SENATE
SEN10-M8
Minutes of the Ordinary
Meeting of Senate on Tuesday 16 November 2010.
|
In attendance: Chris Dunbobbin, Jennifer
Nutkins, Will Spinks, Dave Twigg (for minute 10/104), Caroline Walker.
Apologies for absence were received from: Memis
Acar, Jo Aldridge, Chris Backhouse, Jon Binner, Jonathan Chambers, Jack
Demaine, Rob Dover, Janet Harrison, David Kerr, Angus Laing, Myra Nimmo, Carol Robinson, Richard Stobart, Elizabeth Stokoe,
Andrew Watson, Mark Webber, Huaizhong Zhao.
The Vice-Chancellor
welcomed new members, and noted that the meeting would be the last to be held in
the Council Chamber in Administration Building 2. The next meeting would be in
the new Council Chamber in the Hazlerigg Building.
10/100 Minutes
Senate RESOLVED to confirm and sign the minutes of the Ordinary meeting held on 30 June 2010 (SEN10-M5) (with the
exception of minute 10/52 relating to the Shape and Structure of the
University, which was confirmed at the Extraordinary meeting on 15 September
2010), and of the Extraordinary meeting held on 15 September 2010 (SEN10-M7).
10/101 Powers and Functions of Senate
SEN10-P96
Senate NOTED the
powers and functions of Senate.
10/102 Browne Review / Comprehensive Spending Review
Senate RECEIVED a presentation from
the Director of Finance.
The Browne Review of HE
Funding and Student Finance had been published on 12 October 2010, and provided
a template for radical reform, based on the creation of a market, with quality
of provision being driven by competition and student choice. Following Browne,
the government had published its Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), with
details of substantial reductions in funding for HE,
albeit with some protection for science and research. BIS’s budget would
be cut by 7% per annum for 4 years, and indications were that HEFCE’s
budget would be cut by 40%. HEFCE was expected to release an overview of
intended cuts in December 2011, and issue individual institutional grant
letters in March 2011.
The government had released its
initial response to Browne, and proposals relating to student finance would be
made to Parliament in December. A White Paper was expected later in the winter
relating to other Browne recommendations followed by further legislation. The government had indicated that it would seek to cap
tuition fees at £9000, rather than imposing a levy on fees of £6000 or over.
However, it was expected that institutions charging fees above £5999 would be
required to meet strict participation targets. It remained unclear whether
there would be mechanisms to control student numbers. It was likely that there
would be an 80% cut to teaching grants overall, but this might be less for
Loughborough given its relatively high proportion of STEM based subjects. It
seemed likely that there would be no public capital funds for 4 years, and
further QR concentration was possible. Browne recommended that institutions be required
to publish detailed information on all
programmes (relating to issues such as the standard of teaching, support and
guidance, contact hours, and graduate destinations), in order to inform student
choice.
Browne and the CSR raised a number of
critical questions for the University, including what fees would need to be
charged to be financially sustainable; where Loughborough should seek to place
itself in the new market; whether the same fees should be charged for all
subjects; whether enhancements eeded to
be made to the University’s offer, and how to market it; and what
participation targets would be required. Fiscal studies suggested that without
public funds for capital, surpluses would need to be at least 8% to fund
sustainable renewal of facilities. However, the University was not yet in a
position to formulate its detailed response to these questions as much
information about how the changes would be implemented was not yet available.
The following points were noted in
discussion:
(i)
If
the University was to set tuition fees at a high level, it would need to be
confident that students felt their experience represented good value for money.
(ii)
If
all institutions decided to charge £9000 for all their programmes, it was
possible that in order to control its student finance liability, the government
would need to review its stated position that there would be no levy on tuition
fees over £6000.
(iii)
Clarification
was provided that the financial modelling in the Director of Finance’s
report took into account anticipated fluctuations in the rate of inflation, and
assumed an increased spend on bursaries and other participation requirements if
tuition fees were set at a higher level.
(iv)
There would be a difficult period to negotiate in
the immediate future with funding cuts expected to come into effect (in
2011-12) prior to the introduction of higher tuition fees (in 2012-13). Full
income from the latter would only be realised in three to four years as fees
phased in. It was noted, however, that the University had an accumulated
surplus which could be drawn upon in the short term although the terms of its
borrowing covenants meant it was important to avoid even a temporary deficit.
Sector representatives were lobbying for cuts to HEFCE funding to be backloaded to the end of the CSR period but it was unclear
whether this would be successful.
(v)
Part
of the rationale for the restructuring of the University’s academic organisation
was to allow the existing portfolio of subject areas to be maintained. It would
also be necessary in this context for the University to examine the operation
of its resource allocation system in light of the funding changes
(vi)
It
was important that the University did not lose any focus on its research
agenda, as those institutions with the best research reputations, which were
able to offer high quality research-led teaching, would be in the best position
to attract the most able students.
(vii)
Although
there were uncertain and challenging times ahead, Loughborough was well-placed take advantage of any
opportunities that arose.
10/103 Progress Report on Implementation of New
Organisational Structure
SEN10-P97
Senate NOTED key issues discussed by the
Structure Implementation Project Management Board at meetings held on 4 October
and 3 November 2010, and the job descriptions in Annex B.
The following points were noted in
discussion:
(i)
It
was AGREED that in relation to the person specification for the AD(T) role, the
third Essential point of the Teaching Experience section should be amended, in
order to improve clarity, to state: Experience of delivering high quality
teaching at undergraduate and postgraduate (PGT and/or PGR) levels.
(ii)
It
was AGREED that the wording of the job description for the AD(R) role should be
amended so that item 6. stated that it was the AD(R)’s role to determine
the most appropriate person to represent the School in the international and
national academic and practitioner research communities (i.e. to clarify that
it would not necessarily be the AD(R) who acted as the School’s
representative in this context). ACTION:PVC(R)/EH
(iii)
The
reference to 0.2FTE in the AD(T) job description
related only to the external activities that all AD(T)s would be required to
perform. References to the proportion of FTE had not otherwise been included in
the AD(T) or AD(R) job descriptions because of the
likelihood of significant variation from school to school.
(iv)
Clarification
was provided in relation to Note 2. of the AD(T) job
description, which referred to external roles relating to quality and standards
and to validation being carried out on a rotational basis. In relation to professional
body accreditations, it would remain appropriate for the process to be led by the
relevant person closest to it in subject terms who might not be the AD(T) in some schools..
(v)
It
was emphasised that the AD(T) role under the new
School structure was intended to be different to that which existed under the
Faculty structure although there would be some duties in common. The roles of
programme and module leaders within each school would need to develop and
change in order to take account of this.
(vi)
In
relation to the School Manager job description, experience of a general
management role in a HE environment had been deliberately classified as a
desirable rather than an essential requirement in order not to exclude the
possibility of appointing candidates from outside of the HE sector. Internal
candidates for these roles would be sought prior to the posts being advertised
externally, and it was anticipated that the majority of appointments would be
made from within the University. It was noted in this context that local
knowledge was an important commodity for School Managers, and that it would be
crucial to the success of the roles that those appointed worked very closely
with the academic teams within each school. It was not intended that the
establishment of the School Manager role would ultimately result in an
additional 10 administrative staff over and above the University’s
existing complement.
(vii)
It
was AGREED that consideration should be given to the inclusion of explicit
references to maintenance and enhancement of the Loughborough student
experience within the job descriptions for Associate Deans, Heads of
Department, and School Managers.
(viii)
It
was AGREED that it would be helpful if future PMB reports referred explicitly
to actions/initiatives which had resulted in specific savings or efficiencies
being made.
(ix)
Confirmation
was given that the Infrastructural Support Working Group was considering the
interface between the new Schools and existing support services, including the Library.
(x)
Confirmation
was given that the Learning and Teaching Working Group was considering how APR
and PPR processes would operate within the new structure, and proposals would
be brought to Senate later in the academic year.
(xi)
A
website dedicated to the restructuring project had been established to provide
information for staff. Members were invited to advise the Vice-Chancellor of
any suggested improvements or if they felt any key areas had been omitted.
10/104 British University in Egypt
SEN10-P98
104.1 Senate RECEIVED an update on the
University’s relationship with BUE. It was noted that BUE’s main
sponsor had recently agreed to fund a number of scholarships for students from
elsewhere in Africa to study at BUE.
SEN10-P99
104.2 Senate RECEIVED a final report on the
Revalidation Process 2009/10. The final stages had taken place in August and
September 2010, and there had been evidence of many positive developments.
However, at a meeting in August 2010, the Validation Sub-Committee (VSC) had
noted concerns about a lack of progress in several key areas. The PVC(T) subsequently contacted the President of BUE with
details of LU’s concerns. BUE submitted a detailed response, and members of
the BUE senior management team visited LU at the beginning of October 2010 for
further discussions. The VSC met again later in October 2010, and noted that
although some issues remained , sufficient positive
steps and commitments, particularly in relation to entry standards and other
key areas, had been made to allow it to recommend to Senate that the current
Validation Agreement be extended to include LU validation of the existing
validated degrees of the 2012 and 1013 Preparatory Year intakes. This recommendation
was made on the basis that a project-based approach to supporting BUE’s
further development, as outlined in a paper presented by the Vice-Chancellor to
the BUE Board of Trustees on 25 October 2010, would be led by Professor Chris
Backhouse, and progressed over a 12 month period starting in January 2011. The
VSC recommended further that should satisfactory progress be made with these
projects and the annual monitoring activities related to the validation in
2011, a decision on revalidation for 3-5 additional intakes beyond the 2013
intake would be taken during the first half of 2012.
The following comments were noted in
discussion:
(i)
Mechanisms
were in place to monitor action plans that had been produced by BUE in relation
to two specific programmes, and progress with these action plans would
determine how they were treated under the proposed extension of validation.
(ii)
The
projects to be led by Professor Backhouse would cover the following areas:
Leadership (British academic leadership to support the BUE President); Human
Resources (Recruitment and retention processes); Management and Development
(Management/reward/career progression); Budgetary Processes (Resource
allocation and decision making); Administration (Data management and
information sharing); and Research (Development of the shared
‘energy’ research programme). It was noted that as part of the
project-based approach, it would be important to ensure that a robust and
auditable risk-management process was in place.
(iii)
The
PVC(R) was due to visit BUE shortly with Professor Dennis Loveday,
in order to explore further possibilities for research collaboration.
Senate RESOLVED to approve the
recommendations of the BUE Validation Sub-Committee.
10/105 Governance
& Operations in relation to Financial Matters (Excluding Audit Committee)
SEN10-P100
Senate RESOLVED to recommend to Council
proposals relating to the establishment, from 1 January 2011, of a Finance
Committee, to be a Joint Committee of Senate and Council, incorporating the
activities of Performance Monitoring Group and Treasurer’s Committee.
10/106 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor
(Research)
SEN10-P101 (to follow)
Senate RECEIVED a report from the PVC(R). The
following points were highlighted:
(i)
Applications. A record number of applications had been
made during 2009-10. The total value was down by £9M on the total for the
previous year, but this could be attributed to a small number of exceptionally
large applications in 2008-09.
(ii)
New grants and contracts. The value of new
grants and contracts awarded to the Science Faculty had fallen. This was a
cause for some concern, but part of the decrease could be attributed to
restructuring (Human Sciences into SSH and IPTME into Engineering). Overall,
the total value of new grants and contracts awarded in 2009-10 was slightly
lower than the total for 2008-09, which suggested that a temporary plateau
might have been reached.
(iii)
Research Schools. The Design Research School, led by Dr Ian
Campbell was up and running.
(iv)
Publications. The implementation of a new research
publications management system, supplied by Symplectic,
was expected for the first quarter of 2011.
(v)
Citations. Action would be taken to improve the
management of research outputs and citations following the University’s
relatively poor performance in the THE international
league table, which was in part attributable to a very low citation count.
(vi)
REF. Further feedback and dissemination
of the results from the “impact” pilot institutions studies were
due to be released, and developments would be monitored closely. Departments
were considering the impact of their research and would be asked to prepare
case studies for which guidance would be provided.
(vii)
EPSRC. Representatives would be visiting the University on 18
November 2010.
10/107 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor
(Teaching)
SEN10-P102
107.1 Student Recruitment,
2010 Entry.
The PVC(T) reported a
successful outcome across all student groups, and thanked all involved in the
recruitment process. The following points were highlighted:
(i)
A high proportion of undergraduate students with A*
grades had been recruited across all departments.
(ii)
Taught postgraduate recruitment was virtually on
target, despite significant visa uncertainties. This appeared to be
attributable in part to the attractiveness of the University’s
programmes, but also to the difficult employment market.
(iii)
12 of the 59 students on the Loughborough
University International Foundation Programme taught at Loughborough College
during 2009-10 had successfully progressed to a degree course at the
University.
(iv)
There continued to be a huge growth in applications
from mainland China for Business and Economics programmes, which had affected
the speed of decision-making and response to the increased volume of emails.
The International Office was working with departments on steps to discourage
weak applications.
SEN10-P103
107.2 National Student Survey.
The PVC(T) reported a
successful outcome for the 2010 survey. At institutional level, the results
placed Loughborough in a strong position within the sector, and many subject
areas had achieved excellent rankings. In other areas, however, the results had
been less outstanding, and actions were underway within Faculties to ensure
that that issues of concern were addressed. It was
crucial in this context that the findings of the survey were seen as integral
to the University’s broader processes of annual teaching and learning
evaluation. The following points were noted:
(i)
Drama should also be included in Table 2, as it was
ranked 2 out of 66 in the UK. (The paper would be amended before being submitted
to Council).
(ii)
It would be helpful for departments, in determining
appropriate detailed action, for data to be provided at programme level.
(iii)
One member expressed concern that sports science
was ranked 8 out of 60, given the University’s reputation for excellence
in this area. The Head of SSEHS was not present to respond. It was noted,
however, that anatomy, physiology and pathology, which was part of SSEHS was
ranked 1 out of 43.
(iv)
The PVC(T) was in
discussions with the LSU VP Education about analysing survey data on the least
well performing subject areas.
10/108 Matters for
Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Enterprise)
SEN10-P104
Senate
RECEIVED a report from the PVC(E). The following
points were highlighted:
(i)
Emda.
All of the Regional Development Agencies would be disbanded by the end of March
2012, but it was likely that some of their functions would be transferred to
the new Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP) well before then. Current
indications were that LEPs would be funded primarily by local councils, and as
councils were facing significant budget cuts, it was unlikely that they would
receive funding equivalent to that previously enjoyed by emda.
The Regional Growth Fund had also been announced but bids would probably need
to be led by the private sector, with LEPs and any relevant public sector
bodies acting as partners.
(ii)
Science and Enterprise Park.
The Independent Review Group had decided that the University should not proceed
with the development agreement at the current time. The PVC(E)
had been asked by Operations Committee to develop a new strategy for the
Science and Enterprise Park, and work on this was underway.
(iii)
Loughborough Innovation Centre.
The Innovation Centre would be moving into new accommodation in the Charnwood
Building, in December 2010, providing an opportunity for greater integration
with other tenants on the Science and Enterprise Park.
(iv)
Enterprise Office.
Megan Powell Vreeswijk had been appointed as Senior
Commercialisation Fellow, and would be working with the Design School and the
School of the Arts in order to establish commercial spaces for each school.
10/109 Matters for Report by the Vice-Chancellor
The Vice-Chancellor reported on the following
matters:
(i)
USS Pension Scheme. The consultation on the proposed reform of
the USS pension scheme was ongoing.
(ii)
National Pay Negotiations. There were no new
developments to report. The UCEA Board was due to meet next on 9 December 2010.
(iii)
League Tables. Loughborough had received a disappointing
ranking in the THE World Rankings league table, in
part as a consequence of a very low citation count. Action was being taken to
improve the management of citations, and all members involved in leading
research activities were asked to emphasise with colleagues the importance of publishing
in highly cited journals.
10/110 Programme Proposals
SEN10-P105
On the recommendation of Learning and
Teaching Committee, on the advice of Curriculum Sub-Committee, Senate RESOLVED to
recommend to Council as appropriate:
110.1 New programmes (with effect from October 2011 unless stated):
MA Global Media and Cultural Industries
MSc, PGDip
Management and Leadership (Nazareth Care) (December 2010)
110.2 Award, title or major programme changes (with effect from October 2010 unless stated):
BSc Computing and Management / IT
Management for Business / Computer Science and Mathematics – addition of
part D leading to MSci (+ possible transfer from
existing BSc)
MComp Computer Science / Computer
Science & Artificial Intelligence to
MSci Computer Science / Computer Science &
Artificial Intelligence (Oct 2011 entry)
BA English with a minor in North American Literature and Film to BA English with a minor in American
Literature and Film (2011 entry)
MRes Art, Design and Performance by
Practice to MA Arts Research by
Practice (Oct 2011 entry)
MEng Product Design Engineering
– addition of DPS option (from 2010-11)
MSc Packaging Technology (Materials
for Industry) to MSc
Packaging Technology (Materials Science and Technology)
FdSc Sports Development and
Management to FdSc
Sports Science, Sports Development and Management (2009 entry)
BSc Web Development and Design to Information Management and Web
Development (2012 entry)
Addition of DPS option for students entering placements in 2010/11
onwards to: BEng Product Design Engineering, BEng/MEng Mechanical Engineering,
BEng Manufacturing Engineering/Manufacturing
Engineering & Management, BSc Sports Technology, BSc Engineering Management
110.3 Discontinuation of programmes (last intake
shown in brackets):
MSc Analytical Chemistry and IT (Oct
2010)
MSc Mechatronics
(Oct 2009)
MSc Pharmaceutical Engineering (Oct
2010)
MScs in Occupational Health (Oct
2009): Psychology of Work and Health, Workplace Health, Occupational Health for
Safety Professionals
110.4 Suspension of programmes (proposed dates of last and next intake shown in brackets):
MRes Criminal Justice Research (last
intake 2009/10, next intake 2011/12)
MSc Strategic Automotive Dealership
Management (Malaysia) (last intake 2008/09, next intake 2011/12)
MRes Sustainability in the Built
Environment (last intake 2009/10, next intake 2011/12)
MSc Sustainable Infrastructure
Services Management (last intake 2009/10, next intake 2011/12)
10/111 Estates Management Committee
SEN10-P106
Senate RECEIVED reports of the meetings on 20
July, 23 September and 21 October 2010, and RESOLVED to approve:
SEN10-P107
111.1 Amended Terms of Reference for Estates
Management Committee.
10/112 Ethical Advisory Committee
SEN10-P108
Senate RESOLVED to approve:
112.1 The establishment of a Human Tissue Authority
Licence Committee (HTALC) as a sub-committee of Ethical Advisory Committee.
112.2 A proposal that Ethical Advisory Committee
become a Joint Committee of Senate and Council.
10/113 Health, Safety and Environmental Committee
SEN10-P109
Senate RECEIVED a report of the meeting held
on 20 October 2010, and RESOLVED to approve:
SEN10-P110
113.1 The Annual Plan for the Health, Safety and Environmental
Office.
10/114 Advancement Committee
SEN10-P111
Senate RECEIVED a report of the meeting on 27
October 2010, and RESOLVED to approve an amendment to the Membership and Terms
of Reference of Advancement Committee (Annex A refers).
10/115 Prizes Committee
SEN10-P112
115.1 Senate RECEIVED a report of the meeting held
on 4 November 2010.
SEN10-P113
115.2 Senate RECEIVED the Annual Report from Prizes
Committee.
115.3 Senate NOTED the action of the
Vice-Chancellor on behalf of Senate in approving exceptional one year
extensions to the terms of office of Dr Jeremy Leaman
and Professor Ray Jones as members of Prizes Committee.
10/116 Academic Misconduct Committee
In accordance with
paragraph 18 of Regulation XVIII, Senate RESOLVED to appoint the Academic
Misconduct Committee for 2010-11, as below:
Three academic members of the Senate or the
Learning and Teaching Committee, including one Associate Dean (Teaching), who
shall act as Chair: Dr R Kinna (Chair), Dr J Harrison, Dr S Tarleton.
One University member
of the Loughborough Students’ Union Executive nominated by the Executive: A Swinscoe.
10/117 Student Discipline Committee
SEN10-P114
117.1 Senate
RECEIVED a report of the meeting held on 2 November 2010.
SEN10-P115
117.2 In accordance with section
1(v) of Ordinance XVII, Senate RESOLVED to appoint the Student Discipline
Committee for 2010-11.
10/118 Term Dates
SEN10-P116 (to follow)
Senate APPROVED term dates for the
2012-13 academic year.
10/119 Membership of Senate 2010-11
SEN10-P117
Senate NOTED the membership of
Senate for 2010-11.
10/120 Librarian’s Annual Report 2009-10
Senate NOTED that the annual report for
2009-10 from the Librarian was available at http://www.lboro.ac.uk/library/about/PDFs/annrep09-10.pdf.
10/121 Reports from
Committees
Senate RECEIVED reports from the
following Committees:
121.1 SEN10-P118 Arts
Committee of 12 October 2010.
121.2 SEN10-P119 Costing
and Pricing Committee of 21 July 2010.
121.3 SEN10-P120 Enterprise
Board of 6 October 2010.
121.4 SEN10-P121 Learning
and Teaching Committee of 4 November 2010.
121.5 SEN10-P122 Performance
Monitoring Group of 17 June and 8 October 2010.
121.6 SEN10-P123 Research
Committee of 4 June 2010.
121.7 SEN10-P124 Research
Performance Monitoring Committee of 6 July, 14 July 2010, and 24
September
2010.
121.8 SEN10-P125 Student
Experience Committee of 3 November 2010.
10/122 Dates of Future
Meetings in 2010-11
Wednesday
26 January 2011, 9.15am (if necessary).
Wednesday
9 March 2011, 9.15am.
Wednesday
6 July 2011, 9.15am.
Author – Chris
Dunbobbin
Date – November
2010
Copyright ©
Loughborough University. All rights
reserved