Previous page
Table of Contents
|
Previous page
|
Table of Contents
|
Next page
|
1. The General Board submit this Annual Report to the Council.
2. The focus of the University's involvement with national quality assurance arrangements during the year was an Institutional Audit of the University by a team of auditors from the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), which took place in the week beginning 28 April 2003. Preparations for the Audit included the production of a University Self Evaluation document (Reporter, 2002-03, p. 639); the collation of some 250 items of documentation for the auditors; and assisting with the preparations necessary for the six institutions selected by the QAA as 'Discipline Audit Trails': the Institute of Astronomy; the Computer Laboratory; the Department of Experimental Psychology; the Faculty of History; the Centre of International Studies; and the Faculty of Law. The Audit team's visit involved meetings both with staff and student representatives of those institutions and with a range of other University and College staff. The Audit team chose to focus its attention on support for taught graduate students and the work of the Board of Graduate Studies; the assurance of the quality of teaching staff; the University's use of external reference points (including the QAA's Code of Practice, the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications, and subject benchmark statements), and its use of External Examiners; internal quality assurance processes; and the teaching of, and academic support for, undergraduates. The visit was followed by the production of a Report by the QAA (published in October 2003 - available on the web at http://www.qaa.ac.uk/revreps/instrev/cambridge/main.htm), in which the auditors confirmed that 'broad confidence' could be placed in the soundness of the University's current and likely future management of the quality of its academic programmes and the academic standards of its awards. As well as commending a number of aspects of the University's activities the Report included a number of recommendations which the Board are addressing and on which they will report during 2003-04. The Board wish to record their appreciation of the contributions made by many staff and students, in particular the members of the six institutions particularly involved to the Audit, which led to this positive outcome.
3. As part of the new external quality assurance regime, the University is also required by the HEFCE to publish information on the quality and standards of its educational provision, as set out in the final report of a Task Group set up by the HEFCE and chaired by Sir Ron Cooke, 'the Cooke data'. Early in 2003, Cambridge took part in a pilot set up by the HEFCE, to explore how 'the Cooke data' could be made available by institutions through the Higher Education and Research Opportunities (HERO) website. The University's participation involved the preparation of information for publication on a trial website, including the production of digests of External Examiners' reports, of internal review reports, and of the University's Learning and Teaching Strategy, as well as quantitative data. Participation in the pilot demonstrated that the information being required for publication is not necessarily that which stake-holders most wish to use; that publishing the information will require changes to Cambridge's procedures which risk harming its relationships with key players in its quality assurance procedures, above all with External Examiners; and that publishing the information will be resource- and time-consuming. The University, along with other bodies, has made representations to the HEFCE outlining these reservations. Further guidance from the HEFCE is awaited.
4. The Board have also, through their Education Committee, paid particular attention to the interaction between University institutions and relevant national professional and statutory bodies. They were pleased to note the continued accreditation of courses in the Computer Laboratory and the Departments of Engineering and of Experimental Psychology by the relevant professional bodies, and they have worked with the Faculty Boards of Clinical Medicine and Law in responding to proposals from the professional bodies concerned for revised quality assurance arrangements, following changes to the QAA's national arrangements at subject level.
5. Through their Education Committee, the Board have operated the various 'strands' of their own University-wide quality assurance procedures, the revisions to which were described in the Board's Annual Report for 2001-02. These revised procedures included the production of a substantial 'Quality Guide'; interviews with some 45 institutions, resulting in the production of 'Quality Statements' (summaries of the quality assurance arrangements in place within each institution); the production of some 130 draft 'programme specifications' for all of the University's taught award-bearing courses; and amendments to the Board's departmental review procedures. The Education Committee has reviewed the first year's operation of these procedures and expects to make adjustments to them, in the light both of experience and of the references to those procedures in the Institutional Audit Report.
6. The Education Committee identified activities to be funded through the HEFCE's Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund (amounting to c. £803,000 for the period 2002-05), including support for the Joint Committee on Academic Performance, the Language Centre, and staff development activities. The Committee has continued to work closely with the Senior Tutors' Standing Committee on Education and a number of other bodies with an interest in teaching, learning, and assessment. It has, for example, participated in a working group, comprising representatives of the Education, Staff Development, and Personnel Committees, which discusses matters of mutual interest to those committees. It has worked closely with the Joint Committee on Disability and the Disability Resources Centre on the implications for teaching, learning, and assessment of the Disability Discrimination Act, with the Senior Tutors' Committee and the Personnel Division on the Race Relations (Amendment) Act, and it has kept in close touch with representatives of the Cambridge-MIT Institute over the undergraduate exchange scheme with MIT. The Committee has, amongst other activities, reviewed general issues arising from the reports of Tripos External Examiners for 2002 and has considered the outcome of an investigation, undertaken by the Faculty of Biology, on the use of multiple choice questionnaires as a form of assessment. In collaboration with the Senior Tutors' Committee, good progress has been made towards fulfilling requirements of the HEFCE for the production of transcripts for University examinations. Whilst full and complete transcripts are not expected to be available until CamSIS is fully operational, steps have been taken to record centrally data relating to student performance for all examination papers, including their final marks and position in the class.
7. As part of the Board's rolling programme of departmental reviews, the Computer Laboratory, the Departments of History and Philosophy of Science and of Land Economy, and the Faculties of Modern and Medieval Languages and of Music were reviewed during 2002-03, under the revised procedures for internal reviews which now, routinely, include at least one external member on each review committee and an explicit focus on each institution's arrangements for teaching, learning, and assessment. The Board have also considered, and acted upon, the reports of Review Committees for the Departments of Engineering, Experimental Psychology, History of Art, and Plant Sciences, and the Faculty of Economics and Politics (including the Department of Applied Economics). During the year the Board were in close contact with the Faculty Board of Social and Political Sciences concerning its governance arrangements, resulting in a Report making proposals for the reorganization of the Faculty (Reporter, 2002-03, p. 1217).
8. New courses and examinations for the M.Phil. Degree (one-year course) were approved as follows: Advanced Chemical Engineering Practice; History of Art and Architecture; and Industrial Systems, Manufacturing, and Management. The first of these was approved under the arrangements whereby particular M.Phil. programmes may involve a period of study and residence at another university (in this instance MIT). The M.Phil. in Industrial Systems, Manufacturing, and Management will replace, with effect from October 2004, the Postgraduate Certificate in Design, Manufacture, and Management. The Board's Education Committee also agreed the means whereby award-bearing courses administered through the Institute of Continuing Education and the Cambridge Programme for Industry are considered by the Education Committee. Numerous changes to the regulations for examinations were approved, of which the most significant were those relating to the Engineering and Electrical and Information Science Triposes, the Historical Tripos, and the Social and Political Sciences Tripos.
9. The Joint Committee on Academic Performance continued to consider the factors which affect the academic performance of students in the University and in particular focused on two main areas. First, a summary report of the innovative research project, funded by the Board, on 'Indicators of Academic Performance' was published on 12 February 2003 (Reporter, 2002-03, p. 572) and generated a certain amount of media interest. The researchers had undertaken statistical analyses of the academic performance of students as well as focusing on a qualitative study of a group of volunteers from amongst the 1997 intake. The Education Committee is co-ordinating the process of addressing the findings of the project to ensure that the issues which it raises are properly addressed, and is discussing them with the Faculties and Departments which were the subject of particularly close scrutiny. Secondly, a further study, commissioned and overseen by the Committee, is investigating the admission and academic performance of graduate students, and in particular why fewer women than men undertake research degrees. The project is supported by funds from the HEFCE associated with the Learning and Teaching Strategy and completion is expected early in 2004.
10. The Financial Working Party1 (FWP), established in May 2002 by the Planning and Resources Committee (PRC) to recommend 'the steps to be taken to ensure the University achieves the Committee's target of break-even on the Chest in three years and a return to a surplus within five years', reported to the Planning and Resources Committee on 5 February 2003. The FWP confirmed that the financial position of the University was deteriorating and was a cause of concern. Their conclusions were based on detailed studies of teaching income, research income, staff costs, space costs, composition fee income, and the management of trust and other discretionary income. The Board endorsed the broad conclusions of the Working Party that the task set for them of bringing the University budget to break-even in three years, and into surplus in five, was unachievable without either the injection of substantial additional resources or inflicting major damage, but a number of sensible steps could be taken in the short term to ease the current problems and to reverse the trend over a longer period. A number of recommendations of the Working Party were reflected in the 2003 Allocations Report:
| (i) | selective targets for reductions in recurrent expenditure; |
| (ii) | above-inflation rises for Overseas student fees (but with a proportion of the additional income being used to increase funding for bursaries); and |
| (iii) | increased overhead recovery rates, a revised distribution of interest on cash balances, and the introduction of overheads on salaries met from donation and other accounts. |
In addition to recommendations leading to savings, the Board accepted that the cost to institutions of continuing the pause in approving the filling of vacant offices was out of proportion to the financial savings and recommended that it be lifted. A range of issues was also identified for resolution in the medium and longer term, including a review of teaching and other categories of space, and the introduction of a Resource Allocation Model (RAM).
11. The RAM Development Group2 was, accordingly, established, and with the target of the RAM being used to inform the allocation process. The RAM Development Group established a number of sub-groups to assist them in a number of issues which needed detailed study. The RAM, which is the subject of a separate Report, is expected to be a key element in setting School financial targets and, by providing Schools with a clearer picture of the future, to enable them to plan ahead. Work is continuing to develop a new budgeting and planning process for institutions, embracing both Chest and non-Chest income and expenditure; to review the range and attribute of current central Heads of Expenditure; and to consider the appropriate governance and management responsibilities within a framework of devolved budgetary responsibility. Development of the latter will be crucial and it is important to emphasize that the output of the RAM will only inform this process and not dictate it.
12. The White Paper The Future of Higher Education was the main expression during the year of evolving Government policy. The general tenor of the White Paper, in its support for excellence, was welcomed by the Board, as was the delivery of some additional funding, particularly for infrastructure, in the allocations for 2003-04 and subsequent years. The White Paper was followed by the HEFCE consultation on their Strategic Plan, on the format and timing of the next Research Assessment Exercise, and on the funding of research and the funding of teaching. The Office of Science and Technology also announced a review of the Dual Support arrangements for research funding. These issues are all linked and it is difficult to form a complete picture, given the lack of certainty about the future arrangements. The general tenor of the reforms is not favourable to research-intensive universities and initial analysis of their effects suggests that the high hopes of the White Paper of investing 'even more in our very best research institutions, enabling them to compete effectively with the world's best universities.' (Key point, p. 23) may not be realized, and there is the prospect of significantly reduced funding in 2004-05. It is of particular concern that there seems little immediate prospect of further amelioration of the chronic under-funding of teaching and research. In May 2003 the HEFCE published the report of their review of the Research Assessment Exercise, under the Chairmanship of Sir Gareth Roberts, with proposed significant modifications to the 2001 procedures, including the interim monitoring of staff numbers and university policies and the determination of Departmental research profiles based on an aggregation of assessments rather than the previous single rating on the familiar scale, for each Unit of Assessment. The Board considered submissions from the Schools and agreed a number of points and recommendations, which were incorporated into the Cambridge response. It is anticipated that the next research assessment will be conducted so that the outcome can be published by December 2007 and used in funding allocation for 2008-09. The Board are cognizant that this timetable, if confirmed, will require them to determine in the near future those policies and procedures which will guide the University's approach to the next Exercise.
13. The disappointing financial outcome of the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), given the University's outstanding result, was partly mitigated by the HEFCE's decision, at the request of the Government, to make £20m extra funding available to those Departments across the sector who had achieved a 5* rating in both 1996 and 2001. Twenty-three Departments met this criterion which resulted in a welcome 5.6% increase in HEFCE research funding for the University. However, the £20m of additional funds will be allocated from 2004-05, until the next RAE, not only to units that achieved a 5* rating in both 1996 and 2001, but also to units that achieved a 5* rating in 2001 for the first time without a drop in the number of research active staff submitted. The result will be a drop in the University's income, since more units across the HE sector will satisfy the revised criterion.
14. In their last Annual Report the Board announced their expectation of not less than the top rating in every Department and, consequently, of their review of those few Departments which, in 2001, did not achieve at least a 5 rating or retain their 5* awarded in the 1996 Exercise. The Board gave preliminary consideration to the outcome of their reviews in the Michaelmas Term, and elicited a number of general points of good practice, which the Councils of the Schools have been requested to disseminate to institutions within their scope. A working group, under the Chairmanship of Professor Malcolm Grant and comprising the Chairmen of the Schools, together with senior officers, formulated further recommendations on the basis of the individual review reports, for consideration by the Board in the Easter Term. In most cases, the Board were satisfied that the Departments reviewed had provided satisfactory responses to the recommendations of the Board's reviews, which the Board will monitor annually through both the relevant Council of School and the Pro-Vice-Chancellor concerned. In the case of three Departments, however, the Board agreed that more substantive measures are required if the prospects of a better outcome in the next RAE are to be improved. The Board are working, with the Councils of the Schools concerned, to determine the appropriate actions in those cases and they will report to the University in due course.
15. In February 2003 the HEFCE announced the Scientific Research Infrastructure Fund (SRIF) round 2 funding programme, for 2004-06, of £845.12m for universities in England. Allocations were based partly on total research income (QR) and partly on the amount of quality-related research income received from HEFCE, and the University was allocated £60.34m. Proposals for the use of the allocation had to be submitted by 30 May 2003. The principal objectives of the funding programme were to:
| (a) | contribute to the long-term financial sustainability of higher education institutions' (HEIs') physical research infrastructure (buildings and equipment) and its activities; |
| (b) | make up some of the past under-investment in research infrastructure; |
| (c) | promote collaborative partnerships between HEIs, industry, charitable bodies, Government, and NHS Trusts; |
| (d) | promote high quality research capability in areas of national strategic priority (identified by the Research Councils and other major funders of research). |
The University's programme consists of 93 projects, encompassing a small number of new buildings, the refurbishment of accommodation and equipment. Subsequently, the HEFCE raised concerns about certain projects in relation to the criteria and requested additional information justifying two of the projects for new buildings, before approving the entire programme. A revised programme, responding to these concerns, will be submitted.
16. In June 2003 the HEFCE announced the Project Capital Round 3 funding programme for 2004-06, comprising three streams of funding (the amounts in brackets are those allocated to the University):
• Learning and teaching and IT £320.88m (£5.03m)
• Students with special needs £118.35m (£1.66m)
• Science and Engineering
teaching laboratories £60.0m (£1.04m)
The above totals include some additional funding that was simultaneously announced for Project Capital Round 2. The amounts allocated to each HEI were determined formulaically and applications for the funds submitted by 1 October 2003.
The principal objectives of the funding programme were:
| (a) | Learning and teaching and IT capital: address past under-investment in infrastructure and to contribute to the long-term sustainability of the institution's infrastructure and activities; |
| (b) | Students with special needs: to assist with meeting the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and its extension in the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001; |
| (c) | Science and Engineering teaching laboratories: to meet the past under-investment identified in the Roberts report. |
17. The University's submission for the Learning, teaching, and IT allocation was divided into four broadly based projects:
• upgrading lecture room facilities (£2.8m)
• refurbishment and development of student IT
resources (£1.8m)
• language laboratories (£133,000)
• library facilities (£126,000)
A separate submission of £1.19m was made for upgrading science and engineering teaching laboratories. The allocation for students with special needs was mostly allocated to nine projects to improve access to buildings.
18. These initiatives, though administratively burdensome, made up for the lack of an allocation to the Minor Works Fund in 2002-03 and cutbacks in funding for equipment. The Board recognize that the continued improvement of the University's buildings, though vital to provide the facilities necessary for outstanding teaching and research, presents significant challenges for the University, given the depressed financial position, and the different requirements that have to be met in order to release special initiative funding. A more co-ordinated and priority-driven approach needs to be developed, to ensure that the University is well placed in relation to future such initiatives. Equally importantly, financial provision will have to be made for the renewal of the infrastructure for activities which do not fit the terms of such externally driven schemes.
19. Despite the financial constraints, and mainly as a result of the availability of external funds, the Board were able to propose the establishment of the following Professorships in 2002-03:
| (a) | A Visiting Professorship of Marketing, Strategy, and Innovation in the Judge Institute of Management Studies, funded by a generous benefaction from Mr and Mrs G. Montezemolo. |
| (b) | A Professorship of Gastroenterology, established for one tenure from 1 June 2003 in the Department of Medicine, supported by the Addenbrooke's NHS Trust. |
| (c) | The Professorship of Clinical Gerontology, which was established in 1987 for a single tenure, and is held by Professor K.-T. Khaw, was established as a permanent Professorship in the University and reassigned to the Department of Public Health and Primary Care. This followed the receipt of generous donations of £860,000 from a local benefactor and £250,000 from Help the Aged which, with the accumulated funds, provided more than sufficient for the permanent endowment of the Professorship. |
| (d) | The Professorship of Metabolic Medicine was re-established for a single tenure from 1 July 2003 in the Department of Medicine, funded from the University Education Fund. |
| (e) | A Professorship of Plant Systematics and Evolution, established from 1 June 2003 in the Department of Plant Sciences, funded by the suppression of a University Lectureship and a technician post. |
20. In their Report for 2001-02, the Board reported that the University had received a very major bequest in the Will of Dr Herchel Smith. The world-wide economic downturn resulted in the Executor's Trustees taking longer than anticipated to realize the assets. The University has now received funds to support the five Professorships specified by Dr Smith and the Board have asked the Schools of the Biological and Physical Sciences to consider the fields in which they would wish to fill the Professorships. The Board will report further on these developments and the implementation of other proposals in the Will in due course. Following approval of their Report, dated 30 September 2001, on the establishment of an office of Director of the Cambridge Endowment for Research in Finance, and on the recommendation of an Advisory Committee, the Board proposed the establishment of a Professorship of Financial Policy in the Judge Institute of Management Studies from 1 October 2002 for five years. After extensive discussions, initiated by the Trustees of the Commonwealth Institute, the Board proposed the establishment, from 1 June 2003, of a Centre for Commonwealth Education, within the School of Education, and funded by the Institute. The Board consider that the establishment of a partnership between the Institute and the University will greatly facilitate the development of a centre of excellence in the field of educational policy and provision within the Commonwealth.
21. During the year the Research Policy Committee met regularly. In addition to its role of overseeing the work of the Research Services Division (and the Corporate Liaison Office), the Committee considered several policy papers prepared by the Division. Recommendations on introducing a register of interests and on managing conflicts of interest were agreed and passed to the General Board and Council for their approval. A proposed new policy on the ownership of intellectual property arising out of non-externally funded research, which had been passed through the General Board and Council, was the subject of a Discussion in October 2002. In the light of the debate generated by the proposals, a Working Party was set up by the Research Policy Committee, under the Chairmanship of Professor W. R. Cornish, to consider the appropriate response. The Working Party consulted widely and published its findings in July 2003. A Discussion was scheduled for 21 October 2003. The Committee discussed policy on 'Embedded Companies' and agreed guidelines for publication on the Division's website. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor led discussion in the Committee on Research Strategy. Much useful information on School, Faculty, and departmental strategies was gathered and discussed. In view of the diversity of strategic approaches to research in different parts of the University, it was decided not to try to produce an overall statement of research strategy.
22. The Board would like to draw attention to the work that has been done by the Personnel Committee and the Personnel Division in taking forward the implementation of a wide range of activity in the context of the University's HR Strategy, for which additional funding has been received from HEFCE under its Rewarding and Developing Staff initiative. In particular:
| (i) | There has been a further expansion of staff development provision, including management skills training and staff and student selection interviewing; |
| (ii) | There have been significant developments in the area of equality and diversity, including the introduction of a race equality policy and action plan, a gender action plan, and the establishment of an Equality and Diversity Committee as a sub-committee of the Personnel Committee with terms of reference related to staff. |
23. Considerable progress has been made to develop the University's personnel policies and procedures, in the light of experience, and to bring about a greater degree of consistency and efficiency in operation. The previously separate schemes for promotion to University Senior Lecturer and to Reader and Professor have been brought together in a single scheme for Senior Academic Promotions, which will be implemented in 2003-04. Similarly, a single scheme for regrading and discretionary increments, which will also apply from 2003-04, has replaced a number of existing schemes for other staff groups. These arrangements will be developed further in the light of the introduction of a common grading methodology and the development of reward policy. The Board have approved a draft scheme for probation in respect of academic staff and hope to publish a Report in Michaelmas Term 2003 for consideration by the University.3 Probationary schemes for other staff groups and a career management scheme for contract research staff have already been introduced. Employment-related legislation has continued to impact on all parts of the University. Much work has had to be done, particularly in regard to the implications for the University of the Fixed-Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002, Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. Work is beginning in anticipation of the implementation of further legislation relating, for example, to age discrimination, information and consultation, discrimination, harassment, and dispute resolution. This will also involve revisions to disciplinary, grievance, and other procedures including Statute U and other related Statutes and Ordinances. In partnership with Addenbrooke's NHS Trust, work has continued on the implementation of the Follett Committee's recommendations in respect of clinical academic staff. This is likely to have to encompass also the introduction of new pay and contractual arrangements for staff at consultant level.
24. The HEFCE has confirmed that it will extend funding for HR Strategies under a second phase of the Rewarding and Developing Staff initiative. However, it is a matter of concern for research intensive universities that the funding council has indicated that it intends to apportion funding according to teaching grant only. Other measures taken to assist recruitment include improved financial assistance with relocation, reform of the arrangements for appointing academic-related staff, and, subject to Privy Council approval, provision for making initial appointments at University Senior Lecturer level. Notwithstanding the current uncertainty about the outcome of the national negotiations on pay for all staff groups in the HE Sector, the Personnel Committee will be considering significant changes in the structure of University's pay scales and in the way staff are rewarded, in order to assist recruitment and retention and meet equal pay considerations. Further improvements to the University's salary structure and reward arrangements will, given the current financial position, have to be balanced against other competing claims for resources, consonant with the aim of enhancing the academic vitality of the University.
25. The Board, through the Health and Safety Executive Committee, pay close attention to the strengthening of the University's Health and Safety policy and in monitoring performance.
The continued effective implementation and development of the University's policy is the operational responsibility of the Health and Safety Division through activities such as training initiatives, the initiation of a programme of departmental safety audits and the continued improvement of the quality and accessibility of guidance and information.
| (i) | Safety Education: a much expanded education programme was implemented in 2002-03, with the range of subjects growing for more targeted audiences, and will include an assessed two-day course for Departmental Biological Safety Officers, annual training course for Radiation Protection Supervisors, etc. |
| (ii) | Information and Guidance: the Health and Safety Division website has been completely overhauled during the year enabling anyone within the University to access information and sources of information across the health and safety spectrum. |
| (iii) | Existing Codes of Practice, policy, and guidance publications in all areas have been reviewed, and where required revised, and many new publications have been completed. Of particular note is the new University Safety Policy. |
| (iv) | Safety Audits: in July 2003, the programme of internal health and safety audits of Departments began. By the end of the period covered in this report three major Departments (Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Physics, Computer Laboratory) will have been audited and four others will have been completed by Christmas 2003. The audits are already indicating common themes for improvements. |
| (v) | Radiation protection audits continue to run on a regular basis, and the target to complete a formal visit to all Departments using radioactive substances, within a two-year period ending in December 2003, will be achieved. |
The University, like similar HEIs, continues to receive close attention from the enforcing authorities (HSE, EA, DEFRA, etc.). This year there have been a number of pre-planned 'routine' inspections from various specialist sections of the HSE. The number and nature of these visits means that considerable efforts have to be expended by Health and Safety Division staff and University Departments in preparation for the visits. However, none resulted in any formal enforcement action, although a number of follow-up actions were required.
26. The Board's Committee on Libraries has been addressing the growing concern about the escalating cost of scientific journals and the difficulties of ensuring that the resources available within the University for their purchase can be used to maximum effect. As a result of commitments given to publishers in order to secure more advantageous subscription prices, the General Board reminded Faculty and departmental libraries of the requirement that no journals be cancelled without their permission. The Library Syndicate, the Council of the School of the Biological Sciences, and Council of the School of the Physical Sciences agreed to discuss the establishment of a joint fund for the purchase of journals in departmental libraries and the relevant sections of the University Library, with a view to rationalizing the use of resources. The Board's Committee on Libraries continues to pursue the issue of improving professional development, training, and mentoring for Librarians throughout the University and an electronic questionnaire was sent to Librarians to find out what their needs were. The responses to the questionnaire are being considered and the issue of staff development for librarians will be discussed further with the Personnel Committee.
27. The Board's review of the Centre for Advanced Research in Educational Technologies (CARET) concluded that the Centre had started to fulfil the aims set by the Board at its inception and that it had become a significant resource for the development, evaluation, and implementation of new technologies to support teaching and learning throughout the University. However, the Board were unable to maintain the funding of the Centre at its current level. The Board subsequently approved a revised structure of programmes, more closely aligned with the needs of Faculties and Departments, and funding for the Centre for a three-year period from 2003-04. They expect to report further on new constitutional arrangements for the Centre in the course of the next academical year.
28. The University approved the constitution of a School of Clinical Medicine as the sixth full School of the University with effect from 1 January 2003, and a consequential amendment to the constitution of the Board.
29. The Board take this opportunity to record their appreciation of the leadership provided for the work of the Board by Professor Sir Alec Broers, as Vice-Chancellor from 1 October 1996 to 30 September 2003. They would also like to record their thanks to Dr David Livesey for his contribution to the Board's work during his tenure as Secretary General of the Faculties from 1 January 1992 until 30 September 2003.
| 5 November 2003 | ALISON RICHARD, Vice-Chancellor | N. O. A. BULLOCK | D. W. B. MACDONALD |
| SARAH AIREY | H. A. CHASE | ROGER PARKER | |
| JOHN BELL | JESSICA CHILDS | KEITH PETERS | |
| T. L. BLUNDELL | ANDREW CLIFF | S. J. YOUNG | |
| WILLIAM BROWN | M. J. DAUNTON |
1 Professor Malcolm Grant (Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Chairman); Professor Ian Leslie (Computer Laboratory); Professor Peter Goddard (Master, St John's College); Professor Tony Minson (Chairman, Council of the School of Biological Sciences); and Mr Nigel Brown (External Member of the Finance Committee)
2 Professor Malcolm Grant, Chairman (until 31 July 2003); The Chairs of the Councils of the Schools: Dr N. O. A. Bullock; Professor A. Cliff; Professor A. C. Minson (Chairman from 1 August 2003); Dr K. Pretty (until 30 June 2003); Professor M. Daunton (from 1 July 2003); Professor Sir Keith Peters; Professor S. Young; a representative of the Colleges: Professor W. A. Brown, Master of Darwin; a representative of institutions outside Schools: Mr P. K. Fox, University Librarian; the Treasurer; Co-opted members: Mrs A. M. Lonsdale (Pro-Vice-Chancellor), with one vacancy.
3 See Reporter, 2003-04, p. 206.
Abstract of Accounts for year ended 31 July 2003 [PDF 171Kb]
|
Previous page
|
Table of Contents
|
Next page
|
Cambridge University Reporter 17 December 2003
Copyright © 2003 The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars
of the University of Cambridge.