Secretary: Dr L Boon
Research, Enterprise and Regional Affairs Unit
Woolwich
Tel: 7902 Fax: 8630
email: l.boon@gre.ac.uk
ACADEMIC COUNCIL
RESEARCH AND ENTERPRISE COMMITTEE
Minutes of the first meeting held in 2006 on Monday 16th January 2006 at 2.15
p.m. in Room 075, Queen Anne, Maritime Greenwich
Present:
Professor J Humphreys (Chair)
Dr L Boon (Secretary)
Professor E Galea
Professor P Harvey
Mr M Hume
Professor D Isaac
Dr J Jameson
Ms J Poulton
Professor A Reed
Dr A Ruston
Professor M Snowden,
Professor A Westby
Dr S Woodhead
06/1.1 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Professor C Bailey, Dr J Dunne, Professor C Mackie, Mr M Morris, Professor
J Morton, Dr M Sharp, Dr Z Sevic, Mrs L Spencer
06/1.2 MINUTES OF THE 1ST MEETING OF THE RESEARCH AND
ENTERPRISE COMMITTEE HELD IN 2005 ON 5th SEPTEMBER
Professor Reed queried whether the Annual Report of the Research Committee
2004/05 had been modified as requested by the Committee under Minute
05/2.5. It was agreed to discuss this under item 1.3.11.
The Minutes of the 2nd Meeting held in 2005 on 31st October were approved.
06/1.3 MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
1.3.1
Minute 05/2.10 University Postgraduate Annual Research
Conference: Secretary to draft proposal in consultation with DoRs
and investigate possibility of funding. Secretary reported that she had
not yet developed a proposal, as she felt she needed more information
1
on the nature of the seminar specifically whether its main focus would
be external or internal. The Committee commented that both would be
the focus of the seminar, and that all Schools would be involved with
three sessions covering three themes. The Committee proposed that
RERA present a proposal at the next meeting.
ACTION:
1.3.2
ACTION:
1.3.3
Secretary to liaise with Mr Hume re the drafting of a
proposal for a one day seminar
Minute 05/4.5 UoG response to the QAA audit re the provision of
skills training for research students involved in teaching or
demonstrating activities, together with a mechanism for
subsequent monitoring and support: Mrs Spencer to locate the
response and ascertain who signed off the University’s response
Ms Poulton reported that Mrs Spencer had requested the response from
Mr Steve Naylor, but had not been able to follow it up due to being on
extended sick leave. The Committee agreed the action would be
deferred to the next meeting while stressing the importance of the
Committee seeing the response.
Mrs Spencer to chase Mr Naylor for the response and ascertain
who signed it off
Minute 05/4.5 UoG response to the QAA audit re the provision of
skills training for research students involved in teaching or
demonstrating activities, together with a mechanism for
subsequent monitoring and support: Secretary to contact Barbara
Chandler from Education and Training to prepare the proposal,
seeking input from Peter Doyle re the special requirements for
teaching and demonstration in Science. Secretary reported that she
had contacted Barbara Chandler but had not yet received a reply.
Professor Reed commented that Personnel organise an induction to
teaching that can also be attended by research students. Mr Behn, from
Personnel regularly notifies staff of these and other training
opportunities. It, therefore, does not reach research students directly,
only if informed by their Director of Research of Supervisor. In
addition, the Director of Research from the School of Science added
that within their School there is a real need for training specifically for
research students involved in demonstration.
ACTION
1.3.4
Secretary to contact Barbara Chandler and circulate the current
programme requesting Directors of Research to comment where
the programme does not meet the needs of their School.
Minute 05/1.5 Full Economic Costing: Secretary to investigate the
role of EPSRC in the DTI Technology Programme, to recalculate
the allocations assuming the Research Council are successful and
to arrange with Finance for the funds to be transferred. Secretary
reported that the DTI grant awarded to Professor Bailey was not being
2
cofunded by the EPSRC and, therefore, would not be included in the
distribution of the transitional fund awarded by the Research Councils.
Furthermore, she would now proceed with instructing finance to
transfer the funding to the individual grant holders.
1.3.5
ACTION:
1.3.6
ACTION:
Minute 05/2.4.1 Late Registrations: Offer letter sent out to
research students: Mrs Spencer to draft a letter to Recruitment
and Admissions requesting them to identify a single contact for
research students. Ms Poulton reported that she had spoken with
Recruitment and Admissions. Mr Peter Fisher, Manager of Central
Recruitment Centre was reluctant to appoint a single contact for
research student recruitment as the staff where given responsibility for
a single School. The Committee decided to invite Mr Steve Wallis,
Director of the Unit, to the next meeting, while requesting Ms Poulton
to brief him and prepare a paper for the next meeting explaining the
issue.
Ms Poulton to invite Mr Wallis to the next meeting and prepare a
paper for the meeting
Minute 05/2.4.2 Evaluation of the University’s Key Skills
Development Programme: Secretary to convene a meeting with
Mrs Spencer, the Research Students Administration Office and the
Chair to take this forward. Ms Poulton reported that following this
meeting, Dr Odle had nearly completed a new version of the student
logbook. The Committee requested that before the next meeting, the
logbook be circulated amongst the members of the Committee.
Moreover, that Dr Odle produce a cover sheet for the next meeting
summarising the key points.
Ms Poulton to inform Dr Odle
1.3.7
Minute 05/2.4.3 CCLR and Research Students: Secretary to
inform the Head of the School of Science. Secretary reported that the
Head of the School of Science had been informed of the Committee’s
decision.
1.3.8
Minute 05/2.4.5 Postgraduate Research Degrees Programmes –
Review of Quality and Standards: Secretary to convene a meeting
with Mrs Spencer, the Research Students Administration Office
and the Chair to take this forward. Minute 1.4.8 refers
1.3.9
Minute 05/2.4.6 New funding arrangements for research degree
programmes (RDPs): Secretary to liaise with Planning and
Statistics for a report. Secretary presented a briefing note which
explained the new funding arrangements and their likely impact in
more detail.
The Chair reported that through VCG, Planning and Statistics had been
asked for a detailed report on the impact of the new funding
3
arrangement, assuming a steady state of number of PhD students, and
informed the Committee that the report would also be sent to the
Committee.
The Committee agreed that in the run up to the next RAE, it is
important that PhD recruitment should be maintained at current levels
even in a more hostile funding climate. Considering the growing
numbers of EdD students, the Committee requested that the Secretary
contact Dr Couper, to investigate whether HEFCE provide funding for
this programme or professional doctorates in general.
ACTION:
Secretary to contact Dr Couper
1.3.10 Minute 05/2.4.7 Medway School of Science Research Students:
Rights and Responsibilities: Secretary to collect documentation
and liaise with the Research Students Administration Office to
draft a University wide learning contract. Secretary reported that at
the time of the last Committee meeting, the Research Students
Administrative Office was already in the process of printing the new
Student Handbook, which will include the Guidelines of the new
Academic Regulations for Research Awards. Therefore, there was no
time to make significant changes. Ms Poulton informed the Committee
that she had read the Medway Sciences learning contract, and was of
the opinion that many of the issues were covered in the Handbook and
that, in general, the learning contract could be seen to be in addition of
the Handbook not instead of it. The Chair requested the Director of
Research of the School of Science to check whether the Student
Handbook does not contain information supplied in the learning
contract produced by his School.
ACTION:
Ms J Poulton to forward a copy of the new Student Handbook to
the Director of Research of School of Science
ACTION:
Director of Research of School of Science to check
1.3.11 Minute 05/2.5 Annual Report of the Research Committee 2004/05:
Secretary to modify the Annual Report of the Research Committee
2004/05 and send it to Carol Edwards for inclusion in the papers of
the next meeting of Academic Council. Secretary reported that she
had modified the Annual Report to reflect that the Research Committee
had not approved the reconfiguration of the committees, by replacing
‘approved’ with ‘acknowledged’. The Annual Report had already gone
to Academic Council.
1.3.12 Minute 05/2.6.1 Draft Code of Practice on preparing RAE
Submissions: Secretary to modify the document. Minute 1.7.3 refers
1.3.13 Minute 05/2.6.2 External Assessment: Secretary to work with
Directors of Research to contact External Assessors for those Units
4
of Assessment where an External Assessor still needs to be signed
up. Minute 1.7.1 refers
1.3.14 Minute 05/2.6.2 External Assessment: Directors of Research to
inform the Secretary of the Units of Assessment to which their
School will make a submission and the inclusion of staff from other
Schools. Minute 1.7.1 refers
1.3.15 Minute 05/2.9.2 Form 1: Proposal/Bid Approval Form and Form
2: Contract Approval Form. Secretary reported that the two forms
had been modified and that Form 2 will replace two existing forms:
Fund Set-up Form and Attachment A of the University's Guidelines for
Research, Consultancy, Analytical Testing and other Non-Mainstream
Work. Both Forms had been circulated for comments. The deadline for
sending comments is 27 January. The Committee commented that it
would be helpful if the threshold could be raised for applications to be
checked by Finance from £50,000 to £100,000. The Chair requested
the Secretary to draft an email to Linda Cording:
 Requesting whether the threshold for applications to be
checked by Finance could be raised from £50,000 to £100,000
 Informing her that NRI would maintain its own bid and
contract approval system. NRI is not exempt from the
University’s requirements concerning the sign off of contracts
However, the Committee recommended that it will not need to
adopt the new proposal/contract approval process, as NRI
already have a sophisticated contract processing procedure in
place. This was a requirement of the major NRI review in 2001
to ensure that NRI does not enter into contracts, which are not
in NRI/UoG's commercial interest. Their current system is
subject to regular audit by the University's internal and external
auditors and is also subject to their separate ISO 9001 quality
management system.
ACTION:
Secretary to draft email to Linda Cording and forward it to the
Chair
06/1.4 RESEARCH STUDENTS
1.4.1
Minutes of the Local Devolved Research Degrees Committees
(LRDCs)
The Minutes of the following local research degrees committee papers
were included:
 Business School Research Degrees Committee meeting 28
September 2005
 School of Science Research Degrees Committee meeting 19
October 2005
 CMS Humanities Research Degrees Committee meeting 9
November 2005
5

Engineering, NRI and Pharmacy Research Degrees Committee
meeting 11 November 2005
These minutes were included for the Committee to note and the
Committee was requested to raise any particular issues not included
under item 1.4.3.
The Committee commented that in the Minutes CMS Humanities
Research Degrees Committee there was an action (Minute 1.15.2)
whereby a request would be made to this Committee to reconsider the
necessity of mini vivas. The Committee agreed to wait for a proposal
from the CMS Humanities Research Degrees Committee before
discussing this issue.
1.4.2
Revised Terms of Reference of the Engineering, NRI and Pharmacy
Research Degrees Committee
The Chair requested that when the Committee is requested to approve
revised terms of reference of a local research degrees committee, a
cover sheet be enclosed outlining the changes that are proposed.
Prof. Reed, Chair of the Engineering, NRI and Pharmacy Research
Degrees Committee, informed the Committee that two changes were
proposed:
1. Addition of a footnote stating that “The School of Pharmacy is a
joint venture between the Universities of Greenwich and Kent.
Candidates for research degrees from this School will be dealt with
under the auspices of the University of Greenwich and its
associated regulations.”
2. Under “Others to be present in an observer/non-decision making
capacity”, the bullet point had been added: “One ‘junior’ member
of staff from each of the Medway School of Engineering, Natural
Resources Institute and the Medway School of Pharmacy who will
observe the operation of the Committee for the course of an
academic session in a staff development capacity. Any appropriate
member of staff may act in this capacity, providing they are not
registered with the Committee for a research degree, or any other
degree of the University.”
The Committee approved the first change, but did not consider the
second a valid term of reference of the LRDCs However, the
Committee acknowledged that the Chairs of LRDCs are authorised to
invite other members of staff as observers, in the context of staff
development, provided this is not in breach with the confidentiality
requirement.
1.4.3
Initial Feedback on Local/School Research Degree Committees
September to December 2005 from the Research Student
Administrative Office
6
Ms Poulton presented the paper submitted by the Research
Administrative Office, and informed the Committee that on the whole
the LRDCs are operating well, although there are still some
improvements that can be made. There were some concerns with
backdating and that the minutes did not always accurately reflect what
happened at the meeting. Ms Poulton also clarified that the third bullet
point under section 6, referred to the statement made by the Chair that
when LRDCs accept individual members of staff to supervise more
than six PhD students as a first supervisor, an explanation needs to be
recorded in the minutes why this was considered acceptable
ACTION:
1.4.4
Ms Poulton to inform the Chairs of the LRDCs of this requirement
Optimising interactions between local RDCs and the University
Prof A Reed presented a paper wherein he showed how the
devolvement of the Research Degrees Committee to School level, had
increased the number of steps involved between PhD students
producing a definitive bound thesis, and PhD students receiving their
award and for the thesis to be archived by the appropriate UoG library.
The Chair commented that the current structure will be reviewed after
one year and that one suggestion could be that the R&EC would not be
responsible for confirming PhD completions recommended by LRDCs.
At the moment, the Chair with assistance from the RSAO, checks for
each PhD recommended for confirmation, whether the paperwork is in
order and authorises its inclusion on the R&EC agenda. In the
Committee’s opinion this might make it possible for these PhD
completions to go straight to Academic Council for endorsement of
confirmation, with the R&EC, depending on when it meets with
respect to Academic Council, confirming the award retrospectively.
This will need to be endorses by Ms L Cording.
ACTION:
1.4.5
Secretary to seek advice from Ms L Cording and liaise with the
RSAO for a paper on the issue for the next Committee meeting
PhD completions recommended for confirmation
The Committee recommended to Academic Council the conferment of
the PhD awards recommended by the External Examiners and the
LRDCs
ACTION:
1.4.6
Secretary to inform Ms N Powell (PA to Ms C Rose) of the
Committee’s recommendation
Adjustments to Regulations for Research Awards
7
The Chair introduced this paper, informing the Committee that two
changes were introduced in the new Regulations for Research Awards
that had raised some concerns:
1. Reduction in word length for a PhD thesis in Humanities, Social
Sciences, Education and Business from 100,000 to 80,000 words
2. Eligibility of candidate for PhD by Published Work.
Candidates for PhD by Published Work no longer need to have a
connection with the University (e.g. as former students or members
of staff).
Considering the fact that both changes were included in the Guidelines
section of the Academic Regulations, the R&EC was in a position to
implement changes without seeking approval from Academic Council.
The Committee approved the following modifications:
1. Reduction in word length - replacement of 80,000 words with the
range 80,000 – 100,000
2. Eligibility of candidate for PhD by Published Work – insert the
statement: This route to PhD is open to individuals with a personal
connection with the University or working for an organisation with
links to the University
ACTION:
1.4.7
Ms Poulton to consult with Director of Research of the School of
Humanities re point 1, and implement changes in the Guidelines
section
Supervisor training (for new supervisors of research degree students)
and Annual Supervisor Conference/Forum (for all supervisors of
research degree students)
Ms Poulton presented a proposed training programme for new
supervisors of research degree students and a proposal for an annual
supervisor conference/forum. The supervisor training will be delivered
by experienced supervisors and the RSAO had already recruited three
volunteers.
1.4.8
Postgraduate Research Degrees Programmes – QAA Review of
Quality and Standards
The RSAO had drafted a first version of the University’s response to
the questionnaire. The Committee agreed that the document would be
circulated to all Committee members and LRDC Chairs for comments.
A small working group consisting of the Chair, Professor Reed and Ms
Poulton would consider all responses and draft the final document.
ACTION:
1.4.9
Secretary to circulate the first draft to all Committee members and
Chairs of LRDCs
Registration status of Research Students
8
Ms Poulton presented an updated table of the all Research students and
their registration status for this academic year. She informed the
Committee that the situation has improved considerably on last year’s
and that her colleague Dr Odle would continue with contacting
individual supervisors whose students had not yet registered.
06/1.5 STAFF DEVELOPMENT IN RESEARCH
Secretary presented a briefing paper, which informed the Committee of how
much of the funding received from HEFCE for staff development in research
still remained. The University received £30,000 from HEFCE and
approximately £5,000 had gone towards contracting a consultant to deliver
three ‘Winning Grant Funding’ workshops in Summer 2005. These workshops
were very well received by staff.
After discussion, the Committee recommended that the remaining £25,000
would be employed in the following way:
1. Organising a University wide workshop on getting published and
another on Winning Grant Funding
2. Create a biddable component to be managed by RERA open to all
academic staff
ACTION:
Secretary to liaise with Mr K Behn from Staff Development about
the Committee’s recommendation
06/1.6 HEFCE PROMISING RESEARCHER FELLOWSHIP SCHEME
Secretary informed the Committee that as part of HEFCE’s Rewarding and
Developing Staff Initiative, HEFCE had awarded the University £100k for
2004/05 and £100k for 2005/06 under this Scheme. The Promising Researcher
Fellowship Scheme enables ‘talented researchers in non-research intensive
departments (scoring 4 or below in RAE 2001) to spend 6 months researching
in a high scoring department’. Last year an invitation to bid was put out and
two Fellowships were awarded, one to a member of staff in CMS and one to a
member of staff in NRI. There was still £142,602 available to award to
members of academic staff.
The Committee requested the Secretary to contact Mrs A Yakub in Finance to
check whether all funding can be carried forward to next academic year. If this
was the case a second invitation to bid should be sent to all members of
academic staff.
ACTION:
Secretary to pursue
06/1.7 RAE2008
1.7.1
External Assessment & RAE Units of Assessment – Update
The Committee was requested to note the updated table. The Chair
reminded the Committee that the aim is to have the external
9
assessments completed by the end of February, expect for those UoAs
where discussions are still ongoing. The Committee asked whether the
new templates had already been published and requested the Secretary
to investigate. Furthermore, the Director of Research of CMS asked
whether the RAE 2008’s position on submitting postdoctoral
researchers had been clarified. The Secretary informed the Committee
that the final criteria and working methods had not been published yet,
but that she would contact the RAE2008 team directly about it
ACTION:
1.7.2
Secretary to pursue
University Approach to RAE2008 Submissions
The Chair introduced the paper describing the University approach to
RAE2008 submissions, stating that the University has identified two
specific RAE 2008 aims:
1. To maximise RAE 2008 income
2. To ensure that RAE profiles accurately represent the totality
of the University’s measurable research activity.
Therefore we will endeavour to submit all members of staff whose
outputs are rated 1* by the relevant external assessor.
The University’s approach was agreed.
1.7.3
Draft Code of Practice on Preparing RAE Submissions
The Committee was invited to comment on the latest draft of the Code
of Practice on Preparing RAE Submission after which the final version
would be circulated for use.
ACTION:
1.7.4
Secretary to circulate the document for comments
Continuation of Research Capability Funding until 2008-09 (encl.)
The Chair requested the Committee to note this announcement and
informed them that HEFCE will be requesting revised research
capability strategies for Subjects Allied to Medicine and
Communication, Cultural and Media Studies.
06/1.8 HEIF 3 - UPDATE
Mr Hume updated the Committee on HEIF3. HEIF3 consists of two elements:
75% will be allocated to HEIs using a formula, and 25% will be awarded
through a competitive bid process. The University’s provisional allocation is
£1.5M. The University will need to submit an institutional plan in March and
RERA is working with the Schools and Hubs to prepare this before the
deadline. The University is also developing a competitive bid and is in
10
discussions to participate as a consortium partner on 3-4 other competitive
bids, at least two of which are Olympics related.
06/1.9 RESEARCH FELLOWS WITH PERMANENT CONTRACTS EMPLOYED
ON EU PROJECTS
The Secretary reported that a few months ago one of the University’s EU
projects had been audited by auditors from the Commission. The auditors were
unhappy about the fact that research fellows with permanent contracts were
employed as research staff on EU projects, even though these contracts were
conditional on external funding being available to pay salaries. The auditors
accepted the University’s report, however, some measures will need to be
introduced to ensure that in future the auditors will be satisfied that projects
are carried out in accordance to EU grant conditions.
Mrs Yakub had proposed the following two measures:
1.
Principal Investigators need to inform both Finance and
Personnel straightaway when a research fellow is put on an EU
project, so that a note can be added to the relevant research
fellow’s personnel file stating that he or she is employed on the
relevant EU project.
2.
Research fellows employed on EU projects should keep
timesheets, thereby keeping track of the time spent on the project
Mrs Yakub was working on the form of words for the note, so that it will be
acceptable to the auditors. The Committee agreed that in order for these
measures to be enforced, formal guidance will need to issued, including a
timesheet template.
ACTION:
Secretary to collect examples of timesheets and issue formal
guidance on employing research fellows on EU projects
06/1.10 GUIDELINES RELATING TO PROFESSORIAL INAUGURAL
LECTURES
The Chair presented the Guidelines relating to Professorial Inaugural Lectures,
which had been developed to ensure that all Professors on their appointment to
the University deliver an inaugural lecture and publish it in written form.
The Committee was invited to comment on the guidelines
ACTION:
Secretary to circulate the Guidelines for comment
06/1.11 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION
1.11.1 HEFCE Circular Letter Number 33/2005: Completion of the Joint
Costing and Pricing Steering Group’s programme of activities
This item was noted for information
11
06/1.12 AOB
There were no matters for AOB
06/1.13 DATE OF NEXT MEETING
2.15 p.m., Monday 20th February, Room 075 Queen Anne, Maritime
Greenwich.
12