4

SENATE

SEN06-M5

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Senate on Friday 5 May 2006.

Shirley Pearce

Memis Acar Clive Edwards Mario Minichiello

Serpil Acar (ab) John Feather Mary Morley

David Allen (ab) Maurice Fitzgerald (ab) Ken Parsons

Chris Backhouse David Gillingwater (ab) Ian Reid

Morag Bell Peter Golding Phil Roberts

David Berry (ab) Keith Gregory Steve Rothberg (ab)

Matt Best Neil Halliwell Fytton Rowland

Stuart Biddle (ab) Roger Haslam Gab Stone

Jon Binner Tony Hodgson Tony Thorpe

Russell Bowman (ab) Sarah Holloway (ab) Rob Thring

Ed Brown Terry Kavanagh Yiannis Vardaxoglou

Paul Chung Steven Kenny Richard Wakeman (ab)

Sandra Dann Feo Kusmartsev Peter Warwick

Ian Davidson Mark Lansdale (ab) Tony Westaway

Lesley Davis (ab) Jeremy Leaman (ab) Tom Weyman-Jones (ab)

Becky Dicks Chris Linton Nigel Wood (ab)

Helen Drake Geoff Mason (ab) Bryan Woodward (ab)

Marsha Meskimmon (ab) Martha Wőrshing (ab)

In attendance: Chris Dunbobbin

Jennifer Nutkins

Michael Pearson

John Town

Apologies for absence were received from: Serpil Acar, David Allen, David Berry, Stuart Biddle, Russell Bowman, Lesley Davis, Maurice FitzGerald, David Gillingwater, Sarah Holloway, Geoff Mason, Marsha Meskimmon, Steve Rothberg, Richard Wakeman, Tom Weyman-Jones.

06/48 Statement from the Vice Chancellor

The Vice-Chancellor reported on the following:

48.1 Strategic Plan.

The joint Senate/Council Away Day, scheduled for 19 June 2006, would provide an opportunity for participants to discuss key strategic issues relating to the University’s core activities within small working groups, and give feedback to the University's Strategic Planning Team. An agenda including the composition of the working groups would be circulated in advance. The Vice-Chancellor noted also that Council, at its meeting on 31 March 2006, had approved in principle the creation of a new PVC(Enterprise) post, and a new senior post in marketing and public relations.

48.2 Industrial Action.

The Vice-Chancellor reassured Senate that the University was engaged in regular discussions with the local AUT Committee and expressed hope that there would be developments towards a resolution at the talks scheduled for Monday 8 May 2006. The Vice-Chancellor emphasised that the University was doing all it could, in collaboration with the Students’ Union, to keep students informed and to ensure they were not disadvantaged, and thanks were offered to LSU for its help in this area. It was noted that the impact of the dispute varied from department to department, but in general it was not possible to assess the precise extent of the action until towards the end of the week commencing 15 May 2006. Full information would be circulated to departments from Academic Registry after the deadline for the submission of examination papers.

48.3 Additional Funded Places.

The Vice-Chancellor noted that HEFCE had awarded Loughborough an additional 100 student places (ASNs) for 2006, in recognition of the University’s role in helping to prepare elite athletes ahead of the 2012 Olympics. The PVC(Teaching) would work with Heads of Department to determine how these would be distributed throughout the institution.

06/49 British University in Egypt

SEN06-P32

49.1 Senate received a paper containing an update on the University’s proposed partnership with the British University in Egypt (BUE). The annex included a set of criteria which, in the view of the BUE Project Group, had to be met before a formal agreement could be reached. The cover sheet contained four further criteria, proposed following discussions at the Engineering and SSH Directorates. The Science Directorate had met the previous day and proposed two further criteria: (i) that any Memorandum of Understanding went only as far as to agree to enter negotiations regarding the terms of a validation agreement, and did not commit the University to progress to the next stage, and (ii) that if the partnership went ahead, the contract should only be formulated in the context of a full business plan.

49.2 In discussion, the importance of the criteria was emphasised, including the need to ensure that Loughborough would be the sole partner for any validation service (and not part of a consortium arrangement), and to guarantee that the costs to Loughborough in staff time and resources would be fully covered in any contractual arrangement. Reference was also made to the following:

(a) It was stressed that BUE had introduced a Preparatory Year to bring its students broadly up to A-level before they progressed onto its undergraduate degree programmes, and that Loughborough would not validate BUE degrees as joint and equivalent if they did not meet Loughborough’s standards on graduation.

(b) In the context of evaluating the potential reputational benefits and risks of the proposed initiative, one member expressed uncertainty as to whether BUE, as an entirely new University, was the kind of international institution with which Loughborough should be seeking to enter into partnership. The Vice-Chancellor noted that Loughborough did not currently have a comprehensive international strategy, but that when one was developed as part of the strategic planning process, it was likely that it would involve the establishment of some developmental partnerships, as well as relationships with well-established institutions with high reputations. It was noted further that BUE had the potential to grow into a very high-profile institution.

(c) In response to one member’s concerns about the size of the higher education market in Egypt, it was noted that BUE was confident in its ability to recruit sufficient students, and that the British Ambassador to Egypt had indicated that there was a rapidly growing market. A validation agreement such as that proposed meant that the institution to be validated, in this case BUE, would bear the risk of any failure to recruit.

(d) One member noted that although the proposal referred to potential new research opportunities for Loughborough in the future, it appeared to be primarily a teaching development and was therefore out of step with the University’s existing strategic aims. The Vice-Chancellor emphasised that research gains need not be delayed if the University was entrepreneurial in its approach, and that there was potential for business links, postgraduate programmes and short courses.

(e) It was agreed that the resources arising from the proposed initiative should be allocated to departments/sections according to their contribution.

49.3 Senate agreed that the University should proceed with formal negotiations with BUE on the basis of the criteria set out by the BUE Project Group, and the Faculty Directorates.

06/50 Date of Next Meeting

Wednesday 28 June 2006 (am)

Author: C Dunbobbin

Date: May 2006