COURT PAPERS 28 September 2015
In accordance with the University Court Standing Orders the University publishes Court papers classified as ‘public’ or ‘internal’ in accordance with our Data Classification Policy. For the meeting above, the following papers come into this category.
Paper No. Title Classification 1 Remit, Composition & Membership Public 2 Key Developments in External Environment Internal 7 Governing Bodies, Equality & Diversity Internal 8 Academic Council Report Internal 9(i) University Court Annual Reflective report Internal 9(ii) JPPRC Report Annual Reflective report Internal 9(iv) Research Ethics Committee Annual report Internal 10 Institutional‐led review of Quality 2014/15 Internal
These papers are attached below. UC (15/16) 1 University Court
Reporting To:
Remit:
The Court shall have all such powers as are necessary for the discharge of its functions as they are defined in the Statutes, including the following: a) To take over all properties, assets, benefits and liabilities of the company registered under the name of The University of Stirling Limited; b) To govern, manage and regulate the finances, accounts, investments, property, business and all affairs whatsoever of the University and for that purpose to appoint bankers and any staff or agents whom it may deem expedient to appoint and to cause books of account to be kept in such manners as to give a true and fair view of the state of the University's affairs and to explain its transactions; c) To invest any money belonging to the University in such stocks, funds, fully paid shares or securities as the Court shall from time to time think fit whether within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or not or in the purchase of heritable subjects in the United Kingdom including feuduties or rents:
Provided that in the case of moneys held by the University as Trustees the powers conferred by this sub-paragraph shall be exercised subject to the provisions of the law relating to investments by trustees. d) To sell, buy, take on feu, exchange, lease and accept leases of any property, heritable or moveable, real or personal, on behalf of the University; e) To provide the buildings, premises, furniture and equipment and other means required for carrying on the work of the University; f) To borrow money on behalf of the University and for that purpose to grant security over, mortgage or charge all or any part of the property of the University, whether heritable or moveable, real or personal, unless the conditions of any Will, Deed of Trust or other similar instrument are thereby contravened and to give such other security whether upon any such property or otherwise as the Court may think fit; g) To enter into vary, carry out, cancel contracts on behalf of the University; h) To provide for the welfare of all persons in the employment of the University or formerly in the employment of the University or of the company registered under the name of The University of Stirling Limited and the wives, widows and dependants of such persons including the payment of money, pensions or other payments and the provision of housing and of assistance in obtaining housing and to subscribe to benevolent and other funds for the benefit of such persons; i) To provide for the welfare of the students of the University.
In discharging its responsibilities the Committee will have due regard to the promotion of equality and diversity. Composition:
Post Category Name Department From: To: Clerk to the Court Clerk to Court Ms Fiona Wheater Policy & Planning 01/01/2012 31/12/2999
One of up to Eleven members appointed by Court (Chair) Appointed (1k) Ms Fiona Sandford 01/08/2015 31/07/2018
The Principal Ex-Officio Prof Gerry McCormac Principal's Office 01/05/2010 31/12/2999
16 September 2015 Page 1 of 3 UC (15/16) 1 University Court
Composition:
Post Category Name Department From: To: The Provost of Stirling Ex-Officio Councillor Mike Robbins 17/05/2012 31/12/2999
Senior Deputy Principal Ex-Officio Prof John Gardner Deputy Principals' 01/07/2015 31/12/2999 Office The President of the University of Stirling Students' Union Ex-Officio Mr Andrew Kinnell University of Stirling 01/06/2015 31/05/2016 Students' Union The Vice President for Development & Activities the Ex-Officio Ms Lauren Marriott University of Stirling 01/06/2014 31/05/2016 University of Stirling Students' Union Students' Union One Member nominated by the Chancellor Nominated (1b) Vacancy 01/01/1900 31/12/2999
One of Six from Academic Council's own membership Appointed (1d) Prof Jayne Donaldson School of Health 01/08/2015 31/07/2019 Sciences Two of Six from Academic Council 's own membership Appointed (1d) Prof Brigid Daniel School of Applied 01/12/2011 30/11/2019 Social Science Three of Six from Academic Council's own membership Appointed (1d) Prof Holger Nehring School of Arts and 01/08/2015 31/07/2019 Humanities Four of Six from Academic Council's own membership Appointed (1d) Prof Leigh Robinson School of Sport 01/01/2012 31/12/2019
Five of Six from Academic Council's own membership (non- Appointed (1d) Ms Alison Green School of Arts and 01/08/2013 31/07/2017 professorial) Humanities Six of Six from Academic Council's own membership (non- Appointed (1d) Ms Kate Howie School of Natural 01/08/2015 31/07/2019 professorial) Sciences One member form the University of Stirling Alumni Appointed (1j) Mr Kevin Condron 01/08/2013 31/07/2016
Two of up to Eleven members appointed by Court (Vice Appointed (1k) Mr Harry Adam 26/01/2005 31/07/2016 Chair) Three of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Vacancy 01/01/1900 31/12/2999
Four of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Mr Sean Lewis 01/12/2012 31/07/2018
Five of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Mr Peter Holmes 01/08/2011 31/07/2017
Six of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Ms Barbara McKissack 01/02/2013 31/07/2016
Seven of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Mr Richard G Murray 10/03/2008 31/07/2016
Eight of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Mr Andrew Sturgess 01/01/2010 31/07/2016
Nine of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Mr Scott Haldane 01/08/2012 31/07/2018
16 September 2015 Page 2 of 3 UC (15/16) 1 University Court
Composition:
Post Category Name Department From: To: Ten of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Ms Lynne Marr 01/01/2010 31/07/2016
Eleven of up to Eleven members appointed by Court Appointed (1k) Mr Simon Anderson 01/01/2010 31/07/2016
One member appointed by the Staff Assembly from among Appointed (1l) Mr James Dick School of Natural 01/08/2013 31/07/2017 its own number not being a member of the Academic Staff Sciences University Secretary In Attendance Ms Eileen Schofield University Secretary's 01/11/2013 31/12/2999 Office One of two Deputy Principals In Attendance Prof Malcolm MacLeod Deputy Principals' 01/01/2015 31/12/2999 Office Two of two Deputy Principals In Attendance Vacancy 01/01/1900 31/12/2999
Deputy Secretary In Attendance Ms Joanna Morrow Deputy Secretary's 01/11/2013 31/12/2999 Office Director of Finance In Attendance Mr Liam McCabe Finance 01/04/2009 31/12/2999
Director of HR & OD In Attendance Mr Martin McCrindle HR & OD 01/08/2006 31/12/2999
Director of Estates & Campus Services In Attendance Ms Karen Plouviez Estates & Campus 01/08/2006 31/12/2999 Services Director of Development & External Affairs In Attendance Ms Kerry Bryson Development & 01/06/2011 31/12/2999 External Affairs Director of Information Services In Attendance Ms Kathy McCabe Information Services 15/12/2014 31/12/2999
Director of Research & Enterprise In Attendance Dr John Rogers Research & Enterprise 01/08/2006 31/12/2999
Director of Commercial Services In Attendance Mr Liam Spillane Commercial Services 01/11/2013 31/12/2999
16 September 2015 Page 3 of 3 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 2
UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING UNIVERSITY COURT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
1. INTRODUCTION
This paper provides an overview of recent external developments that will impact upon the higher education sector. This paper contains information on developments since the last update was given to University Court on 22 June 2015.
2. PURPOSE
Members of Court are invited to note recent developments in the external environment.
3. KEY DEVELOPMENTS
3.1 Ministerial Letter of Guidance for 2016/17
The Scottish Government have issued their letter of guidance to the Scottish Funding Council (see Appendix 1) in advance of SFC finalising their Outcome Agreement guidance (see below). The strategic objectives remain is similar to last year and includes:
Internationally competitive and impactful research.
Effective knowledge exchange and innovation including excellent university/industry collaboration.
Meet the challenges set out by the Developing Scotland's Young Workforce report.
Address the underrepresentation of women on the governing bodies of colleges and universities and at senior levels, and gender balance among student intakes for some key subjects. This includes a challenge to all boards to achieve a 50:50 gender balance by 2020.
3.2 Outcome Agreement Guidance for 2016/17
The Scottish Funding Council published the Outcome Agreement guidance at the beginning of September 2015. The full guidance can be viewed at: http://www.sfc.ac.uk/communications/Guidance/2015/SFCGD162015.aspx. The guidance is broadly the same as in previous years but there are some key changes including:
Driven by the Equality Act 2010, the SFC is asking HEI’s to set out their ambitions and how they are going to achieve the following:
o An improvement in the gender balance of the student population, and in specific subjects where there is a severe imbalance.
o An increase in the number and proportion of undergraduate entrants with care experience.
1
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 2
o An increase in the retention rate of full-time undergraduate entrants with care experience.
For universities that received regional coherence funding the SFC outline the changed arrangements for what will now be called the Widening Access and Retention Fund.
In their discussions with universities this year, the SFC want to discuss how universities can better demonstrate their response to the skills needs and the Skills Investment Plans for key sectors published by Skills Development Scotland.
HEIs are asked to provide a statement reflecting on their performance in REF 2014 and how that will influence their research strategy; and a statement of ambition in relation to equality and diversity issues identified by the REF 2014 Equality and Diversity Advisory Panel (EDAP) report.
A draft Outcome Agreement is to be submitted in December 2015 with the final version being submitted in February 2016. The funding allocations will be published in April 2016.
3.3 Comprehensive Spending Review
The UK Government is expected to publish its Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) in November 2015. In July 2015 government departments were asked by Treasury to model scenarios of 25% and 40% of real terms savings by 2019/20. This followed an announcement of £3bn of savings from non-protected government departments in June 2015. As a result the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills will have £450 million cut from its 2015/16 budget. Universities Scotland has worked with the Scottish sector to draft a response to the CSR. A Scottish Government Spending Review and detailed consideration of budgets for 2016/17 are also expected.
3.4 Chancellors Budget and Productivity Plan
The UK Government announced its Summer Budget on 8 July and Productivity Plan on 10 July 2015. The Budget introduced several measures related to higher education. These included replacing maintenance grants with loans in England for new students from 2016/17 and setting out plans for those institutions in England which offer ‘high teaching quality’ to increase their tuition fees in line with inflation from 2017/18. The budget confirmed the government will deliver on the science capital commitment, investing £6.9 billion up to 2021 in infrastructure including through national catapult centres and mapping innovation. Also included in the budget was a commitment to a new living wage from April 2016 with a target of reaching £9 per hour by 2020.
In addition, the Productivity Plan outlined actions to; consult on freezing the loan repayment threshold at £21,000 for students in England for five years and other discounts, allowing alternative HE providers to enter the market more easily and adopting a risk-based approach to quality. Following the consultation on income contingent loans for postgraduate taught Masters courses and PhDs in England, details on how these will be delivered will be set out later in the year. With regard to innovation, the Government has asked Sir Paul Nurse to lead an independent review of how to ensure the UK’s science has a ‘focus on those areas
2
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 2 with the greatest potential’ and will respond to Professor Dame Ann Dowling’s review of collaboration between UK business and universities.
3.5 Teaching Excellence Framework
The government has announced its intention to introduce a new Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) to sharpen incentives for providing an outstanding education to students. The government will consult later in 2015 on how a Teaching Excellence Framework can be developed, including outcome-focussed criteria and metrics. The TEF may be used as the mechanism by which it would be decided those English institutions able to increase their prices by inflation. This would suggest an exercise would need to be undertaken by 2017.
3.6 One Nation Science
The Minister for Business, Innovation and Skills, Jo Johnson, delivered a speech on 16 July 2015 entitled One Nation Science. The speech outlined proposals to uphold and strengthen the UK’s performance in science. These included the introduction of science and innovation audits in England to identify and build on potential in each region, initiatives working with schools the Royal Society, Royal Academy of Engineering to improve diversity and with RCUK to investigate gender imbalances in research council grant applications. Equality and diversity was a prominent theme of the speech.
3.7 Scotland Bill
The UK parliament considered plans to devolve more powers to Scotland as part of the Scotland Bill in June and July 2015 which has progressed to report stage. The date the Bill will next be brought forward for consideration has yet to be confirmed. The Scottish Secretary David Mundell has stated that the Bill will transfer significant powers to the Scottish Parliament.
3.8 HE Governance Bill
The Scottish Government published the Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Bill on 17 June 2015. This set out a raft of potential changes including the requirement to hold an election for the position of Chair of Court and changes to the composition of the governing body (such as trade union representatives). A range of additional powers for ministers are introduced including control of the above processes. There was a call for evidence from the Finance Committee of the Scottish Parliament in relation to the financial implications of the proposed Bill which the University responded to in August. There was also a separate call for evidence in relation to the Bill as a whole and a response was submitted on behalf of the University Court prior to the deadline at the beginning of September. The next stage is for the Education and Culture committee to consider the responses to the consultation before putting the Bill to Parliament to vote on whether the Bill should proceed.
3.9 Gender Action Plan
The Scottish Funding Council is currently consulting upon the introduction of a Gender Action Plan for Scottish universities and colleges. The aim of the plan is to put in place actions to address disciplines which are heavily gendered (either mainly men or women) which has a later impact upon career options and occupations. This is part of work being conducted by SFC to place equality at the heart of the education system, responding to the
3
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 2 vision set out by the Scottish Government. The University has submitted a response to the consultation. The SFC plan is to update Outcome Agreement guidance in the Summer of 2015 to enhance expectations concerning gender imbalance at subject level and in Summer 2016 publish a full action plan setting out actions to be taken to tackle gender inequality more broadly.
3.10 Dowling Review
The Dowling review into how businesses can best connect with university research was published on in July 2015. The report recommended to Government that the mechanisms for supporting business-industry research collaborations were too complex and the systems should be streamlined reducing the overall number of schemes and simplifying the interface. It also called for a culture change in universities and businesses in order to support collaboration and to focus helping short-term collaborations evolve into longer term partnerships.
3.11 Review of Quality Assessment (England)
HEFCE and the higher education funding bodies in Wales and Northern Ireland are currently seeking views on future approaches to assessing the quality of education at the universities and colleges they support. The consultation closes on 18th September. QAA have published their response to the consultation in which they argue that higher education must be protected by quality assurance that embraces all parts of the UK, is internationally recognised, fully co-regulated and able to align with the national priorities including the developing Teaching Excellence Framework in England. They make a case for a strong system that protects student interests while being much more tailored, proportionate and responsive to the needs of the providers.
4. DATA CLASSIFICATION
This paper is classed as internal.
5. RECOMMENDATION
Members of Court are invited to note recent developments in the external environment.
Policy & Planning
September 2015
4
UC (15/16) 2 Appendix 1 Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning Angela Constance MSP
FIT:03002444000 The Scottish E: [email protected] Government Rlaghaltas na h·Alba
Professor Alice Brown CBE FRSE Chair Scottish Funding Council Apex 2 -- LEGACY- 2014 97 Haymarket Terrace IX CQMMONWUUH GAlUS r IArJl) ·Edinburgh EH125HD
l 0 September 2015
LETTER OF GUIDANCE TO SCOTTISH FUNDING COUNCIL: ACADEMIC YEAR 2016-17
1. I am writing, as before, at this time of year because of the need to set out our expectations for the funding we provide to the Scottish Funding Council before you finalise ·your guidance to institutions for Outcome Agreements for 2016-17.
2. In light of the UK government's plans for a Spending Review to take place this summer and report in late November, I cannot, at this point, advise on funding figures or volume targets. The UK government has signalled its intention to reduce public spending by £20 billion in real terms by 2019-20, on top of the £17 billion cuts already announced to welfare and other spending over this period. While we await the outcome for Scotland, what is clear is that we face Significant further austerity over the coming years.
3. In sharp contrast to the UK government, the Scottish government wishes to take a different approach. We want to explore all opportunities and work with our partners across the public sector and beyond to deliver a fairer, more prosperous country.
4. The current constitutional context, however, requires us to be pragmatic about the resources available. Therefore, it is a priority for all our public bodies and those receiving funding from the public purse to examine continuously and creatively how, through clever collaboration and a learner-centred approach, we can focus on improving delivery of transformative services, such as education, which can make a difference to our lives.I shall ·write again following the publication of the Scottish Government's Draft Budget.
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ ISOI40~.IV. ~ r v www.gov.scot ~ I '->-'" 8;)/I.'VESTORINPEOPU! UC (15/16) 2 Appendix 1 5. At this point I can, nonetheless, be clear that the Government's high-level strategic objectives for the further and higher education sectors remain essentially unchanged from those set out in Michael Russell's letter to you of 31 July last year. These are:
• Highly efficient and effective regional structures for colleges, including structures in multi-college regions
• High-quality, effective learning
• Access to education for people from the widest range of backgrounds
• Learning which prepares people well for the world of work and successful long-term careers, and in doing so supports our ambitions for economic growth
• Internationally competitive and impactful research, and
• Effective knowledge exchange and innovation including excellent university/industry collaboration
• Meet the challenges set out by the Developing Scotland's Young Workforce report
• Address the underrepresentation of women on the governing bodies of colleges and universities and at senior levels, and gender balance among student intakes for some key subjects.
·6. I know you will also want to take account of the recently published Programme for Government and Scotland's Economic Strategy. The Scottish Funding Council and the institutions it funds must playa leading role in driving improvement in Scotland's participation, prosperity and fairness.
7. We need to do more to ensure that everyone in Scotland is able to take advantage of the life-changing opportunities our education sector offers. Specifically, I expect the SFC and its partners to strongly support the work of the Commission on Widening Access to address the complex challenge of ensuring equality of access to education. Learners from disadvantaged backgrounds should have the same opportunities as other Scots in gaining access to, and qualifying from, further and higher education.
8. Equally, as we focus on improving attainment and young people's life chances, SFC should continue to use its influence to deliver the strategy to reduce youth unemployment through the Developing Young Workforce agenda and to forge productive partnerships between schools, colleges, universities and employers.
9. SFC should also seek to maximise the opportunity provided by European funding so as to drive innovative activity that delivers the skills employers need in the growth sectors of each region of Scotland and to improve employment prospects of young people in South West Scotland through the Youth Employment Initiative.
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ r v www.gov.scot \J "'_'" I;o.IVB.'iTOR IN PEOPLH UC (15/16) 2 Appendix 1 10. You should also play an active part in improving gender equality generally, and by building awareness and commitment to our partnership for change pledge that challenges all boards to achieve a 50:50 gender balance by 2020. 11. I continue to look to the SFC to direct the funding we provide for higher and further education and research in a way that focuses on delivering the Government's high-level strategic objectives set out above. Moreover, as you strive for continuous improvement in the effectiveness of the funding you provide to colleges and universities, you should continue to build your influence and cement partnerships that will deliver the outcomes we expect.
12. As you do so, I consider it essential that you accelerate your efforts to reform and .strengthen your own organisation to ensure it is attuned to the evolving political and economic environment and the needs of our communities; capable of acute analysis and effective and efficient ways of working; and of delivering effective, high-quality leadership to the HE and FE sectors it funds, ensuring that public investment delivers for learners and, ultimately, grows the economy.
·13. In conclusion, I should like to thank the SFC for its efforts and achievements over the past year including its progress on embedding the Outcome Agreement approach in partnership with universities and colleges; with college regionalisation; and in launching Innovation Centres in partnership with industry. As ever, I should be happy to discuss my expectations further with you. I am copying as below. a rr-: t?~;;l.--C. /~P ANGELA CONSTANCE
Copies:
Stewart Maxwell MSP, Convener of Scottish Parliament Education and Culture Committee Hugh Hall, Chair, Colleges Scotland Shona Struthers, Chief Executive, Colleges Scotland Liz Mcintyre, Convenor of Scotland's Colleges' Principals' Convention Professor Peter Downes, Convener, Universities Scotland Alastair Sim, Director, Universities Scotland Rory Mair, Chief Executive, COSLA Bill Maxwell, Chief Executive, Education Scotland Damien Yeates, Chief Executive, Skills Development Scotland Grahame Smith, General Secretary, Scottish Trades Union Congress Mary Senior, Scottish Official, University and College Union Larry Flanagan, General Secretary, Education Institute for Scotland Dave Prentis, General Secretary, UNISON Scotland Pat Rafferty, General Secretary, UNITE Scotland Harry Donaldson, General Secretary, GMB Scotland Vonnie Sandlan, President, NUS Scotland Lena Wilson, Chief Executive Scottish Enterprise Alex Paterson, Chief Executive, Highlands and Islands Enterprise
Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.gov.scot (-) ".>-~ INVI!STOR IN PEOPI.P. 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 7
UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING
UNIVERSITY COURT
Equality Challenge Unit – Governing bodies, equality and diversity in Scottish higher education institutions
Introduction 1 In June 2015 the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) published a report on ‘Governing bodies, equality and diversity in Scottish higher education institutions’. A full copy of the report is available at www.ecu.ac.uk/wp- content/uploads/2015/06/010_ECU_Governing-bodies-report_v6.pdf. A hard copy of the report will also be distributed at the Court meeting. The report looked at two main areas: The role governing bodies play in assurance of equality The diversity of membership on governing bodies
Purpose 2 Court members should note the report and particularly the recommendations in relation to Court’s responsibilities regarding assurance of equality.
Background
3 At the University of Stirling, Court retains ultimate responsibility for matters relating to equality. The Equality Steering Group, chaired by the Deputy Principal (Operational Strategy & External Affairs), oversees and monitors the implementation of the University’s agreed strategy for equality and diversity and the fulfilment of its statutory equality duties on behalf of Court. The Equality Steering Group reports regularly to the University Strategy and Policy Group and reports at least annually to University Court.
4 The work of the Equality Steering Group, and the officers with responsibility for equality matters within the Policy & Planning team, are also supported by the Dean of Equality & Diversity.
Equality Challenge Unit Report
5 The ECU report was prepared following extensive consultation, particularly with governors, chairs, university secretaries, staff and students.
6 The report highlights the importance of governors understanding their equality responsibilities, the assurance mechanisms that can be used by governing bodies and what role senior management has in relation to equality. Appendix 1 is an extracted list of the recommendations in this report.
7 The second part of the report looks at diversity within the membership of the governing body. The Court Appointments Committee will be considering separately the recommendations in this area.
8 The Equality Steering Group will be considering the full report at their meeting on the 24th September.
1
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 7
Equality implications 9 The report highlights the equality responsibilities for both members of Court and for the Court Appointments Committee in terms of ensuring the membership of Court is diverse.
Resource implications 10 There are no significant resource issues arising from this report.
Data Classification 11 This document is classed as internal.
Recommendations 12 Members are asked to:
note to the responsibilities of Court members in relation to equality; and note the recommendations of the report.
Policy & Planning September 2015
2
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 7
Appendix 1 Recommendations from ‘Governing bodies, equality and diversity in Scottish higher education institutions’ published by Equality Challenge Unit (http://www.ecu.ac.uk/wp‐content/uploads/2015/06/010_ECU_Governing‐bodies‐report_v6.pdf )
Assurance of Equality by Governing Bodies
The following recommendations have been drawn from the practice of institutions involved in the research. By sharing existing learning and practice within institutions, they are intended to help institutions reflect on their current practice and support development. Provide governors with information on their equality responsibilities as part of their induction and ongoing development. Include information on: o why equality is important to the institution, for example, ethos, mission, values, reputation, risk o the Equality Act 2010’s public sector equality duty and Scottish specific duties, and how the institution is responding to these, for example, the institution’s published equality outcomes o the structure or framework for equality within the institution, for example, committees involved, specialist staff, any champions and what they should expect to see reported to them o how progress on equality is measured by the governing body, for example, any equality KPIs Review the awareness and understanding of equality among existing governors and provide additional training and development where necessary. Rather than a one‐size‐fits‐all approach, assess development needs on an individual basis. Ensure there is a clear and effective link between any equality committee, or other committees with equality responsibilities, and the governing body and that information on progress is communicated to and addressed by the governing body regularly. Ideas include: o appoint an independent governor to the committee to feedback to the governing body o give opportunity for the equality committee to request discussion of equality matters at governing body meetings o promote discussion of equality committee minutes/matters arising at governing body meetings Mainstream consideration of equality across committees, for example, through including cover sheets. Consider involving the governing body in the development of the institution’s equality outcomes (next set to be published in 2017) to support increased engagement with equality. Ensure equality receives sufficient agenda time as appropriate through the year. Review annual reports to ensure they allow the governing body to effectively review the institution’s progress on the specific duties. To ensure the equality impact assessment duty is being met: o include an equality impact statement or report on papers going to the governing body and ensure governors question and quality check this information o ensure the governing body undertakes EIA, in a proportionate form, during their own decision or policy‐making Promote engagement between the institution’s equality staff and the governing body, for example, invite equality staff to present to the governing body or to run a training session.
3
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 7
Establish or strengthen the executive’s role in the assurance of equality, and their links to the governing body. Consider designating a senior manager, who is a member of the governing body, as an equality champion. Ensure the language of any information provided and discussion on equality and diversity moves beyond a discourse of compliance with equality law to one of equality and diversity being part of the institutional mission and ethos, and therefore a core element of the governing body’s role.
Diversity of governing bodies
The following recommendations have been drawn from the practice of institutions involved in the research. By sharing existing learning and practice within institutions, they are intended to help institutions reflect on their current practice and support development.
Policy and goals
Establish and publish a clear policy on governing body diversity. Set and publish measurable goals to increase the percentage of independent members that are women, and the percentage that share other protected characteristics where possible, ensuring that individuals cannot be identified. Consider developing goals that encompass the whole of the governing body membership. Introduce, or continue collection of equality monitoring information on both existing members and applicants to the governing body for all protected characteristics. Provide the rationale for this activity and assurance of confidentiality to encourage disclosure. Analyse monitoring data at least annually to identify underrepresentation of any groups and/or progress on goals using benchmarking data, such as staff and student data or regional Scottish census data. Address diversity in governing body effectiveness review processes. Include diversity in the governing body skills matrix.
Developing the pool of external candidates
Demystify the role and publicise the benefits of being a university governor, including the skills that can be developed. Be clear on the requirements for example, time commitments, number and timing of meetings, compensation available. Work with communities to raise awareness of the role of the university in the community, and the role of the university governor within this. Work with employers to increase awareness of the professional development benefits of university board positions, secure their flexibility for their employees to serve as governors, and to publicise vacancies to their employees.
Recruitment and selection of independent members
Implement a raft of measures aimed at increasing the number of members from groups underrepresented on the governing body. Consider broadening the skills and experience required to attract women and other underrepresented groups. In the person specification focus on relevant skills, underlying competencies and personal capabilities and not proven career experience.
4
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 7
Revaluate advertisement wording and style to attract diversity. Emphasise the skills and development opportunities that a governing body position offers. Advertise vacancies widely, and in targeted media, to reach underrepresented groups. Also use existing networks to publicise vacancies and source diverse candidates. Ensure transparent and unbiased selection processes for new members, for example, through selection panel training and ensuring gender‐balanced selection panels.
Elected and externally appointed members
Communicate the governing body’s commitment to increase its diversity to all electing constituents, including the senate, academic council and students’ association, and request their support in achieving this. Work with these electing constituents to support them increase the diversity of their elections to the governing body. Communicate the governing body’s commitment to increase its diversity to external constituents that appoint members to the governing body, such as local authorities.
5
28 September 2015 UC(15/16)8
UNIVERSITY COURT – 28.09.15
Report from Academic Council (Chair: Professor G McCormac)
The following matters are reported from the meeting of Academic Council on 16 September 2015.
Items for noting
(a) UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI)
Council noted that further to the recent institutional audit of arrangements (previously reported to Court in June 2015), a positive report on the audit had been received from UKVI indicating full confidence in the University’s processes to manage its sponsor licences in relation to the immigration system.
(b) Enhancement-led Institutional Review (ELIR)
Council received a report providing an update on preparations and the planned programme for the part 1 visit of the ELIR due to take place in September 2015. The documentation for the review had been submitted to the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) within the deadline. Council noted that details of the review panel’s emerging themes of interest had been received from the QAA; following the part 1 visit there would be a clearer indication of themes for the part 2 visit taking place in November 2015.
(c) Student Intake and Population Planning
Council received a report providing an analysis of the student population following the initial 2015/16 intake of students. Council noted:
The forecast population for home/EU undergraduate students was estimated to be around 11.7% above the indicative population target and therefore outwith the consolidation limit. The over-recruitment was as a result of higher than expected offer conversion rates in most subject areas, and the University exceeding targets for widening access. The anticipated recruitment of undergraduate students from the rest of the UK was 307 which exceeded the recruitment target; this was positive particularly given the removal of caps in England. Recruitment of overseas undergraduate students was anticipated to be slightly ahead of 2014/15 numbers but below the recruitment target figure. An overall increase in home/EU taught postgraduate students was expected. The forecast number of overseas students was below the
1
28 September 2015 UC(15/16)8
budget expectations, although students had been recruited from a more diverse range of countries. Research postgraduate student numbers were likely to be down slightly compared to 2014/15, however the University would continue to recruit throughout the year.
(Student Intake and Population Planning is a separate item on the Court Agenda).
(d) National Student Survey
Council received a report providing an overview of the results of the 2015 National Student Survey (NSS). Council noted:
The University had achieved its best response rate (71%), however overall satisfaction had decreased by one point to 86% (against a UK average of 86%). Subject scores varied across academic schools and whilst significant improvement had been made in some subjects, some scores were disappointing. Colleagues within schools had increased efforts to improve the student experience but this was not reflected consistently in subject level results; further consideration would be given best practice both across the institution and the sector and the Senior Deputy Principal, Dean of Student Affairs and Academic Registrar would work with schools to identify improvement actions. The presentation of subject level trend data would be helpful, particularly to see the impact of small sample sizes on the results.
(e) Postgraduate Taught Experience and Postgraduate Research Experience Surveys 2015
Council received a report providing a summary of results from the 2015 Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES) and Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES). Council noted:
The PTES was carried out annually and the PRES biennially. Response rates for both surveys were amongst the highest in the sector (52% for both surveys). Following a programme of improvement actions focussing on engagement and enhancement, Stirling was now leading the Scottish sector in taught postgraduate satisfaction with top quartile scores in eight of nine measures. PRES saw top quartile scores in four of nine measures. Whilst the PTES agreement prevented the publication of quartile data, the Stirling Graduate School would be working with Development and External Affairs to identify key themes for use in promotional material.
Thanks was extended to colleagues across the institution who had worked to improve the postgraduate student experience and achieve the commendable results.
2
28 September 2015 UC(15/16)8
(f) Destination of Leavers from Higher Education Survey (DLHE)
Council received a report providing a summary of the results from the DLHE return for 2013/14.
Council noted that the positive destination indicator for first-degree students had increased from 93.8% to 95.7% with Stirling achieving 7th place in the UK for employability. There had been a slight reduction in the number of graduates in work however there was an increase in the numbers entering graduate level jobs and going on to further study.
A national review of the DLHE was planned and the University Secretary had been appointed to the steering group that would lead the review.
(g) Annual Reports from Council’s Committees
Council received annual evaluative reports from the Education and Student Experience Committee and the Research Committee.
During discussion it was noted that changes to the research leave scheme had resulted in a reduced success rate for applicants. Whilst the scheme was intended to schedule research leave in a more strategic manner, the role of such a scheme in attracting and retaining staff was discussed. . A number of changes were being considered following implementation of the revised scheme and these were being taken forward by the Dean of Research Enhancement.
(h) Appointment to Committees
Council approved a number of appointments to committees. Processes for nominating colleagues for committee appointments were discussed; Council noted that these processes would be considered as part of the review of Academic Council effectiveness that would take place in the coming session.
Donna Waddington 17.09.15
3
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(i)
UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING
ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMITTEE EFFECTIVENESS
University Court
Purpose
1 This is a report from the Chair of University Court. The report covers the period 1 August 2014 to 31 July 2015 and details the main issues considered by Court during the year.
Remit and Membership
2 The remit and membership of Court is specified in the University’s Statutes and was noted by the members at the September 2014 meeting.
3 New members of Court during the year were: Professor Edmund Burke, Ex-officio, Senior Deputy Principal from 1st August 2014 Andrew Kinnell, Ex-officio, Students’ Union President from 1st June 2015
4 Members leaving were: Alan Simpson, Chair of Court to 31st July 2015 Gordon Pomphrey, Lay Member to 31st July 2015 Amy McDermott, Students’ Union President to 31st May 2015 Professor Brian Austin, Academic Council member to 31st July 2015 Professor Edmund Burke, Senior Deputy Principal 31st July 2015 Professor Tara Fenwick, Academic Council member 31st July 2015 Dr Jozsef Farkas, Academic Council member 31st July 2015
5 There was a vacancy throughout the year for a member nominated by the Chancellor.
6 A summary of attendance by members during the year is included in Appendix 1.
Meetings during the year
7 Court met five times during the year: 28-29 September 2014 – including Away Day 15 December 2014 23 March 2015 6 May 2015 – Special meeting of Court 22 June 2015
Main items of business
8 Court has responsibility to govern, manage and regulate the finances and accounts of the University and to oversee the strategic direction of the University. In this capacity Court has focused on the University’s strategic direction and financial health, its progress in internationalisation, its long term capital infrastructure needs, strategic risk management and institutional performance. The Court considered and/or approved the following items during the year: Financial Statements Outcome Agreement
1
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(i)
Plan for Academic Success Annual Budget Performance Report Student Intake and Population Planning Overview of Philanthropic health Infrastructure Plan Development of next Strategic Plan Institutional Reflective Analysis for Enhancement-led Institutional Review Research Strategy Learning & Teaching Quality Enhancement Strategy
9 Following the introduction of the Scottish Code of Good HE Governance in 2013 Court has received a number of updates on changes that have been made in order to implement the good practice guidance in the Code. During the year members were invited to comment on the proposed Higher Education Bill and a response to the Scottish Government consultation was submitted on behalf of Court.
10 In December 2014 Court approved the process for appointing a new Chair of Court. The position was widely advertised internally and externally and a number of prospective candidates were interviewed. Following this process a special meeting of Court in May 2015 approved the appointment of Fiona Sandford as the new Chair of Court from 1st August 2015.
11 The University’s Ordinances are kept under review and during the year amendments were made to ordinance 1 (Constitution of the Students’ Association), ordinance 18 (Matriculation, Registration and Payment of Fees and Charges by Students), and ordinance 58 (Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates of the University).
12 During the year Court receives regular updates from all its committees and Academic Council. Reports received were: Academic Council – 4 reports & Annual report Joint Policy, Planning & Resources (JPPRC) – 3 reports & Annual report Academic Advancement & Promotions Committee (AAPC) – Annual report Audit Committee – 3 reports & Annual report Court Appointments Committee – 2 reports Combined Joint Negotiating & Consultation Committee (CJNCC) – Annual report Remunerations Committee – 1 report & Annual report University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) – Annual report
13 Reports from these committees keep Court members up-to-date on important issues such as the latest set of management accounts (JPPRC) and the Register of Strategic Risks (Audit).
14 Other regular items on the Court agenda include an update on key developments in the external environment and an update on HR matters.
15 Policies approved by Court during the year included: Data Classification Policy Payments Policy Risk Management Policy Risk Appetite Statement
2
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(i)
16 Other general updates that were given to Court members during the year covered subjects such as nursing provision, the Macrobert Arts Centre, INTO joint venture and international developments.
External factors
17 Court is kept well briefed of external factors that could impact the University via the regular report on the external environment. Topics covered during the year included:
Changes/proposed changes in legislation (Counter Terrorism and Security Bill, Scotland Bill, HE Governance Bill, Smith Commission) Political changes, elections and referendum Policy changes/reviews (UKVI, postgraduate funding, tuition fee policy, comprehensive spending review, Nurse Review of Research Councils, Fair Work Convention) Initiatives (innovation centres, open access, widening access, Science and Innovation Strategy)
Equality implications
18 In April 2015 the Committee of Scottish Chairs published a policy statement saying they would work with governing bodies to do everything which they reasonably could to achieve a minimum of 40 percent of each gender among independent members of the governing body.
19 On the 31st July 2015 there were 2 female lay members on Court out of 13 (i.e. 15.4%). Court Appointments Committee will seek to improve this ratio over the next few years.
20 A summary of equality data for all Court members as of 31st July 2015 is attached in Appendix 2.
Evaluation
21 The Scottish Code of Good HE Governance provides guidance on ensuring that institutions promote success, integrity and probity of the institution as a whole. The Code suggests that good governance entails: Supporting the institutions mission as an autonomous institution; Ensuring the proper and effective use of its funds Promoting an appropriate participation of its key constituents, including students and staff Guarding against potential conflicts of interest Maintaining and observing clear statements of authority and responsibility throughout the institution Matching such authority and responsibility with accountability to key internal and external stakeholders.
22 More specifically the responsibilities of Court include: Approving the mission and strategic vision of the institution, long-term business plans, key performance indicators and annual budgets Appointing the Principal and putting in place suitable arrangements to monitor his/her performance Ensuring the quality of Institutional education provision
3
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(i)
Ensuring adherence to the funding requirements of the Scottish Funding Council Ensuring the establishment and monitoring of systems of control and accountability, including financial and operational controls and risk assessment Monitoring performance against KPIs and where possible against appropriate benchmarks.
23 Court has worked effectively to fulfil its remit and responsibilities under the Scottish Code of Good HE Governance during 2014/15 by engaging with the business detailed in this report. Court has also received assurances from its sub-committees, via reports and regular updates, that they are also fulfilling the responsibilities that have been delegated to them by Court. Members were proactive in their engagement with each item on the agenda and meetings were well attended.
24 Following a recommendation made at the last full review of Court Effectiveness, Court has undertaken visits to various areas of the University prior to each Court meeting. This is a way for Court members to gain a greater understanding about the operations of different areas of the University and to meet with staff from across schools and services. During 2014/15 visits were undertaken to: Residences (Willow Court and Polwarth House) HR & Organisational Development School of Arts & Humanities Research & Enterprise Office
25 Visits have always been positively received by both Court members and the areas that have been visited who welcome the direct engagement.
26 In 2015/16 Court will be finalising the Strategic Plan 2016 – 2021 which will guide the work of Court and the University for the next 5 years.
Data Classification
27 This document is classified as internal.
Recommendations
28 The University Court is invited to note this report.
Alan Simpson Chair of University Court July 2015
4
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(i)
Appendix 1
Summary of Attendance
Name Dates No. of meetings attended Regular meetings Special meeting (out of 4) (out of 1) Alan Simpson (Chair) 4 1 Harry Adam (Vice Chair) 4 Simon Anderson 3 Professor Brian Austin 1 1 Professor Edmund Burke 4 1 Kevin Condron 3 Professor Brigid Daniel 4 James Dick 4 1 Dr Jozsef Farkas 3 1 Professor Tara Fenwick 3 Alison Green 3 Scott Haldane 3 Peter Holmes 4 Andrew Kinnell From 1 June 1 (of 1) (of 0) 2015 Sean Lewis 1 Lauren Marriott 3 1 Lynne Marr 2 Professor Gerry 4 1 McCormac Amy McDermott To 31 May 2015 3 (of 3) 1 Barbara McKissack 4 1 Ricky Murray 2 1 Gordon Pomphrey 3 1 Councillor Mike Robbins 3 1 Professor Leigh Robinson 4 1 Andrew Sturgess 4
5
Summary of Court Equality & Diversity data 31 July 2015 UC (15/16) 9(i) Appendix 2
Total number of members: 24 Current vacancies: 1
Age 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-80 No. 2 1 7 5 8 1 % 8% 4% 29% 21% 33% 4%
Caring Responsibilities Not Yes No known No. 4 16 4 % 17% 67% 17%
Disability
Prefer not Yes No to answer No. 0 23 1 % 0% 96% 4%
Ethnicity No. % White 23 96% Other mixed 1 4%
Gender Gender of Lay members F M F M No. 8 16 2 11 % 33% 67% 15% 85%
Same Gender at birth
Prefer not Not Yes No to answer known No. 19 0 1 4 % 79% 0% 4% 17%
Religion No. % None 5 21% Christian 13 54% Another Religion/Belief 1 4% Prefer not to answer 2 8% Not known 3 13%
Sexual Orientation No. % Gay 1 4% Heterosexual/straight 20 83% Prefer not to answer 1 4% Not known 2 8% 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(ii)
UNIVERSITY COURT ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMITTEE EFFECTIVENESS: JOINT POLICY, PLANNING AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
1 This paper provides a report on the key activities undertaken by the Joint Policy, Planning and Resources Committee (JPPRC) during the academic session 2014/15, and details the main issues considered by the Committee during the year.
REMIT AND COMPOSITION
2 The remit of the committee was approved in December 2011 by University Court and is as follows:
To consider the institutional Strategic Plan and recommend its approval to University Court;
To ensure the alignment of all strategic documents and institutional plans with the approved Strategic Plan, and to recommend their approval to University Court;
To evaluate progress in achieving the objectives of the institutional Strategic Plan and the objectives and targets set in underpinning planning and strategy documents;
To monitor and advise the University Court on policy, strategy and resource issues relating to the University infrastructure (physical, technological and human);
To scrutinise new or revised University policies and recommend their approval to University Court and/or Academic Council;
To recommend the annual University budget to the University Court;
To advise the University Court on the overall financial position and resource horizon in relation to agreed strategic objectives;
To monitor and review financial performance throughout the year in the wider context of University strategy and the approved annual budget (including any companies in which the University has an interest), and to review the annual outturn and performance;
To scrutinise and endorse the institution’s Capital Plan and recommend its approval to University Court;
To undertake all other matters as may be stated in the Schedule of Reservations and Schedule of Delegated Authority.
3 The membership of JPPRC comprises:
1
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(ii)
Membership One of four lay members of University Court (Chair) Two of four lay members of University Court Three of four lay members of University Court Four of four lay members of University Court Chair of University Court President of University of Stirling Students’ Union (ex-officio) VP Activities and Development of USSU (ex-officio) Principal Senior Deputy Principal Deputy Principal Deputy Principal University Secretary One of two Heads of Academic School Two of two Heads of Academic School One of three members of academic staff who are not Heads of School Two of three members of academic staff who are not Heads of School Three of three members of academic staff who are not Heads of School
In Attendance Deputy Secretary Director of Finance Director of Estates and Campus Services Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development Director of Research and Enterprise Director of Information Services Director of Commercial Services Director of Development and External Affairs Committee Secretary
4 A summary of attendance by members during the year is included in Appendix 1.
MEETINGS HELD IN 2014/15
5 The committee met three times during the 2014/15 session, on 25 November 2014, 3 March 2015 and 26 May 2015.
ITEMS OF BUSINESS
6 The following items of business were considered by the committee during 2014/15:
6.1 Developments in the External Environment
JPPRC received a regular update on recent developments in the higher education sector and the potential impact to the University of Stirling. This included policy developments in Scotland and other parts of the UK particularly in relation to core teaching and research activities.
6.2 Quarterly Management Accounts
JPPRC received a regular report that summarised the management accounts on a quarterly basis. The reports provided commentary on the major areas of income and expenditure, whether they were anticipated to be in line with budget and, if not, JPPRC
2
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(ii)
was informed of any factors causing a projected deviation (either adverse or favourable) from budget.
6.3 Plan for Academic Success / Infrastructure Plan
The committee endorsed a Plan for Academic Success (PAS) for 2015/16 that represented the outcome of the annual planning and budgeting process. The PAS included a summary of institutional performance and progress made towards the University’s Strategic Plan targets. JPPRC also endorsed the annual infrastructure plan for 2015/16.
6.4 Annual Budget
JPPRC considered and endorsed the draft budget for 2015/16 and indicative budgets for 2016/17 and 2017/18. Members considered the detail of budgetary assumptions for the financial year that were presented as part of the paper, including assumptions for both income and expenditure.
6.5 Year-End Financial Statements
JPPRC considered and endorsed the year-end financial statements for 2013/14 incorporating the Operating Financial Review (ORF). In addition, the Committee received an impairment review of fixed-assets and an update on the position in relation to covenant compliance.
6.6 Outcome Agreement
JPPRC endorsed a draft of the Outcome Agreement for 2015/16, which was presented in final draft to University Court and was agreed with the Scottish Funding Council (SFC).
6.7 Student Population Planning
The committee considered and approved student intake targets for 2015/16.
6.8 Fees and Scholarships
JPPRC approved tuition fees for entrants in 2016/17. The committee also approved the continuation of institutional scholarships for undergraduates and postgraduates on non- capped programmes.
6.9 Residences Redevelopment Project
The committee received regular exception-reports on the redevelopment of student residences on the Stirling Campus. Members also received an annual report from the Chair of the Programme Board that provided a summary of the activities of the Board in overseeing the delivery and governance of the residences programme.
6.10 Residential Rents and Allocations
Based on the recommendations of a rent review group, JPPRC approved a set of residential rents and the allocations policy for 2015/16.
3
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(ii)
6.11 Human Resources
The committee received regular updates relating to sector-wide HR issues such as nationally agreed pay awards, industrial action, and issues relating to hours-to-be-notified contracts. The committee also received updates on actions taken in response to the previous staff survey and plans for the next survey.
6.12 Equality and Diversity
JPPRC received an update on behalf of the Equalities Steering Group on the progress made against equality outcomes approved by University Court in spring 2013, including an updated Mainstreaming Equality Report.
6.13 Strategies and Policies
The committee scrutinised a number of draft policies and strategies, including the Data Classification Policy, the Ethical Code, the Business Continuity Policy, the Research Data Management Policy and the Internationalisation Strategy.
6.14 Compliance
JPPRC received annual reports on Freedom of Information (FoI) compliance, the Operational Risk and Environmental Sustainability (ORES) report, the Annual Report on Procurement and the Transparent Approach to Costing (TRAC) return.
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JPPRC
7 Recommendations and advice from JPPRC were communicated via regular reports to Academic Council and University Court.
EVALUATION
8 The Committee has fulfilled its remit during 2014/15 by actively engaging with the business detailed in this report and providing timely scrutiny and advice to Academic Council and University Court. Members were proactive in their engagement with each item of committee business and meetings were well attended.
DATA CLASSIFICATION
9 This paper is classified as Internal.
RECOMMENDATION
10 The University Court is invited to note this annual report from JPPRC.
Andy Sturgess Chair of the Joint Policy, Planning and Resources Committee September 2015
4
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(ii)
Appendix 1
Summary of Attendance
Dates No. of Meetings Name attended (out of 3) *Mr Andrew Sturgess (Chair) 3 *Mr Harry Adam 3 *Mr Peter Holmes 3 *Ms Barbara McKissack 3 *Mr Alan G Simpson 3 Amy McDermott 3 Lauren Marriott 3 Andrew Kinnell From 1 June 2015 0 (of 0) Professor Alison Bowes 3 Professor Edmund Burke 2 Professor Steve Burt To 31 December 2014 0 (of 1) Professor Malcolm MacLeod From 1 January 2015 1 (of 2) Professor John Gardner 2 Professor Gerry McCormac 3 Mr Stephen Morrow 1 Professor Richard Oram To 31 December 2014 1 (of 1) Ms Eileen Schofield 3 Professor Leigh Sparks 3
* Lay member
5
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv)
UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING
ANNUAL REPORT ON COMMITTEE EFFECTIVENESS
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Purpose
1. This paper presents a report on the key activities undertaken by the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) during the academic session 2014/15, and details the main issues considered by the Committee during the year.
Remit and Composition
2. The remit and composition of the committee is provided as annex 1.
Meetings held in 2014/15
3. The committee met twice during the 2014/15 session, on 7 November 2014 and 8 May 2015.
Quality Assurance of the Ethical Review Process
4. Research Ethics Committees operated at school level during 2014/15 with the exception of the School of Natural Sciences which continued to operate at divisional level.
5. At each meeting of UREC, reports were received from each of the school/divisional research ethics committees (S/DRECs) summarising their work during the preceding period. In total, there were 686 projects considered by SRECs during the course of the 2014/15 academic session (an increase from 621 projects considered during 2013/14). A breakdown of these projects is provided in annex 2.
6. Reports from S/DRECs were submitted using a proforma which allowed for the provision of additional and consistent information to demonstrate the nature of S/DREC engagement. S/DREC reports also provided enhanced information on key developments, details of rejected applications and challenging issues or recurring themes considered. In addition, the revised reports allowed UREC members to easily identify project applications approved subject to amendment and those resubmitted or rejected, through the use of consistent outcome codes. Additional information on applications approved following major amendment was provided as relevant within S/DREC reports.
7. The Committee discussed the reports submitted by S/DRECs and requested additional information and clarification from the chair of the S/DREC as necessary. Such enquiries might relate to individual projects or to the processes and work of the S/DREC more generally. Examples of issues and good practice highlighted and discussed by the Committee in 2014/15 included:
Difficulty of appointing lay members to S/DRECs; the process for the appointment and selection of lay representatives; and clarification of the status of the lay member; Clarification of the issues concerning project applications in one school which had requested retrospective approval; Awareness of external review processes (e.g. NHS/NRES); The frequency of meetings at school and divisional level and the process for consideration of proposals (whether virtually by email or face to face at meetings); The examining of ethical issues related to the medium of documentary;
1
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv)
Positive implications of staff training in relation to an increased number of informal enquiries and applications within one school; Progressing proposals relating to peer review.
Ethics Committee Structure
8. At its meeting in November 2014, the committee considered a revised paper on the ethics committee structure. This aimed to address key points identified by the chairs of S/DRECs without diluting the primary aim of the review of the University Ethics Committee structure, to ensure an appropriate degree of consistency and to position the University as sector leading in its research ethics practices. Underlying the proposed new structure was the principle that committees should be structured around the nature, focus and methods of the project in question, rather than the discipline within which it originated. Within the revised proposal the principle of separating ethical scrutiny from academic management was maintained in order to remove any conflict of interests.
9. Members approved the proposal for a revised University Ethics Committee structure from session 2015/16, although this approval was not unanimous. Members received an update on the implementation of the revised ethics committee structure at the meeting held in May 2015. In order to progress this, an implementation plan was developed and an implementation group established in July 2015. The revised committee structure is set out in annex 3.
Wider Issues and Activities
During the course of the year, the committee noted the following items as reported by the Research and Enterprise Office:
10. Guidelines for handling allegations of Research Misconduct
The University guidelines for handling allegations of research misconduct will be reworked in consultation with the Head of Human Resources and Organisation Development and the University legal advisors Anderson Strathern.
11. Concordat to support Research Integrity
As part of the University’s compliance with the Concordat to support Research Integrity and the review of the Research and Enterprise Office webpages, sections of the Code of Good Research Practice are being rewritten and the information provided online is being made more user-friendly.
The Research Policy Officer, participated in a one-day event hosted by the University of Glasgow bringing together colleagues from across the UK to share best practice on the implementation of training and support structures for all researchers. As a result of attending this event, and as part of the Researcher Development Programme, the University hosted a training session for researchers and members of the S/DRECs on research integrity. This was held in February 2015 and provided an overview of research integrity, introduced the Concordat to support Research Integrity and resulted in a lively discussion of the issues raised.
12. Research Management System
Further investment in the development of the Research Management System has been approved by the University. The Research Systems Manager is working with colleagues
2
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv)
in Information Services to achieve a systematic solution to many administrative processes including the aspiration to enhance the ethics approval functionality.
13. Electronic ethics solutions
A review has been undertaken of three electronic ethics systems that are being used within the sector. The University of Sussex and Leeds Beckett University have built their own systems and Stirling was approached by infonetica.net whose system has been implemented by King’s College London and Cranfield University. In consultation with the Research Systems Manager it was considered that the capabilities offered by these systems could be accommodated in the further development of the Research Management System. Some of the capabilities discussed were;
Online checklists and forms (with save and edit options) Workflow Messages/Comments facility Electronic approvals/signatures
14. Review of safety protocols
A review of safety protocols has been undertaken and a report will be submitted to UREC during 2015/16.
15. Potential loss of confidential information
In November 2014 the Research and Enterprise Office were notified of a potential loss of confidential research data. A research student had their vehicle stolen while transporting some field notes and consent forms. Following a School based inquiry it was determined that all the data lost was anonymised, other than participant signatures. The student’s supervisor and the Research and Enterprise Office worked together to determine a course of action. It was decided that letters, detailing the loss and the procedures followed, would be sent to the external research ethics committee responsible for the approval, the SREC and the Academic Registrar. As a result of this loss and following a recent internal audit of research data carried out by Ernst & Young the Research and Enterprise Office will develop guidance and policy documents on procedures to be followed in the rare cases where research data has been lost.
Sector-wide Implications
16. Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Framework for Research Ethics
The committee noted an update on the ESRC Framework for Research Ethics.
In January 2015, following review, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) published an updated version of its Framework for Research Ethics. A summary of the key changes and emphases include:
The importance of ethical thinking throughout the lifecycle of the project from planning through to dissemination, archiving and data reuse; A re-emphasis on maximising the benefit of the research and minimising harm to participants; A draft UK wide policy framework for health and social care research.
The Chief Scientist Office (CSO), along with the other devolved administrations developed a draft UK-wide policy framework to replace the existing country specific versions. CSO invited Scottish institutions to comment on the draft framework by 1st May 2015. The comments from Scottish institutions will feed into the development of a revised framework
3
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv)
that will be made available for consultation later in 2015. The Research and Enterprise Office drafted a response after seeking views from the School of Health Sciences and the School of Applied Social Science. The revised framework will be circulated to UREC members for comment in autumn 2015.
Animals Scientific Procedures Act (ASPA) 2013 Notifications
17. The use of animals in experiments and testing is regulated under ASPA 2013 which is implemented by the Home Office. The University was consulted on updated ASPA guidance which replaced the draft guidance issued in January 2013.
18. Members received a summary of the annual return of statistics relating to regulated procedures started during 2014 and a comparison with the statistics returned for 2013 and 2012. The committee noted that an apparent reduction in numbers was the result of a change in reporting requirements which has changed the number of animals completing procedures when previously the number of animals starting procedures was recorded.
19. Members noted that updates would be made to the University’s licence regarding named persons and that recruitment was underway for a Named Veterinary Surgeon.
20. The committee received a summary of a number of compliance issues relating to the functioning of the Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Body (AWERB); the Code of Practice for operation of Home Office licenced establishments for animal experimentation; and, the Concordat on Openness on Animal Research in the UK. It was acknowledged by members that the University worked closely with the Home Office Inspector in this area. The areas of risk identified were addressed by relevant areas of the University and an update was received by UREC at its meeting in May 2015.
Equality Implications
21. The Committee takes cognisance of equality issues in the appointment of its business and membership. Equality issues relating to specific project applications are addressed by the S/DREC and noted by UREC.
Evaluation
22. The Committee has fulfilled its remit during 2014/15 actively engaging with the business detailed in this report. In session 2015/16 the committee will monitor the implementation of the ethics committee structure in order to ensure an appropriate degree of consistency and to position the University as sector leading in our research ethics practices.
Data Classification
23. This document is classed as internal.
Recommendations
24. The University Court is invited to note the report.
Simon Anderson Chair of University Research Ethics Committee August 2015
4
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv) Annex 1
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Remit and Composition
1. The remit of the committee was approved in October 2012 by University Court as follows: a) To keep the University Court informed of issues and legislative requirements relating to research ethics; b) To develop, implement and keep under review arrangements to quality assure the ethical review process within schools; c) To report to the University Court on a regular basis on the operation of the ethical review process; d) To provide guidance as to the activities to be undertaken by School Ethics Committees; e) To monitor the functioning of School Ethics Committees; f) To consider any contentious project proposals which emerge from School Ethics Committees; g) To submit an annual report of its business to University Court.
In discharging its responsibilities the Committee will pay due regard to the promotion of equality and diversity.
2. The revised composition of the committee was approved by University Court in September 2013 and comprised:
Membership Chair (Lay Member of University Court) Deputy Principal (Research) (ex-officio) Two Directors of Research Two Chairs of School Research Ethics Committees* Member from outwith the University University Secretary and Establishment Licence Holder** (ex- officio) Deputy Establishment Licence Holder (ex-officio) The Chair of University Court (ex-officio) The Principal (ex-officio) Named University Vet (in attendance) Director of Research and Enterprise (in attendance) Home office representative (in attendance) Committee Secretary
*The inclusion of two directors of research and two chairs of school research ethics committees is intended to strike an appropriate balance in terms of interests and knowledge in relation to research funding and ethics.
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv) Annex 1
** The Establishment Licence holder has overall responsibility for the implementation of the ethical review process and compliance with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (ASPA) 2013.
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv) Annex 2
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
1. Summary of project applications by school/division reported to UREC during 2014/15
School/Division Reported to UREC in November 2014 Reported to UREC in May 2015
Staff RPG TPG UG Staff RPG TPG UG Applied Social 5 0 6 0 14 10 42 66 Science Arts and 2 8 11 0 2 3 1 2 Humanities Education 3 0 0 0 3 8 3 0 Management 8 0 4 0 5 5 1 5 Aquaculture 18 1 8 3 23 8 25 1 Psychology 6 1 17 30 32 91 25 21 Biological & 1 5 12 18 2 1 0 26 Environmental Sciences Health Sciences 2 2 1 0 8 5 1 0 Sport 8 2 12 0 2 8 13 31 Total 53 19 71 51 91 139 111 152
RPG = Research Postgraduate TPG = Taught Postgraduate UG = Undergraduate
2. Total number of project applications submitted by category
Category November 2014 May 2015 Total
Staff 53 91 144 RPG 19 139 158 TPG 71 111 182 UG 51 152 203
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv) Annex 2
3. Category of Approval
3.1 Reported to UREC in November 2014
School/ Total Approved Approved Approved Approval Proposal Division number without subject to subject to deferred rejected of amendment minor major projects amendment amendment Applied Social 11 7 4 0 0 0 Science Arts and 21 19 2 0 0 0 Humanities Education 3 0 3 0 0 0 Management 12 5 7 0 0 0 Aquaculture 30 24 5 0 1 0 Psychology 54 24 27 2 0 1 Biological & 36 35 1 0 0 0 Environmental Sciences Health 5 4 0 0 1 0 Sciences Sport 22 10 12 0 0 0 Total 194 128 61 2 2 1
3.2 Reported to UREC in May 2015
School/ Total Approved Approved Approved Approval Proposal Division number without subject to subject to deferred rejected of amendment minor major projects amendment amendment Applied Social 132 125 5 2 0 0 Science Arts and 8 8 0 0 0 0 Humanities Education 14 13 1 0 0 0 Management 16 12 2 0 0 2 Aquaculture 57 50 6 0 1 0 Psychology 168 103 63 1 0 1 Biological & 29 22 7 0 0 0 Environmental Sciences Health 14 2 7 1 0 0 Sciences* Sport 54 0 54 0 0 0 Total 492 335 145 4 1 3
*4 projects were pending approval at the date of report submission 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 9(iv) Annex 3
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Approved new committee structure
The new structure for research ethics at the University of Stirling was approved by the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC) meeting in November 2014. The new structure moves away from separate division based ethics committees to position Stirling as sector leading in our research ethics practices by separating ethical scrutiny from academic management.
UREC
Animal, Environmental & Human Research (non-invasive) NHS, Invasive or Clinical Research Conservation Research
Panel A
Education AWERB Applied Social Science Stirling Management School Arts & Humanities
Panel B
Non-Home Office Animal, Non-NHS Health Sciences Environmental & Conservation Sport Natural Sciences 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING
UNIVERSITY COURT
Annual Report on Institution-led Review of Quality in Academic Year 2014/15
Introduction
1. The attached annual report relating to academic year 2014/15 is the third of the cycle which began in August 2012 and as such adheres to the guidance set out in the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) circular Council guidance to HEIs on quality, August 2012 (attached as Annex 1).
2. The deadline for receipt of the report by the SFC is 30 September 2015. It is required to be endorsed by a full meeting of the governing body with an annual statement of assurance signed by the Chair of the governing body.
Purpose
3. The purpose of this paper is for endorsement.
Equality implications
4. No equality implications have been identified as a result of the report.
Resource implications
5. There are no resource implications as a result of the attached report.
Data Classification
6. This paper is classified as Internal.
Recommendations
7. Court is asked to endorse the annual report.
Governance and Review September 2015 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
INSTITUTION‐LED REVIEW OF QUALITY IN 2014/15
ANNUAL REPORT TO THE SCOTTISH FUNDING COUNCIL
1. SELF‐EVALUATION PROCESSES
1.1 The University’s self‐evaluation processes take account of chapter B8 of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education, Programme Monitoring and Review and SFC guidance to higher education institutions on quality (August 2012). Processes comprise module review, annual programme review, and periodic learning and teaching review (incorporating periodic programme review).
Module Review
1.2 Procedures for module review require consideration of feedback from student module evaluation questionnaires, external examiners and student staff consultative committees. Each semester the outcomes of module review are discussed at school learning and teaching committees with outcomes and action points reported to divisional committees and student staff consultative committees.
Annual Programme Review
1.3 Procedures for annual programme review provide a framework for programme directors to reflect upon the outcomes of the module review process, consider feedback from external examiners and students, as well as data on student achievement. Annual programme review reports are considered at school learning and teaching committees; institutional summaries on the outcomes of annual programme review are considered at the University’s Education and Student Experience Committee.
Learning and Teaching Review
1.4 Subject review is carried out through a rolling programme of learning and teaching reviews conducted at subject level. The review includes scrutiny of all credit‐bearing provision at undergraduate and postgraduate level for all modes of study, including any collaborative provision in those areas, CPD and continuing education provision, as well as the postgraduate research student experience.
1.5 The University conducted internal reviews of learning and teaching in the following areas during 2014/15:
(i) Languages (November 2014) (ii) Communications, Media and Culture (December 2014) (iii) Housing, Dementia Studies, and Social Work CPD (March 2015) (iv) Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology (April 2015)
1.6 Review panels are able to make recommendations to a variety of groups within the University relating to operational, procedural or curricular matters; the report also identifies good practice for wider dissemination across the University.
1 | Page
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
1.7 Detailed reports from learning and teaching reviews, together with the formal response from the subject area to the outcomes of the report, are considered at the University’s Education and Student Experience Committee. Recommendations are communicated to schools, central support services, and relevant University committees as appropriate, all of whom are required to respond formally. Good practice identified within the reports is disseminated within schools through directors of learning and teaching.
2. EXTERNAL ACCREDITATION
2.1 An accreditation visit was undertaken in 2014/15 by the following bodies:
(i) British Psychological Society (BPS) and Health Care Professions Council (HCPC): MSc in Psychology of Sport (accredited) (April 2015). Accreditation was for the 2014/15 cohort of students following a paper‐based accreditation exercise in March 2014.
3. OUTCOMES OF SELF‐EVALUTION PROCESSES
3.1 Consideration of annual programme review activity evidenced ongoing review of curriculum content, learning resources, and the appropriateness of assessment methods. Reflection and enhancement activity was generally a continuous process with subject areas responding appropriately to feedback and changes in the internal and external environment.
3.2 Commendations arising from learning and teaching reviews in 2014/15 included:
(i) The supportive and positive learning experience for students. (ii) Strategies for the development of taught postgraduate programmes. (iii) Internationalisation initiatives. (iv) The sense of collegiality in subject areas. (v) Development of cross‐school partnerships to enhance inter‐ and multi‐disciplinary learning and teaching. (vi) Mentoring programmes for newly appointed early career staff and support provided for teaching assistants. (vii) Engagement with student survey data to identify and reflect upon specific issues. (viii) Strong development of PhD provision and developments in research postgraduate student support. (ix) The approach to feedback on assessment in some subjects. (x) The efforts in some subjects to improve the student experience including meeting the needs of a diverse student body.
3.3 Recommendations arising from learning and teaching reviews in 2014/15 included:
(i) Review workload allocation models. (ii) Increase emphasis on opportunities for students to undertake a full year studying abroad. (iii) Improved marketing of postgraduate programmes. (iv) Review processes for communications with students particularly relating to employability within the curriculum; raising awareness of contacts and appropriate channels for raising issues; ensuring students are aware of all available resources; and ensure students are aware of the student representative system. (v) Establishment of a formal system for virtual communication between postgraduate students.
2 | Page
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
(vi) Consideration of ways in which postgraduate students could engage more fully with the wider student community. (vii) One subject area was asked to ensure comprehensive engagement with the annual programme review process and University policy relating to responses to external examiner reports. (viii) Encourage active links with relevant student activities to increase opportunities for students to gain practice skills. (ix) Enhanced provision of writing skills support for international students. (x) Consideration of the risks around reliance on the ESRC doctoral training centre. (xi) Provision of shared space for taught postgraduate students.
3.4 Outcomes of self‐evaluation processes are considered at subject, school and institutional level. Good practice is shared across the University facilitated by the Education and Student Experience Committee, Directors of Learning and Teaching, and the annual learning and teaching conference. Good practice identified in 2014/15 will also be disseminated through ‘Teaching Bites’, part of the University’s eLearning Blog.
4. SUPPORT SERVICE REVIEW
4.1 A new approach to service area review is being developed during 2015, within which we will undertake a periodic programme of reviews of service provision. This will focus on enhancing the 'stakeholder' experience, looking at coherent service provision, rather than simply reviewing a specific service directorate at a time. For example, we will review library services, counselling and wellbeing services, accommodation services, careers services etc. The reviews will consider the evidence base including student feedback, outcomes from LEAN reviews (based on the principle of continuous improvement), internal audit reports and actions, sectoral benchmarking materials, KPIs relevant to the service provision, strategic planning statements for the wider service area and service action plans. The review process will also engage with staff and stakeholder groups, and will focus on plans to enhance the service provision, sharing good practice and contribute to the University's strategic objectives. The process will also involve an external perspective through the inclusion of an external panel member. The outcomes of service area review for all student facing services and functions will be reported to ESEC, in order to ensure that one body oversees both service area and periodic learning and teaching review.
5. MONITORING AND ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
5.1 The learning and teaching review process considers a range of performance measures drawn from the University’s annual performance report and other sources. This includes measures of retention, progression, completion, attainment and achievement derived from internal systems. Where possible, performance indicators are benchmarked against equivalent subject groups at other institutions.
5.2 In relation to student engagement, the learning and teaching review process considers directly the way in which subject areas solicit, consider and act upon feedback from students. Subject areas consider student feedback (including National Student Survey and Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey data) as part of the annual programme review process, the outcomes of which are considered at their learning and teaching review.
5.3 Examples of action taken in 2014/15 response to student feedback have included:
(i) The introduction of a University‐wide Wi‐Fi allowing students to ‘bring your own device’.
3 | Page
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
(ii) Update of the ‘mStir’ app to contain bus times and other useful information. (iii) A signed agreement with five major publishers for access to 27,000 recently published e‐ books. (iv) The introduction of a personal tutor for every undergraduate student to provide general pastoral support. (v) Invested in an online training suite allowing students to access training courses on employability, software, management, and study skills. (vi) Opened the library 24/7 for the duration of the examination period. (vii) Creation of opportunities for postgraduate students to mix with peers such as School‐wide seminar series, formal induction sessions for programmes and discussion sessions for distance learners. (viii) Online electronic resource list for every taught postgraduate module available prior to the start of the relevant semester. (ix) Amendments to the semester schedule including changing the spring semester start date and moving the autumn semester resit examination diet.
6. ROLE AND NATURE OF STUDENT INVOLVEMENT IN SELF‐EVALUATION PROCESSES
6.1 Feedback from students through module evaluation questionnaires and Student Staff Consultative Committees (SSCC) is considered through the module and annual programme review processes. Students are members of school learning and teaching committees and the Education and Student Experience Committee at which the outcomes of module and annual review are considered and action points identified.
6.2 The learning and teaching review process engages directly with the relevant SSCC as a method of obtaining student feedback. Student members of the SSCC for the subject area under review are invited to contribute to the review process by producing a document detailing any issues which they would wish the review panel to be aware. The form in which this is presented is for the SSCC to decide, but might be, for example, a list of bullet‐points or a minute of the discussion of issues at the SSCC.
6.3 The panel meets with student representatives during the review. The review schedule includes sessions with the review panel and undergraduate, postgraduate taught and research student representatives, approximately half of whom are nominated through the SSCC, and half by the subject area. The number of student representatives is dependent upon the size of the subject area, but would reflect different years and modes of study, including full time, part‐time and, where relevant, distance‐learning, as well as the range of provision, including single and combined honours programmes, articulation arrangements and access, as well as postgraduate taught and research programmes.
6.4 A student representative of the University of Stirling Students Union, normally a sabbatical officer, is included as a full member of the review panel.
7. OVERVIEW
7.1 The panel for each of the learning and teaching review events held in 2014/15 was confident with the quality and standards of the programmes offered by the subject areas reviewed. It was evident that each subject area engaged actively with the University’s procedures for internal review and monitoring although in one area it was identified that engagement could be more comprehensive. The effectiveness of both formal and informal student‐staff arrangements, and
4 | Page
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
the learning and teaching support provided to students were identified as areas of particular strength.
7.2 As a result of previous enhancement measures, a number of areas of strength were identified through the University’s self‐evaluation processes in 2014/15 including
(i) Improved quality of feedback on assessments. (ii) Increased opportunities for professional placements. (iii) Improved scheduling of assessments to avoid multiple assignments with the same deadline. (iv) Wider range of assessments enabling students to gain a range of skills to enhance their employability. (v) Increased support for research postgraduate students.
These improvements have been evidenced by increased scores in relevant sections of student surveys including NSS, PTES and PRES.
7.3 Areas identified for further enhancement included:
(i) Increased support for academic writing, particularly for international students. (ii) Ways in which to increase engagement of postgraduate students with the wider student community. (iii) Improved communications with students to ensure awareness of appropriate issues.
7.4 Actions arising from module and annual programme review, and recommendations from learning and teaching reviews will be taken forward during 2015/16.
8. SCHEDULE OF LEARNING AND TEACHING REVIEWS 2015/16
8.1 Learning and teaching reviews are currently scheduled for 2015/16 as follows:
(i) Health Sciences (Spring 2016) (ii) Law (Spring 2016)
8.2 No reviews are scheduled for autumn 2015 as the University will be undergoing Enhancement‐led Institutional Review.
Governance and Review September 2015
5 | Page
28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10
INSTITUTION‐LED REVIEW OF QUALITY IN 2014/15
ANNUAL STATEMENT OF ASSURANCE
On behalf of the governing body of the University of Stirling, I confirm that we have considered the institution's arrangements for the management of academic standards and the quality of the learning experience for academic year 2014/15, including the scope and impact of these. I further confirm that we are satisfied that the institution has effective arrangements to maintain standards and to assure and enhance the quality of its provision. We can therefore provide assurance to the Council that the academic standards and the quality of the learning provision at this institution continue to meet the requirements set by the Council.
Signed:
______Fiona Sandford Date Chair, University Court
UC (15/16) 10 Annex 1 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10 Annex 1 28 September 2015 UC (15/16) 10 Annex 1 28 September 2015