UNIVERSITY PLANNING
PROCESS
PREPARING THE FIVE YEAR PLAN
Christopher Edwards
Vice-Chancellor
AIMS


Top 10 university: need to define
Research
–
–
–
–

2001 RAE 31st
Research power 15th
SRIF funding 13th
Biological sciences/Medicine top 5
Teaching
– QAA results
– Institutional audit
– Student satisfaction survey

Technology transfer
– Top 4
– Excellence with a purpose
– Science City
Student recruitment




Applications from UK students rose by 27% between
2001 and 2006 (including a fall of about 3.5% in 2006
compared with 2004)
PARTNERS programme applicants 122 (2000) to 435
applications in 2006 (accepted 44 in 2000 and 156 in
2005). 98 schools and colleges now have a formal
partnership with the University. Applications from
PARTNERS schools and colleges have increased by over
60% since 2000.
Latest bid to HEFCE for additional student numbers
(ASNs) providing 240 additional numbers for 2006 and
2007, plus 113 provisionally for 2008.
Should we be further expanding the university?
Improving the quality of the
student experience

The quality of teaching
– Responding to the student satisfaction survey
– Special focus on assessment
– Staff student ratios

Infrastructure
–
–
–
–

Lecture theatres (£6.9m PCA)
Student Union
Sports facilities
Residential accommodation
Student services
Size, shape & strategic direction
Staff vs students
30000
The Giants
25000
Students
20000
N
15000
The Internationals
10000
5000
0
0
1000
2000
3000
Staff
4000
5000
Research funding
OST, Charity, UK Govt and industrial research funding, HESA
Languages
Clinical dentistry
Design
IT and systems
Humanities
Nursing
Veterinary science
Mathematics
Business studies
Education
General engineering
Social studies
Chemistry
Physics
Clinical Medicine
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Staff
Studen
ts
Res
Income
SSR
More staff (M)
2300
17500
75426
7.6
Extra students (E)
1975
19902
58006
12.3
Nothing (N)
1761
17300
55457
12.4
Internationalisation
In last three years we have more than
doubled our international student numbers
but these are now static
 £2m CRM system
 ?target for 2010/11 4800 or less
 Singapore
 Malaysia

Income
(FT students charged overseas fees)
25
20
15
Income, £millions
10
5
0
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Knowledge House: Summary of Project Values
6000
Value of Projects£k
5000
Teesside
4000
Sunderland
Northumbria
3000
UNE
Newcastle
2000
Durham
1000
0
2000
2001
Teesside
175349
324986
Sunderland
12427
99277
No rthumbria
195023
118056
309853
UNE
Newcastle
Durham
2002
2003
2004
2005
39230
56330
224109
213958
134287
306404
412007
106430
410158
439932
173182
5000
5079
3200
2000
7000
0
334422
163575
228834
1330068
952360
4481072
0
16518
0
660
17160
7388
University of Newcastle Income: HEFCE Income vs Income from
all other sources
£k
300000
250000
200000
HEFCE Grant
Other Income
150000
100000
50000
0
Newcastle 2000
Newcastle 2001
Newcastle 2002
Newcastle 2003
Newcastle 2004
HEFCE Grant
64046
67924
76385
80911
89463
Other Inco me
107260
121423
136544
149505
160197
Percentage Income growth
over period 1999/00 -2003/04
50.00%
45.00%
40.00%
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
M
an
ch
es
te
r
Bi
rm
in
gh
am
rp
oo
l
Li
ve
Le
ed
s
Sh
ef
f ie
ld
pt
on
So
ut
ha
m
Br
ist
ol
No
tti
ng
ha
m
Ne
wc
as
t le
5.00%
0.00%
Note: Provisional Newcastle Income in 2004/05 is £276m, reflecting “year on year” growth of
10.6%, and a growth rate of 61% over the period from 1999/00.
Spaces for Science and Business
Science Central
CONFIDENTIAL
To support and
FOR COUNCIL ONLY
empower our staff to
undertake successfully
their academic and other
activities and to deliver the
University's strategic objectives.
1
2
3
4
5
To make Newcastle
a world-class
research-intensive
university, capable of
attracting and retaining
staff of the highest quality.
1
To double the
number of international
students to 4,800
by 2010-2011
1
2
3
4
2
3
4
5
To play a leading
role in the economic,
social and cultural
development of the North
East of England working in
partnership with other universities
and colleges in the region, a wide
range of public authorities and
private and voluntary sectors.
1
2
3
4
5
5
To provide
Excellence in our
learning and teaching
activities.
1
3
4
5
UNIVERSITY OF
NEWCASTLE UPON
TYNE
To expand greatly
our net income
portfolio and develop our
management structures
and estate to support it.
2
3
4
To increase our
intake of students from
a less privileged
background, and those
registered with disabilities.
1
Strategic
Objectives
1
Scale:
5 indicates a Strong Performance.
1 indicates a Weak Performance..
2
To increase our
full-time student
numbers from 14,500 in
2002-03 to 18,000 by 2007-08
2
3
4
2
3
4
2
3
4
5
5
To aim to increase
our annual rate of
growth to 12.5% p.a.,
based upon a growth in
core activities, to
generate increased income of
8% per annum, supplemented
by other activities which will raise it,
in those years, to 12.5%.
1
1
5
5
To support the
commercialisation of
research activity for social
and economic benefit.
1
Produced by The Planning Office.
January 2006
2
3
4
5
University mission

To be a World-class research intensive
university, to deliver teaching of the
highest quality and to play a leading role
in the economic, social and cultural
development of the North East of England
Industrial action
Industrial action
AUT/NATFHE demand for very substantial
increase in pay over the next 3 years
 4%, 3% and 3% over and above the
general level of increase in the public
sector pay
 Upward adjustments in the pay spine to
further increase the minimum level of
appointment for academic staff

Background to industrial action
Formation of a new Union
 Introduction of variable tuition fees
 Full economic costing of research
proposals
 AUT/NATFHE claim that this can fund
increase in pay >20% over 3 years (23%).

Newcastle facts

Increase in income from tuition fees of
– £7.7m in 2006/7
– £15.1m in 2007/8
– £21.4m in 2008/9

bursaries £3.1m (£4.6m)
bursaries £4.5m
(£10.8m)
bursaries £5.4m ((£16.1m)
Cost of AUT/NATFHE proposals
–
–
–
–
£11.2m
£10.5m
£11.3m
(105% of available income)
Newcastle facts
Normal year worked example
 Pay award to cover basic cost of living
increase (say) 3%
 Cost of promotions 0.5-0.75%
 Incremental drift (normal movement
through the scales) 1.2%
 Apart from the lower 3 points on the
professorial scale further payment is
discretionary

Newcastle facts
2003 total pay bill £123m
 On the basis of adding cost of living
increase, incremental drift and promotion
awards would expect 2005 pay bill to be
£135m
 Actual pay bill in 2005 £143m.

Newcastle facts
Pay modernisation has added 3% to our
pay bill
 This has been of particular advantage to
those below the level of Professor.
 For those on the first 4 points on the
professorial scale there has been an uplift.
Nothing for those above this.

Current situation
‘Unions have accused employers of
reneging on the implied deal that a third
of the new tuition fees income this
autumn would be devoted to staff pay’
 ‘UCEA 12.6% best and final offer and
represents 90% of the extra money
expected when tuition fees rise’
 ‘stalemate’

Student views
‘We are completely against this action 100%’
(Communications Officer Ally Robson)
 ‘I come to the unavoidable conclusion that the
AUT at Newcastle University has been heavyhanded, manipulative (albeit poorly), arrogant
and, at a national level, condemnably
irresponsible and in severe breach of the trust
that students place on those in charge of
overseeing their education. The AUT has let
down those it would claim to protect: the
students.’ (Simon Winch, Courier).

Academic Board
Questions
10 May 2006
Group One

"On 21 September 2004, the Newcastle University VC said that
addressing the backlog in academic pay was one of his two top
priorities for spending the top- up fee income
http://education.guardian.co.uk/students/tuitionfees/story/0,12757,
1306986,00.html Is this still his position, and can he provide details
of the amount of extra income expected from this source in the next
academic year and how he intends to spend this money.” Dr.
Jennifer Toomey

“On the 21st of September 2004, you said that addressing the
backlog in academic pay was one of your two top priorities for
spending the top-up fee income, but now you are saying that the
money has already been spent. Why were we promised this money
only to be told it is no longer available and what has it been spent
on?” Ghada Khattab, Speech and Language Sciences
Group Two

Although I am not an AUT member, I am nonetheless troubled by the direction of
recent events and so my question is: "The proposal passed by Senate on 2 May
could result in some students graduating with a partial set of marks. Doesn't this
decision threaten the integrity of a Newcastle degree?" I would be grateful if you
could address my concerns at the appropriate moment. Dr Keith Brewster, Historical
Studies.

I would like to submit the following question to be answered at Academic Board. The
guidelines to the new clause added to the General Regulations on Tuesday 2 May
state that, where professional accreditation is involved, graduating students must
complete all their assessments at some point, even if they cannot do so at the
normal time. However, the same provision does not appear to apply to nonaccredited degrees. Please could the Vice-Chancellor explain this difference in
treatment? Naomi Standen, Historical Studies

'Irrespective of the outcome of the current pay dispute, are you not concerned that
the emergency measures that were drafted in the university regulations last week run
the risk of damaging Newcastle's national and international reputation and adversely
impact on student recruitment in the long run; and thus outweigh any prejudice
caused by the industrial action?‘ Luc Racaut, Historical Studies
Group Three

"Does the VC acknowledge that Academic staff are overworked and
underpaid, and that unless they receive pay rises over the next few years
similar to or greater than those which he himself has received in recent
years the effect on morale, productivity, and academic standards is likely to
be very damaging?“ Dr. Colin G. Brooks, School of Biomedical Sciences

Does the Vice-Chancellor think that the current UCEA pay offer (6% over 2
years at the time of writing) is appropriate? If not, what is he doing to
persuade UCEA to improve its offer? Diana Paton, Senior Lecturer in History

In 1984-1985, the bottom point of the senior lecturer scale was £14,135
p.a. Using the Treasury GDP deflator to account for inflation, the salary that
an individual at the bottom of the senior lecturer scale should now earn is
£52,158 (2005-2006). Could the Vice-Chancellor provide similar figures for
executive (senior academic) staff? Will the Vice-Chancellor act to reverse
this erosion in the salaries and status of University academic staff?
N.L.Simmons