University Rich List 2019

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

University Rich List 2019 University Rich List 2019 Jeremy Hutton October 2019 Introduction Universities are funded by both taxpayers and students (including graduates) directly. Because of this mixed form of funding, it often seems that the university sector is spared the scrutiny usually applied to other public sector institutions. In 2018, however, the Office for National Statistics re-classified student loans so that they could only partially be classified as loans in government financial returns. This means that the loans would partially count towards the deficit. The reasoning behind this decision was that the ONS concluded that a “significant proportion” of student loans would never be repaid and as such should count as government expenditure.1 For British taxpayers, this is a matter of great concern. Every year the government loans students over £16 billion, with just 30 per cent of full-time undergraduate loans expected to be repaid in full. By 2050 the total government liability will have grown to approximately £450 billion.2 Despite the clear benefits of a strong higher education sector, this ever-growing debt will place a burden on future generations of taxpayers. This is not the only challenge facing the higher education sector. The Universities Superannuation Scheme, the main pensions scheme for universities, has amassed a £5.7 billion deficit.3 In response to attempts to modify the scheme to reduce this, lecturers across the UK took to the picket lines for 14 days in 2018 at a cost to students of 575,000 teaching hours.4 This may be repeated later this year. This research presents total remuneration data from 120 universities for 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 to highlight that senior pay at many British universities is soaring. Furthermore, there are only small correlations existing between the number of highly paid staff at a university and student satisfaction and employment rates. This research should help students press for the best value from their tuition fees, as well as help taxpayers hold universities to account for the money they are spending. The data from the different years has been presented as an average figure. Due to variable data, the years used for the average may vary. Turn to the methodology section at the end of the paper for a more detailed explanation on this. To see the full data set, click here 1 Office for National Statistics, New treatment of student loans in the public sector finances and national accounts, 17 December 2018, https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/newtreatmentofstudentloansinthepubli csectorfinancesandnationalaccounts/2018-12-17 (accessed 23 September 2019). 2 House of Commons Library, Student loan statistics, 28 June 2019, https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN01079 (accessed 23 September 2019). 3 Universities Superannuation Scheme, Report and Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2019, page 5. 4 Times Higher Education, Pensions strike forces UK universities to reset examinations, 28 March 2018, https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/pensions-strike-forces-uk-universities-reset-examinations (accessed 27 September 2019). 2 [email protected] Key findings § Across 120 universities, there was on average 3615 staff in receipt of over £100,000 each year in total remuneration. § Of these there were 762 staff being remunerated over £150,000. § Russell Group universities reported much higher numbers of highly paid staff than other university groups and unaffiliated universities. On average over 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, Russell Group members remunerated 185 members of staff over £100,000, and 63 over £150,000. § The average numbers for an unaffiliated university meanwhile are 27 staff receiving over £100,000 and five staff receiving over £150,000, with MillionPlus and University Alliance institutions lower still. § The University of Edinburgh reported the greatest number of high earners, reporting that 335 staff received over £100,000 in total remuneration, of which 118 receive over £150,000. The university with the second highest number of staff receiving over £100,000 was the University of Manchester, with 331 receiving over £100,000. The London School of Economics had the second highest number of staff receiving over £150,000, with 117. § Universities with more staff paid over £100,000 fared better in student satisfaction surveys, though no such correlation exists in terms of the number of staff paid over £150,000. Conversely, there is no clear correlation between universities with more high paid staff and employment rates post-graduation. § There is a strong correlation showing that the greater the number of highly paid staff a university has, the higher the average earnings of a graduate. This trend is consistent at both the £100,000 and £150,000 level, it is however much weaker in the case of the highest earning university staff. § Oxford and Cambridge did not provide the full information requested and so have been excluded from the data. Cambridge did provide remuneration data which excluded pension contributions showing that 357 staff were paid over £100,000 in 2017-18. Oxford meanwhile paid 331 staff a base salary in excess of £100,000. Had total remuneration data been provided it is likely these institutions would have topped the university pay rankings. ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff [email protected] 3 Data tables Table 1: average number of highly paid staff by university group, 2016-17 to 2018-19 University group Receiving over £100,000 Receiving over £150,000 MillionPlus 10 3 University Alliance 24 5 Russell Group 185 63 Unaffiliated 27 5 Table 2: average number of highly paid staff by level of student satisfaction, 2016-17 to 2018-195 Satisfaction (%) Receiving over £100,000 Receiving over £150,000 Less than 80 37 21 80-89 42 9 More than 89 48 11 Table 3: the ten universities with the most highly paid staff on average by £100,000 and £150,000, 2016-17 to 2018-19 University Staff receiving over University Staff receiving over £100,000 £150,000 University of Edinburgh 335 University of Edinburgh 118 University of Manchester 331 London School of 117 Economics University of Cardiff 250 University of Manchester 101 University of Glasgow 246 University of Glasgow 66 Queen Mary University, 207 University of Cardiff 62 London City, University of 178 City, University of London 54 London University of Newcastle 159 Queen Mary University, 52 London University of Leeds 158 University of Dundee 50 University of Dundee 133 Institute of Cancer 23 Research University of York 127 Cranfield University 22 5 Office for students, National Student Survey results 2019, https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/student- information-and-data/national-student-survey-nss/get-the-nss-data/ (accessed 23 September 2019). 4 [email protected] Table 4: average number of highly paid staff by rates of students in employment or further education rate after six months, 2016-17 to 2018-196 Employment or further education Receiving over £100,000 Receiving over £150,000 (%) Less than 90 36 10 90-95 46 12 More than 95 39 8 Chart 1: average number of highly paid staff by graduate average earnings at age 29, 2016-17 to 2018-197 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Less than £25,000 £25-30,000 £30-35,000 £35-40,000 £40,000+ £100,000 and £150,000 Graduate earnings at age 29 Number of employees recieving over Staff receiving over £100,000 Staff receiving over £150,000 Table 5: the top five universities with the greatest year-on-year increase in staff paid over £100,000, 2016-17 to 2018-198 University Increase in staff University Increase in staff receiving over £100,000 receiving over £150,000 University of Liverpool 55 London School of 27 Economics University of Ulster 52 University of York 19 University of Edinburgh 48 University of 7 Northumbria University of Leeds 39 City, University of 6 London University of 26 University of Newcastle 6 Surrey/University of Newcastle 6 Higher Education Statistics Agency, Employment of leavers: UK Performance Indicators 2016/17, 5 July 2018, https://www.hesa.ac.uk/news/05-07-2018/employment-of-leavers-tables (accessed 23 September 2019). 7 Department for Education, The absolute labour market returns to different degrees – appendix data tables, 27 November 2018, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/undergraduate-degrees-labour-market-returns (accessed 23 September 2019). 8 Note that how the year-on-year increase is calculated varied dependent on what data was provided. Please refer to the methodology section for an explanation of this. [email protected] 5 Table 6: average number of staff paid over £100,000, and over £150,000, at each university - full list, 2016-17 to 2018-19 University Staff paid over £100,000 Staff paid over £150,000 Aberdeen 105 3 Abertay 5 3 Aberystwyth 25 3 Anglia Ruskin Inadequate data Inadequate data Arts University Bournemouth 3 1 Aston 33 Inadequate data Bangor 32 6 Bath 50 5 Bath Spa 4 1 Bedfordshire 9 Inadequate data Birmingham City 14 Inadequate data Bishop Grosseteste 3 1 Bolton 5 1 Bournemouth 22 Inadequate data Bradford 16 2 Brighton 21 4 Brunel 83 19 Buckinghamshire New University 3 1 Canterbury Christ Church 11 2 Cardiff 250 62 Cardiff Metropolitan 8 Inadequate data Central Lancashire 34 11 Chester 8 1 Chichester 5 1 City, University of London 178 54 Conservatoire for Dance and Drama 0 0 Courtauld Institute of Art 6 Inadequate data Coventry 44 11 Cranfield University 35 22 Cumbria 7 2 De Montfort 32 9
Recommended publications
  • University Collaboration on Technology Transfer Pdf 4.9 MB
    University Collaboration on Technology Transfer: An All-Island Feasibility Study University Collaboration on Technology Transfer: An All-Island Feasibility Study Contents FOREWORD 03 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 04 SECTION 1 CONTEXT 08 SECTION 2 CURRENT ENVIRONMENT 10 SECTION 3 PROFILE OF THE SECTOR 16 SECTION 4 OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATION 19 SECTION 5 EXTERNAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE SECTOR 23 SECTION 6 WHAT WORKS ELSEWHERE 25 SECTION 7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 30 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 METHODOLOGY 35 APPENDIX 2 CASE STUDIES 46 APPENDIX 3 RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS 56 APPENDIX 4 GLOSSARY 58 DISCLAIMER InterTradeIreland, Universities Ireland and the Irish Universities Association are confident that the information and opinions contained in this document have been compiled by the authors from sources believed to be reliable and in good faith, but no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made to their accuracy, completeness or correctness. All opinions or estimates contained in this document constitute the authors’ judgement as of the date of this document and are subject to change without notice. This publication is intended to provide general information to its readers concerning the subject matter of the publication. It is not intended to provide a comprehensive statement of the subject matter of the publication and does not necessarily reflect the views of InterTradeIreland. While care has been taken in the production of the publication, no responsibility is accepted by InterTradeIreland for any errors or omissions herein. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS InterTradeIreland, Universities Ireland and the Irish Universities Association would like to thank Technology & Research Services (Heriot-Watt University), the universities across the island, North and South, and the consultees who participated in the research, for their assistance with the development of this report.
    [Show full text]
  • UKRI Open Access Policy: Summary of Stakeholder Workshops and Consultation Meetings
    UKRI Open Access Policy: Summary of stakeholder workshops and consultation meetings Contents: 1. UK Research and Innovation Open Access Review Universities Stakeholder Roundtable – Meeting Note..................................................................................................................................2 2. UKRI Open Access Review Stakeholder Roundtable Libraries, Research Management and Knowledge Exchange – Meeting Note..........................................................................................12 3. UK Research and Innovation Open Access Review Stakeholder Academies and Learned Societies Roundtable – Meeting Note...........................................................................................21 4. UKRI Open Access Review Stakeholder Roundtable Publishers Association – Meeting Note....32 5. UKRI Open Access Review International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers Stakeholder Roundtable – Meeting Note....................................................................41 6. UKRI Open Access Review Stakeholder Roundtable Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) – Meeting Note...........................................................................................50 7. UKRI Open Access Review Licensing and Copyright Retention Workshop – Meeting Note........59 8. UKRI Open Access Review Metadata Workshop - Meeting Note................................................78 9. UKRI Open Access Review Researcher Workshop – Meeting Note...........................................93
    [Show full text]
  • The Key Role of Non-UK Postgraduate Research Students
    Preserving the DNA of UK universities: the key role of non-UK postgraduate research students Ludovic Highman and Simon Marginson 17 July 2018 § Introduction We cannot understand the risks posed by Brexit to the UK higher education (HE) system simply by taking a bird’s eye view of the system at the macro-level, treating the ‘university’ as a one and indivisible unit and the ‘student’ as a one-size-fits-all category. This misses the diversity of higher education institutions (HEIs), the multitude of disciplines they harbour that cater for all dimensions of human activity and the different types of students they enrol. We offer a more fine-grained analysis, focusing on one dimension of higher education and research with many ramifications. That is the role of non-UK postgraduate research students in UK research. These students substantially enhance UK research capacity and teaching excellence and UK HEIs are highly dependent on them. § The UK higher education system as a kaleidoscope of HEIs Not all HEIs are equally affected by Brexit, or affected in the same ways. Even within membership groups, such as the Russell Group, MillionPlus, the United Kingdom Arts and Design Institutions Association (ukadia) or University Alliance, each university is different. Each has a distinctive mission and set of core activities, based on the disciplinary mix which defines its course offering, research capacity and intensity, wealth, size, location, selectivity, target audience and its regional, national and/or international engagement. Some universities are located in global cities, others are rural and depend on a narrowly defined regional intake.
    [Show full text]
  • Value for Money in Higher Education
    House of Commons Education Committee Value for money in higher education Seventh Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 24 October 2018 HC 343 Published on 5 November 2018 by authority of the House of Commons The Education Committee The Education Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Education and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Robert Halfon MP (Conservative, Harlow) (Chair) Lucy Allan MP (Conservative, Telford) Ben Bradley MP (Conservative, Mansfield) Marion Fellows MP (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw) James Frith MP (Labour, Bury North) Emma Hardy MP (Labour, Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) Trudy Harrison MP (Conservative, Copeland) Ian Mearns MP (Labour, Gateshead) Lucy Powell MP (Labour (Co-op), Manchester Central) Thelma Walker MP (Labour, Colne Valley) Mr William Wragg MP (Conservative, Hazel Grove) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/education-committee and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Richard Ward (Clerk), Katya Cassidy (Second Clerk), Chloë Cockett (Committee Specialist), Anna Connell-Smith (Committee Specialist), Victoria Pope (Inquiry Manager), Natalie Flanagan (Senior Committee Assistant), Olivia Cormack (Committee Assistant), Hajera Begum (Committee Apprentice), Gary Calder (Senior Media Officer) and Oliver Florence (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • The Student Visa System: Principles to Reform
    THE STUDENT VISA SYSTEM: PRINCIPLES TO REFORM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Universities UK, GuildHE, MillionPlus, the Russell Group, University Alliance and UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA) have identified five principles that should underpin the design of the new student visa route and several actions that must be taken to achieve this reform. These actions include improving the international student experience, reducing the administrative burden and increasing reliability, transparency and accountability of the immigration system. BACKGROUND Under the current immigration system universities wishing to recruit international (non- EEA) students must sponsor these students, requiring the university1 and student to comply with a range of duties. In December 2018 the UK government published an Immigration White Paper announcing plans for a post-Brexit single visa route for all non-UK domiciled students. The White Paper outlined a commitment to streamlining the existing immigration system to develop more ‘light touch’ sponsorship procedures. The International Education Strategy published on 16 March 2019 reiterates this intention, stating that the government will ‘…keep the visa application process for international students under review, with the aim of improving the customer journey both for students and their sponsoring institutions’. The strategy’s intention to strengthen the UK’s visa offer for international students is central to achieving its ambition of growing the UK’s education exports to £35 billion a year and increasing the number of international higher education (HE) students in the UK to 600,000 by 2030. Together, the commitments in the Immigration White Paper and the International Education Strategy present an opportunity to rethink how the student visa system operates for universities and students.
    [Show full text]
  • Excellence, Concentration and Critical Mass in UK Research
    Concentration and diversity: understanding the relationship between excellence, concentration and critical mass in UK research A report by University Alliance Libby Aston and Liz Shutt December 2009 Research Paper 2009/01 © Copyright University Alliance 2009 ISBN 978-1-908190-04-8 Concentration and diversity: understanding the relationship between excellence, volume and critical mass in UK research Executive Summary 1. Selectivity not concentration has driven excellence • A policy of selectivity – funding research based on quality – has driven up the quality of UK research since the introduction of the RAE, not concentration. • Selectivity has resulted in concentration of research funding where quality exists. This is fully supported by University Alliance. • The UK has one of the most highly selective research funding methods in the world – QR funding in 2009-10, based on RAE 2008, has not changed that: o In 2007-8, four institutions received 29 per cent of Quality-related (QR) funding (and 23 around 75 per cent). o In 2009-10, four institutions received 32 per cent of QR funding (and 25 around 75 per cent). • Selectivity can, however, be taken too far. HEFCE’s ‘Fundamental Review of Research Policy and Funding’ concluded that “a major increase in selectivity could reduce the number of research-led institutions to a level that would be inconsistent with the general health of the UK research base, in terms of both its economic and its social contribution…leading to complacency and ossification.” 2. Excellence is not determined by volume alone • There is no direct correlation between volume and excellence outside some of the physical sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The
    KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE AND COMMERCIALISATION: THE STATE OF THE PROFESSION IN UK HIGHER EDUCATION Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The State of the Profession in Higher Education “Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The state of the profession in UK Higher Education” This report was commissioned by PraxisUnico Contact: [email protected] Authors: Rob Johnson and Mattia Fosci www.researchconsulting.co.uk Contact: [email protected] Report dated: February 2016 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 2 CONTENTS Foreword 5 Executive summary 7 Background and methodology 9 The KEC profession in UK higher education 11 The work of KEC professionals 19 Profiling KEC professionals 25 Improving the effectiveness of the KEC profession 31 Key trends and challenges 37 Appendix 1 43 Appendix 2 44 Appendix 3 46 3 Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The State of the Profession in Higher Education 4 FOREWORD The focus on taking research knowledge into commercial products and services, policy and social interventions is intense. PraxisUnico has represented professionals working at the interface between researchers and external organisations for almost 15 yearsI. During that time we have seen the work of such intermediaries become increasingly recognised and respected. The UK is ranked 4th in the world for university- industry collaboration in R&DII. The government’s ambition is that universities should ‘continue to increase their collaboration with industry to drive At a time of growth research commercialisation’ and increase the ” in the economy income they earn from working with business III and others to £5 billion by 2025 .
    [Show full text]
  • Changes and Choices
    Changes and Choices Advice on future frameworks for international collaboration on research and innovation, commissioned by the Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation Professor Sir Adrian Smith and Professor Graeme Reid JULY 2019 THE AUTHORS Adrian Smith joined The Alan Turing Institute in September 2018. His previous role was Vice- Chancellor of the University of London from 2012. He was Director General, Knowledge and Innovation in BIS (now BEIS) from 2008-2012. Professor Smith has worked with the UK Higher Education Funding and Research Councils and was appointed Deputy Chair of the UK Statistics Authority from September 2012. In 2014, he was Professor Adrian Smith appointed Chair of the Board of the Diamond The Alan Turing Institute Synchrotron at Harwell and in 2018, a board member of the UK Atomic Energy Authority. Professor Smith is a past President of the Royal Statistical Society and was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 2001 in recognition of his contribution to statistics. In 2003-04 Professor Smith undertook an inquiry into Post-14 Mathematics Education for the UK Secretary of State for Education and Skills and in 2017, on behalf of Her Majesty’s Treasury and the Department for Education, published a 16-18 Maths Review. In 2006 he completed a report for the UK Home Secretary on the issue of public trust in Crime Statistics. He received a knighthood in the 2011 New Year Honours list. Graeme Reid is Chair of Science and Research Policy at University College London. He has spent most of his career at the interface between science and Government, having worked in the Business Department, the Cabinet Office and HM Treasury before moving to UCL.
    [Show full text]
  • Bracingfor Brexit
    BRACING FOR BREXIT 01 Discussing international education BRACING FOR BREXIT 09 Torn between our best friends 24 In conversation with Sir Anton Muscatelli 30 Putting Europe on the map in India 33 Brussels’ Brexit blues SUMMER 2019 BRACING FOR 02 BREXIT CONTENTS 04 EDITORIAL 05 CONTRIBUTORS 06 SYSTEM OUT OF ORDER (APOLOGIES FOR THE INCONVENIENCE) A look at the malfunctioning political system that brought us Brexit 09 TORN BETWEEN OUR BEST FRIENDS Published by Caught between the UK and the EU, Ireland faces a hard choice European Association for International Education PO Box 11189, 1001 GD Amsterdam, the Netherlands 12 REDISCOVERING OUR SUPERPOWERS TEL +31-20-344 51 00 E-MAIL [email protected], www.eaie.org Universities must overcome outrage to lead the fight against Brexit Editor Douglas Proctor 15 CHARTING THE FLOW OF BREXIT Publications Committee Douglas Proctor (Chair), ‘Brexit flowchart guy’ Jon Worth guides us through the twists and turns Irina Ferencz, Jos Beelen, Han Aarts, Lucia Brajkovic, Jacob Gibbons 18 BRIDGING THE ANGLO-GERMAN DIVIDE Deputy Executive Director, Strategic Engagement Partnerships may prove key to softening the blow of Brexit Elise Kuurstra Associate Director, Knowledge Development and Research Laura E. Rumbley 21 PARTNERSHIPS IN PERIL Editorial Coordinator Jacob Gibbons Uncertainty reigns for UK students and staff in Spain and vice versa Graphic Designer Nhu Nguyen 24 IN CONVERSATION WITH SIR ANTON MUSCATELLI E-MAIL [email protected] Glasgow University Principal Anton Muscatelli on what’s at stake Advertising Contact [email protected] for more information. 28 THE BREXIT BACKDROP: WHAT DOES THE DATA TELL US? The EAIE welcomes requests for advertising space from Facts and figures on UK higher education and its place in the world companies and organisations whose aims and values are compatible with those of the Association and its members.
    [Show full text]
  • Rebalancing Promotion in the HE Sector: Is Teaching Excellence Being Rewarded?
    Rebalancing promotion in the HE sector: is teaching excellence being rewarded? Annette Cashmore, Chris Cane, Robert Cane HEA research series 1 Genetics Education Networking for Innovation and Excellence: the UK’s Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Genetics (GENIE CETL), University of Leicester The Higher Education Academy 2 Contents Section Page Foreword by Professor Craig Mahoney 4 Executive Summary 5 Introduction 6 Background 7 1 Comparing Policy Trends 10 Summary of HEA/Genie CETL 2009 reports 10 Then and now: changes to promotion policies since 2009 11 Methodological considerations 11 Policies publically accessible on the internet 12 Use of teaching and learning criteria in promotion policies 13 Structure of Promotion Pathways 17 Three-track pathway 17 Two-track pathway 18 Single-track pathway 19 2 Career Case Studies 21 Conflict between subject specific research and teaching activities 21 Ceiling on promotion for teaching and learning activities 24 Status of staff in teaching-focussed posts 26 Movement between institutions for career progression 27 Lack of career flexibility 27 Scholarship and pedagogic research 28 3 Criteria and Evidence for Promotion 29 4 Recommendations 34 Development of a flexible framework of criteria 34 Changing the culture 35 Giving incentives and support to institutions 35 5 Conclusion 36 Reference List 37 3 Foreword Students value and deserve excellent teaching. And with “students at the heart of system” and similarly expressed sentiment in higher education policies of governments and assemblies from across the United Kingdom, it follows that teaching should be recognised on an equal footing alongside research, particularly when career prospects and promotions are being considered in universities and colleges delivering higher education.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Findings
    Fair admissions to higher education - a review of the implementation of the Schwartz Report principles three years on: Report 2: Research Findings Centre for Education and Inclusion Research, Sheffield Hallam University and Institute for Access Studies, Staffordshire University December 2008 Research Team: Centre for Education and Inclusion Research, Sheffield Hallam University and Institute for Access Studies, Staffordshire University: Colin McCaig, Tamsin Bowers-Brown, Kim Slack, Ruth Barley, Nick Adnett, Caroline Cripps, Claire Wolstenholme and Ben Willis Acknowledgements The researchers would like to express their thanks to the participating higher education provider institutions that took part in this review through responding to the questionnaire and also to those members of staff who took part in interviews with the researchers to provide qualitative information for the good practice case studies. We also wish to thank the project steering group: Gregory Boone (DIUS); Leslie Currie (SPA); Annie Doyle (SPA); Janet Graham (SPA) and Elaine Underwood (DIUS), with input from stakeholders on the SPA Steering Group. In particular Janet Graham and Annie Doyle of the Supporting Professionalism in Admissions Programme (SPA) for their help and guidance throughout this project. Alternative Formats This is a web-based publication available as a PDF or word document at www.spa.ac.uk or http://www.dius.gov.uk/publications/index.html. If you require this document in any other format, please contact [email protected] Funding This review was funded by the Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills and managed by the Supporting Professionalism in Admissions Programme Intellectual property rights and copyright statement All intellectual property rights and copyright are owned by UCAS on behalf of SPA.
    [Show full text]
  • Vice-Chancellors' Pay, Benefits and Educational Backgrounds
    UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL: VICE-CHANCELLORS’ PAY, BENEFITS AND EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUNDS / r f r d o o e e e o l f s y m a t t v l t o i l t d d o e d d d a a ) ) ) ) t m fi r o e s y a u h y a a a u u f £ £ £ £ u o e c t h o b r e ( ( ( ( r e e e d d t n n c y s c n f n f p e e g a h g t h h h o a a n o e d l s e o 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 i a f i g g i r r n x t n e n n n e n t t t t i a t s b f o i h 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 n n g g i r e e n r o o y o s - - - - - - - d n n n u r r d u r c o d i a a i i r r t p t e e e e - f s l e e e n 8 9 8 9 9 9 9 e e u i u s i s s u h h r r e v r l r r r a u c e e l e t t e a d d i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r c l n n n r r r c c i g h c a t t s o c a s c p n n n t u 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 e i t l e e e f x u u u h r e y o n n n c Y c a T o p U c d U 2 i C p i % 2 P 2 % 2 p e T 2 O 2 S 2 c V U g I Robert Gordon University No affiliation J.
    [Show full text]