; grants for virtual surgery schools; the impact of diet and microbiome on cancer pathways, and the future of digital prehabilitation. The conversation emphasizes the importance of optimizing patient care and reducing complications through innovative approaches in prehabilitation and perioperative medicine. Presented by Kate Leslie and Mike Grocott with their guests Bernard Riedel, an academic anaesthesiologist and the Director of the Department of Anaesthesia, Perioperative Medicine, and Pain Medicine at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre in Melbourne, Australia, he holds a Professorial appointment at the University of Melbourne and Linda Denehy, Professor of Physiotherapy at the University of Melbourne, she has a joint appointment as Professor of Health Services Research: Allied Health at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Melbourne.

With the rapid growth of new evidence from astronomy, space science and biology that supports the theory of life as a cosmic rather than terrestrial phenomenon, this book discusses a set of crucial data and pictures showing that life is still arriving at our planet. Although it could spark controversy among the most hardened sceptics this book will have an important role in shaping future science in this area.We are led to believe that modern science is free of all forms of irrational prejudice that plagued science over the centuries. In this book we document an instance when this is far from true in relation to the most fundamental aspects of biology — the question of the origin of life and its cosmic provenance. From the early 1980's evidence in favour of the theory of cosmic life and a version of panspermia, developed by Fred Hoyle and CW has grown to the point that its continued marginalisation, or even outright rejection, is a cause for serious concern. We present here the story of panspermia in which we ourselves have been directly involved…Milton Wainwright, BSc, PhD, FRAS was born in 1950 in the mining village of Fitzwilliam in the West Riding of Yorkshire. He obtained his BSc and PhD from Nottingham University, and after a short period as a National Research Council of Canada Research Fellow became lecturer in Environmental Microbiology at the University of Sheffield. Here, he taught and researched for forty-two years in the Departments of Microbiology and Molecular Biology and Biotechnology. He is an Honorary Professor at the Universities of Cardiff and Buckingham, UK, the University of Ruhuna, Sri, Lanka, and the Slavic University of North Macedonia; he is also a Visiting Professor of King Saud University, Riyadh, and one of the few biologists to be made a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society. He has published widely on the history of science, particularly on the germ theory, the history of antibiotics (notably penicillin) and alternative accounts of the history of natural selection and evolution. Nalin Chandra Wickramasinghe, MBE, BSc (Ceylon), MA, PhD, ScD (Cantab), Hon DSc (Sri Lanka, Ruhuna), Hon DLitt (Tokyo, Soka), FRAS, FRSA was born in 1939 in Sri Lanka. He commenced work in Cambridge on his PhD degree under the supervision of the late Sir Fred Hoyle, and published his first scientific paper in 1961 He was awarded a PhD degree in Mathematics in 1963 and was elected a Fellow of Jesus College Cambridge in the same year. In the following year he was appointed a Staff Member of the Institute of Astronomy at the University of Cambridge where he remained until 1973. He was formerly a Fellow of Jesus College Cambridge and Staff Member of the Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge; Formerly Professor and Head of the Department of Applied Mathematics and Astronomy, Cardiff University, UK; Director of the Buckingham Centre for Astrobiology, University of Buckingham, UK; Honorary Professor, University of Buckingham; Honorary Professor University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka; Honorary Professor, Sir John Kotelawala Defence University of Sri Lanka; Adjunct Professor, National Institute of Fundamental Studies, Sri Lanka. He has also held visiting Professorial appointment in the US, Canada and Japan and Sri Lanka over the past four decades. Professor Wickramasinghe has published over 350 papers in major scientific journals, some sixty in the journal Nature. Together with the late Sir Fred he pioneered the theory of cometary panspermia the evidence for which has become compelling over the past few years. Finally, he is also the author/co-author of over thirty-five books.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/earth-ancients--2790919/support.

“The Pervasiveness Of Social Media” “The Pervasive Trend Of Transgenderism” “Biden's Economy Is Crashing His Cred With The Young” “Biden Lies Again, His Professorial Days”

Bible Study: (2:10) Rom 1:16-25 What is a Tzadik? Lk 11:37-41 Who were the Pharisees?  Father Simon has a Professorial Pause discuss the state of the episcopacy  Letters (26:09) - I work for hospice - can we use an orthodox priest in an emergency?  (28:01) - My grandma won't go to Church; what can I do?  Word of the Day: Boundary stone (30:43) Callers:  (35:44) - A co-worker says The Bible can not be the basis for Catholicism because it was written by men. How should I respond?  (39:08) - What is the proclamation of the kingdom, the third luminous mystery? (43:51) - How do I explain that idolatry degrades humanity  (46:34) - What color was Jesus' hair when he was baby? (47:49) - Today is my b-day! (49:44) - I was at a prayer vigil at abortion clinic. The abortion worker, quoted a verse from Exodus, using that as their defense: Exodus 21: 22-23

​ @JordanBPeterson  The Future: Vision and Invitation | EP 339 https://youtu.be/EZo2H2hlJzI   @JonathanPageau  New Think | with Gregg Hurwitz https://youtu.be/nR53MJd8VLI   @grailcountry  Jordan Peterson and the Political Right https://youtu.be/z7tshluxN_8  High Noon vs James Bond: Generative Future vs Self-Actualization: Hero's Journey Isn't about You https://youtu.be/PXpB6e-PBPc  The ARC Forum: Alliance for Responsible Citizenship https://twitter.com/BrettPAndersen/status/1635332696569450496  https://twitter.com/kalezelden/status/1635254776819752960    The Quest for a Spiritual Home Conference with PVK, Jonathan Pageau and John Vervaeke by Estuary Chino May 18 to 21 2023 Link for tickets https://events.eventzilla.net/e/estuary-chino-2023-2138601197  Paul Vander Klay clips channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX0jIcadtoxELSwehCh5QTg Bridges of Meaning Discord https://discord.gg/hYkJNRuq https://www.meetup.com/sacramento-estuary/ My Substack https://paulvanderklay.substack.com/ Estuary Hub Link https://www.estuaryhub.com/ If you want to schedule a one-on-one conversation check here. https://paulvanderklay.me/2019/08/06/converzations-with-pvk/ There is a video version of this podcast on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/paulvanderklay To listen to this on ITunes https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/paul-vanderklays-podcast/id1394314333  If you need the RSS feed for your podcast player https://paulvanderklay.podbean.com/feed/  All Amazon links here are part of the Amazon Affiliate Program. Amazon pays me a small commission at no additional cost to you if you buy through one of the product links here. This is is one (free to you) way to support my videos.  https://paypal.me/paulvanderklay Blockchain backup on Lbry https://odysee.com/@paulvanderklay https://www.patreon.com/paulvanderklay Paul's Church Content at Living Stones Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh7bdktIALZ9Nq41oVCvW-A To support Paul's work by supporting his church give here. https://tithe.ly/give?c=2160640    

Dr Angela Martin is the founder and Principal Consultant of Pracademia. Angela holds current part-time and honorary Professorial appointments with the Menzies Institute for Medical Research and the College of Business and Economics, University of Tasmania. On today's episode we look back at the last 20 years Angela has spent working in the workplace mental health sector, how employers and employees awareness around workplace mental health has grown and developed and the changes around stigma and conversations in the workplace around mental health. We chat about the now and the future and touch on National Workplace Initiative, which is an exciting workplace mental health initiative. Welcome Angela.

Deborah Netolicky talks with Professor Alma Harris about leadership, networks, the teaching profession, and education policy. Alma is a Professor Emeritus at Swansea University, specialising in Education Policy and School Improvement. She has held Professorial posts at the University of Warwick, University College London, the University of Malaya, and the University of Bath. In 2009-2012, she was appointed to the Welsh Government as a senior policy adviser to assist with the process of system-wide reform. Since 2009, she has worked for the World Bank contributing to development and research programs aimed at supporting schools in challenging contexts in Russia. She is a Visiting Professor at the Moscow Higher School of Economics and the University of Southampton, and Past President of the International Congress for School Effectiveness and School Improvement. She is currently an international adviser to the First Minister of Scotland. Want to know more? - Alma's Google Scholar profile: https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?user=aJMrEK0AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao - School Leadership & Management journal: https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/cslm20 Join the conversation on social media. - Alma: @AlmaHarris1 on Twitter. - Deb: @debsnet on Twitter and @theeeduflaneuse on Instagram. - The Edu Salon: @theedusalon on Twitter and Instagram.

This episode Keepers Murph and Dave talk with Youtuber XPLovecat about gaming and life! Campus Crier The Campus Crier is where we keep all the mythos related news and info for the podcast, this episode was recorded on October 5th, 2022.  We are looking for new Show Editors! If you want to help this show stay online, and help preserve my sanity, then I will teach you how to edit our audio. This isn't for the faint of heart, however. Beginning audio editing can take many hours for one of our typical shows, but that gets better as you get better. As a thank you for this, we will give you a Professorial status as a Backer (minus the episode) and gain massive influence with us and some special Discord Channel access, etc.. Into the Odd Remastered is out and available to all to order! You can pick it up now at the Free League webstore or DriveThruRPG. Judge Dredd: The Game of Crime Fighting in Mega-City is getting a re-release 40 years after its initial run. You can follow the link in the show notes to pre-order. Patreon has rolled out a new type of billing that will charge patrons on the day that they started backing a content creator, as opposed to the beginning of the month. It is optional as to whether we swap to this method, but we thought we would ask you guys which you prefer. So let us know on our Discord server, or you can send us an email at mup.feedback@gmail.com. Roll20Con 2022 is starting on October 21st through 23rd. Speaking of email Dave, we got a bunch of email from people that listened to the last episode! So a hearty thank you goes out to… FredRittertonChrisWillJames And in a bid to take over Cute Pet Picks Andrew Leman emailed a pic of his dogs as well, you'll have to go to the Show notes to see those. Patreon Plug & Update We have a Patreon! To back us you can click the button on the sidebar of our website, mu-podcast.com or head over to Patreon directly at www.patreon.com/mup! Speaking of amazing backers we have new backers! Everyone welcome: PuddletimeBrian DunnPete Shanahan The Discord Plug We have our MUP Discord and we are all there! We invite all of our listeners to come and enjoy the community of horror gaming and cute pet pics. Dave's Discord discussion Call Out - what are we talking about today? #shelves-mail discussion on Kickstarters, fulfilled and not. MU Discord server invite link: https://discord.gg/vNjEv9D  And thank you beaucoup to MURPH for editing this episode.  Bridgett's Pet Pick Shout Out "Hi guys! It's Bridgett! I may sound like Murph right now, but that's just because I'm probably 36,000 feet into the air. I'd like to shout out the lovely kittuhs of 12gmsc: Franny, Edie and Charlie! Thanks for sharing these gorgeous cats with us in the petpics channel!" titty-sprinkles. Because Bridgett demanded I say it. titty-sprinkles. Main Topic --  A chat with XPLoveCat. Leslie is a part of a fundraiser for the month of October called "Play Cancer Away" (https://twitter.com/playcanceraway?lang=en) which plays RPGs to raise money for Stand Up 2 Cancer. Check out her YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/c/xplovecat) and the editing services she provides for RPGs on her website (www.xplovecat.com) Do you find that YouTube is a less toxic platform than the RPG blog-o-sphere, or convention gaming?How'd you come up with the name XPLovecat?Do you do your own video editing?How does she decide what topics to make videos on? Do certain ones reliably get more traction?What professional services do you offer for those in the ttRPG community?What value does developmental editing add, and how should MR authors go about using it?

This episode Keepers Murph and Dave talk with Youtuber XPLovecat about gaming and life! Campus Crier The Campus Crier is where we keep all the mythos related news and info for the podcast, this episode was recorded on October 5th, 2022.  We are looking for new Show Editors! If you want to help this show stay online, and help preserve my sanity, then I will teach you how to edit our audio. This isn't for the faint of heart, however. Beginning audio editing can take many hours for one of our typical shows, but that gets better as you get better. As a thank you for this, we will give you a Professorial status as a Backer (minus the episode) and gain massive influence with us and some special Discord Channel access, etc.. Into the Odd Remastered is out and available to all to order! You can pick it up now at the Free League webstore or DriveThruRPG. Judge Dredd: The Game of Crime Fighting in Mega-City is getting a re-release 40 years after its initial run. You can follow the link in the show notes to pre-order. Patreon has rolled out a new type of billing that will charge patrons on the day that they started backing a content creator, as opposed to the beginning of the month. It is optional as to whether we swap to this method, but we thought we would ask you guys which you prefer. So let us know on our Discord server, or you can send us an email at mup.feedback@gmail.com. Roll20Con 2022 is starting on October 21st through 23rd. Speaking of email Dave, we got a bunch of email from people that listened to the last episode! So a hearty thank you goes out to… FredRittertonChrisWillJames And in a bid to take over Cute Pet Picks Andrew Leman emailed a pic of his dogs as well, you'll have to go to the Show notes to see those. Patreon Plug & Update We have a Patreon! To back us you can click the button on the sidebar of our website, mu-podcast.com or head over to Patreon directly at www.patreon.com/mup! Speaking of amazing backers we have new backers! Everyone welcome: PuddletimeBrian DunnPete Shanahan The Discord Plug We have our MUP Discord and we are all there! We invite all of our listeners to come and enjoy the community of horror gaming and cute pet pics. Dave's Discord discussion Call Out - what are we talking about today? #shelves-mail discussion on Kickstarters, fulfilled and not. MU Discord server invite link: https://discord.gg/vNjEv9D  And thank you beaucoup to MURPH for editing this episode.  Bridgett's Pet Pick Shout Out "Hi guys! It's Bridgett! I may sound like Murph right now, but that's just because I'm probably 36,000 feet into the air. I'd like to shout out the lovely kittuhs of 12gmsc: Franny, Edie and Charlie! Thanks for sharing these gorgeous cats with us in the petpics channel!" titty-sprinkles. Because Bridgett demanded I say it. titty-sprinkles. Main Topic --  A chat with XPLoveCat. Leslie is a part of a fundraiser for the month of October called "Play Cancer Away" (https://twitter.com/playcanceraway?lang=en) which plays RPGs to raise money for Stand Up 2 Cancer. Check out her YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/c/xplovecat) and the editing services she provides for RPGs on her website (www.xplovecat.com) Do you find that YouTube is a less toxic platform than the RPG blog-o-sphere, or convention gaming?How'd you come up with the name XPLovecat?Do you do your own video editing?How does she decide what topics to make videos on? Do certain ones reliably get more traction?What professional services do you offer for those in the ttRPG community?What value does developmental editing add, and how should MR authors go about using it?

"And the good news is that we may or may not have an answer to this fluid debate that's been running now for 25 years..." The Great Fluid Debate is a popular fixture at Evidence Based Perioperative Medicine (EBPOM) and this year that was once again the case. Are we genuinely starting to see evidence based practice emerging and finally knocking "eminence based" notions off the shelf? Presented by Monty Mythen and starting with a short presentation from Professor John A Myburgh, Intensive Care Medicine, University of New South Wales; Director of the Division of Critical Care and Trauma at the George Institute for Global Health and Senior Intensive Care Physician at the St George Hospital, Sydney. He holds honorary Professorial appointments at the University of Sydney and Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine. This piece is then complimented by a debate and discussion featuring Desiree Chappell, Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) and Vice President of Clinical Quality for NorthStar Anesthesia and Andy Shaw, Chairman, Department of Intensive Care and Resuscitation at The Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. With further questions from the audience.

Jack gathers four of Oxford Mississippi's leading crime fiction writers to chat about influences, inspirations, books that need to be made into movies, challenges of Social Media and that one “must read” writer.Best Sellers, Award winners and good friends all - Ace Atkins, Tom Franklin, William Boyle and Michael Farris Smith join the Leisure Class for an evening of good conversation, mutual admiration and laughs. Tequila may have been involved!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Rarely do I get the opportunity to welcome a guest with such a wonderful range of frames that have been used to describe their work – especially in combination! Our guest today is Wayne Visser, a professor, a poet, a possibilist and a pracademic.Throughout this season of Better World Leaders, we'll examine the conditions needed to co-create our better world. This conversation with Wayne provides a thorough exploration of the layers of shifting consciousness, discovery of new frameworks and creation of new structures through which we can create not just a better world, but a Thriving one.Wayne has been deeply immersed in the world of sustainability as a corporate advisor and Professorial academic for many years. His revelation is that despite decades of work by millions of well intentioned people, the variety problems we face and the scale of the challenges are greater than ever before – requiring fundamental changes in systems, ethos and beliefs.To usher in Wayne's vision of a Thriving world, we need new leaders to rise, with different capabilities, values and ethics striving to co-create new forms of society, through embracing nature, technologies and practices which in combination provide an opportunity to give life to a world which is far better than me might think. This is an inspiring tale, not only of what's possible in the future, and of what's already here – Wayne's work showcases hundreds of examples of thriving practices that are transforming the world for the better right now!Here's a review of the key messages from this episode;Confronting Reality- Recognising that we're living a contradiction, as we all are in the world of paradox- You have to confront the brutal reality without giving up hope that a better world is possible- What we need is to up the game because so many of the problems have gotten so much worse- We don't need to change the whole world. All we need to do is change our world.Purpose- We see the emergence of purpose in business, not just profit.- Having something to believe in is a powerful force that can get you through anything- Bringing solutions to the worlds biggest problems is the role of businessLiving Systems- The underlying principles of thriving are living systems. Relationships. Circularity, creativity, coherence, convergence & continuity.- We currently rely on things running perfectly. That's not life.- All of life is about relationships- Creativity comes from diversity, flexibility and permeable boundaries.- Creativity always comes when we have overlapping fields- We need to think about nature as an ally in our search for resilienceLeading- What does leadership mean? To be a leader is someone who can take us on a journey- 6 attributes of leaders. Systemic. Inclusive. Strategic. Ethical/Moral. Innovative. Courageous.Thriving- To thrive is to flourish & prosper, to go beyond surviving- We've had a failure of storytelling because we've had a narrative of change that's all about sacrifice- Sustainability has failed because it's boring and not inspiring- The way to up the game is not to scare, blame or shame people. Rather it is to give them something inspiring to go after. That inspiring thing is thriving.- The companies that are going to be winners are those that will invest in thriving.The future- The future will be better than you think- The momentum is unstoppable, the more we spread the solutions, the faster it will occur.- Imagine workspaces full of waterfalls, mini-forests and social space- Offices will be places where we go to bond.- This is not just dreaming, everything Wayne says already has precedenceFollow Wayne via the links below;https://www.waynevisser.com/https://www.linkedin.com/in/waynevisser/Grab a copy of ‘Thriving' here via Amazon, or here via Goodreads (including links to numerous on-line sellers, or from wherever you get books.Follow Tim and join the Better World Leaders community via the links below:linkedin.com/in/timcollingslinkedin.com/company/better-world-leadersinstagram.com/timcollingslifedownsouthtimcollings-betterworldleaders.medium.comyoutube @timcollings – click here for channelEpisode Pages for this episode and all previous Better World Leaders conversations available here;4ileadership.com/category/better-world-leadersAs always, great thanks and appreciation to the team who contributed to bringing Better World Leaders to you;To Brendan Ward for mastering, final production, composition and performance of original music throughout each episode.To Cooper, Pat and the team at RadioHub studios for audio editing, technical support and creative guidance during the episodes that are recorded face-to-face. You can find out about Radio Hub's services here - https://www.radiohub.com.au/To NokNok Studios for website design, hosting and advice. Find out about NokNok's awesome services here - https://www.facebook.com/NOKNOKstudios/To Cirasa Design for logo and site graphics – Find our about Cirasa's inspiring work hereThis is the Better World Leaders, brought to you by 4iLeadership

While writing a tribute to his father, a survivor of the Holocaust who educated him on the importance of faith and Jewish values, Scott Shay was disturbed and dismayed to discover the presence of extremist anti-Zionist professors (Far Left and Far Right) on the faculty of his alma mater, Northwestern University. As a student of Jewish thought, history, and current events, who has written extensively on contemporary Jewish issues, he was compelled to take a deep dive into the world of anti-Zionist conspiracy theories and academia.“I learned that Northwestern University, my beloved alma mater and a jewel of American academia, has enabled some of its professors to openly promote conspiracy theories,” says Shay. “Sadly, many academics can no longer even identify conspiracy theories. Professorial proponents insist that far from being conspiracy theorists, they are brave truth tellers.”Set against the framework of Northwestern University's motto, Conspiracy U not only illustrates the issues present when serious and trustworthy scholarship is abandoned in favor of theory and ideology, but proposes that the motto itself points toward a better option. Rather than dismissing ideology or giving it undue precedence, Shay suggests that the motto and the Golden Rule together form an unbiased and universally applicable framework which provides the intellectual and moral criteria to distinguish between facts and conspiracy theories, leaving room for diversity while also excluding approaches that devalue our common humanity.

Dr. Elena  Antonacopoulou is the founder and director of GNOSIS an international, interdisciplinary, and independent research and leadership development Institute. She has held full-time Professorial appointments at the Universities of Liverpool, Manchester, and Warwick and currently holds Visiting Professorial appointments at Western University, Canada, University of Lincoln (UK), and the Royal Norwegian Airforce Academy (Norway). Her scientifically rigorous collaborative research in management and organization studies has earned her many research grants, awards, and accolades recognizing the impact of the ideas developed. Her principal research expertise lies in the areas of Strategic Change, Organisational Learning and Resilience, Knowledge, and Crisis Management with a focus on leadership implications. Elena's work is published widely in international journals including Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal, Journal of Management Studies, British Journal of Management, Journal of Management Inquiry, Management Learning. She has co-edited 5 books including two new volumes (Sensuous Learning for Practical Judgment in Professional Practice) advancing innovative learning modes that enhance the impact of management practice. She has been elected and served in multiple leadership roles in the top professional bodies in the management field and has received several awards for her outstanding leadership and service contributions and teaching excellence. She is frequently invited to deliver keynote speeches at international conferences, and deliver workshops that inspire and promote action choices that serve the common good. She is a certified coach from the International Coaching Federation.Connecting with ElenaGoogle ScholarLinkedInQuotes From This Episode"Phronesis is a creative act, especially when navigating the unknown...It's not just what happens when we're faced with dilemmas, paradoxes, and crucible moments. Of course, that's where our strength of character shines and guides our action choices, which is why we mark it as an act of practical wisdom.""Practise is about repetition, not replication. I emphatically highlight in my work the distinction between repeating and replicating. I draw on Deleuze, who asserts that repetition is always about the difference. Hence, for me practising is about the leap of faith.""Reflexivity is this moment where we are in a situation fully present. So we show up, and we are experiencing it by allowing ourselves to feel and participate as an insider, at the same time, simultaneously, as we have the capacity to extrapolate and see it from an outsider's perspective.""Sensuousness is the secret intelligence that I don't think we've even begun to tap into, which is so important to phronesis. I call it CORE (Centeredness, Oneness, Reflex and Energy) Intelligence (CQ) because it is about tapping beyond our sensibility and sensitivity into our sentience".Resources Mentioned in This EpisodeEikeland, O. 2008. The ways of Aristotle: Aristotelian phrónêsis, aristotelian philosophy of dialogue, and action research. Shotter, J. & Tsoukas, H. 2014. In search of Phronesis: Leadership and the art of judgment. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13: 224-243The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho About The International Leadership Association (ILA)The ILA was created in 1999 to bring together professionals with a keen interest in the study, practice, and teaching of leadership. Connect with Scott AllenWebsite

Professor Peter Brooks is Research Lead of Northern Health and has Professorial appointments at Melbourne University in the Centre for Health Policy at the School of Population and Global Health and in the School of Medicine. Peter established the Australian Health Workforce Institute at the University of Melbourne in 2008 and is a frequent commentator on health policy and the importance of developing an evidence base in this area. In 2010 he was awarded Membership of the Order of Australia for services to rheumatology as a clinician, researcher and academic.

LEARNING OUTCOMES1. Explore how the oral microbiome can impact oral and dental2. Review how oral dysbiosis can contribute to the aetiology of cardiovascular conditions such as atherosclerosis, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome3. Examine how “leaky mouth syndrome” can drive autoimmunity chronic inflammation4. Discuss research on the links between the oral microbiome, the maternal placental microbiome, and adverse pregnancy outcomes5. Hear about strategies that can help restore optimal oral microbial balance – including the use of probiotics such as L. reuteri DSM 17938 and L. reuteri ATCC PTA 5289 for oral dysbiosisDr Antonio Flichy is a dentist with a Masters if Oral Surgery & Dental Implantology. He also has a PhD in Dentistry and for his doctorate Toni researched the benefits of certain probiotics for oral health. Dr Flichy is based in Valencia, Spain, where he also lectures and holds a Professorial position in the School of Dentistry program. He is the author or co-author of numerous papers relating to oral health, the oral microbiome, and the use of probiotics to balance the oral microbiota. Dr Flichy has also authored numerous textbook chapters on these topics, and is a member of a variety of different boards and societies that are all focussed on the improvement of oral health through restoration of the oral microbiome. In addition to his academic and research work, Dr Flichy also runs a busy clinical practice in Valencia in the fields of oral surgery and implantology.

In this episode I talk to Dr. Jonathan Doney, Lecturere at the University of Exeter about the process of getting his PhD and postdoc research published as a book.    Music credit: Happy Boy Theme Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/    Podcast transcript   1 00:00:09,000 --> 00:00:15,000 Hello and welcome, R, D And the in betweens, I'm your host, Kelly Preece, 2 00:00:15,000 --> 00:00:32,000 and every fortnight I talk to a different guest about researchers development and everything in between. 3 00:00:32,000 --> 00:00:39,000 Hello and welcome to this episode of T, F and the In Betweens. I'm delighted this episode to be talking to my colleague, Dr. Jonathan Doney. 4 00:00:39,000 --> 00:00:44,000 Jonathan and I are gonna be talking about publishing research as a book and 5 00:00:44,000 --> 00:00:48,000 specifically being unsuccessful in trying to get your thesis published as a book. 6 00:00:48,000 --> 00:00:59,000 But thinking about how that material and the learning from the process of failure or rejection can inform other opportunities further down the line. 7 00:00:59,000 --> 00:01:04,000 So, Jonathan, are you happy to introduce yourself? I'm Dr. Jonathan Doney 8 00:01:04,000 --> 00:01:09,000 I'm a lecturer in education at the School of Education, University of Exeter. 9 00:01:09,000 --> 00:01:16,000 And my specialism in teaching is history of education and education policy. 10 00:01:16,000 --> 00:01:26,000 All right. Thank you very much. And so we we're going to talk today a little bit about experiences of kind of book publishing processes, 11 00:01:26,000 --> 00:01:29,000 because one of the things that particularly humanities and social science students, 12 00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:37,000 when they come out of that research degree, often thinking about the kind of, you know, can I publish my thesis as a book? 13 00:01:37,000 --> 00:01:42,000 And that is something that you tried to do. Is that right? That's right. 14 00:01:42,000 --> 00:01:45,000 Yeah. With without a huge success, I would say. 15 00:01:45,000 --> 00:01:52,000 But I did learn a lot of lessons from from that process, which I'm willing, willing and happy to share. 16 00:01:52,000 --> 00:01:59,000 So how did when you decided that you were when you were thinking about publishing your thesis as a book, what kind of. 17 00:01:59,000 --> 00:02:04,000 How did you go about investigating whether or not that was possible? 18 00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:15,000 OK, so that might be helpful to give a bit of background and context to my sort of wider academic networks involvement, 19 00:02:15,000 --> 00:02:23,000 because I at that point, I had been a co-editor of a journal in the history of education with my supervisor. 20 00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:29,000 We shared it. And so I was kind of used to dealing with editors. 21 00:02:29,000 --> 00:02:32,000 Understanding the process of peer review and things like that. 22 00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:40,000 And I got in touch with a couple of people from different publishing houses who were very keen. 23 00:02:40,000 --> 00:02:48,000 You know, you've just done a PhD. We would love to publish it. They tended to be I think the term used is vanity publisher. 24 00:02:48,000 --> 00:02:56,000 So these publishers where you pay a large sum of money and they publish your book as a monograph. 25 00:02:56,000 --> 00:03:02,000 First of all, I didn't have a large sum of money because I've just been a grad student for three years. 26 00:03:02,000 --> 00:03:11,000 But also, I was warned by by my  sort of academic champions that what you really need is a book that is published by a reputable company. 27 00:03:11,000 --> 00:03:20,000 So go to Palgrave, go to Routledge, go to someone like that and see if they'll publish it. 28 00:03:20,000 --> 00:03:26,000 So I approached I approached someone I knew at palgrave, and they said, oh, yes, we got a lot of this kind of thing. 29 00:03:26,000 --> 00:03:39,000 Here are some information about how to basically how to show us that you are preparing a book and not just changing a couple of words in a thesis. 30 00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:44,000 I think that was really useful because, you know, a thesis is written for examiners and no one else really. 31 00:03:44,000 --> 00:03:48,000 I mean, maybe those who who love you or who you love might read the acknowledgements. 32 00:03:48,000 --> 00:03:55,000 But on the whole, a thesis is written with the examiners in mind that they are your audience. 33 00:03:55,000 --> 00:04:01,000 And so the suggestion really was that you don't just say, let's change a few bits. 34 00:04:01,000 --> 00:04:08,000 You actually take the content of your thesis and restructure it, maybe rework it. 35 00:04:08,000 --> 00:04:13,000 So instead of thinking what I'm gonna do is quickly convert a thesis into a book. 36 00:04:13,000 --> 00:04:19,000 Actually, what you do is think I'm going to write a book for which I already have the bulk of the content, 37 00:04:19,000 --> 00:04:25,000 but I need to express some of that in different ways. I need to give a different sort of introduction. 38 00:04:25,000 --> 00:04:32,000 Maybe I need to express some of the findings in more in broad terms for a wider audience. 39 00:04:32,000 --> 00:04:45,000 So I sort of sat down with this guidance and prepared the proposal, which was basically my PhD for a different audience, My PhD is 40 00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:53,000 quite different from a lot of PhDs because my main contribution to knowledge is a methodological one. 41 00:04:53,000 --> 00:04:58,000 So might be PdD basically started off as a historical enquiry that ended up being. 42 00:04:58,000 --> 00:05:09,000 Here's a new method for undertaking historical enquiry. But I'd frame in the in the material I submitted, first of all, I framed it as the content. 43 00:05:09,000 --> 00:05:17,000 The history of religious education, that's got a very short list of people who'd want to read it. 44 00:05:17,000 --> 00:05:24,000 And so far, in preparation for this podcast, I looked back at some of the feedback I got on my initial thing, 45 00:05:24,000 --> 00:05:28,000 and it was, you know, this is a really interesting method. It's a very interesting proposal. 46 00:05:28,000 --> 00:05:35,000 But the audience is so limited that we can't suggest that it's printed. 47 00:05:35,000 --> 00:05:44,000 So the sense I had was I'd miss the target. Because what what book publishers want is something that's gonna sell. 48 00:05:44,000 --> 00:05:46,000 Because that's how to make their money. 49 00:05:46,000 --> 00:05:55,000 The history of R.E. in the 1960s in England, however much I want it to be the case, is never going to be in the top 10 in the Times. 50 00:05:55,000 --> 00:06:03,000 Weelend supplements. So the feedback, as I say, was, you know, it's interesting but not interesting enough. 51 00:06:03,000 --> 00:06:12,000 It's too niche. It's too specialised. I spoke to another a couple of other editors and they said, you know, broadly speaking, 52 00:06:12,000 --> 00:06:19,000 the fundamental thing that editors, you know, commissioning editors looking for is will this sell? 53 00:06:19,000 --> 00:06:28,000 Will it be a textbook? So actually, what I did is looked again at the content. 54 00:06:28,000 --> 00:06:36,000 And said, I don't think I would buy that book. To be honest. What did that feel like for them to come back and sort of basically say. 55 00:06:36,000 --> 00:06:42,000 Yeah, it's interesting, but it's not interesting enough, given that you kind of dedicate three years of your life to this work. 56 00:06:42,000 --> 00:06:48,000 And obviously you do find it interesting and there are many other people to find interesting, obviously. 57 00:06:48,000 --> 00:06:54,000 Well, I wouldn't say many others, Kelly, but few I think on the one hand, 58 00:06:54,000 --> 00:07:00,000 I was I obviously I was disappointed because my my career plan was finished at the PhD 59 00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:10,000 publish a monograph be the expert, get a job, you know, easy pathway to Professorial appointment. 60 00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:16,000 I think I think I agreed with some of the feedback, which shocked me slightly. 61 00:07:16,000 --> 00:07:22,000 I mean, I know I know that my area is niche and I know that it's very specialised. 62 00:07:22,000 --> 00:07:27,000 Now, obviously, I'm saying that with the benefit of hindsight, since then, I've had a book contract and I've submitted a manuscript. 63 00:07:27,000 --> 00:07:33,000 So that is obviously going to change. Changed my view on the feedback. 64 00:07:33,000 --> 00:07:41,000 I think what I also learnt what what I also felt with some of the feedback was it's actually very personal. 65 00:07:41,000 --> 00:07:49,000 And I've since discovered that both for that and an unsuccessful submission for the later book were sent to 66 00:07:49,000 --> 00:07:59,000 people in my field because my field is narrow who think that my cutting edge approach is inappropriate. 67 00:07:59,000 --> 00:08:07,000 And so some of the feedback was actually quite personal. I'm not that was difficult to deal with because it was it was the typical reviewer two. 68 00:08:07,000 --> 00:08:15,000 You know, if I was writing this book, I would have written something else. And the reasons I would have written those is because you're wrong. 69 00:08:15,000 --> 00:08:21,000 So that that was harder. I think that the rejection per say, if that makes sense. 70 00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:28,000 That's a really important thing to acknowledge, is kind of, you know, you appreciate that you agree with some of the feedback. 71 00:08:28,000 --> 00:08:35,000 But also, you know, even though we we talk about kind of peer review as this wonderful objective, 72 00:08:35,000 --> 00:08:44,000 kind of idealised process, actually it is incredibly subjective. Fast forward a little bit then to the book. 73 00:08:44,000 --> 00:08:53,000 That you're working on now, say. This is come out of the original book that you proposed out of your thesis that. 74 00:08:53,000 --> 00:08:57,000 Had that wasn't accepted. That's right, isn't it? Yeah. 75 00:08:57,000 --> 00:09:07,000 I mean, it's kind of it's a development in two ways. So first of all, I applied and was successful in getting a British Academy postdoc fellowship. 76 00:09:07,000 --> 00:09:18,000 After my PhD and that project was basically to take the method that I devised in my PhD and use it in a broad sweep of education policy, 77 00:09:18,000 --> 00:09:22,000 still focussed on religious education, but rather than just one event. 78 00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:28,000 Looking at a series of events from nineteen forty four to the present day. 79 00:09:28,000 --> 00:09:32,000 And so that that sort of expanded the horizon. 80 00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:42,000 But also as part of that, there was an opportunity to be published through the British Academy imprint, which is with Oxford University Press. 81 00:09:42,000 --> 00:09:51,000 So I applied for that opportunity. And again, the feedback, the feedback from one reviewer was, you know, this is really interesting, 82 00:09:51,000 --> 00:09:57,000 potentially very important methodology could be useful across a broad spectrum of policy areas. 83 00:09:57,000 --> 00:10:01,000 And another one was basically this is this is not a good idea. 84 00:10:01,000 --> 00:10:11,000 This is completely inappropriate. Straight. You know, I'm disappointed that the writer has not referred to the work of Scholar X. 85 00:10:11,000 --> 00:10:17,000 That Scholar X, being the person who done the review, is the typical kind of you haven't done what I would have done. 86 00:10:17,000 --> 00:10:20,000 Yes. So the British Academy said no. 87 00:10:20,000 --> 00:10:29,000 Which was disappointing again, because obviously having an Oxford University publication would have been a good career starter. 88 00:10:29,000 --> 00:10:36,000 But what I did is I took I took the proposal that I prepared for that to another publisher. 89 00:10:36,000 --> 00:10:46,000 I don't think I changed any of it and simply said, please don't send it to Scholar X for review. 90 00:10:46,000 --> 00:10:50,000 And because, you know, I was advised that that is possible. 91 00:10:50,000 --> 00:10:54,000 And I thought, you know, and I said, you know, if you need more information about why, they were like, no, that's fine. 92 00:10:54,000 --> 00:10:59,000 You know, we recognised that there were people who are not appropriate. So we sent it to others. 93 00:10:59,000 --> 00:11:07,000 And it came back with, you know, a couple of suggestions of how I might slightly improve the text along the lines of, 94 00:11:07,000 --> 00:11:11,000 you know, some of the work I've done is international comparison. 95 00:11:11,000 --> 00:11:17,000 And then one of the comments was just make the reason for the international comparison a little bit more obvious. 96 00:11:17,000 --> 00:11:25,000 But otherwise, they accepted it. They wanted to change the title and the title they proposed 97 00:11:25,000 --> 00:11:33,000 I was not happy with. And I was I was stuck because I thought, well, you know, I'm on the cusp of a monograph. 98 00:11:33,000 --> 00:11:38,000 Contract. Do I want to argue about the title? Well, I do. 99 00:11:38,000 --> 00:11:41,000 I care about the title and they accepted the title I suggested. 100 00:11:41,000 --> 00:11:45,000 So both in the title and in the content of the book, 101 00:11:45,000 --> 00:11:53,000 the book is now very much a methodological explanation and guide to statement archaeology, which is my thing. 102 00:11:53,000 --> 00:12:07,000 Yeah. And it uses a series of case studies from RE, two of which came from the page day and two of which are more recent work as part of the postdoc. 103 00:12:07,000 --> 00:12:13,000 So in that respect, significant elements of the PhD are now included in the monograph, 104 00:12:13,000 --> 00:12:20,000 a couple of other bits I've published separately as journal articles. And the method, 105 00:12:20,000 --> 00:12:24,000 the method sort of which begins and ends is that the monograph to be published early 106 00:12:24,000 --> 00:12:30,000 next year hopefully is just an extension of the material I've prepared for the PhD. 107 00:12:30,000 --> 00:12:36,000 So it kind of feels like it is the monograph from the thesis with a couple of bits at it. 108 00:12:36,000 --> 00:12:42,000 But it's restructured in quite a significant way. So that instead of being a book about the history of R.E., 109 00:12:42,000 --> 00:12:51,000 it's a book about statement archaeology and the history of RE is the basis of the worked examples, but all the way through it's as you know. 110 00:12:51,000 --> 00:12:56,000 And think about how you would use this in your study. This is the kind of question that I have asked here. 111 00:12:56,000 --> 00:13:02,000 What kind of question would you ask? And so on. So it is quite a different beast now from what it was. 112 00:13:02,000 --> 00:13:13,000 And I think I think because of why it has a better position in the market and will be useful to to people who are interested in RE 113 00:13:13,000 --> 00:13:20,000 And I think it's that that's seems to be say the things that when I talk to people like that this is published, 114 00:13:20,000 --> 00:13:24,000 that's this this seems to be the core of it is actually, you know, 115 00:13:24,000 --> 00:13:29,000 it's you hope it might just be changing a few words here and there, but it's actually, 116 00:13:29,000 --> 00:13:33,000 in a lot of cases, a complete reframing because like you said, you write a thesis for your examiners. 117 00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:39,000 It's for a very particular audience in a very particular and go. 118 00:13:39,000 --> 00:13:45,000 And so it's constructed in a very particular way. And if you were kind of wanting to reach the wider academic audience, 119 00:13:45,000 --> 00:13:53,000 but also the kind of potentially the wider, you know, a student and or public audience, actually, 120 00:13:53,000 --> 00:14:05,000 a lot of people are reframing the work based on what is what is more of interest to the field rather than kind of the requirements of examination. 121 00:14:05,000 --> 00:14:12,000 I think that's absolutely right. And I think I would encourage people when they're thinking about how to develop their thesis 122 00:14:12,000 --> 00:14:18,000 into a book is is think about as many different possible groupings who might be interested. 123 00:14:18,000 --> 00:14:25,000 So, I mean, like I say, my book is primarily a methodological handbook with a lot of stuff about religious education policy, 124 00:14:25,000 --> 00:14:33,000 but actually the audience that would be interested. You've got masters level students undertaking their own research projects, PhD students 125 00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:41,000 but you've also got historians of education policy makers and policy shapers, people who are interested in social history. 126 00:14:41,000 --> 00:14:46,000 You know, there's quite a lot of social history and contextualising some of these policy moves, 127 00:14:46,000 --> 00:14:50,000 initial teacher trainees who are going to go into the humanities. 128 00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:57,000 So think as broadly as possible about who might read your book and how you can sort of tick as many boxes. 129 00:14:57,000 --> 00:15:01,000 And one of the big things I say, you know, from experience is if there's an international market. 130 00:15:01,000 --> 00:15:05,000 So I think I added a paragraph about the US. 131 00:15:05,000 --> 00:15:10,000 I've got quite a lot of stuff in there already about Scandinavia, because that's where I do my comparison. 132 00:15:10,000 --> 00:15:11,000 That ticks an international box, 133 00:15:11,000 --> 00:15:19,000 which which keeps publishers happy because they can then think about marketing this book beyond beyond our own shores, 134 00:15:19,000 --> 00:15:26,000 whether it's into Europe or the US or any sort of Anglophone type country. 135 00:15:26,000 --> 00:15:34,000 So think broadly and then kind of write in a way that tickles the ears of those sorts of people. 136 00:15:34,000 --> 00:15:41,000 It is going from the very specific niche kind of contribution that you make in the thesis. 137 00:15:41,000 --> 00:15:49,000 And broadening back out again, kind of doing, almost doing, going in the opposite direction to what you've been. 138 00:15:49,000 --> 00:15:53,000 Well, you've been doing for a number of years. I think so, yeah. 139 00:15:53,000 --> 00:16:01,000 I mean, I know some of the some of the books, the monographs that I've read that have been theses. 140 00:16:01,000 --> 00:16:06,000 They maintain the level of detail that PhD thesis requires. 141 00:16:06,000 --> 00:16:17,000 But they contextualise it differently if that makes sense. Whereas I think probably I would argue for mine, I, I stepped back from some of the detail. 142 00:16:17,000 --> 00:16:24,000 For example, you know, I had five or six thousand words just on how Foucault does historical enquiry. 143 00:16:24,000 --> 00:16:29,000 Now most sane people would say that's too much in a thesis, let alone a book. 144 00:16:29,000 --> 00:16:32,000 I think I've got a page and a half in the book about it. 145 00:16:32,000 --> 00:16:38,000 I mean, the other thing that you can do, which I did quite often, is where you where you don't want to move away from the detail. 146 00:16:38,000 --> 00:16:48,000 You can write in general terms in the book and you can reference your PhD because with, you know, the library there available for people to consult. 147 00:16:48,000 --> 00:16:56,000 Absolutely. And so you don't have to give up that sense of of the detail and the richness and the integrity of what you did. 148 00:16:56,000 --> 00:17:03,000 Thinking a little bit more about the process, because I think that's something that feels really almost mystical to people. 149 00:17:03,000 --> 00:17:10,000 So you sent in a proposal. So what kind of format did that take? 150 00:17:10,000 --> 00:17:16,000 So most publishing houses that I'm aware of will publish their format. 151 00:17:16,000 --> 00:17:18,000 You know, if you look look on the Web site for all, you know, 152 00:17:18,000 --> 00:17:24,000 authors submission to and then your chosen publisher, yeah, they will usually have some kind of pro forma. 153 00:17:24,000 --> 00:17:33,000 And is it you know that there are similarities. So, you know, I proposed title give a 300 word description of what the book is. 154 00:17:33,000 --> 00:17:43,000 You usually have to give chapter outlines, you know, chapter title, what the chapter will cover, how many words you expect it to be. 155 00:17:43,000 --> 00:17:47,000 And quite a lot of stuff about intended audience. Yeah. 156 00:17:47,000 --> 00:17:53,000 And also an analysis of competitor. Competitor titles. 157 00:17:53,000 --> 00:18:03,000 So by being in the system of submitting author, I've also been asked to review a few publications in my field and proposals. 158 00:18:03,000 --> 00:18:07,000 And some of them, you know, this is this is the only book on this topic. 159 00:18:07,000 --> 00:18:12,000 It's essential because it's core reading for these modules and others. 160 00:18:12,000 --> 00:18:19,000 You get a list of fifteen or twenty competitor titles and nothing about why this is different. 161 00:18:19,000 --> 00:18:28,000 Yeah, I think those kind of really those kind of marketing positioning in the market kind of questions are quite important. 162 00:18:28,000 --> 00:18:37,000 And I guess if that's got a lot of similarities to how you position the the scholarship is kind of filling a. 163 00:18:37,000 --> 00:18:39,000 A gap is as having originality. 164 00:18:39,000 --> 00:18:48,000 It's just thinking about it in less in terms of original contribution to knowledge as it is to mark, as is thinking about the market. 165 00:18:48,000 --> 00:18:54,000 It's a sounds like it's doing something very similar. I think it's a similar kind of approach in the mind. 166 00:18:54,000 --> 00:19:00,000 You know, that's the kind of thing you have to think of. Why what is it that I'm going to do that either hasn't been done before? 167 00:19:00,000 --> 00:19:06,000 Or I mean, one thing that I've seen quite often is books that have been published 30 years ago. 168 00:19:06,000 --> 00:19:10,000 There are key texts here, you know, are out of date. 169 00:19:10,000 --> 00:19:16,000 And this this will update the established scholarship in the field, kind of saying. 170 00:19:16,000 --> 00:19:23,000 So those kinds of things are important. I was very lucky because because of my sort of contacts, 171 00:19:23,000 --> 00:19:33,000 I had someone who had recently submitted a successful book proposal to Oxford University Press, and they sent me their proposal. 172 00:19:33,000 --> 00:19:41,000 And obviously, the topics were completely different. The structure was different. But you kind of get an idea of what kind of things make this. 173 00:19:41,000 --> 00:19:46,000 It's a bit like doing a funding bid or an application for a funded PhD 174 00:19:46,000 --> 00:19:51,000 You know, if you look at successful ones, you kind of get an idea of what what works. 175 00:19:51,000 --> 00:19:57,000 Yeah. So I would encourage, you know, particularly early career academics if they're looking for that. 176 00:19:57,000 --> 00:20:06,000 Ask your ask your existing networks, even if their fields are slightly different or their topics are slightly different. 177 00:20:06,000 --> 00:20:12,000 And I'm always willing to share my my proposals both for funding and for publication, 178 00:20:12,000 --> 00:20:18,000 because I think one of the ways we learn how to do it is by looking at ones that I've worked, say. 179 00:20:18,000 --> 00:20:22,000 You submit the proposal, they got back and said, yep, no, no. 180 00:20:22,000 --> 00:20:27,000 Oh, no. If only it was as easy as that. So I submitted. 181 00:20:27,000 --> 00:20:31,000 I submitted to Routledge and Routledge, published on their website. 182 00:20:31,000 --> 00:20:37,000 Who they're commissioning editors are for different fields now because of a project I'd worked on with other colleagues. 183 00:20:37,000 --> 00:20:48,000 There is someone who worked in religious education. So what I did first was sent the proposal to him and said, I realise this may not be your field, 184 00:20:48,000 --> 00:20:52,000 but, you know, could you have a quick look because there was already some kind of relationship. 185 00:20:52,000 --> 00:20:56,000 Could you have a quick look and or let me know who I should send it to? Yeah. 186 00:20:56,000 --> 00:21:02,000 And he said, oh, yes, the person you need is my colleague so-and-so. So I sent it to her. 187 00:21:02,000 --> 00:21:09,000 I actually see she used the policy editorial lead because that's where the book has been. 188 00:21:09,000 --> 00:21:13,000 That's another thing to sort of perhaps come back to is where do you position your book? 189 00:21:13,000 --> 00:21:20,000 Yeah. So she had a quick look at it and said, let's have a quick chat. 190 00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:27,000 There was an initial just one to one conversation with her, and she said, I think, you know, add some detail to this, maybe change there. 191 00:21:27,000 --> 00:21:33,000 Be open to the possibility of the title being being adapted. 192 00:21:33,000 --> 00:21:39,000 Once I'd done that, she then takes it to the editorial board meeting. 193 00:21:39,000 --> 00:21:44,000 You know, with her support, they came back with a couple of suggestions. 194 00:21:44,000 --> 00:21:51,000 Sorry. And in between that, I discussed it with her. Then it went to review and I had the reviewers comments back to me. 195 00:21:51,000 --> 00:22:03,000 Yeah. To change the proposal before it went to the editorial board and the editorial board agreed it subject to a change of title. 196 00:22:03,000 --> 00:22:09,000 And then once once they agreed and you've agreed with them the changes, 197 00:22:09,000 --> 00:22:16,000 you get offered a contract and the contract is to produce the manuscript within a given amount of time. 198 00:22:16,000 --> 00:22:26,000 So how long did that take between, say, between the kind of initial contact and getting the contract? 199 00:22:26,000 --> 00:22:30,000 So I think the initial contact was January, and I signed the contract in September. 200 00:22:30,000 --> 00:22:39,000 Wow. Now, that's partly because my commissioning editor was off sick for a while, but I mean, that's not an unusual. 201 00:22:39,000 --> 00:22:44,000 It's not an unusual timescale, particularly if there is a bit of to ing and fro ing. 202 00:22:44,000 --> 00:22:53,000 Yeah. And I think it also depends on the publishing house, because I think some some that have big structures, 203 00:22:53,000 --> 00:23:03,000 you might send it to the person you think and they they without you knowing, send it on to a colleague before it even gets any kind of indication. 204 00:23:03,000 --> 00:23:11,000 It's a really important thing to be aware of that actually, when it comes to book publishing, things can move incredibly slowly. 205 00:23:11,000 --> 00:23:13,000 Yeah, I think I think that's right. 206 00:23:13,000 --> 00:23:23,000 And I think I mean, if it taking the whole thing from when I first approached that publisher, which was what do we know, it was January. 207 00:23:23,000 --> 00:23:31,000 Twenty, eighteen. And I I have just finished completing the page proofs in the last couple of days. 208 00:23:31,000 --> 00:23:36,000 Wow. So there'll still be another month or so before it goes to press. 209 00:23:36,000 --> 00:23:43,000 Yes. But, you know, obviously part of that time I've been writing the book. 210 00:23:43,000 --> 00:23:50,000 Because one thing I didn't want to do, what some people do is they write the book and then they submit a proposal and then they might 211 00:23:50,000 --> 00:23:57,000 have to do quite a lot of changing according to what proposal changes the editorial board require. 212 00:23:57,000 --> 00:24:04,000 Whereas I had the structure of the book in my mind and then I've written it according to the proposal, we've agreed. 213 00:24:04,000 --> 00:24:08,000 So I guess I've got two questions. And on that say, I mean. 214 00:24:08,000 --> 00:24:14,000 Even though you have the structure, you you know, you hadn't written the thing as a as a whole before you went to proposal. 215 00:24:14,000 --> 00:24:23,000 It sounds like from your from your the you from your PhD n and from the that you wrote it on you. 216 00:24:23,000 --> 00:24:28,000 I'm guessing you had quite a reasonable amount of text already. 217 00:24:28,000 --> 00:24:32,000 I had the basis of a lot of the time. I mean, for the two chapters that came from the PhD 218 00:24:32,000 --> 00:24:38,000 It wasn't a copy. Copy and paste job. But it wasn't it wasn't a starting from scratch. 219 00:24:38,000 --> 00:24:45,000 There were chunks, particularly chunks of primary evidence that I did just copy and paste across. 220 00:24:45,000 --> 00:24:56,000 But I think what I would say is before I said send the book's proposal in, I knew what I'd found and I knew what the structure of the arguments were. 221 00:24:56,000 --> 00:25:05,000 Yeah. Because, you know, I think for for this route, the book chapter summaries were about four or five hundred words per chapter. 222 00:25:05,000 --> 00:25:09,000 Yeah, but you need to know enough about what you're gonna say. 223 00:25:09,000 --> 00:25:17,000 What's your supporting evidence to be able to test to satisfy them that it's not just a you know, you can't be too general. 224 00:25:17,000 --> 00:25:23,000 You have to be specific. Yeah. I'll talk about this act. I'll talk about these policymakers in the process. 225 00:25:23,000 --> 00:25:30,000 When did you actually start writing the book? Did you wait until you got the contract or did you start kind of earlier? 226 00:25:30,000 --> 00:25:31,000 What I think. 227 00:25:31,000 --> 00:25:42,000 I'd started writing a book a while ago, probably after I finished my PhD, because because I knew that there were bits I wanted to publish. 228 00:25:42,000 --> 00:25:48,000 So in terms of sort of text on page, I suppose by the time I submitted the proposal, 229 00:25:48,000 --> 00:25:54,000 I might have had forty thousand words written out of eighty five thousand total. 230 00:25:54,000 --> 00:25:58,000 Okay. So yeah, sort of with half of the book written. 231 00:25:58,000 --> 00:26:02,000 I mean a lot of that was just plain old as it says in this paragraph. 232 00:26:02,000 --> 00:26:07,000 Describe in this paragraph account for. Yeah. 233 00:26:07,000 --> 00:26:14,000 And then you kind of fill those gaps in. But I was I'd heard stories of people who'd written a book. 234 00:26:14,000 --> 00:26:21,000 Written a proposal based on the book they'd written, had the proposal talked around and accepted, and then they basically were starting again anyway. 235 00:26:21,000 --> 00:26:26,000 Yeah, I thought the sensible thing was just, you know, it's bad enough write in one book. 236 00:26:26,000 --> 00:26:31,000 I certainly did want away two for the price, you know, two books for one publication. 237 00:26:31,000 --> 00:26:37,000 If that makes sense, you've got to be you've got to be persuasive enough to the publisher that they think. 238 00:26:37,000 --> 00:26:41,000 I won't say they think you finish the book, but they think you can write the book. 239 00:26:41,000 --> 00:26:49,000 And also, I didn't take before with a proposal. I had to send a completed chapter as an exemplar of my writing. 240 00:26:49,000 --> 00:26:55,000 And that was one of the chapters that I'd already adapted from the PhD And that was that was okay. 241 00:26:55,000 --> 00:27:01,000 So by the time you getting to the point of writing and you've done the proposal, you submit the example chapter, 242 00:27:01,000 --> 00:27:08,000 you've had all of these back and forth conversations, like you said, you've got such a clear idea of of where the market's going. 243 00:27:08,000 --> 00:27:13,000 It's then kind of sitting down and doing the thing. 244 00:27:13,000 --> 00:27:24,000 So we will momentarily we will gloss over the process of writing as if it it's an, you know, click your fingers magically. 245 00:27:24,000 --> 00:27:33,000 It happened. So at what point did you send kind of drafts to your editor? 246 00:27:33,000 --> 00:27:45,000 So I. I didn't. They they issued a contract and initially my contract was for the complete book to be ready in April this year. 247 00:27:45,000 --> 00:27:56,000 OK. Once we got towards April, I sent a very, very nice email that said, you know, this is this is not going to happen by April. 248 00:27:56,000 --> 00:27:58,000 Can I have till July? 249 00:27:58,000 --> 00:28:07,000 And because I also wanted to push back the publication date for for strategic reasons, I didn't want the book published in the current REF cycle. 250 00:28:07,000 --> 00:28:13,000 I wanted it published in the next REF cycle. So they said, well, yeah, bearing in mind you're not in a hurry to have it. 251 00:28:13,000 --> 00:28:21,000 Then we're happy to put the date back. So I submitted the whole manuscript in July. 252 00:28:21,000 --> 00:28:30,000 Yeah. And in the process after that is that, first of all, the editor who has commissioned the work reads the piece. 253 00:28:30,000 --> 00:28:36,000 Yes. Basically to check that you've supplied what you agreed. Yes, of course. 254 00:28:36,000 --> 00:28:39,000 So I think it was three or four week turnaround. 255 00:28:39,000 --> 00:28:47,000 And I have an e-mail from her saying, you know, you've not only supplied what we asked for, but it's extremely well-written and very engaging. 256 00:28:47,000 --> 00:28:57,000 Yes. Which is a technical book on a documentary analysis technique, I think is I said, can I put your comment on the back in the blurb? 257 00:28:57,000 --> 00:29:03,000 Then it goes to copyediting that they then send back questions like, you know, 258 00:29:03,000 --> 00:29:09,000 you've sometimes you've used ize, sometimes you use ise, which should it be throughout? 259 00:29:09,000 --> 00:29:15,000 They ask questions about missing references or references are incomplete. 260 00:29:15,000 --> 00:29:24,000 That takes about a month. Yeah. Then it goes to typesetting, and I think that took about another month. 261 00:29:24,000 --> 00:29:33,000 So the best in a sense, the bits that they do take about a month, six weeks at a time, and then you get an email saying, hey, is your galley proofs. 262 00:29:33,000 --> 00:29:39,000 Please let us have them back in three days. Oh, wow. Which I responded. 263 00:29:39,000 --> 00:29:44,000 Thank you very much for the opportunity. I will have them within the next fortnight. 264 00:29:44,000 --> 00:29:48,000 And so far it's been. Oh yes, of course. That's fine. Don't. 265 00:29:48,000 --> 00:29:56,000 Don't be afraid to say to your publisher. Hang on a minute. You know, that's not a realistic timescale. 266 00:29:56,000 --> 00:30:01,000 So the situation at the moment is that I've got I've got the marked up proofs I need to enter the 267 00:30:01,000 --> 00:30:11,000 corrections onto the system and then I won't see the text again until I get physical copies delivered. 268 00:30:11,000 --> 00:30:14,000 So there's no sort of submission of drafts along the way. 269 00:30:14,000 --> 00:30:20,000 Certainly in my experience, I don't know how other publishers work, but my sense is that they're not interested. 270 00:30:20,000 --> 00:30:24,000 Once they've awarded the contract, what they want is the finished text. 271 00:30:24,000 --> 00:30:32,000 Yeah. So. At what point or is there a point at which it is going to go out to? 272 00:30:32,000 --> 00:30:38,000 Review is again, so obviously the proposal went through a peer review process. But does the book, the manuscript as a whole. 273 00:30:38,000 --> 00:30:44,000 Go out for a full review in any way? Well, with this one, no. 274 00:30:44,000 --> 00:30:48,000 I've got friends who have published with Palgrave or when they submitted the 275 00:30:48,000 --> 00:30:55,000 manuscript that was read by a couple of external readers before it was accepted. 276 00:30:55,000 --> 00:30:57,000 Now, obviously, 277 00:30:57,000 --> 00:31:07,000 my take on that is my book is such a close resemblance with the book that I was contracted to write that it didn't need to go out to review, 278 00:31:07,000 --> 00:31:12,000 or it may simply be that that's just a delay in the process. 279 00:31:12,000 --> 00:31:19,000 And, you know, usually there's some kind of reward, I suspect. So, you know, it costs it takes time. 280 00:31:19,000 --> 00:31:26,000 I think that might vary by publisher. It's important to say that there will always be variations in inexactly. 281 00:31:26,000 --> 00:31:31,000 How publishers deal with entry is different. These different elements say. 282 00:31:31,000 --> 00:31:36,000 So the next time you see you see it, it's going to be. A physical copy. 283 00:31:36,000 --> 00:31:40,000 It's gonna be a physical copy with. With covers and a title on it. 284 00:31:40,000 --> 00:31:48,000 Which is gonna be quite scary, but also exciting. So have you seen things like cover art or anything? 285 00:31:48,000 --> 00:32:01,000 Yeah, I am. I was hoping I. I've got a friend who's got a picture that was painted by a relative after that relative had read some of Foucaults work. 286 00:32:01,000 --> 00:32:06,000 And it's an amazing picture. I was hoping that that could be the cover of the book. 287 00:32:06,000 --> 00:32:18,000 Because it's got that link with Foucault's theory. But I was sent a bland collection of 12 different covers from which I could choose one. 288 00:32:18,000 --> 00:32:23,000 So I chose in consultation with my artistic director, my daughter. 289 00:32:23,000 --> 00:32:29,000 I chose one. And they said, yeah, we can't use that one on your book because that's for a different series. 290 00:32:29,000 --> 00:32:42,000 So in the end, I cover I've got it's not the one I've chosen, but it has the kind of corporate link with books in policy, 291 00:32:42,000 --> 00:32:46,000 which is useful for me because I kind of wanted to position this more in policy 292 00:32:46,000 --> 00:32:51,000 than in sort of religious education theology or anything else like that. 293 00:32:51,000 --> 00:33:02,000 So I'm not hugely unhappy with the outcome. But, you know, it shows you how constrained you are as an author about some of these decisions. 294 00:33:02,000 --> 00:33:08,000 Yeah. And I think that the thing you said about the identifying it is so visually as corporately as policy. 295 00:33:08,000 --> 00:33:18,000 It's interesting you mentioned that earlier about and about it being part of the policy series and the kind of positioning of the book. 296 00:33:18,000 --> 00:33:21,000 Can you say something a little bit about that? 297 00:33:21,000 --> 00:33:30,000 Yeah, I mean, I think so, as I sort of hinted earlier on, religious education, there's not a huge sector of educational research. 298 00:33:30,000 --> 00:33:37,000 It's a very niche field. And actually, the work that I do is religious education by accident. 299 00:33:37,000 --> 00:33:45,000 My my motivation and my intellectual project, if you like, is about understanding how policy development works in real life. 300 00:33:45,000 --> 00:33:54,000 It just so happens that I've worked on religious education because that's where I've had ways in or pre-existing knowledge. 301 00:33:54,000 --> 00:34:02,000 Because I know developing my career as an early career researcher, I want to develop an identity as a policy researcher. 302 00:34:02,000 --> 00:34:03,000 So to me, 303 00:34:03,000 --> 00:34:16,000 getting the book published in the policy staple was really important because to have it published is as a religious education book would in a sense, 304 00:34:16,000 --> 00:34:26,000 keep me constrained within that very narrow field where I've already established a reputation by moving to a slightly broader intellectual silo. 305 00:34:26,000 --> 00:34:29,000 I suppose there is scope for more development. 306 00:34:29,000 --> 00:34:35,000 And it's I mean, it's already led to some interesting discussions about other education policy projects. 307 00:34:35,000 --> 00:34:42,000 So it's been successful. But I think I think the piece of advice that I was given, I would pass on when thinking about publication, 308 00:34:42,000 --> 00:34:47,000 if think about what you want your academic identity to focus around. 309 00:34:47,000 --> 00:34:52,000 Yeah. Because lots of us do PhDs to a sort of a combination of what we're interested in, 310 00:34:52,000 --> 00:34:59,000 but also what we can get funding for, what our supervisors interests are, where where there is a gap. 311 00:34:59,000 --> 00:35:07,000 I mean, I think of Einstein as the example because his PhD was nothing to do with theories of relativity. 312 00:35:07,000 --> 00:35:12,000 But that's what he's known for. Yeah. He's not not known for his PhD work, is known for his work afterwards. 313 00:35:12,000 --> 00:35:15,000 And I think it's an opportunity. 314 00:35:15,000 --> 00:35:23,000 Getting a book published is to create an early career researcher is a huge thing and it's a thing that gives you opportunities. 315 00:35:23,000 --> 00:35:31,000 So think about the opportunities. Where do I want to be positioned and how do I then get this book of this monograph? 316 00:35:31,000 --> 00:35:35,000 How do I then use that as a stepping stone to where I want to be, if that makes sense? 317 00:35:35,000 --> 00:35:38,000 Yeah, absolutely. 318 00:35:38,000 --> 00:35:44,000 And within that, I wondered if you could just say a bit more about so you said about delaying it because you didn't want it published. 319 00:35:44,000 --> 00:35:49,000 You wanted it published in the next REF cycle. So what was the. 320 00:35:49,000 --> 00:35:59,000 What was the rationale for that? OK. So because of the way the REF works, we're all encouraged or demanded to submit, 321 00:35:59,000 --> 00:36:04,000 you know, X number of papers at whatever, you know, five For star articles. 322 00:36:04,000 --> 00:36:12,000 I know that's ridiculous. But, you know, the pressure is to produce a certain number of For star articles or three star articles within the REF cycle. 323 00:36:12,000 --> 00:36:18,000 I'd already I've already achieved that through publications that I've done in the last few years. 324 00:36:18,000 --> 00:36:28,000 So if I had got the book published in the current REFcycle, I would have just ended up with, you know, 10 articles from which to choose. 325 00:36:28,000 --> 00:36:33,000 And then when the clock resets for the new REF cycle, I would have had nothing. 326 00:36:33,000 --> 00:36:42,000 So it was suggested strongly to me, hold the book back. And then that gives you a starting point for the next REF's cycle. 327 00:36:42,000 --> 00:36:52,000 You know, you've already got a good solid. Submission sitting on your desk waiting rather than starting from scratch. 328 00:36:52,000 --> 00:36:56,000 So it's simply that that kind of strategic planning. 329 00:36:56,000 --> 00:37:01,000 Yeah, and I think with what you said about kind of how you position yourself. 330 00:37:01,000 --> 00:37:04,000 And how you want to position your academic career? 331 00:37:04,000 --> 00:37:15,000 These are incredibly important considerations and particularly with things that like the REF cycle and kind of forward forward planning, I guess. 332 00:37:15,000 --> 00:37:19,000 So what have you learnt from the process of doing the book? 333 00:37:19,000 --> 00:37:28,000 I would say I've learnt a lot. You know, I've learnt some some fairly fundamental practical skills, like if you're going to write a book. 334 00:37:28,000 --> 00:37:32,000 You have to change the way that you live. To make it possible. 335 00:37:32,000 --> 00:37:45,000 Go. For the the year between getting the contract and submitting the manuscript, I spent the first two hours of every working day working on the book. 336 00:37:45,000 --> 00:37:48,000 OK. Yes. Because it doesn't write 337 00:37:48,000 --> 00:37:58,000 You know how much I wanted it to write itself So there's the practical level, I think, on the on the sort of career development level, 338 00:37:58,000 --> 00:38:04,000 you know, the importance of a book I'd completely underestimated. Well, I when it was first suggested, it was like, yeah, you know, well, 339 00:38:04,000 --> 00:38:09,000 I've done a couple of articles, a book, you know, a book will just be another thing like that. 340 00:38:09,000 --> 00:38:14,000 But it's not the way that it's viewed, particularly in terms of job applications and progression. 341 00:38:14,000 --> 00:38:20,000 A book is a big thing. And and the all the publication house is a big thing. 342 00:38:20,000 --> 00:38:25,000 Yes. So, you know, people were asking me, I interview. 343 00:38:25,000 --> 00:38:29,000 Oh, yeah. You've got your work on a book. Who's publishing it? That was the question before. 344 00:38:29,000 --> 00:38:32,000 What's it about? Yeah. Which I think is interesting. 345 00:38:32,000 --> 00:38:40,000 So I've learnt I've learnt that I think I've learnt more about how to negotiate the process of putting together a submission. 346 00:38:40,000 --> 00:38:49,000 Getting comments on it, sending it to the right person. You know, that sort of process your side of things. 347 00:38:49,000 --> 00:38:58,000 But I think what I've learnt also is that many of my colleagues are hugely academically generous and also very interested in what I'm doing. 348 00:38:58,000 --> 00:39:03,000 I tend to think that my work was so niche that no one else really had any interest. 349 00:39:03,000 --> 00:39:12,000 But my colleagues have been hugely supportive, very encouraging. I mean, it's a bit like when you start a new job, you know, how's the job going? 350 00:39:12,000 --> 00:39:16,000 How are you getting on? Anything you need? Maybe like when you do. 351 00:39:16,000 --> 00:39:20,000 Each day when people say instead of saying, have you finished yet? 352 00:39:20,000 --> 00:39:25,000 They say, can I give you some money or buy you a meal? It's a bit like that, you know. 353 00:39:25,000 --> 00:39:29,000 How's the book coming on? Yeah, I see it quite encouraging. 354 00:39:29,000 --> 00:39:35,000 So. We also have learnt quite a lot about myself because I didn't I didn't believe that I could do PhD 355 00:39:35,000 --> 00:39:43,000 I come from a very chequered educational background. But I left school with with few qualifications. 356 00:39:43,000 --> 00:39:46,000 And each time I, you know, I got my degree, I got my masters, I got my PhD 357 00:39:46,000 --> 00:39:55,000 Each time I thought, well, I didn't believe I could do it. And in a sense, getting the book finished showed me that I could. 358 00:39:55,000 --> 00:40:03,000 Other people around me believed I could, but I didn't always. I think the biggest lesson for me is actually you can. 359 00:40:03,000 --> 00:40:10,000 Yeah. And I think the final lesson is don't rush into writing a book. 360 00:40:10,000 --> 00:40:13,000 Because it is a lot of work. It's worth it is hugely rewarding. 361 00:40:13,000 --> 00:40:18,000 And, you know, I'm so looking forward to hearing from people who are using the method that I've devised. 362 00:40:18,000 --> 00:40:25,000 But there are easier ways to spend your life and work you. 363 00:40:25,000 --> 00:40:36,000 So in the process of writing, writing the book, where you finishing the postdoc and starting the job you're in now, we say we I working full time. 364 00:40:36,000 --> 00:40:41,000 For about. Six months. No more than six months. 365 00:40:41,000 --> 00:40:46,000 I started my current role as a lecturer in September last year. 366 00:40:46,000 --> 00:40:56,000 OK, but September 2019 and I submitted the manuscript in July 2020 and I didn't get the contracts till September. 367 00:40:56,000 --> 00:41:02,000 So most of the time that I was working on the specific book, I've been working full time. 368 00:41:02,000 --> 00:41:07,000 Say, I was think that that kind of doing two hours on it every day, like in the morning, 369 00:41:07,000 --> 00:41:11,000 was that the way that you managed to kind of the balancing of the work? 370 00:41:11,000 --> 00:41:17,000 Yeah. Yeah. Because prior to that, I you know, I spent three years with my postdoc. 371 00:41:17,000 --> 00:41:24,000 I spent, you know, working on the book all the time. But, you know, a lot of that was research. 372 00:41:24,000 --> 00:41:35,000 You know, archive research, data analysis, redeveloping the method, you know, networking meetings, etc. 373 00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:41,000 And I did quite a lot of other projects alongside that kind of teaching other places. 374 00:41:41,000 --> 00:41:47,000 So. I did try to have a a day, a week on the book. 375 00:41:47,000 --> 00:41:55,000 When I first started this role, but it's it wasn't manageable, partly because I can't write flat out for seven or eight hours ago. 376 00:41:55,000 --> 00:42:04,000 Yeah, partly because however much you set aside a day and lock yourself away and turn your e-mail off, people still find you and they still demand, 377 00:42:04,000 --> 00:42:10,000 whereas somehow it's more acceptable when people knock on your door eight o'clock in the morning and say, have you got time for a meeting? 378 00:42:10,000 --> 00:42:15,000 You can say I'm free at lunchtime or I'm free later. 379 00:42:15,000 --> 00:42:23,000 And that's okay. So, yeah, at this point, I mean, it's sort of one of those things that you achieve it by chipping away a bit at a time. 380 00:42:23,000 --> 00:42:26,000 And for me, a couple of hours a day was the way to do it. 381 00:42:26,000 --> 00:42:34,000 I know that for some people they write best, you know, in big, long chunks, maybe at the weekend or they take a day away from the office. 382 00:42:34,000 --> 00:42:36,000 But I think you have to do what works for you. 383 00:42:36,000 --> 00:42:44,000 I would also say over the course of the whole project, what works for me has changed at different times. 384 00:42:44,000 --> 00:42:48,000 I should be be responsive to be be okay with that. 385 00:42:48,000 --> 00:42:58,000 Thank you so much to Jonathan for a really fascinating discussion about the publishing process, about failure, about rejection, 386 00:42:58,000 --> 00:43:10,000 but also about finding and articulating your identity as an early career researcher and and placing yourself within your field, moving forward. 387 00:43:10,000 --> 00:43:15,000 And that's it for this episode. Don't forget to like, rate and subscribe and join me. 388 00:43:15,000 --> 00:43:42,408 Next time we'll be talking to somebody else about researchers development and everything in between.  

Professorial fellow of Epidemiology at the University of Melbourne, Professor Tony Blakely, reveals how likely he thinks it is that lockdown will be eased after six weeks. See omnystudio.com/policies/listener for privacy information.

It's another week of Topic Thunder on The Top 10, hosted by John Rocha (@therochasays) and Matt Knost (@mattknost). This show is brought to you by our incredible patrons over at https://www.patreon.com/thetop10. They send in questions/topics and we answer them. It's that simple. If you're a patron then make sure to get your questions in and the email address is listed on the site for you to join the show today! Twitter: @toptenshow Facebook: https://bit.ly/39m9Nbf Patreon: https://bit.ly/39sNb9b Merch: https://bit.ly/2WQBDtO --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Episode 75: Professorial, Yet TwinkyThe Gaylords try to read the signs with Nicolas Roeg's Don't Look Now (1973)! Stacie & Anthony tackle that shock ending, Julie Christie in a black turtleneck, heterosexual love scenes done right, A-listers in horror, and more. Put on your tweed and shoulder-bumps and do listen now!Find out more at https://gaylords-of-darkness.pinecast.co

Join your host Emma and her clown Barbara talking all things Motherhood.  What are the myths of motherhood?  What holds us as mothers back?  What fun can be had being a mother?  Find Danusia on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/school.for.mothers.podcast/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SchoolForMothers/ Subscribe and listen to her two podcasts – School For Mothers and School for Fathers More about Danusia After earning her PhD scholarship, Danusia Malina-Derben became an ESRC Fellow then rose to Professorial level in Organizational Behaviour and Development. As an international career academic, she became a Leadership theoretician publishing extensively in top refereed business journals. Danusia founded and heads DMD Global, a niche Board & C-suite consultancy advising corporates on leadership capabilities and decision making processes. Clients include Microsoft, Mars, Sainsbury's, MoD, Coca-Cola, Deloitte, The Home Office plus a host of fast growth start-ups.   An authority on all things “C-suite” she is also mother of ten. The juncture of working with those at the top whilst raising a super brood, means Danusia has unique perspectives on what it is to be a successful working mother. Danusia is a sought-after keynote speaker, expert commentator on women's career success, podcast host and Founder of School for Mothers.

This week, our resident professor, Dr. Keith Poniewaz, is in the booth with Clint to talk about the ways academic faculty can take full advantage of the unique financial offerings of the university system. They also discuss how habits developed by graduate students can become patterns of poor investing by professors, as well as pertinent tips on where to find the best "discount tweed."

Here we feature a central figure in the ongoing Great World Fluid debate. He was sadly unable to attend EBPOM 2018 so we wanted to get a very important contribution from him: What are the big takeaways from some of the larger trials such as Saline versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation (SAFE)? What about the long term implications of Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial (CHEST)? What new trials should be on the horizon - given the information we now have? Monty Mythen speaks with his guest Professor John A Myburgh, Intensive Care Medicine, University of New South Wales; Director of the Division of Critical Care and Trauma at the George Institute for Global Health and Senior Intensive Care Physician at the St George Hospital, Sydney.   He holds honorary Professorial appointments at the University of Sydney and Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine.

Here we feature a central figure in the ongoing Great World Fluid debate. He was sadly unable to attend EBPOM 2018 so we wanted to get a very important contribution from him: What are the big takeaways from some of the larger trials such as Saline versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation (SAFE)? What about the long term implications of Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial (CHEST)? What new trials should be on the horizon - given the information we now have?   Monty Mythen speaks with his guest Professor John A Myburgh, Intensive Care Medicine, University of New South Wales; Director of the Division of Critical Care and Trauma at the George Institute for Global Health and Senior Intensive Care Physician at the St George Hospital, Sydney.   He holds honorary Professorial appointments at the University of Sydney and Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine.

Here we feature a central figure in the ongoing Great World Fluid debate. He was sadly unable to attend EBPOM 2018 but we still wanted to get a very important contribution from him. What are the big takeaways from some of the larger trials such as Saline versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation (SAFE)? What about the long term implications of Crystalloid versus Hydroxyethyl Starch Trial (CHEST)? What new trials should be on the horizon - given the information we now have? Monty Mythen speaks with his guest Professor John A Myburgh, Intensive Care Medicine, University of New South Wales; Director of the Division of Critical Care and Trauma at the George Institute for Global Health and Senior Intensive Care Physician at the St George Hospital, Sydney. He holds honorary Professorial appointments at the University of Sydney and Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine.

This week on Ghosted Stories, Chelsea (@thechelseawhite) and Erin (@erinleafe) chat with writer and comedian Rebecca Leib (@RebeccaLeib) about sleeping with a professor and being a phone sex operator and dating coach. Plus, Topical Sh**: We read a listener ghosted story and help Rebecca with her Tinder profile. We would love you for subscribing, rating, and reviewing and telling a friend about us if you love this podcast! Email us your ghosted stories, dating questions and concerns to ghostedstoriespodcast@gmail.com and we may feature them in a future episode! Follow us on Twitter @GhostedStories and Instagram @GhostedStoriesPodcast. And tune in to Chelsea’s weekly Facebook Live show “What A Delight! w/ Chelsea White” every Wed at 8pm EST at facebook.com/whatadelightwithchelseawhite! Boo!

Presented by Professor Andrew Gunston on Thursday 23 February 2017.Over many decades, the Australian Higher Education sector has struggled to genuinely address the educational needs of Indigenous Australians. ‘Indigenous Australians and the Australian Higher Education Sector’, will discuss a number of interrelated factors – leadership, governance, culture, employment, student support, engagement, teaching and learning, research – that are essential in enabling the sector to address this critical area.

John Clayton joins Matt Maiocco on The 49ers Insider Podcast after this weekend's game against the Seahawks to discuss the team's future at quarterback, head coach, general manager and much more. (Episode 4)

Based on the translation by Graham Parkes. In this episode, Alex discusses the attitude of passionate engagement towards the things in our lives that we care about. If we take all the right steps and do all the right things, but with the wrong attitude, we will not grow, and we will not develop.

Sean, Charles, & Leeman are joined by John Langan to discuss his short story collection "The Wide, Carnivorous Sky and Other Monstrous Geographies" and other tangents. Music: Eyes Gone Wrong Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Show Notes: Check out John Langan on Twitter, Facebook, or his blog. Pick up a copy of The Wide, Carnivorous Sky from Hippocampus Press or Amazon

Gerard Ferrari, 2011 McKnight Artist Fellow for Ceramic Artists, holds an MFA(VCU) and a BA(Berea). His artistic career began in 1989 and his Professorial career in 1999. In 2009 he left academia to become a stay-at-home parent, artist, and micro-homesteader. Above all, he has an active imagination and creative spirit.

On 26 November 2014 the Creative Economy Research Centre (CERC) launched with two professorial lectures delivered by Professors Peter Richardson and Keith Randle. CERC is a multi-disciplinary centre of excellence for research, and for business and social engagement, in the creative industries and the broader creative economy. This video contains Professor Peter Richardson's talk.

On 26 November 2014 the Creative Economy Research Centre (CERC) launched with two professorial lectures delivered by Professors Peter Richardson and Keith Randle. CERC is a multi-disciplinary centre of excellence for research, and for business and social engagement, in the creative industries and the broader creative economy. This video contains the lecture by Professor Keith Randle.

In 2004 the UK opened its labour market to workers from the post-communist countries which had joined the European Union that year. Although it was estimated that a few thousand would come, by 2010 over half a million Polish workers had arrived to work in the UK. This lecture explores the dynamics and features of what is the biggest inward migration to the UK since the Second World War. However, as the UK has lurched from boom to crisis and then faltering recovery, the debate on migration has sharpened. In March this year Britain’s immigration minister urged companies to wean themselves off their “addiction” to hiring foreign workers. The role of migrant workers in the workplace and how the agendas of different sections of government and business have produced contradictory views and demands will be discussed. Polish migrant workers themselves will be seen as active agents in an environment of super mobility. It argues that both Polish trade unions, such as Solidarno´s, and those in the UK have used innovative strategies to play a positive role in promoting workplace cohesion and solidarity.

Hello! In this Fri-Internet Day episode we explore everything from the lows of depression to the highs of Zach Galifianakis spanking Justin Bieberr... I discuss: Between Two Ferns with Host Zach Galifianakis & Guest Justin Bieber, TED: Why Our IQ Points Are Higher Then Our Grandparents', TED: Confessions of a Depressed Comic, Serious Jibber Jabber with Host Conan O'Brien & Guest Martin Short, and Penn's Sunday School "Directors Cut"Announcement.

Sam Acho from the Arizona Cardinal shares at PhoenixONE!

Sam Acho from the Arizona Cardinals shares at PhoenixONE.

Chris, Creighton, and Chris discuss healthcare solutions in the wake of oral arguments in the Obamacare case currently in front of the SCOTUS. The guys also discuss what it means to be a libertarian college student on a campus filled with liberal profe...