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
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(
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
SEN06-P32
49.1
Senate
received a paper containing an update on the University’s proposed
partnership with the
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
(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
Copyright ©
Loughborough University. All rights reserved.