NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY
COURT
13 May 2011
Present:
The Chancellor (in the Chair), Chairman of Council and Pro-Chancellor, Sir Alan
Beith, Mrs L Braiden, Professor G Burgess, Sir Peter Carr, Mrs J J Clubley, Ms M
Coyle, Sir Michael Darrington, Mr T Delamere, Mr A A E Glenton, Dr V A
Hammond, Professor C Harvey, Councillor M Henry, Professor O R Hinton, Mr M
I’Anson, Lady Irvine, Mr J Jeffery, Lord Judd of Portsea, Miss F M Kirkby, Dr H
Loebl, Professor E Ritchie, Mr P Shaw, Mr N Sherlock, Mr H M Shukla, The Rt
Rev the Lord Bishop of Newcastle, Lord Walton of Detchant, Professor M J
Whitaker and Professor N G Wright.
In attendance:
1.
Mr R C Dale (Executive Director of Finance), Dr J V Hogan (Registrar)
and Miss E M Niven (Administrative Officer).
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 12 October 2010 were approved as a correct
record and signed.
Noted that:
1. The minutes included the following statement ‘that a debate should take place as
to whether it was more important to improve the quality of education provided
rather than increase the number of graduates.’ A question was raised as to
where and when this debate could take place.
2. The presentation Court would receive under item 8 would cover some of the
considerations raised by the above statement.
2.
HONOURS/AWARDS
Reported:
(a)
That the Right Reverend Martin Wharton, lay member of Court, was awarded
a CBE in the New Year Honours List 2011.
(b)
That Dr Herbert Loebl, lay member of Court, was awarded a Lifetime
Achievement Award at the North East Business Executive of the Year event
in November 2010.
Resolved that Court record its congratulations to the Lord Bishop and Dr Loebl.
3.
MEMBERSHIP OF COURT
Reported:
(i)
That the terms of appointment of the following members of Court would end
on 31 July 2011:
Page 1 of 8
Sir Thomas Allen
Ms Mary Coyle
Councillor David Faulkner
Mr Adam Fenwick
Lady Irvine
Lord Joicey
The Rt Hon Sir Mark Waller
(ii)
Professor Suzanne Cholerton had been appointed as Pro-Vice-Chancellor
Learning and Teaching on 1 February 2011 and was attending her first
meeting of Court.
Resolved that:
4.
(i)
Court record its thanks to the retiring members for their service to the
University.
(ii)
Court welcome Professor Cholerton to her first meeting.
MEMBERSHIP OF COURT STEERING COMMITTEE
Reported:
That the term of appointment of Sir Peter Carr on Court Steering Committee would
end on 31 July 2011.
Considered:
A recommendation from Court Steering Committee that Sir Peter Carr be reappointed for a further term.
Resolved that Sir Peter Carr be re-appointed for a further term from 1 August 2011 to
31 August 2013.
5.
REPORTS FROM COURT STEERING COMMITTEE
Received and considered:
(a)
First Report from Court Steering Committee.
(b)
Second Report from Court Steering Committee.
[Circulated with the agenda as Documents B and C]
Noted that this was Mrs Olivia Grant’s last meeting of Court as Chair of Council and
Pro-Chancellor as her term of office was to end on 31 July 2011.
Resolved that:
(i)
The following members be appointed to serve on Court from 1 August 2011
until 31 July 2014, subject to their willingness to serve:
Mr Paul Campbell
Councillor Joe Carlebach
Mrs Olivia Grant
Page 2 of 8
Mr Edmund King
Dame Fiona Reynolds
Mr Mark Scrimshaw
Lord Shipley
Mr Gregg Smith
(ii)
Court approve the conferment of Honorary Fellowships on the following
candidates at the Honorary Fellowships Dinner and award ceremony to be
held on 10 October 2011:
Sir Peter Carr
Mrs Margaret Levy
Mr Mark Scrimshaw
6.
(iii)
Court record its thanks to Mrs Grant for her dedicated and inspirational work
as Chair of Council and Pro-Chancellor over the past 10 years.
(iv)
Court record its congratulations to Mr Mark I’Anson on his appointment as
Chair of Council from 1 August 2011.
VICE-CHANCELLOR’S BUSINESS
Received:
An oral report from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor on current issues within the
University on behalf of the Vice-Chancellor who had given his apologies.
Noted:
1. During the past few months, determining the tuition fee to be charged to home
undergraduate students from September 2012 and the preparation of the Access
Agreement had been significant considerations for the University.
2. Refurbishment of the Students’ Union building was underway. It was important
for the student experience for this work to be completed by September 2011.
3. The University had recently submitted an application to the Government’s
Regional Growth Fund for funding for infrastructure developments and a gateway
building on the Science Central site. No applications emanating from the public
sector in the North East had been successful.
4. The University was offering support to students from Middle Eastern countries
following recent events. Students could access the University’s Student
Wellbeing Service for support and guidance should it be required.
5. It was noted that the University performed well in relation to student satisfaction
surveys and should be commended for this. The offer of support to Canterbury
University in Christchurch, the response to students from the Middle East and the
priority placed on the completion of the Students’ Union refurbishment suggested
that there was a good culture in place within the University and those who were
responsible for this should be commended.
6. Recent media reports had covered the Government’s decision to ask the Human
Fertilisation and Embryology authority to assess a fertility treatment developed by
researchers at the University which could eradicate serious inherited disorders.
Page 3 of 8
In April and an independent scientific report described the technique as
‘potentially useful’ and recommended a number of experiments to address any
potential safety concerns. New regulations would be required under the Human
Fertilisation and Embryology Act before the treatment could be permitted.
7. Details of the University’s connection with Science City and the impact of the
recent resignation of Dr Peter Arnold, the Chief Executive Office, were requested.
It was suggested that the University and Science City had an important role to
play in encouraging innovation. Interim management arrangements were
currently being considered. It was hoped that the University’s technology transfer
activities could be increased and it was suggested that Court could discuss this
further at a future meeting. The abolition of the regional development agency,
One North East, and the reduction in funding which would result had necessitated
a reassessment of the role of Science City but this did not represent a diminution
of interest on the part of the University.
8. Recent media reports had helped to publicise the 2km borehole that was
currently being drilled on the Science Central site. The near surface drilling
(245m) had been completed and the engineers were in the process of changing
to a new drilling rig to complete the next stage. So far the development was
proceeding well and ahead of schedule. The University was in discussions with
the City Council to determine how the development could fit into the wider energy
infrastructure of the city.
9. Details of the significance of the introduction of the impact assessment as a
component of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) was requested. The
assessment of the impact of research required institutions to submit case studies
explaining the social, economic or cultural impact of the research that had taken
place during the assessment period. The management task of preparing for the
impact assessment was significant but the University had many good examples
which it could draw upon.
10. It was suggested that the changes to the tuition fee regime from September 2012
onwards could have the effect of discouraging future students from studying
subjects in which they were particularly interested in favour of subjects that were
perceived to provide better employment prospects. The fact that state funding of
humanities and social sciences subjects was to be withdrawn could give the
impression to students that studying these subjects was not valuable. It was
confirmed that the University had taken these considerations into account during
the tuition fees discussions and intended to do what it could to counter such
views.
11. Employability was expected to become increasingly important under the new fees
regime. Within the Higher Education sector in general there was considered to
be insufficient focus on providing students with the skills required to improve their
employability such as the development of interpersonal skills, demonstrating a
positive attitude and being prepared to work hard. The University placed a
strong emphasis on the skills required to improve the employability of its
graduates. Students completed rigorous degree programmes and the
employability of all graduates, including those completing non-applied degrees,
was high.
12. The University had recently received its employability statistics for students
graduating in July 2010. Early indications suggested that the proportion of
Page 4 of 8
graduates who remained unemployed after 6 months of graduation had
decreased from 7.4% in the previous year to 5.7%.
13. Members of Court who had assisted the University with lobbying the Government
over the proposed changes to the UK Border Agency rules for student visas were
thanked for their support.
7.
VICE-CHANCELLOR’S QUESTIONS
Received from Lord Judd:
‘Request for an update on the funding situation and its implications’.
Noted that this question was addressed under item 8 below.
8.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF FUNDING
Reported:
That both Senate and Council had considered and approved proposals from the
Tuition Fees Task Group regarding the setting of Tuition Fees from September 2012.
Received:
(i)
A report from Professor Suzanne Cholerton, Pro-Vice-Chancellor Learning
and Teaching.
[Circulated with the agenda as Documents D]
(ii)
A short presentation from Mrs Lesley Braiden, Director of Marketing and
Communications.
[PowerPoint slides attached]
Noted that:
1. The University’s Access Agreement, which included the tuition fee proposal, had
been submitted to the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) in April. The activities
included in the Access Agreement were designed to safeguard and increase
participation by under-represented groups. The University could demonstrate a
strong track record in this regard and widening participation was perceived to be
a natural consequence of its aims and values.
2. The University had announced its intention to charge a fee of £9k for all
undergraduate home students from September 2012. Under the new
arrangements the University would be required to spend 30% of fee income
above £6k on widening participation activities; by 2015/16, this would provide a
budget of £11m.
3. There was a strong history of widening participation across the University and the
University itself was recognised as a national leader. The University was ahead
of the national benchmark in terms of participation from students in the North
East however, since the majority of students came from outside the region, this
served to dilute performance against the benchmark when the total student
population was taken into account.
Page 5 of 8
4. The University’s outreach activities sought to identify students with the potential
to succeed. Poverty of aspiration amongst students, parents and some teachers
remained a challenge.
5. Currently four graduate ambassadors were employed alongside student
ambassadors and student tutors to undertake school visits, events and student
tutoring activities. The Access Agreement included a commitment to increase the
number of graduate ambassadors to 20.
6. The University intended to increase its activities in the North East and to expand
the reach of the PARTNERS programme to ensure that 100% of state schools
and colleges in the targeted regions were covered and to include new schools in
Merseyside, Greater London and the West and East Midlands.
7. There are widespread misconceptions of how the new fee regime would operate.
Students would not be required to repay their debt until they earned £21k or more
and there would be many cases where, ultimately, the debt would be written off.
The University should seek to engage with leaders from black and ethnic minority
communities in the region to inform them of the new arrangements so that the
correct messages could be conveyed to those who might be concerned about the
changes. The University should ensure that a number of the graduate
ambassadors were from black and ethnic minority groups or from a similar
background to the students in the targeted areas.
8. The budget for widening participation during 2009/10 amounted to £6.3m and it
was claimed that by 2015/16 it would increase to £11m. This represented less
than double the current budget, yet, during the same period, there would have
been a threefold increase in the tuition fee. The University had stated its intention
to spread its widening participation activities over a wider area but it was
suggested that its budget might place a limitation on what could actually be
achieved. The University should ensure that it continued to invest in the region.
9. Contact time with lecturers and staff:student ratios were considered to be two key
considerations for prospective students and universities would need to be
transparent about their offer to students. The Government had introduced a
requirement for all institutions to publish similar data sets, such as staff:student
ratios, contact hours and graduate employability rates, to allow prospective
students to make comparisons between institutions.
10. Student expectations would increase as a result of the new tuition fee regime and
it was noted that amongst the current cohort of students interest in student
representation opportunities had increased significantly during the past year.
11. It was considered that education should take place in the context of a global
environment and it was important for there to be a good mix of nationalities and
backgrounds amongst the student population.
12. The past academic year had been challenging for the Students’ Union’s
Sabbatical Officers and Court commended Tom Delamere, President of the
Students’ Union, and the other Sabbatical Officers for having maintained good
relations with both students and University management during this difficult
period.
13. The possibility of offering two year degrees should be considered in order to
reduce the overall costs to students.
Page 6 of 8
14. The increase in the student fee would require the University to improve its
performance management in order to provide the best quality student experience.
The realisation of the student offer would require all staff to contribute and staff
performance in relation to the student experience would be monitored.
15. Consideration should be given to the potential impact of the changes to the fee
regime on mature students.
16. It was possible that a more regionalised recruitment pattern might emerge as a
consequence of the new fee regime but this would not happen immediately. The
degree choices of current sixth form students was determined by their A-level
subjects and, as a result, it was possible that there would be no significant
change in degree subject choice in September 2012.
17. The University was committed to offering a diverse range of subjects. It intended
to maintain the quality of its provision and to focus on skills development. The
University’s resources were strong enough to allow it offer additional support to
the humanities and social science subjects, should this be required.
18. It was agreed that a better explanation of the loan arrangements was required at
a national level. The University intended to work with teachers and potential
applicants to ensure a clear message was conveyed to those it could reach. It
was suggested that this message should be included in the University’s
marketing materials.
19. Consideration should be given to potential awards for which the University’s
widening participation activities could be entered.
Resolved that Court members be thanked for their contribution to the discussion.
9.
STATUTE CHANGES
Reported:
That the Privy Council had approved the amendments to the University Statutes,
subject to the following minor change recommended by the Privy Council advisers:
3.(2) The object of the University is, for the public benefit, to promote
advance education, learning and research.
10.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Equality Monitoring
Noted that an email questionnaire would soon be circulated to members of Court for
completion to enable the University to fulfil its equality monitoring requirements.
Page 7 of 8
11.
MEETINGS 2011-12
Reported:
(a)
That meetings of Court in the forthcoming academic year would be held on:
Tuesday 11 October 2011 at 1030
Friday 11 May 2012 at 1030
(b)
That this year’s Honorary Fellowship Awards Dinner would be held on
Monday 10 October 2011.
Page 8 of 8