Knowledge exchange Clause Samples

Knowledge exchange. (2010). The Impact of Open Access Outside European Universities. Busi- ness, 13. Retrieved from ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇/Default.aspx?ID=412 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, B. (2014). Thinking the unthinkable – doing away with the library catalogue. Insights: The UKSG Journal, 27(3), 244–248. ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇/10.1629/2048-7754.174 ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2009). Google book search: Citation analysis for social science and the humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1537–1549. ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇/10.1002/asi.21085 ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, M., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, S. (2011). Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(11), 2147–2164. ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇/10.1002/asi.21608 ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, P., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (1999). Trawling the Web for emerg- ing cyber-communities. Computer Networks, 31(11–16), 1481–1493. ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇/10.1016/ S1389-1286(99)00040-7 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇. ▇. ▇. (2010). Electronic Book Usage Patterns as Observed at an Academic Library: Searches and Viewings. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 5(1), 1–16. Retrieved from ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇/index.php/perj/article/ viewArticle/1071 ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇. (1989). An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law. Journal of Legal Studies, 18(2), 325. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, M. (2001). Climbing the Ladder of Research Utilization: Evidence from Social Science Research. Science Communication, 22(4), 396–422. https:// ▇▇▇.▇▇▇/▇▇.▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇, N. (2003). The Extent and Determinants of the Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 192–205. ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇/10.1111/1540-6210.00279 ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2004). The Creative Commons. Montana Law Review, 65(1), 1–13. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (1996). Emergence of a Triple Helix of University-Industry- Government Relations. Science and Public Policy, 23, 279–286. Retrieved from ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇. ▇▇▇.▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇ Library Partners – Google Books. (n.d.). Retrieved April 3, 2016, from ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/ googlebooks/library/partners.html ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇., & ▇▇▇▇, ▇. (2003). ▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇ recommendations: Item-to-item collabora- tive f ıltering. IEEE Internet Computing, 7(1), 76–80. ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇/10.1109/MIC.2003.1167344 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇...

Knowledge exchange. The identification and exchange of good practices from real-life experiences of cities, including an understanding of some of the major successes and challenges they have faced.

Knowledge exchange. The Authorities recognise that it is of mutual interest to exchange general information relating to their respective fields of competence, including in the context of trainings, conferences and workshops. Each Authority may invite staff members of the other Authorities on a case-by-case basis to join such knowledge exchange sessions. Each Authority covers its own expenses incurred in relation to such sessions.

Knowledge exchange. The Open University in Scotland receives baseline funding from the Scottish Funding Council for its knowledge exchange activity which includes conferences, lectures and workshops. However The OU also engages in significant non-income generating knowledge exchange in Scotland, such as the development and provision of informal learning, at a much higher level than the baseline knowledge exchange grant. Under the current metrics such activity cannot be acknowledged or rewarded. It remains our intention to work with the SFC to have the benefits of such knowledge exchange activity recognised. The laboratory brings interactive practical science to students anywhere and anytime the internet is available. The laboratory features investigations based on on-screen instruments, remote access experiments and virtual scenarios using real data. Working with the Opening Educational Practices in Scotland project, we have been piloting the use of OpenScience Lab in a small number of Scottish secondary schools.

Knowledge exchange. Within the consortium and with stakeholders from outside the consortium the lessons learnt will be shared. This includes establishing best practices and recommendations for other AHMSSBL institutions. It also includes the efforts of the network organizations to investigate whether they can include the EQUAL4EUROPE project results in their accreditation framework and standards.

Knowledge exchange. In line with our commitment to the collaborative sharing of best practice within the field of Widening Participation, we will continue to contribute to UK, European and International knowledge exchange and research conferences. In the UK we are active members of NEON and have been invited to join the Laser Awards’ Access Quality and Development Committee. The Sussex Learning Network is the coordinating body for NCOP in Sussex, the acronym is SLN-COP. SLN-NCOP institutions include all three HEIs and all FE Colleges in Sussex, East Surrey College, both County Councils and the Careers and Enterprise Company. The group have adopted a localised model that divides Sussex into east and west and is focussed on the universities collaborating and integrating activity with FE Colleges. The West Sussex Partnership is formed of Chichester College, Central Sussex College and the University of Chichester. The Operating Plan falls into three distinct projects: accessibility, outreach and information, advice and guidance. The intention is for Chichester College to oversee the day-to day operational plan, as many NCOP learners are existing Further Education students or new Further Education applicants. The steering group, comprising Director of SLN, NCOP Programme Managers, senior leads from the partnering institutions and the two newly appointed Student Outreach and Engagement Officers, meet monthly to monitor progress against targets. Teachers, FE staff and careers advisers are the key influencers when it comes to supporting young people into Further and Higher Education. The WP team offers support to teachers and careers advisers in our partner schools and colleges with a range of focused activities.  A series of INSET training sessions  Programme-specific training to individuals or groups of teachers  UCAS processes  Student Finance system in conjunction with Student Finance England  Annual conference for partner schools, teachers and staff involved in widening participation  Provision of relevant information, advice and guidance that can be used to explain the options available to students. In conjunction with our local National Careers Service, the university has introduced a network for careers advisers across the South Coast region. The group meets 4 times a year to discuss current issues and best practice. The group includes members from schools, FE colleges, West Sussex County Council, independent advisers working in our partner schools and Education Busines...

Knowledge exchange. Impact of a Competence Centre: (self-) evaluations 16 June 2021 Led by NL. Involved: All Members presented the results of recent (self) evaluations of the performance of their CC. What were the main lessons learned? What impact is easy to measure, and what impact more difficult to detect? Discussion focused on the methodology used to evaluate performance. Expert Opinion Paper on Impact of a Public Procurement Competence Centre: Internal and External Evaluations Peer2peer exchange workshop 13 October 2021 Led by NL. Involved: All • Exchange on challenges platforms and features for success. • Austria approach as one of the leading member states in Europe with regard to innovation procurement projects. • Discussion on Horizon Europe Lighthouse projects and how to use them for innovation procurement. The following indicative workplan has been developed for the first two years of the project (as well as the run-up to the official launch of the Network). Updating the workplan will be the responsibility of the Co-chairs and Secretariat at the beginning of each new MoU period. Period: Y1 – Y2 (July 2022 – June 2024) Activity Planned for: [date] Members involved Description Expected Outcome P2I Final Event Spring 2022 All Final event of P2I project organized in collaboration with PIANOo Signing of MoU and official launch of P2I Network Event: Procura+ Conference Autumn 2022 All Opportunity for in-person Knowledge Exchange event as part of the Procura+ conference (Lisbon, Portugal) Topic: TBC Knowledge exchange and potential P2I Expert Opinion Document

Knowledge exchange.  The Contractor will need to undertake knowledge exchange activities to 1) ensure that relevant outputs are communicated effectively to the appropriate target audiences and 2) ensure that key information is captured by engaging with stakeholders as required. This may include (but isn’t restricted to):  Policy makers in Defra, Welsh Assembly Government and other appropriate government departments  Government agencies/ policy delivery bodies (e.g. Environment Agency, Natural England etc)  Agricultural stakeholders (industry groups e.g. National Farmers Union (NFU), agri-businesses, farmers, farm advisors etc)  Appropriate non-governmental organisations (e.g. environmental groups).

Knowledge exchange. The Parties will exchange expertise on ex-ante and ex-post harmonization approaches, survey methodology as well as other resource intensive tasks. This collaboration aims to enhance methodological compatibility and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ mutual learning. ● Joint Collaborations: MEDem and ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ will initiate collaborative projects that leverage on the insights of both democracy research as well as public attitudes, beliefs and behaviors, more generally. This MoU does not commit either Party to any specific financial obligations. Collaborative activities under this MoU will be pursued on the basis of available resources and funding. Where necessary, the Parties may jointly seek external funding for research projects and activities, with roles and responsibilities outlined in subsequent agreements. This MoU is intended to express the good-faith intentions of the Parties and does not create legally binding obligations or liabilities. Each Party is responsible for its own actions and decisions made under this MoU.