Senate

SEN00-M3

Minutes of the 334th (Ordinary) Meeting of Senate held on Wednesday 28 June 2000.

Apologies for absence were received from: Professor Alty, Professor Bowman, Ms Carrillo, Professor Cox, Dr Infield, Professor Kavanagh, Professor Smith and Dr Wild.

00/43 Business of the Agenda

Item 21.3 had been unstarred.

00/44 Minutes

(SEN00-M1)

The Minutes of the 332nd Meeting held on 8 March 2000 were confirmed and signed.

00/45 Matters Arising from the Minutes

.1 Minute 00/6 - Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)

The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) reported that discussions involving the Research Team on improving research grant applications and overhead recovery were being held with each Faculty. Heads of Departments were asked to ensure that supportive practices operated in departments to provide experienced advice with applications. There was a need to encapsulate best practice and the characteristics of success. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) reported that bids for the EPSRC Research Equipment Fund had been prepared by the Science and Engineering Faculties. An announcement from EPSRC was expected shortly.

.2 Minute 00/9 - Special Honour for Service to the University

It was reported that Council had approved Senate's recommendation to establish The Loughborough University Medal. The Awarding Panel had met and, exceptionally on this first occasion, four awards were approved by the Chair of Council, on behalf of Council.

00/46 Matters for Report by the Vice-Chancellor

The Vice-Chancellor reported that:-

.1 No agreement had been reached between UCEA and the unions on a salary increase for the current year. UCEA had recommended a 3% increase with effect from 1 April 2000 and the University would be implementing this recommendation.

.2 A positive draft report had been received from a recent HEFCE Audit visit to review the University's finance and governance structures. Many elements of good practice had been identified, including the reporting of Deans directly to the Vice-Chancellor, the content of the Strategic Plan, and the approach with which the Strategic Plan was developed, with Council involvement at an early stage followed by iteration within the institution. The HEFCE Regional Consultant was reported to have seen no other Strategic Plan as well developed as Loughborough's. HEFCE financial indicators for the sector showed the University to be strong in terms of income/expenditure and cash relative to other institutions. The University's borrowing was in line with that of its competitors (which was higher than the sector average), but this was matched in the University's case by its strong reserves. The Funding Council considered the University's financial position to be sound.

.3 The forecast outturn (surplus before transfers) for the 1999/2000 budget was likely to be about £600K, £1M short of the projected budget of a year ago. The whole sector was finding it difficult to balance income and expenditure and an anticipated report in the Sunday Times would show that over half the sector would show a deficit for this year. The Vice-Chancellor considered rumours of a threatened 3% cut in HE funding by the Treasury to be an indicator that there would at least be no remission on the 1% per annum cut per student.

.4 Council was now well engaged in determining the strategic direction of the University. However, Senate was not utilised to the same degree in developing an academic vision for the University. The Vice-Chancellor suggested that Senate should have the opportunity to take a more active role in this, outside its normal meetings. Members were supportive of the suggestion and whilst it was acknowledged that Directorates served a valuable role, it was felt that Senate as a university-wide body should provide a university-wide perspective that was particularly important in regard to interdisciplinary matters. It was reported that Research Committee intended to bring forward proposals for Research Schools and Senate would be the appropriate body to consider these.

.5 Loughborough Students' Rag had raised a record £235K for charity for which they were to be congratulated. Such an achievement impacted significantly on the perception of the University locally and in national charities.

00/47 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching)

The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) reported that:-

.1 International student recruitment for 2000 was showing a 25% increase over 1999, which at worst would contain the decrease in recruitment following the sharp decline in 1997. There were now a series of mechanisms in place to support departments in their international recruitment. Home recruitment was on course to meet quotas. What needed to be addressed next was the absence of significant postgraduate presence in certain areas.

.2 Bids for Teaching Quality Enhancement Funds had been submitted to the Funding Council in the Autumn with the University's Learning and Teaching Strategy. The University was one of a minority where the strategy and bids had been approved without change. Five projects were being taken forward at a total of about £0.5M over 3 years. In the last 4 years income for teaching related projects additional to formula funding had reached £6M, which represented a good return on the £1M investment from the Development Fund in 1996 and was strongly attributable to departmental success in TQA/ESR.

.3 Project Capital Funding of about £350K had been allocated to the University by the Funding Council. This was being used in part to improve the quality of pool teaching rooms and refurbishing and re-equipping had already begun. Particular gratitude was expressed to the Director of AVS for her detailed consultation with departments on their pool-room requirements.

.4 The University was heavily involved in Widening Participation projects including the provision of HE taster courses for ethnic minorities. Discussions were underway with FE Colleges concerning the provision of Foundation Degrees. The University's intake statistics showed a decreasing percentage of intake from independent schools, from 20% to around 15%.

00/48 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)

The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) reported that:-

.1 Research grants and contracts awarded to May 2000 totalled £22.1M. This compared with a total of £21.8M for the last complete year. All involved were to be congratulated on this achievement.

.2 No JIF bids had been successful in the first three rounds which was most disappointing. It was believed that Engineering had been disadvantaged in the scheme. Three bids remained involving CREST, Human Sciences and Chemistry.

.3 A Gatsby Innovation Scholarship had recently been awarded to Professor Austin and J Steel in Civil and Building Engineering. It was hoped that further such awards would be reported later in the year.

.4 Meetings with departments on the RAE dummy run had been completed and feedback from departments was now awaited. A policy was needed on advising staff who were not to be returned in the RAE.

ACTION: Registrar, PVC(R)

.5 The University had been approached in February concerning the development of an enhanced 4-year PhD programme and had signed up to a consortium of 10 universities. This had arisen from the recent drift in overseas PhD recruitment to North America on the grounds that the UK PhD was too narrow. The North American model was therefore being explored and it was intended that a suitable enhanced programme would be in place for Autumn 2001. It was commented that this would be a radical departure for the University. Senate was informed that this would be just one avenue to a PhD, along with the 3-year PhD and the EngD. Research Council funding approaches were becoming increasingly varied and it was likely that the whole research student portfolio would become less restrained. ESRC was withdrawing support for PG programmes and transferring funds to support a 1-year (training) and 3-year (research) PhD. The Vice-Chancellor wished to see all Faculties incorporate accredited training and coursework within PhD programmes, which was likely to become an external requirement in due course.

00/49 General Regulations for Undergraduate Awards/Assessment Regulations for Undergraduate Awards

SEN00-P27

.1 Senate considered proposals from Teaching and Learning Committee for amendments to GRUA/ARUA arising from discussions on:

(i) Professional Accreditation in Engineering

(ii) Review of Reassessment

Senate was informed that the special arrangements in the proposed Appendix 3 of GRUA were intended for BEng/MEng programmes where the accrediting body would not accept certain rights of resit. These changes were required in particular to retain IMechE accreditation. Senate acknowledged that whilst dialogue should continue with professional institutions as to whether such an approach was appropriate, the University would not wish to disadvantage its students and should proceed with the changes.

.2 Senate was informed that a Working Party to consider reassessment matters had been established by the PDQ Team which had produced 8 recommendations. Following consultation with Faculty Boards and discussion by Teaching and Learning Committee, a number of the recommendations had been withdrawn, including a proposal to replace capping with a rule that a student's original Module Marks should stand for the purpose of determining the degree classification, and other recommendations that interlocked with that proposal. It was acknowledged that there were logical educational arguments in both directions for the withdrawn proposals, but that the ramifications of any one change that formed part of a package needed careful consideration. It was intended that the PDQ Team would revisit the matter of reassessment and further recommendations might be submitted in due course.

.3 It was RESOLVED to approve the revised versions of GRUA and ARUA as presented, which encompassed changes in relation to the following:-

Credit requirements for progression and awards, including removal of Pass Degree with lower credit requirement than Honours. (Effective for Part A in 2000/01)

• Engineering Accreditation (Effective for Parts A and B in 2000/01)
• Programme Regulations for UG Masters degrees to be allowed to stipulate an overall average mark for the part as a progression requirement (Effective for Part A in 2000/01)
• Capping to remain at 40%, with exceptions where Programme Regulations required a higher module mark or specified an average mark for the Part (Effective for Part A in 2000/01)

The current versions of GRUA and ARUA would remain in force alongside the new versions until all students in the 1999/2000 entry cohort had completed.

.4 It was suggested that guidelines be produced to help with the implementation of the revised Regulations and that an incoming Head of Department be asked to test these.

ACTION: PVC(T)

00/50 Student Appeals against Decisions of Programme Boards

SEN00-P28

.1 Senate considered proposals from Teaching and Learning Committee for the introduction of procedures for student appeals against Programme Board decisions. Senate was reminded that there was currently no right of appeal except where studies had been terminated. The proposals, with which the LSU Executive had been heavily involved over several months, incorporated the right to appeal in certain defined circumstances. A member drew attention to para 1 (ii) of the proposed Regulations concerning the circumstance of procedural irregularities in the conduct of the assessment or of the Programme Board, which was identified as being potentially very wide ranging. It was RESOLVED to approve the proposed new Regulation XIV.

.2 Evidence was reported that this year's new procedures for claiming impaired performance had resulted in at least a containment of burgeoning claims with some reductions in the number of claims reported. It was suggested that allowances for impaired performance claims varied widely. Senate was advised that a tariff had been considered in recent years but had been rejected as too impersonal. This view was supported by Senate. It was suggested that students should be required to discuss claims with their Personal Tutor who could then make a recommendation to the Programme Board on the basis of how the student's work might have been affected by their particular circumstances. It was noted in relation to problems faced by the Medical Centre during the examination period that the incoming Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) would be exploring the possibility of self-certification by students, which was likely to involve Personal Tutors.

00/51 Validation of Cert HE/Dip HE Programmes

.1 Senate considered recommendations in regard to:-

(i) Peterborough Regional College

SEN00-P29

(ii) Stamford College

SEN00-P30

Senate was assured that the University's validation procedures had been carefully followed and any outstanding issues arising from the validation visits had been satisfactorily resolved. It was RESOLVED to approve the validation of the following programmes, initially for the 2000/01 cohort only, with ongoing responsibility for the programme to be assigned to the Faculty Board indicated:-

Peterborough Regional College

Dip HE in Combined Studies (Social Sciences and Humanities) (SSH)

Stamford College

Dip HE in Graphic Design (SSH)

Dip HE in Sports Science with Rehabilitation (SSH)

Dip HE in Business Information Technology (SCI)

It was noted that the Working Parties would remain in place to consider whether to recommend the extension of validation for 2001/2002 and beyond.

.2 The Vice-Chancellor advised Senate that the validation of sub-degree programmes was likely to become a more significant activity for the University, particularly in relation to Foundation Degrees. Senate was assured that the University's validation approval procedures would be adhered to in each case. It was noted that these procedures were particularly labour intensive.

00/52 Strategy for the Elimination of Structural Deficits

SEN00-P31

.1 Senate received a report on the discussions by Resources and Planning Committee and Council on the strategy for the elimination of structural deficits. Senate was informed that further activities had been instigated following the meeting of Operations Sub-Committee on 12 June 2000, including external consultations and reviews and also discussions with Heads of Departments.

.2 Senate was advised by several members of the perception of some staff that the University was in financial crisis, and that recent announcements had instilled panic. Information made available to staff had outlined the procedures for handling structural deficits but had not apprised them of how this position had been reached nor of the University's general financial position in relation to the HE sector. Staff morale was being affected and there were dangers of staff being lost in the run-up to the RAE to institutions which they felt, possibly mistakenly, might provide a more financially stable environment.

.3 The Deputy Vice-Chancellor informed Senate that many institutions were in a worse financial position than Loughborough and some 'new' universities had experienced redundancies. The present exercise at Loughborough was intended to identify areas with long-term financial problems and to explore how to deal with them. Loughborough's financial position was sound, as the Vice-Chancellor's report had acknowledged (Minute 00/46.2), and the scale of the challenge was minute when compared to the industrial context, with a modest return of surplus to reserves of about 1% expected. The exercise was intended to address internal imbalances whereby financially successful activities were effectively subsidising those activities unable to be maintained via income streaming alone, and to allow for a change in shape of the University in response to market forces to ensure a vibrant future. There had been a shift of £6M over the last 4 years from Support Services to academic departments and no deterioration in Staff : Student ratios. No further savings from support services were possible at this point and further savings and increased income were therefore now required from Departments.

.4 Senate was assured that cross-subsidy in order to retain academic areas desirable to the University would not necessarily be ruled out, but stringent criteria would need to be met. The greatest impact on the University's financial position resulted from a reduction in the unit of resource for home students, salary increases and a reduction in overseas student recruitment in past years, with other income not growing fast enough to compensate. Overseas student recruitment was a key factor and it was emphasised that each Department should have an identified member of staff responsible for this activity.

.5 Senate was informed of Loughborough AUT's view that early retirements should be offered impartially to all staff over 50, rather than being targeted at individuals.

.6 The need for staff to be more informed of the position was acknowledged. It was suggested that a general meeting such as General Assembly was probably not the best forum at this stage, as there were issues relating to individuals and individual departments which it would not be appropriate to raise whilst procedures were underway. Heads of Departments were considered the appropriate communication route at this point in time and it was suggested that they address all staff in their department at a meeting specially convened for the purpose.

ACTION: HODs

.7 It was AGREED that the Vice-Chancellor provide a briefing paper to Heads of Departments and Sections. It should contain: the background and purpose to the discussions currently underway on structural deficits and a summary of the University's financial position relative to other institutions. Heads of Departments should make the paper widely available in departments and use it in meetings with staff. The briefing paper would also be made available electronically.

ACTION: VC

.8 It was hoped that after the Council meeting on 19 July it would be known which posts could be filled and the extent of funding to be provided for restructuring and retirement. It was AGREED that a further communication to staff be undertaken at that point, and suggested that at each stage of the process it should be made clear which academic areas had been removed from the list of those in structural deficit.

ACTION: VC

00/53 Programme Proposals

SEN00-P32

On the recommendation of Teaching and Learning Committee, on the advice of Curriculum Sub-Committee, it was RESOLVED to recommend to Council as appropriate:

00/54 Teaching and Learning Committee

On the recommendation of the Teaching and Learning Committee:

.1 Credit Requirements for Progression and Awards

On the recommendation of Ordinances and Regulations Committee:

00/56 Centre for Environmental Studies

SEN00-P38

On the recommendation of the Science Faculty Board, it was RESOLVED to recommend to Council the establishment of a Centre for Environmental Studies within the Department of Chemistry with immediate effect.

00/57 Prizes Committee

SEN00-P39

On the recommendation of Prizes Committee, it was RESOLVED to recommend to Council the establishment of prizes.

00/58 Co-opted Membership

It was RESOLVED to authorise the Vice-Chancellor to act on behalf of Senate in co-opting a member of Senate to fulfil the requirements of Statute XIV para 1 (iv).

00/59 Amendments to Charter and Statutes: Replacement of Schools of Studies by Faculties

SEN00-P40

Senate noted proposed amendments to the Charter and Statutes, consequent upon amendments already made to Ordinances and Regulations, for submission to Council.

00/60 Statutes XIII and XIV

SEN00-P41

Senate noted that Council had confirmed a Special Resolution for amendments to Statute XIII: The Council and Statute XIV: The Senate concerned with ex-officio membership by Pro-Vice-Chancellors.

00/61 Ethical Advisory Committee Annual Report

SEN00-P42

The Annual Report of the Ethical Advisory Committee was noted.

00/62 Careers Service Advisory Board Annual Report

Senate noted the publication of the Careers Service Advisory Board Annual Report for 1998/99. (The report had been circulated to Heads of Departments and further copies were available for consultation in the Careers Service.)

00/63 Reports from Committees

Senate received reports from the following Committees:

.1 SEN00-P43 Research Committee of 31 March 2000
.2 SEN00-P44 Ordinances and Regulations Committee of 2 June 2000
.3 SEN00-P45 Teaching and Learning Committee of 8 June 2000

.4 SEN00-P46 Resources and Planning Committee of 27 March, 8 May and 9 June 2000
.5 SEN00-P47 Student Services Committee of 8 March 2000

00/64 Valedictory

The Vice-Chancellor thanked the retiring student members, Mr S Gray and Ms R Church, for their valued contribution to Senate.

00/65 Provisional Dates of Meetings in 2000/01

Provisional dates for meetings of the Committee in 2000/01 were noted as follows:-

Wednesday 25 October 2000 (if required)
Wednesday 29 November 2000
Wednesday 31 January 2001 (if required)
Wednesday 7 March 2001
Wednesday 27 June 2001