Annual Report: Developing Research Capacity at UWS, Report on Structured Writers' Retreats (2013)

Developing research capacity at UWS
Report on Structured Writers’ Retreats
January-December 2013
Professor Rowena Murray
Dr Larissa Kempenaar

of 16
Executive Summary
One way of effectively increasing research capacity, activity and outputs as aimed for in the
University’s Strategic Plan 2008-2015 and Research Strategy 2011-2015 is by means of
Structured Writing Retreats (SWR). SWR provide time away from other academic duties and
allow staff and post graduate students to focus on progression in a range of academic writing
projects and the production of a range of written outputs, such as PhD chapters; books;
conference abstracts; journal articles and research proposals.
A total of 9 retreats took place in 2013 with an average of 12 participants per retreat. Thirty-
seven academics and students from UWS attended of whom 10 attended more than one
retreat. In addition 30 academics and students from other Universities and institutions took
part.
The majority of participants worked towards completion of their thesis, while many participants
worked on journal publications. Furthermore participants reported the acquisition of skills
regarding the process and structuring of writing which were viewed as enhancing research
thinking and were seen as transferable skills to their work environment. They also reported the
advantage of disconnecting from social media and the demands of home and work life during
the retreats. Finally, participants described the formation of peer support networks which have
led to the development of writing groups and a more positive research culture on campus.
Those who attended more than one retreat described how these benefits were enhanced by
repeated attendance at the writing retreats.
The findings of this evaluation support Structured Writing Retreats as an effective way of
achieving the University’s Strategic Plan and Research Strategy, while enhancing the post
graduate student experience. For these reasons, these retreats should be embedded in our
research strategy. This would not only send a signal internally that research activity is valued
and supported, but also externally that UWS is committed to both research capacity
development and growing research identity.

of 16
Contents
Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................2
Introduction: The purpose and function of structured writing retreats..........................................4
Attendance.......................................................................................................................................6
Outputs.............................................................................................................................................7
Outcomes .........................................................................................................................................9
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 12
References..................................................................................................................................... 14
List of participants......................................................................................................................... 15

of 16
Introduction: The purpose and function of structured writing retreats
The University of the West of Scotland “aims to become an academic institution with a
significant profile and reputation for national and international excellence in applied research in
strategically important academic areas. The University aims to do this by concentrating and
building on our current research strengths and increasing the volume of our internationally
excellent research outputs by 2015.” (Looking forward, Strategic Plan 2008-2015)
One way of effectively facilitating research capacity, activity and outputs is by means of
Structured Writing Retreats (SWR). SWR provide time away from other academic duties and
allow staff and post graduate students to focus on progression in a range of academic writing
projects and the production of a range of written outputs, typically PhD chapters; books;
conference abstracts; journal articles and research proposals.
Structured writing retreats are two and a half day, residential retreats which take place in a
secluded location near Glasgow. Participants bring information and sources they need on
memory sticks or loaded onto laptops. Participants write at computer desks, arranged in a
boardroom format. Meals and snacks are provided.
The structure and concepts behind the writing retreats have been published previously by
Murray and Newton (2009). The retreats all include three evidence based elements:
1. The ‘typing pool’ which means that all participants write individually but are situated in the
same room for the duration of the retreat (Grant & Knowles 2000).
2. The use of a series of strict writing and discussion slots. The structured nature of the retreat is
based on a systematic review by McGrail et al (2006) who concluded that structured
interventions were found most effective in developing academic writing. Within the structured
writing sessions ‘free-writing’, i.e. personal writing for short periods, is used at the start of each
session which Elbow (1973) found to stimulate the development of ideas and the improvement
of fluency.

of 16
3. The use of peer discussion to review progress during the retreat (Murray 2005). This was
possible as all participants were writing in the same room. This sharing of experiences in relation
to writing, in turn, facilitates the development of a community of practice for academic writing
at UWS following on from the retreats.
This evaluation reports on research outputs from nine retreats at the University of the West of
Scotland (UWS) in 2013 and identifies outcomes and benefits for participants. This report makes
the case for regular attendance at retreats for those who aspire to develop and/or increase their
research activity, those aiming to increase productivity in research and writing and those who
want to generate new research collaborations in accordance with the University’s Research and
Knowledge Exchange Strategy 2011-2015.

of 16
Attendance
Nine structured writing retreats took place in 2013. A total of 109 participants attended the
retreats. Each retreat had between 8 to 15 participants with an average of 12 participants per
retreat. The 109 participants comprised 67 different individuals. Thirty-seven academics and
students from UWS attended one or more retreats in January, February, April (2), May, October,
November (2) and December (see figure 1). Fifty-seven participants attended one retreat, while
10 participants attended more than one retreat. The majority of participants came from the
departments of Education (n=17, 46%) and Nursing (n=11, 30%). Other departments
represented included Business, Creative and Cultural Industries, Science and Social Science.
Figure 1. Breakdown of participants from UWS
In addition, 30 students and academics from other institutions across the UK attended the
structured writing retreats. Participants came from Scottish and English Universities, a college
and the NHS. Twenty participants attended the retreat a single time, while 10 participants
attended more than once. The largest number of participants external to UWS came from
Strathclyde University (n=11) and the Scottish Rural College (n=5) (see page 15 for a more
detailed breakdown).
Business
3%
Creative and
Cultural
Industries
5%
Education
46%
Nursing
30%
Science
13%
Social Science
3%

of 16
Outputs
At the end of each retreat participants reported on their output in terms of the writing project
they had been working on and the progress they had made with it (see tables 1 and 2). While
many participants only wrote on one project, such as a thesis or journal article, many
participants worked on multiple projects during the retreats.
Of the 109 attendances at the retreats, on 71 occasions participants focused on completion of
their thesis. While most of these participants (n=38) wrote new chapters in the thesis, many also
edited work previously written. In addition, participants wrote preparatory work for the thesis,
including proposals and reflective pieces, and sections such as the reference list. Approximately
one third of participants (n=37) used the time at the retreats to progress their work on journal
articles. Most of these participants produced new drafts of articles (n=21), while in eight
occasions participants edited their work and in 5occasions participants revised previously
submitted articles. The two other main outputs were contributions to papers and abstracts for
conferences (n=20) and book chapters (n=15).
Contribution to: N
PhD 71
Newly drafted 38
Editing of previously written
work
17
Tables/Figures/References 5
Preparatory work 10
Journal article 37
Newly drafted 21
Editing of previously written
work
8
Revisions of submitted articles 5
Preparatory work 3
Conferences materials 20
Book chapters 15
Table 1. Main outputs

of 16
In addition, participants wrote sections for various other projects. This included reports,
research proposals and grant applications. See table 2 below for more detail.
Contribution to: N
Reports 9
Research proposals 7
Grant applications 6
Post graduate assignments 5
Ethics applications 4
Teaching preparation 4
Book/article review 3
Memos 2
Book proposal 1
Cover letters for book and
paper
1
Letter to reviewer comments 1
Read difficult paper 1
Devised questionnaire 1
Prize application 1
Table 2. Additional outputs

of 16
Outcomes
At the end of each retreat participants were asked to describe the impact of attending the
retreat. A number of themes emerged from these descriptions.
The first theme was related to participants’ learning in relation to the development of the
process and skills required to write productively. The main aspect of learning which was raised
by many participants was the importance of ‘paced writing’. This included the discussion and
planning of writing with other participants and in writing, for each time period of writing, and
the use of regular breaks.
“I have never written goals and targets for my writing before – we have done this on
campus orally – but very useful to do that in writing.”
“Imposed stopping is important for productivity. If I sat down to write, I would sit for
longer, but I am more productive here. It’s easier to keep going if you stop regularly.”
For many this was a new way of working and it appeared to help some participants overcome
their fears about writing while increasing their confidence and productivity.
“It makes getting started with writing task less intimidating.”
“It shows you what’s possible. When I arrived I didn’t know what to expect, but now I
know how to make this work.”
The increased productivity provided many with a sense of achievement which acted as a
motivator to continue writing after the retreat. During the retreats the structure was facilitated
by the leader who would provide the external enforcement of the pacing. However, several
participants talked about the transfer of the learning by using the skills acquired to their
individual settings in terms of pacing their writing and using breaks effectively.
“I use the model at home. I work to this pattern. “

of 16
The second aspect of this theme was that the structure appeared to provide participants with an
increase in the quality of concentration and thinking. Some described this as having ‘epiphanies’
or turning points in research thinking. This was in particular for those who attended the writing
retreats regularly.
A second theme was related to the setting in which the writing retreat took place and how this
was conducive to writing productivity. Many participants positively spoke about disconnecting
from their normal lives at the retreats, in terms of not having access to the internet to access
social media, being away from the daily responsibilities of family life and being away from
competing responsibilities at work. One participant described that this disconnecting provided
them with ‘head space’. In addition, participants talked about the writing retreats as being
‘cared for’. Participants felt they could concentrate on the task at hand as they felt looked after
in terms of a relaxed space and the provision of food. This made participants feel nurtured and
added to the sense of legitimizing the focus and time directed at writing.
“Relief: absolute relief. No guilt about not communicating with your work. To come away
for a weekend … work is constantly on your mind, you head’s full of it. You plan not to
answer emails at the weekend, but you always do. But not here. Less feeling of
inadequacy. Great feeling in the evening that I’ve done enough, so I do take a break. Also
morning and afternoon breaks and breaks for lunch – good to switch off, quickly,
because you know you’ll be going back to it. It’s a positive structure. It’s head space.”
The final theme in the feedback was the element of peer support which took place during the
retreats. Peer support was facilitated during the structured part of the retreat by discussion of
participants work at the beginning and end of writing sessions, but also during the unstructured
parts of the retreat as participants socialized during breaks, meals and in the evenings.
Participants talked about the benefits of sharing the challenges of writing, for example when
facing the challenge of completing PhDs. However, participants also appreciated the mixed
backgrounds of participants in terms of different Universities, disciplines, levels of seniority,
experience and the different stages participants were at in terms of completion of their work.

of 16
This is particularly important for early career researchers, doctoral students and UWS staff on
Masters or doctoral courses.
“For PhD students, it’s nice to know that people in more senior positions are human, that
they face the same problems as us with writing and research. Good to be able to bounce
ideas off more experienced people.”
“good to be together with people from other institutions and other disciplines. People
facing similar challenges of writing a thesis or publications. Also good to celebrate
publication successes and PhD completions.”
The nature of peer support was that of ‘non-surveillance’, providing participants with a safe
place to discuss their ideas, and opportunities to receive and give feedback.
“There’s something liberating – you say it’s ‘non-surveillance’ – if you are blocked.
Although it’s very structured, no one is going to read this. This is for me, and that is very
freeing and lets me write”
The positive experience of peer support has resulted in the new writers’ group initiated and run
by PhD students from UWS, Glasgow and Strathclyde. This supports the development of a
community of practice as staff and students transfer the positive culture developed at the
writing retreats to an on-campus setting and sustains research collaborations and networks
developed during the retreats.

of 16
Conclusion
This evaluation has demonstrated that Structured Writing Retreats support the University’s
vision by providing the supportive environment where research and knowledge exchange can
take place across a range of departments and subject disciplines. Both staff and students who
attended the retreats described how they developed their writing skills and improved their
research outputs. These findings are in agreement with existing evidence that these retreats
develop research identities and cultures (MacLeod et al., 2012; Murray, 2012; Murray &
Newton, 2009; Murray et al. 2012).
The development of a community of practice based on peer support to increase research
outputs clearly supports UWS’s strategic objective to “enhance the academic environment by
embedding research/KE in all academic staff workloads and objectives, with the clear
expectation that they will actively engage in producing quality, research and/or KE outputs”
(Research and Knowledge Exchange Strategy, 2011 - 2015). In addition the Structured Writing
Retreats support the University in its strategic objective to “increase the number of staff, and
the quality of outputs, submitted to national research benchmarking exercises (e.g. REF2014)
through developing current staff”.
As the University aims to increase its external research funding by 50%, it is of the utmost
importance to facilitate the completion of its current research projects and PhDs, and, in terms
of knowledge transfer, publication of their findings in journals and at conferences (Looking
Forward, Strategic Plan 2008-2015).
The positive findings of this evaluation also fit with the enhanced focus on Researcher
Development in the Post Graduate Student Experience Survey (PRES). The retreats have given
students the opportunity to develop several skills included in the PRES under Research Skills,
while also giving them the opportunity to develop elements of Professional Development, e.g.
developing contacts or professional networks.

of 16
Evidence that participation at writing retreats has benefit for PhD students is provided in my
forthcoming chapter in Writing Groups for Doctoral Education and Beyond: Innovations in
Theory and Practice (Murray, 2013).
The effects of the retreats are currently consolidated by various writing groups, workshops and
micro-groups meeting on campus and in other settings set up by staff and students who
attended retreats during this period. However, in order to sustain these outputs and outcomes,
participation at retreat should not be a one-off; instead, regular attendance at structured
writing retreats is recommended to develop research capacity and grow research cultures. At a
cost of £170 per person per retreat this would provide a good return on the UWS investment.
For these reasons, these retreats should be embedded in our research strategy. This would not
only send a signal internally that research activity is valued and supported, but also externally
that UWS is committed to both research capacity development and growing research identity.
In conclusion, this evaluation has shown that a research culture is developing at UWS, by means
of participation in structured writing retreats. This form of retreat is therefore a mechanism for
developing research cultures at UWS. As a participant in a British Academy-funded study
(Murray and Newton 2009: 551) of structured writing retreat put it:
‘If I had 3 or 4 retreats a year I would never ask for study leave’.

of 16
References
MacLeod I, Steckley L & Murray R (2012) Time is not enough: Promoting strategic engagement
with writing for publication, Studies in Higher Education, 37(6): 641-654. DOI:
10.1080/03075079.2010.527934.
Murray R (2012) Developing a community of research practice, British Educational Research
Journal, 38(5): 783-800. DOI: 10.1080/01411926.2011.583635.
Murray, R (2013) Doctoral students create new spaces to write in C Aitchison and Guerin, C (Eds)
Writing groups for doctoral education and beyond: Innovations in theory and practice. London:
Routledge.
Murray R & Newton M (2009) Writing retreat as structured intervention: Margin or
mainstream?, Higher Education Research and Development, 28(5): 527-39.
Murray R, Steckley L & MacLeod I (2012) Research leadership in writing for publication: A
theoretical framework, British Educational Research Journal, 38(5): 765-781. DOI:
10.1080/01411926.2011.580049.

of 16
List of participants
UWS
Total number of participants from UWS: 37
Department N Participants (number of repeat attendances)
Business 1 Thandiwe Mtetwa
Creative and Cultural
Industries
2 Kenneth Forbes, Jennifer Jones
Education 17 Gordon Asher, Stuart Caulfield, Annette Coburn (2), Beth
Cross, Jeannie Daniels, Susan Henderson (3), Lisa
McAuliffe, Dermuid McAuliffe, Alison McEntee (2), Sandra
McKechan, Rowena Murray (9), Johanne Miller (3), Kate
Miller, Catherine Miller (2), Khadija Mohammed, Nighet
Riaz, Gillian Thomson
Nursing 11 Nan Bryden, Carol Dickie (2), Fiona Everett, Louise
Johnston, Fiona Lundie, Teresa Macintosh, Elizabeth
Maitland, Lisa McNay, Fiona Millar, Barbara O’Donnell,
Wendy Wright
Science 5 David Child, Angela Beggan, Laura Graham (2), Fiona Hay
(3), Hayley McEwan (3)
Social Science 1 Maria Feeney
Total 37

of 16
Externals
Total number of participants external to UWS: 30
Institution N Participants (number of repeat attendances)
Glasgow Caledonian
University
2 Kirstin James, Morag Thow (2)
Glasgow University 3 Caroline Findlay, Renato Margiotta, Anna Beck
Greenwich University 1 Joyce King (2)
Huddersfield University 1 Janet Ho
Lancaster University 2 Magnus George, Helena Kettleborough (3)
NHS 1 Caroline Findlay
Queen Margaret University 2 Louise Cotton (2), Roni Bamber
Plymouth University 1 Kassandra Clemens
Scottish Rural College 5 Andrew Brownlow, Carla Gomes, Madeleine Hendry,
Selene Huntley, Sue Tongue
Stirling University 1 Maureen Michael
Strathclyde University 10 Matthew Alexander, Sufri Ali, Morag Findlay (4), Kathy
Hamilton (3), Marie-Jeanne McNaughton, Karena Moore
(3), Helen Mullen, Andrea Tonner (3), Beverly Wagner (2),
Mary Welsh (6)
York St John University 1 Liviana Ferrari

Annual Report: Developing Research Capacity at UWS, Report on Structured Writers' Retreats (2013)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Annual Report: Developing Research Capacity at UWS, Report on Structured Writers' Retreats (2013)

Similar to Annual Report: Developing Research Capacity at UWS, Report on Structured Writers' Retreats (2013) (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Annual Report: Developing Research Capacity at UWS, Report on Structured Writers' Retreats (2013)