(University logo)





SENATE

SEN98-M1

[Minutes]

Minutes of the 318th (Ordinary) Meeting of Senate held on Wednesday 4 March 1998

                           Professor D J Wallace        
                                                                                 
          Dr M Acar                         Dr C McKnight                        
          Dr C Backhouse                    Professor I C Morison                
          Dr V J Black                      Mrs M D Morley                       
          Dr P L Byrne                      Dr A Morris                          
          Mr J S Chadwick (ab)              Dr P N Murgatroyd                    
          Mr C J Chamberlain (ab)           Mr A Newton                          
          Professor S Cox                   Professor K C Parsons                
          Dr R K Dart                       Dr A D Price                         
          Professor J V Dawkins             Dr A C Pugh (ab)                     
          Mr A Dumbuya (ab)                 Professor I Reid                     
          Dr D W Edwards (ab)               Professor P H Roberts                
          Professor J P Feather             Mr J F Rowland                       
          Dr M Gilbert                      Professor H Schröder                 
          Professor P Golding               Professor M Shaw                     
          Professor N A Halliwell           Mr I K Smout                         
          Professor V I Hanby (ab)          Professor M Streat                   
          Professor A G Hargreaves          Dr G M Swallowe                      
          Professor D J Hourston            Professor R J Wakeman                
          Mr T P Jones                      Mr D R F Walker                      
          Professor M J Kearney             Professor T G Weyman-Jones (ab)      
          Mr P G Lewis                      Dr P Wild (ab)                       
          Mrs W Llewellyn                   Professor F Wilkinson                
          Dr G Mason                        Professor C Williams                 
          Professor R McCaffer              Ms J Wilmott                         
          Professor J J McGuirk             Dr I Wright                          
          Dr M P McIver (ab)                Professor K R A Ziebeck (ab)         
                                                                                 
                                                                                 
          In attendance:       Mr R A Bowyer                        
                               Dr D E Fletcher                      
                               Dr B P Vale                          
                                                                    

Apologies for absence were received from Mr Dumbuya, Dr Edwards, Dr McIver, and Dr Wild.


98/1 Business of the Agenda

No items were unstarred.

98/2 Minutes

The Minutes of the 316th Meeting held on 26 November 1997 (SEN 97:M5) were confirmed and signed.

Members were consulted about the adequacy of making papers available on the Web. There was general satisfaction as to their availability.

98/3 Matters Arising from the Minutes

.1
Further to Senate's 316th Meeting:

i)
(Minute 97/84 i) refers) it was noted that data on the award of First Class degrees would be initially considered by Teaching and Learning Committee for report to Senate.

ii)
(Minute 97/84 ii) refers) it was noted that data on the provenance of applications had recently been made available by UCAS and was currently being analysed. An initial report would be made to the Student Recruitment Committee.

iii)
(Minute 97/90 refers) it was RESOLVED to approve a recommendation from Research Committee concerning the role of the research supervisor in the examination of a research degree. (SEN98:P1)

iv)
(Minute 97/85.2 refers) it was noted that the Vice-Chancellor had contacted the CVCP.

v)
(Minute 97/95 refers) it was RESOLVED to recommend to Council proposals concerning the School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering. (SEN98-P2)

98/4 Matters for Report by the Vice-Chancellor

The Vice-Chancellor reported that:
.1
Whilst the University could not condone the NUS action leading to non attendance of classes on 4 March 1998, departments were requested not to discriminate against those students supporting the action.

The Students' Union President referred to the letter of explanation sent to all departments regarding the action.

.2
The HEFCE grant letter was expected imminently. The funding situation was extremely unclear. At present the University appeared to be funded at the level of 8% above the norm and it was possible that this might lead to an adjustment to the MASN. If this were the case the University was already poised to meet its intake targets and there was no need to take any immediate action.

.3
The University had recently announced the establishment of an Institute of Youth Sport and an associated Chair. This was on the basis of a generous donation from Mr John Beckwith and would provide opportunities for young people to participate in sport. The formal proposal to establish the Institute would come to Senate in due course.

Substantial funding had also been received from Perkins for a Readership in the School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering.

98/5 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) and the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)

.1
The QAA audit of University systems would take place in mid-May. Heads of Departments had already been alerted to the visit and received copies of the submission. It was possible that the audit team would wish to interview individuals and, if so, briefing sessions would be arranged. The preparation of the documentation was a huge task and was largely undertaken by Dr J Elliott, whose role was acknowledged by Senate.

.2
The University was developing a series of initiatives for financial support for home and international students. These included providing support for tuition fee payments to new and existing students from Indonesia, South Korea, Thailand, Philippines and Malaysia, areas affected by the currency crisis, making use of the Access Funds to assist home students with increased liabilities in terms of fees and loans, and developing a prestigious overseas scholarship scheme for students from the Far East. It was noted that mature student applications were declining and this needed to be addressed. Support for mature students was felt to be a priority, but assessing hardship prior to arrival was very difficult.

The University was adopting an approach similar to that of many universities in introducing tuition fee bursaries. Some further consideration could be given to the current level of tuition fees charged to international students compared with UK/EU fees. It was noted that applications to the Department of PE, Sports Science and Recreation Management from Singapore had declined by 50% and that this market must not be overlooked even if the currency situation appeared to be more stable.

The schemes proposed would not impinge on any departmental bursary initiatives. The Communications and Publicity Office were preparing information on bursary schemes for distribution.

.3
The Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research thanked colleagues for their contribution to the recent RAE consultation document. It was noted that HEFCE appeared to be considering a five year rather than four year assessment period for future exercises. The Vice-Chancellor reported that the RAE could be seen to have a negative, dysfunctional and limiting impact on research behaviour. Although it had assisted research management in the past, he felt that change was now needed.

.4
Heads of Departments were asked to support and enable all relevant staff to attend the meeting for advisors of probationary staff to be held on 11 March 1998.

98/6 Estate Strategy

(SEN98-P3)

Senate noted proposals in relation to the University's Estate Strategy with reference to the West and Central sites and in particular noted a recommendation from the Executive Management Group and the Estates Management Committee that the engineering project be permitted to proceed to tender stage within an overall cost limit to be agreed by Council.

.1
Senate was advised that there were three phases to the University's Estate Strategy which had received initial approval in 1995 and further approval from Council at its most recent meeting, subject to the receipt of satisfactory tenders. The first phase, already accomplished, was the new Business Studies and Economics building. The second phase was the development on the west site of a new Engineering Building. The third phase was the refurbishment of released space on the central site. The release of space on the central site would benefit departments already in space deficit eg Social Sciences and European Studies. It could also lead to the development of an Informatics Centre involving the departments of Computer Studies, Department of Information and Library Studies, Human Sciences and HUSAT, which proposal was supported in principle by the Science Faculty and the departments concerned. It was also proposed to create a Teaching and Resource Centre within the Pilkington Library.

.2
The Engineering Faculty's profile in terms of its RAE performance, TQA outcomes, level of research income generated, the range of programmes available, the employability of its graduates and the expansion of its undergraduate population was well known. A new purpose built Engineering building would permit a rationalisation of existing laboratory facilities. It was aimed to integrate both teaching and research, to remove the duplication of facilities and enhance the use of resources at Faculty level eg the employment of technical staff. It was felt that in order to attract top quality staff and maintain student recruitment in future the engineering facilities needed to be improved. Poor facilities would lose staff, students and sponsors.

The release of space on the central site vacated by Manufacturing Engineering and Aeronautical and Automotive Engineering and Transport Studies would benefit the Science Faculty whose income from research was in decline and whose needs also needed to be addressed.

.3
Council had imposed a cost limit of £14.5M on the project. Up to £11.8M would be provided by the University from reserves and additional borrowing. Bids had been made to the Wolfson and Weston Foundations and to HEFCE for funding the balance; VAT recoveries would provide £1.45M. The Engineering Faculty would contribute £250K pa for 10 years towards costs. It was anticipated that the rationalisation of space would lead to efficiency savings, together with savings on the elimination of central supplements to departments and the residential hall deficit.

.4
The University would need to make provision for restoring its capital reserves to a level recommended by the Treasurer and approved by Council. The minimum level of reserves was already set at £10.5M and this project would still leave reserves of £17.6M. Nevertheless the University should recognise that the need to service borrowing and to transfer monies into reserves would impose spending constraints across all departments. It was estimated that the additional revenue generated by the Engineering Building in terms of student numbers and research income would amount to £1.21M pa. If however, this income and the bids for additional income failed to materialise the University would face a permanent cut of 2.5% on all budgets to pay for the project.

.5
It was noted that the level of reserves had yet to be determined but to restore their level to £20M would require a 1% saving on the University's annual turnover of £100M for three years.

.6
The Teaching and Learning Resource Centre was in the early stages of planning, but its premise was to provide a user-focused resource centre. It would create group study space, teach information skills and establish open access clusters of IT workstations. The Flexible Learning Unit would be housed in the Centre.

.7
Clarification was sought as to the commitment to and cost of refurbishing the central site to the benefit of those departments in space deficit. It was confirmed that the refurbishment of the central site was approved by Council as an integral part of the Estate Strategy. It was noted that the cost of £1.5M seemed low and that this figure was a preliminary estimate budgeted from two years ago.

.8
Concern was expressed about the lack of car parking space on the west site, the lack of provision for large lecture theatres in the new building and the time already spent by staff travelling between James France and the west site. It was felt that there was spare capacity in car parks on the West site. A lecture theatre use survey was currently being conducted and it was important that the needs in this area were fully recognised. There would be no major catering facilities in the new building.

.9
It was felt that it would be useful for the University to have a central reception area for visitors. It was recognised, however, that Security staff already provided a good service and that there was insufficient room for expansion in the new Security building.

.10
Concern was expressed that in the worst case scenario all departments would suffer a cut to their budgets, including those which would not benefit directly from the project.

This concern was acknowledged. It was the case that every investment carried a risk and it was a question of judgement about the right level of investment. To a degree the impact on departments would be cushioned by the recommendation of the Treasurer's Committee on what level of reserves should be held. It was emphasised, however, that the reserves could not be used for recurrent funding.

.11
It was noted that the project envisaged generating income from the successful recruitment of additional engineering students. The national picture of such recruitment was very poor with applications in decline. The Engineering Council was expected to review its accreditation arrangements. The scenario envisaged might therefore be too optimistic. The University, nevertheless, had worked hard at its recruitment and ought to feel confident about its position. Applications to Loughborough had increased by 5.2% against a national decline of 15%.

.12
The Students' Union noted that this was an expensive project and that there might be consequences for the departments' ability to delivery teaching quality should they face a 2.5% cut.

.13
There was some discussion on student recruitment and the current negotiations regarding the level of residential hall fees. Since negotiations were ongoing it was not felt appropriate to discuss these in detail.

.14
It was noted that the £1/4M Engineering Faculty annual contribution was fully budgeted for.

.15
In summary the project had potential benefits for all and should enable the University to increase its market share in a declining market, by offering high quality engineering education. The element of risk was recognised, but there was a risk to the University in not proceeding.

98/7 Academic Standards

(SEN98-P4)

.1
The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) explained that the paper before Senate began to map the University's understanding of standards onto national norms. In many areas the University's standards were externally assessed. It was important, however, for the University to evaluate its position as national standards, eg with respect to programme specifications, were being developed. It was intended to ensure that the University was well positioned as the national debate emerged. There were a number of recommendations contained in the document and it was RESOLVED to approve the proposals set out in the agenda paper.

.2
A member of Senate reported that the culture of standards assessment was changing very rapidly. It seemed likely that the TQA may be abolished by 2000. The introduction of a register of External Examiners was under discussion and a new scheme closer to that of OFSTED inspection might be introduced.

.3
It was felt nevertheless that the University could and should face the issue of standards with confidence.

.4
A member of Senate requested that the arrangements for anonymous marking be investigated and this request was supported by Loughborough Students' Union.

98/8 Programme Proposals

(SEN98-P5)

It was RESOLVED on the recommendation of the Teaching and Learning Committee and on the advice of the Curriculum Sub-Committee to recommend to Council:

i)
new programmes for introduction in the 1998/99 session.

ii)
the retitling of the programme in Electronic, Computer and Systems Engineering as Electronic and Computer Systems Engineering and a change in award from BSc to BEng with effect from the 1998 intake.

iii)
the retitling of the postgraduate programme in Geographies of Global Change as Global Transformations with effect from the September 1998 intake.

98/9 Teaching and Learning Committee

It was RESOLVED on the recommendation of the Teaching and Learning Committee and where appropriate on the advice of the Curriculum Sub-Committee:
i)
Undergraduate Modular Assessment: Credit Transfer (SEN98-P6)

To approve proposals for undergraduate modular assessment: credit transfer.

ii)
Code of Practice on Undergraduate Reassessment (SEN98-P7)

To approve a Code of Practice on Undergraduate Reassessment.

iii)
Postgraduate Programmes

To approve the following requirements for the award of Masters/LPD/LPC from 1998/99 under the new minimum tariff of 180/120/60 modular weights respectively, for inclusion in the GRMPA.
           Degree of Master        150 credits and Grade D in further      
                                   modules with a weight of 30.            
                                                                           
           LPD                     100 credits and Grade D in further      
                                   modules with a weight of 20.            
                                                                           
           LPC                     60 credits                              
                                                                           

iv) Terms of Reference of the Committee
To approve a revision to the Terms of Reference of the Committee to delete reference to the review of Regulations relating to research degrees, which is the responsibility of Research Committee.

98/10 Ordinances and Regulations Committee

It was RESOLVED on the recommendation of Ordinances and Regulations Committee:

i)
GRUA, Appendix 1: General Entrance Requirements (SEN98-P8)

To approve amendments to the GRUA, Appendix 1, Entrance Requirements with immediate effect.

ii)
GRMPA (SEN98-P9)

To approve amendments to the GRMPA with respect to the modular weightings and requirements for the awards of Master's/LPD/LPC from 1998/99.

iii)
Amendments to ARUA and ARPMA (SEN98-P10)

On the recommendation of Teaching and Learning Committee to approve amendments to the paragraphs on misconduct with immediate effect.

iv)
GRUA - Impaired Performance (SEN98-P11)

Further to Minute 97/92 i) of Senate's 316th Meeting to ratify the action of the Vice-Chancellor in approving a revised paragraph 9 of the GRUA.

v)
Code of Practice on Viva Voce Examinations (SEN98-P12)

Further to Minute 97/91 ii) of Senate's 316th meeting to ratify the action of the Vice-Chancellor in approving a revised Code of Practice on Viva Voce examinations.

98/11 Reports from Committees

Reports were received from the following Committees:
  1. (SEN98-P13) Research Committee of 5 December and 5 February 1998
  2. (SEN98-P14) Ordinances and Regulations Committee of 6 February 1998
  3. (SEN98-P15) Resources and Planning Committee of 11 February 1998
  4. (SEN98-P16) Teaching and Learning Committee of 12 February 1998.

98/12 Degree Congregation in Winter 1998

It was noted that the date of the winter degree congregation would be Tuesday 15 December 1998.

98/13 Date of Next Meeting

Wednesday 24 June 1998 am.


Dr D E Fletcher

March 1998

Copyright (c) Loughborough University. All rights reserved.