SENATE
SEN10-M7
Minutes of the Extraordinary
Meeting of Senate on Wednesday 15 September 2010.
Memis Acar Jo Aldridge (ab) Simon Austin Chris Backhouse Alan Bairner Morag Bell Richard Bibb (ab) Jon Binner James Carroll Jonathan Chambers Jim Chandler Mike Cropper Sandra Dann David Deacon Jack Demaine Phill Dickens Rob Dover John Downey |
Shirley Pearce John Feather Neil Halliwell (ab) Janet Harrison Elaine Hobby Tony Hodgson Ruth Jenkins David Kerr Ruth Kinna Feo Kusmartsev (ab) Angus Laing Chris Linton Julian Mackenzie (ab) Graham Matthews Marsha Meskimmon (ab) Myra Nimmo Rob Parkin Ken Parsons Iain Phillips |
Jonathan Potter Ian Reid Helen Rendell Stephen Rice Chris Rielly Carol Robinson Richard Stobart Elizabeth Stokoe (ab) Gerry Swallowe (ab) Alice Swinscoe Tony Thorpe Yiannis Vardaxoglou Peter Warwick (ab) Andrew Watson (ab) Mark Webber Jonathon Wright Huaizhong Zhao |
In attendance: Chris Dunbobbin, Jennifer
Nutkins, Will Spinks, Caroline Walker.
Apologies for absence were received from: Jo
Aldridge, Richard Bibb, Neil Halliwell, Tony Hodgson, Marsha Meskimmon, Myra
Nimmo, Elizabeth Stokoe, Gerry Swallowe, Peter Warwick, Andrew Watson.
10/94 Minutes
Senate NOTED the
Minutes of the Ordinary meeting held on 30 June 2010 (SEN10-M5) and RESOLVED to
approve minute 10/52 relating to the Shape and Structure of the University. Senate
NOTED that the remainder of the minutes and any other matters arising would be
considered at the Ordinary meeting on 16 November 2010.
10/95 Implementing the New Organisational Structure
SEN10-P93
95.1 At the June 2010 meeting of Senate, it had
been agreed that further consultations should take place to determine the final
allocation of departments to schools in the new structure. There had been
subsequent discussions with staff and current Heads of Department in SSH
Faculty, and agreement had been reached on the formation of schools as proposed
to Senate in June 2010. Discussions had also been held with staff and Heads of
Department in Science Faculty, but some concerns remained that the formation of
a School of Science might be regarded externally as diminishing the importance
of science subjects at Loughborough. The PMB had therefore recommended that:
·
10
Schools be formed based on the departmental groupings outlined in the paper to
Senate in June 2010.
·
Proposals
for the naming of individual Schools be submitted to Senate for approval.
Senate was invited to consider whether Senate
should have the flexibility to allow academic units to use the term Faculty,
primarily for external marketing purposes, in order to help preserve individual
subject and departmental identities within the new organisational structure.
The following points
were noted in discussion:
i)
While
the desire to retain subject identity was understood, some members were
concerned that a structure containing both schools and faculties had the potential
to be confusing for students and those external to the University. Similar
concerns were expressed about naming academic units differently for internal
and external purposes. It was noted, however, that within its existing
structure the University had a mixture of departments and schools, and that
many prestigious institutions also used mixed terminology to describe its
academic structures. It was noted further that the external marketing of the
University was of critical importance, and that it was necessary to balance the
desire for a homogenous internal structure, with the need for individual
subject areas and departments to be able to market themselves effectively
externally, according to the differing contexts in which they operated.
ii)
There
were a number of permutations in terms of the way in which the science
departments could be grouped together within the new school structure. However,
none had unanimous support, and keeping the departments together in a single
grouping seemed to be the only practicable approach. Given the considerable
uncertainties that existed in the HE sector, it was impossible to say that the
current proposal involving the formation of a single school comprising all of
the science departments would continue to be the best solution in the future,
and there would be opportunities for review.
iii)
The
proposed school comprising all of the science departments would be the largest
unit (although not disproportionately large compared to the other schools), and
some concerns were expressed about whether its disparate nature in terms of
subject mix and geographical location would mean that it was more difficult to
achieve the desired efficiencies and increased organisational robustness. This
and other issues would need to be addressed in the detailed implementation of
the new structure.
iv)
There
was some discussion about the organisational layer immediately below the 10
schools. The PMB report had stated that all current departments would continue
to exist within the new school structure (unless it was agreed by particular
schools to organise themselves differently). It was noted, however, that some
schools would be comprised of a number of departments, while others would not,
and that in some cases there would be a school within a school. This issue
already existed, and was being managed, in relation to the School of Business
and Economics because for external/marketing reasons it was essential that the
Business School continued to be named as such, notwithstanding that it formed
part of the School of Business and Economics. In view of the above, it was
suggested that proposals for the naming of the units which composed the next
organisational layer should be submitted alongside proposals for the naming of
each school.
v)
Comments
submitted by email by absent members (Marsha Meskimmon and Gerry Swallowe) were
noted.
Senate RESOLVED to
approve the recommendations of the PMB and looked forward to proposals for the
naming of all schools and discipline-based sub-units being brought to Senate,
at the same time (having first been considered by the PMB), in November 2010 or
January 2011.
The Vice-Chancellor
thanked all who had been involved in the consultations relating to the new
organisational structure, within the PMB and elsewhere.
SEN10-P94
95.2 Senate NOTED matters discussed by the PMB.
The following points were highlighted:
i) The PMB would seek to ensure that the
transition to a school structure, and the new structure itself, operated in the
most efficient manner possible. Senate would continue to be provided with
regular updates.
ii) The PMB would give due consideration to
succession planning in relation to the new senior positions that would be
created within the new structure, and to ensuring that appropriate career
progression routes existed.
10/96 Matters for Report by the Vice-Chancellor
The
Vice-Chancellor reported on the following matters:
i)
Financial Climate
Speeches made by
Steve Smith and David Willetts to the Universities UK Annual Conference were
available on the web at http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Events/Annual-Conference-2010/Pages/Default.aspx).
Significant uncertainties remained in relation to the future government funding
of the HE sector, and it seemed likely that there would be substantial cuts to
the budget for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS),
including the budget for science.
Lord Browne’s
report on HE funding and student finance was due to be published on 11 October
2010, and the outcome of the government’s spending review would follow on
20 October 2010. BIS would then determine how it responded to the anticipated
cuts to its budget, and how this would impact on the HE sector. HEFCE would
begin to finalise decisions on how it allocated its resources to individual
institutions for 2011-12 after it received its annual grant letter in December
2010, and allocations to individual institutions would be made know in March
2011. It was noted that even if the Browne Review recommended that the cap on
tuition fees be removed or raised, it was unlikely that any change would be put
into effect before 2012-13 at the earliest.
It was clear from
other recent government announcements on HE that there would be an emphasis on
improving teaching standards, and a move towards a concentration of research
funding on a smaller number of research intensive institutions. It was felt
that the emphasis on teaching might be intended as a means of nurturing those
institutions which received a smaller proportion of research funding, and/or as
a means of encouraging research intensive institutions to place greater
emphasis on teaching. It might also be viewed as paving the way towards an
expectation that institutions delivered more in terms of teaching, in anticipation
of an increase in tuition fees.
ii)
National Pay Negotiations
UCEA’s final
offer of 0.4% for 2010-11 had been rejected by UCU and EIS but was still being
considered by the other unions.
iii)
Proposed Reform of the USS
Pension Scheme
The University was
awaiting a request from USS Board of Trustees to consult with its members
regarding the proposals
for scheme reforms. The consultation period was expected to run from early
October until early December 2010. Indications were that more than 130,000 actual
and eligible members would be entitled to participate, and it was anticipated,
therefore, that the consultation would be conducted electronically. It was
likely that an early meeting of Remuneration Committee would be arranged during
October 2010, in order to consider how the proposed changes would impact on
staff at LU. A number of open sessions would then be arranged to provide an
opportunity for USS members at the University to find out more about the
proposals, before taking part in the consultation. In mid-January 2011 the USS
Board of Trustees would meet to decide whether to proceed with the proposed
changes.
iv)
League Tables
Loughborough had
been ranked 15th, and commented upon very favourably in the Sunday
Times University Guide. The Vice Chancellor thanked Lucy Hopkins for her
comments that had been reported in the Guide.
10/97 Department of Materials - Change of Faculty
Senate NOTED the action of the Chairs of
Senate and Council on behalf of Senate and Council respectively, in approving
the transfer of the Department of Materials from the Faculty of Science into
the Faculty of Engineering for 2010/11, whilst the current Faculty structure
continued to operate. This request had been made by the Head of Department for
operational reasons to assist the transition to the School structure from
2011/12.
10/98 Membership of Senate 2010-11
SEN10-P95
The membership of Senate for 2010-11
was NOTED.
10/99 Dates of
Meetings in 2010-11
Tuesday
16 November 2010, 9.15am
Wednesday
26 January 2011, 9.15am (if necessary)
Wednesday
9 March 2011, 9.15am
Wednesday
6 July 2011, 9.15am
Author – Chris
Dunbobbin
Date –
September 2010
Copyright ©
Loughborough University. All rights
reserved.