SENATE

SEN04-M3

Minutes of the 366th (Ordinary) Meeting of Senate on Wednesday 3 March 2004.

Apologies for Absence were received from Dr Brown, Dr Gillingwater, Mr Minichiello, Professor Porter, Dr Rothberg, Professor Weyman-Jones, Professor Wood, Professor Woodhead, Professor Woodward

04/22 Business of the Agenda

Items 9 and 10 had been unstarred. It was brought to Senate’s attention that some members would have found it difficult to unstar items if they had wished to by the deadline, due to the lateness of circulation of the Senate papers.

04/23 Minutes

It was RESOLVED to confirm the Minutes of the 364^th meeting held on 28 January 2004 (SEN04-M1).

04/24 Matters Arising from the Minutes

.1 Minute 04/03.1 – Holywell Park

The Deputy Vice-Chancellor reported that Holywell Park was now in operation. The position would shortly be reached of vacating space on campus. Other internal and external candidates were now being reviewed for a possible move to Holywell Park.

.2 Minute 04/03.2 – Update on SSR Analysis

The Vice-Chancellor reported that data had been obtained from HESA and SSRs calculated following the data specification provided by HESA. It had not proved possible to reproduce the published SSRs and HESA were now suggesting that the Sunday Times had calculated SSRs from HESA raw data. The Vice-Chancellor would be contacting the Sunday Times to seek clarification.

.3 Minute 04/04.1 – Salaries and AUT Ballot on Industrial Action

The Vice-Chancellor noted that Senate members had received a copy of his letter to UCEA and the AUT by e-mail. A number of academic and academic-related staff had been on strike on 24 and 25 February 2004 and ongoing AUT action short of a strike was operating from 1 March 2004. Deans had been asked to contact Heads of Department to assess the likely scale of disruption. Asked whether he could exert pressure on UCEA to return to the negotiating table, the Vice-Chancellor reminded Senate that it had not wished to be seen as taking sides in the dispute and had already made clear to both sides that it wished negotiations to be re-opened. It appeared that both sides were willing to talk, but nothing appeared to be happening. The Vice-Chancellor would inform Senate of any further information obtained at a meeting of UUK later that week. In response to a question, the Vice-Chancellor informed Senate that no decision had yet been made on whether “saved salary” from the strike would be donated to the Student Hardship Fund, though several individuals who had worked on strike days had donated their pay in that way.

.4 Minute 04/08 – Degree of Doctor of the University

It was noted that Council had approved revisions to Ordinances III and IV.

.5 Minute 04/09 – Revision of Ordinance XVII: Conduct and Discipline of Students

It was noted that Council had approved revisions to Ordinance XVII.

04/25 Matters for Report by the Vice-Chancellor

SEN04-P9(a) (tabled)

HEFCE Grant Letter

Details of the University’s HEFCE grant for 2004/05 had been announced and a summary by the Bursar and Finance Officer was tabled, showing an overall increase of 2.75%. The increase of 7.9% for research was particularly pleasing and above the overall increase for research, resulting from a small uplift in funding for 4-rated RAE Units of Assessment, the achievement of two double 5* Units of Assessment, and an increase in research student numbers. The moderation funding received for 2003/04 had not been included in the allocation to faculties and was largely being used to meet early retirements. In the absence of moderation funding for 2004/05 departments would therefore feel the effect of a 5% funding increase. Senate was advised that the 33% increase for Human Resource Initiatives was now mainstreamed whereas previously it had been earmarked. It was AGREED that a summary of the latest circular on Human Resource Initiatives be circulated to HoDs for information.

ACTION: DVC

The Vice-Chancellor informed Senate that with no significant changes in the funding model the position was relatively stable. There were, however, significant changes in HEFCE funding methodology anticipated, including a change in the basis of QR funding. Senior funding staff of HEFCE would be visiting the University on 19 March to improve their understanding of internal resource allocation mechanisms, and the opportunity would be taken to seek information on future funding intentions. An article by the Vice-Chancellor on funding cuts would appear in that week’s edition of the Times Higher Education Supplement.

04/26 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)

SEN04-P10

.1 New Research Grants and Contracts

The PVC(R) reported that though the total of new research grants and contracts as at 31 January 2004 of £11.48M was behind last year’s total at this time of £12.47M, there were contracts under negotiation which should ensure that last year’s total would be met. Further growth, however, would be desirable.

SEN04-P11

.2 Research Grants and Contracts applications

The PVC(R) reported that the figures as at 31 January 2004 showed reasonable signs of growth. For clarity, additional graphs would accompany the table in future.

.3 Research Assessment Exercise (update)

The PVC(R) reported that RAE funding would be associated with a quality profile of 4, 3, 2 or 1 stars. Stars would be allocated to output rather than individuals, though in practice it was likely that assessors would look at the four outputs from an individual. More than four outputs would not be required from returned staff, which was in line with the University’s strategy so far. Output would be that published between January 2001 and July 2007. The PVC(R) emphasised the importance of esteem in regard to recognition by peers, and top quality output in the most esteemed publications. It was AGREED that quality of output should be included explicitly in the criteria for promotions to Senior Lectureships.

ACTION: Deans

It was suggested that the University should seek to nominate as many RAE panellists as possible. Notification of panel membership was expected in July 2004, but the issue would be raised at the meeting with HEFCE on 19 March.

.4 Full Economic Costing of Research

The PVC(R) informed Senate that HEFCE would be insisting that institutions were aware of the full economic costs of the activities they undertake, applying this to research in the first instance. It was likely that fewer but larger research grants would be available in the future. The Vice-Chancellor noted that this was a major development and that government departments had been warned that they would have to pay the full cost of University research projects in future.

04/27 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching)

SEN04-P12

.1 Student Recruitment

The PVC(T) reported that, based on January 2004 figures, both UK/EU and International UG applications were showing increases above the national growth figures. UG applications in total were showing a 5% increase compared to a national increase of 3.4%, which was ahead of some major universities and of particular achievement in view of the University having no Medical School or Law Faculty, which were disciplines showing rapid growth. There were variations in success across departments, but reduced applications mirrored national declines, though to a lesser extent in all cases. UK/EU and International PGT applications were also showing an increase, though it was still early in the applications cycle. The PVC(R) reported that with Research Studentships having been front-loaded, there were not many available

for this year’s round but the position would improve next year. Effort needed to be increased to secure more external funding for research students. In regard to the growth in UK/EU UG and PGT applications, departments were being asked for feedback on why they felt their applications had improved, so that best practice could be spread.

.2 HEIST Survey

The PVC(T) reminded Senate that HEIST has been asked to undertake market research on behalf of the University, prompted by a drop in UK/EU UG applications in the previous year. A survey had been conducted with Year 12 and 13 students in a selection of schools in England, interviews carried out with teachers and advisors, together with analysis of the website and departmental brochures. The report had now been received and summary conclusions had been circulated to HoDs and Admissions Tutors, the main points being:

- The University should seek to influence teachers by promotion in schools of its qualities in relation to teaching, its placement years and sponsored degree programmes.

- The negative effect on some students of the University not being in a city and some students not being convinced that the campus was lively. It was therefore important to give social life a higher profile in promotional material.

- A high proportion of students did not know where Loughborough was.

- Improvements suggested to the website, which were in hand.

- Praise of the departmental brochure for Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering.

It was commented that a suggestion made since the report was received that the University have an extra Open-Day on a Saturday might not be a worthwhile approach. Senate was advised that this was intended to be a pilot and would not be a duplication of existing Open Days but would allow potential students to view the facilities. This would be particularly relevant for parents who had been identified in the HEIST report as the most important influence in students’ choice of University. Viewing the campus was a critical factor in ensuring a high conversion rate. It was commented, however, that the campus could be extremely quiet on a Saturday and might give a wrong impression. In regard to promoting the location of the University, the Vice-Chancellor AGREED to explore the possibility of a brown directional sign on the M1.

ACTION: Vice-Chancellor

Senate was informed about the “Z” cards for Mathematics and Physics A-level students, circulated by the Engineering Faculty to teachers in selected schools, which had received positive feedback from teachers. The Faculty would now be co-ordinating for the University the production of “Z” cards for circulation to GCSE Mathematics teachers.

.3 Institutional Audit

The PVC(T) reported that six QAA auditors had undertaken their briefing visit in February and had defined the programme for the Audit Visit on 22-26 March and twelve themes which they wished to follow through. It would be sometime after the Audit Visit that feedback could be expected.

04/28 Structure of the Academic Year

SEN04-P13

.1 Senate received the consultation document from the Committee to Review the Structure of the Academic Year and the Faculty Board minutes thereon, noting that the consultation process was still ongoing. The consultation process would finish after the meeting of General Assembly on 17 March and a final report would be considered by Senate on 23 June 2004.

.2 Members were invited to comment to the Committee and the following points were amongst those aired:

(i) Support being received for the status quo was understandable in view of work pressures, but the University should be pursuing the best system for the future.

(ii) The Committee had considered numerous options for Academic Year models, concluding that there was no ideal model. Support for the status quo was the result of fear of change for no benefit.

(iii) Balancing quality teaching and research was the crux and could be achieved without changing the calendar. There was a case for making the status quo work better, addressing the problems identified in the report. The issue was not so much structure but how/how much assessment was undertaken. The University currently over-assessed and probably over-taught.

(iv) After lengthy consideration and consultation further proposals would be coming forward from the Programme Development and Quality Team for increased discretion for UG Programme Boards which should help to address the problem of students failing due to poor performance in a single module out of line with their overall mark profile. These gave considerable discretion to Boards as long as they acted in agreement with external examiners.

(v) The Semester 1 assessment period was a crucial issue. There should be flexibility to use this period creatively where no formal examinations were undertaken.

(vi) Council had been advised that the outcome of the Review of the Structure of the Academic Year would be a structure permitting greater research activity. Should the status quo be the outcome this would require careful communication and the benefits of more flexible use of the year for research would need to be emphasised.

(vii) There were conflicting opinions as to the ideal length of the Christmas and Easter breaks. Shorter periods were not helpful for ongoing research, but were less disruptive to students.

(viii) Year-long modules without Semester 1 examinations should be allowed to grow naturally rather than be imposed.

(ix) Students had expressed concern that too much cramming would be required in a model under 30 weeks, and that potentially there could be too much pressure from Semester 2 examinations under Model C. A balance between Models A and C would be preferred. It was important that student views were obtained and fed into the consultation.

(x) The University needed to be mindful of the international context in any decisions taken.

.3 Senate was advised that were major structural changes to the Academic Year to be agreed, these could not take effect until 2005/06 at the earliest. Should other non-structural changes be agreed, earlier action might be possible.

04/29 Accessibility at Loughborough University

SEN04-P14 (tabled)

.1 Further to Minute 04/20 of Senate’s 365^th (Special) meeting on 28 January 2004, a paper from the Registrar was considered. The Registrar informed Senate that the position was not as negative as had been suggested at the last meeting, though there was a clear need to bring together designers in Estates Services with users. A member commented that though the paper was suggesting a more satisfactory position, this was not the case. The accessibility of fire doors and lifts was a problem particularly for wheelchair users and it was felt this could be reasonably easily resolved. Decisions on such matters were being made by able-bodied staff which did not provide the best solutions. The Registrar advised Senate that the Estates Services and the Disabilities and Additional Needs Unit had been working hard for a number of years to meet the 2005 deadline of the Disability Discrimination Act and the University would meet its legal obligations under the Act. It was acknowledged, however, that there was need for action on issues beyond legal ones and these should be prioritised. It was AGREED that the Registrar and the member of Senate should produce a shared view of what those priorities should be.

ACTION: Registrar

.2 It was commented that there were other issues in addition to access that affected participation. There were no induction loops for hearing-aid users in the Council Chamber and some lecture rooms for example. Issues should not be determined by the able-bodied and a disability audit should be conducted of staff and students in terms of additional support that could be helpful to them, some of which might have minimal financial implications. The Registrar responded that the University’s legal obligation was to tailor facilities to meet the needs of individuals declaring a disability and their particular needs.

.3 Senate was advised that competition for resources was a major factor in these issues and that Estates Management Committee was the appropriate body for their discussion. That Committee would in future include an appropriate item on its agenda annually to which the Registrar would be invited. The Vice-Chancellor considered that it would be valuable in addition for Senate to receive a report annually for information on how priorities were being set and action being taken, and that there should be more detailed feedback sought from individuals to contribute to the process. DANS and the Disability Sub-Committee of Student Services Committee were suggested as possible fora for such feedback, though it was recognised that their current responsibilities related only to students. It was commented that the University should be striving for improvements for the disabled beyond its legal requirements. This included the need to educate able-bodied students and staff on the requirements of the disabled.

.4 The Head of the Department of Geography offered the cartographic skills of his department in redesigning a more user-friendly campus map. Senate was informed that a redesign of the University map was almost at completion. However, DANS was working on a specialised map for disabled users and the offer from Geography might prove valuable for this.

04/30 Programme Proposals

SEN04-P15

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

(i) New Programmes for introduction in the 2004/05 session:

MSc Automotive Retail Management

MSc Research Methods (European and International Studies)

Masters level programmes in Ergonomics and Human Factors, incorporating:

- MSc Ergonomics (Human Factors) (Existing programme)

- MSc Human Factors in Transport

- MSc Human Factors for Inclusive Design New programmes

- MSc Forensic Ergonomics

- MSc Ergonomics for Health Professionals

(ii) Award, Title or Major programme changes from the 2004/05 session:

BSc/MSc Ergonomics: Change of title to Ergonomics (Human Factors)

MSc Retail Automotive Management to MSc Strategic Automotive Dealership Management (Chair’s action)

BSc Retail Automotive Management to BSc Automotive Dealership Management (Chair’s action)

BA International Business: Change of award to BSc from the 2004/05 session

(By Chair’s action the change of award has been extended to existing students, with the option remaining of a BA award in individual cases)

BSc Mathematics: Major programme changes

(iii) Discontinuation of the following programmes:

MSc Construction Innovation and Management (full-time) (last intake October 2002)

Professional Diploma in Criminal Justice Studies (last intake 1999-2000)

04/31 Ordinances and Regulations Committee

Regulation XIV: Student Appeals against Programme Board or Module Board Decisions

SEN04-P16

On the recommendation of Ordinances and Regulations Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee, Senate considered revisions to Regulation XIV. In response to a query, Senate was advised that in principle the requirement for evidence in support for an appeal was critical for the fair operation of the procedure. The aim was to ensure that justice was achieved for all involved including staff against whom an allegation of bias might have been made. Each case would continue to be judged on its merits and, in exceptional circumstances, assistance provided to a student to obtain evidence in support of his/her case. In response to a further query, Senate was advised that a nominee of the Director of Registry Services or the Dean would be a named individual acting on their behalf in their absence. It was RESOLVED to approve the revisions.

04/32 Learning and Teaching Committee

On the recommendation of Learning and Teaching Committee it was RESOLVED:

Collaborative Provision

SEN04-P17

To approve recommendations relating to the responsibilities of academic departments in collaborative provision.

04/33 Prizes Committee

SEN04-P18

It was RESOLVED to recommend to Council the establishment of new prizes and an amendment to an existing prize.

04/34 LUSAD Further Education Academic Year

It was RESOLVED to approve the following dates for the 2004/05 Academic Year for Further Education programmes in LUSAD:

Monday 6 September 2004 – Friday 17 December 2004

Monday 10 January 2005 – Friday 18 March 2005

Monday 4 April 2005 – Friday 3 June 2005

04/35 National Teaching Fellowships Scheme 2004

It was noted that the Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education had issued an invitation to nominate up to three individuals for the above scheme, one for each of the three new routes – “Experienced Staff”, “Rising Stars” and “Learning Support Staff”. Key details had been circulated within the University and a selection panel established to be chaired by the PVC(T). For further information, see http://www.ntfs.ac.uk

04/36 Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning

It was noted that HEFCE had issued an invitation to bid for funds (HEFCE 2004/05). Institutions the size of Loughborough had the opportunity to bid for up to 2 single-institution CETLs and to act as lead for 1 additional, collaborative bid. The PVC(T) was co-ordinating bidding arrangements. See http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2004/

04/37 Reports from Committees

Senate received reports from the following committees:

*.1 SEN04-P19 Ordinances and Regulations Committee of 6 February 2004

*.2 SEN04-P20 Learning and Teaching Committee of 12 February 2004

*.3 SEN04-P21 Resources and Planning Committee of 30 January 2004

*.4 SEN04-P22 Prizes Committees of 3 February 2004

04/38 Any Other Business: Estates Strategy Review

SEN04-P22(a) (tabled)

Senate received a tabled paper from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor outlining the remit of the Estates Strategy Review Group established by Council. The Group would ultimately provide a master plan for consideration by Council. Senate would receive updating reports on a regular basis. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor was advised of architects within the Department of Civil and Building Engineering who could provide input to the project.

04/39 Date of Next Meeting

Wednesday 23 June 2004 at 9.15am

Author – Jennie Elliott

Date – March 2004

Professor D J Wallace

Dr B S Acar

Professor D J Allen
Professor C J Anumba
Professor C J Backhouse

Professor J V Beaverstock
Professor M Bell
Dr D G Berry

Dr M C Best (ab)

Professor S J H Biddle

Professor W R Bowman

Dr E D Brown (ab)

Dr S E Dann

Professor I R Davidson
Professor J P Feather

Dr D Gillingwater (ab)
Professor P Golding
Professor N A Halliwell

Mr J F Harper

Dr R A Haslam
Mr M Hutton

Dr A Jashapara

Professor R Kalawsky
Professor T Kavanagh

Dr R Kinna

Professor F Kusmartsev (ab)

Professor M W Lansdale (ab)

Dr C M Linton

Dr G Mason

Mr M A Minichiello (ab)
Mrs M D Morley
Dr P N Murgatroyd
Professor K C Parsons
Professor J M Porter (ab)
Professor I Reid

Dr P Render
Professor C D Rhodes
Professor P H Roberts

Dr S J Rothberg (ab)
Dr J F Rowland
Professor P R Smith
Professor A Thorpe

Professor R H Thring
Professor R J Wakeman
Miss R Warren (ab)

Professor P Warwick

Professor T G Weyman-Jones (ab)

Dr G D Wilcox

Professor N Wood (ab)

Professor M A Woodhead (ab)

Professor B Woodward (ab)

By Invitation:

Mr A R Hodgson

In attendance:

Dr J E M Elliott

Dr J C Nutkins

Mr J M Town