by Ian Francis
At the start of the February meeting the Principal welcomed Professor Brian Burchell as dean-elect of the faculty of medicine, dentistry & nursing and congratulated Professor Ronnie Harden on the award of an OBE for services to medical education.
The Principal reported that the university had been allocated £10.5 million in the second round of SRIF for the period between 2004 and 2006. This allocation was the third highest in Scotland after Edinburgh and Glasgow. It had been allocated on a formula basis: 50% in relation to research income and 50% in relation to research quality as judged by RAE scores. On this occasion the gearing had been reduced from a 25% to a 10% top-up from the university. Approximately 5% of the total for Scotland was allocated to the arts and humanities.
There was also an unallocated sum of £30M, UK-wide, available for inter-institutional bids.
Priorities for spending were required by the SHEFC by the end of May 2003 and local discussions would have to take account of the established priorities in applied computing and life sciences and other factors in relation to the capital programme. After the meeting of the court on 24 February, the research committee would consult widely and take account of relevant aspects of faculty planning although it had to be acknowledged that there was a clear weighting in favour of the more successful departments in the field of research given that the basis of the allocation had been upon research income and quality.
The Principal also noted that the white paper on higher education in England had been published and was out for consultation until April. The higher education review for Scotland, instigated by Wendy Alexander, was expected to be published on 12 March 2003 but was likely to be silent on the subjects of finance and fees given the proximity of the Scottish parliamentary elections.
On the implications of the white paper for Scotland, the Principal noted the importance of two timescales: from now until 2006 and after 2006. Despite the headline figures for growth of 19% in England and 6.9% in Scotland, the gap was likely to be considerably less once the wider participation premium and the capital injection for the teaching infrastructure in England had been accounted for. Nevertheless there was an opportunity to lobby the Scottish Executive in relation to investment in the teaching infrastructure.
Post-2006, the implications were more troubling. Potentially, with top-up fees, comparable institutions in England could be between £10 and £15 million per annum better off than Dundee. They would have much greater financial flexibility and more capacity to improve their infrastructure and pay incentives to staff. There was a serious danger that the Scottish universities, particularly those who were research-intensive, could be left behind.
Concern was also expressed about the proposed labelling of some 6* departments in England ahead of the next RAE and whether that would also apply to Scotland and indeed whether SHEFC would fund departments in Scotland even if they were identified as 6*.
Major items of business for approval included a complete revision to the student discipline ordinance and related regulations arising from the introduction of the special educational needs and disability act and the race relations (amendment) act, as well as a detailed framework document for the university’s research and enterprise strategy.