Senate

by Dr Ian Francis, academic secretary

At the first meeting in 2002 the Principal reported that, in the latest round of QAA subject reviews, economics, computing, geography and history had all received the highest possible gradings with additional comment made on exemplary aspects in history and computing. Reviews of English and law were currently in progress which would be the last subjects to be assessed under the current arrangements. Thereafter the new, lighter touch TQA regime would be introduced which would concentrate on institutional audit. In that context he noted that it was important for the University to sustain the discipline of internal quality assurance procedures as our next audit was due in 2004.

On the financial implications of the RAE, the Principal reported that while it was expected that HEFCE would concentrate funding only on the higher grades, no information was available on SHEFC plans. It seemed likely that it would be mid-March before the financial outcome would be known.

On the report of the planning and resources committee it was reported that this had been mainly a work in progress meeting and that the next meeting of the committee would concentrate upon the details of faculty plans for the next academic year.

A review of the ABM was underway and deans were heavily involved in ongoing discussions with the FSG. The intention was to make the revised ABM as transparent and simple to operate as possible.

The Senate received a paper from the Principal on proposed changes in the academic management of the University which were consonant with the recommendations of the review of central services and administration.

In his introduction to the paper the Principal emphasised the following points: it was proposed to make two Vice-Principal appointments to reflect the equal standing of research and enterprise and educational development, that the two posts of Deputy Principal would be combined respectively with the roles of director of campus services (Mr Barr) and dean of education & social work (Professor Elder); that, for the time being, there would be no replacement for Professor Howie, leaving the possibility for a future appointment to leadership of a putative postgraduate school; that the current arrangements with regard to deans and faculty structures would remain with deans being more closely involved in the decision making process; that there would be open competition via external and internal advertisement for the Vice-Principal for educational development; and that the second post of Vice-Principal would require amendment to the charter and statutes which was likely to be a somewhat time-consuming process.

In the course of discussion it was confirmed that the Vice-Principal educational development post would involve a joint Court and Senate appointing committee and might be fixed term as opposed to a permanent career post.

On the future of the FSG, which was not mentioned in the paper, the Principal indicated that he expected it not to continue beyond the point at which the new academic management structure was established.

The Senate endorsed the proposals set out in the paper.

Next Page
Return to April 2002 Contact