Cambridge University Reporter


Institute of Continuing Education: Notice

The General Board established a Strategic Review of the Institute of Continuing Education, in June 2008. The Review Committee reported to the Board in February 2009; a copy of the report is attached as an Annex to this Notice. As a result of the Review and after consultation with the Institute's Director and Management Board, the General Board have agreed to replace the Management Board with a Strategic Committee, with revised membership and responsibilities, and to amend the Director's title. They have accordingly agreed to amend the Institute's regulations (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 615), with effect from 1 October 2009, to read as set out below. References to the Director and to the Management Board in the general regulations for the Degree of Master of Studies (p. 520) and in the regulations for the Institute of Criminology (p. 594) and the Centre for Applied Research in Educational Technologies (p. 616) have been amended accordingly with effect from the same date.

Institute of Continuing Education

1. There shall be an Institute of Continuing Education, which shall be an institution under the supervision of the General Board. There shall be a Strategic Committee for the Institute of Continuing Education which shall consist of:
(a) a member of the Regent House, appointed by the General Board, as Chairman;
(b) six members appointed by the General Board on the nomination of the Councils of the Schools, to include a representative of each School;
(c) the Director of Continuing Education;
(d) three members of the academic staff of the Institute, elected in the Michaelmas Term by such staff to serve for three years from 1 January following their election;
(e) not more than four persons co-opted by the Committee, provided that it shall not be obligatory for the Committee to co-opt any person or persons.

Except as otherwise provided, members of the Committee shall be appointed in the Michaelmas Term to serve for four years from 1 January following their appointment. The Director of Continuing Education, or a University officer designated by the Director, shall be Secretary of the Committee.

2. There shall be the University office of Director of Continuing Education. Appointments and reappointments to the office of Director shall be made by the General Board, on the advice of a committee specially constituted for the particular occasion. The duties of the Director shall be determined by the General Board on the advice of the Strategic Committee.

3. There shall be such number of University offices of Senior Assistant Secretary, Assistant Secretary, and Junior Assistant Secretary (in Grades I, II, and III) as may be determined from time to time by the General Board on the recommendation of the Strategic Committee on the advice of the Director of Continuing Education. Appointments and reappointments to an office of Senior Assistant Secretary or Assistant Secretary or Junior Assistant Secretary shall be made in accordance with arrangements agreed by the General Board from time to time. The duties of each office shall be determined by the Strategic Committee on the advice of the Director of Continuing Education.

4. The office of Director may be held concurrently with another University office.

5. There shall be such number of University offices of Senior Staff Tutor and Tutor as may be determined from time to time by the General Board on the recommendation of the Strategic Committee on the advice of the Director of Continuing Education. The duties of the offices shall be determined by the Strategic Committee on the advice of the Director.

6. Appointments and reappointments to an office of University Lecturer or University Senior Lecturer or Senior Staff Tutor or Tutor in the Institute, shall be made by an Appointments Committee for the Institute constituted in accordance with Statute D, XVII, 3.

7. The Strategic Committee may designate, for a period not exceeding five years at a time, one of the officers in the Institute as Deputy Director.

8. The Strategic Committee shall be responsible to the General Board for the government of Madingley Hall. The General Board, on the advice of the Strategic Committee, shall designate a University officer as Warden of the Hall and may establish a committee for management of the Hall. The Warden shall be the principal officer in the Hall responsible under the direction of the Strategic Committee for the administration of the Hall and for presenting the annual accounts of the Hall to the Strategic Committee.

9. The Warden shall be entitled to receive, in addition to the stipend of her or his University office, a pensionable payment for responsibility as Warden at an annual rate determined by the General Board after consultation with the Strategic Committee.

10. The duties of the Strategic Committee shall be:
(a) to determine academic policy for the Institute and the Hall and to report accordingly to the General Board;
(b) to make an annual report to the General Board;
(c) to act as an administering body in accordance with the Ordinances for the Master of Studies Degree;
(d) to act as an administering body in accordance with the Ordinances for Diplomas and Certificates open to non-members of the University;1
(e) to co-operate with other University institutions and outside bodies in the development of continuing education;
(f) to establish such advisory bodies, representing interests and activities associated with continuing education, as it sees fit;
(g) to receive reports from the Director of the Institute and the Warden of the Hall on the deployment of funds allocated for the purposes set out in (a)-(f) above;
(h) to appoint managers, on the advice of the Director, to administer the following funds;
 (i) the Churton Collins Prize Fund,2
 (ii) the Hargood Memorial Fund,2
 (iii) the James Stuart Endowment Fund.2

1 See Reporter, p. 188.

2 The relevant regulations were last published in Ordinances, 1946, p. 22.


Strategic Review of the Institute of Continuing Education

I. Introduction

I.1 At their meeting on 4 June 2008 the General Board established a Strategic Review of the Institute of Continuing Education (ICE), to consider:

I.2 The Review Committee comprised: the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Resources) (Chairman), the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education), Dr D. MacDonald, Professor I. White, and Mr M. Younger. The Committee held nine meetings. It considered a wide range of documentation including the 2007 General Board Learning and Teaching review of ICE, a draft Strategic Plan for ICE for 2009-10 to 2012-13, prepared by ICE's Management and Strategy Team in September 2008, and a summary of market research commissioned by ICE regarding its future provision. The Committee met the Director of ICE, Professor Taylor, and the following ICE staff: Mr A. Barlow (Public Programmes), Mrs S. Collins (Professional Studies), Ms B. Housden (Finance Manager), Dr S. Oosthuizen (formerly Community and Outreach Division), Ms S. Ormrod (International Division), and Miss S. Rawlings (Deputy Director and Warden of Madingley Hall). It also met Dr K. Pretty (Chair of ICE's Management Board), Mrs P. Courtice (Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership (CPSL)), and Professor A. De Meyer (Judge Business School). It invited all academic and academic-related staff at ICE to comment in writing on any aspect of the Committee's remit: nine responses were received. The Director of ICE was invited to solicit opinions from outside the University to inform the Committee's discussions: comments from three experts in Continuing Education from other universities and the Director of the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education were received. The Committee itself sought views from the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Leeds (who had recent experience of the strategic development of continuing education there).

I.3 The Committee was set a tight timetable by the Board. It has seen its primary roles as proposing a broad direction of future travel for ICE (rather than examining in too fine detail every aspect of ICE's operations) and providing parameters within which the next Director should operate (Professor Taylor's early retirement with effect from September 2009 being announced during the Michaelmas Term 2008).

The Review was generally welcomed by ICE. In its discussion with staff, the Committee was at pains to make clear that the Review was not primarily driven by the funding impact of HEFCE's ELQ (Equivalent and lower qualifications) policy (which will lead to a progressive withdrawal of HEFCE funding to the University attributable to ICE of c. £870,000 a year and, taking into account changes to student numbers, a more substantial drop in income to ICE in the RAM, affecting in particular the Public Programmes component of ICE's provision). The effect of that policy, whilst significant, is not so great that urgent drastic action is necessary. In April 2008 the Planning and Resources Committee (PRC) agreed that c. 20% of the current level of Chest allocation would have to be found by ICE in 2008-09 as a consequence of the ELQ policy, representing a drop in total income for that year of only 3%. It was clear to the Committee that ICE would welcome guidance on a number of key issues on which, as indicated in the draft Strategic Plan and the Committee's meetings with staff (and others), different views were held amongst ICE staff, the ICE Management Board, and its Management and Strategy Team. These differences include the role expected of the next Director and the priority to be given to research.

I.4 The Committee has assumed throughout that the proposal whereby ICE could propose a transfer of currently locally certified awards to University awards would go ahead (see the General Board's Report on Diplomas and Certificates awarded by the Institute of Continuing Education and other bodies (Reporter, 2008-09, p. 184)) and the Committee has not thought it necessary to reopen this issue, although the Report's proposals have informed the Committee's views on ICE's future award-bearing provision.

II. Context

II.1 ICE comprises c. 34 fte Academic and Academic-Related Staff (including 13 academic staff (including the current Director)), 29 fte support staff dedicated to academic activity, and a further 29 fte supporting activity in the Hall. The Institute occupies c. 2100 sq.m. of the operational estate, the majority at Madingley with 190 sq.m. in Greenwich House, plus the residential space in the Hall.

Its educational provision encompasses approximately 12,000 part-time students at any one time, taking accredited or non-accredited programmes. (In this report 'accredited' means credit-bearing courses leading to an award either in Cambridge or credits being recognized elsewhere.) The Institute offers a wide range of courses including: modular two-year Certificate and Diploma courses; ten- and twenty-week courses, usually held weekly either in the evening or the day-time; day schools, weekend (and longer) residential courses; M.St. Degrees; International Summer Schools; and a range of credit and non-credit programmes designed for professionals. Some provision is delivered entirely face to face, some online, and some through a blend of each. Some is delivered at Madingley Hall, some elsewhere in Cambridge, and some across the region. Student numbers on each course range widely from less than 5 to 150+. A list of current award-bearing courses is appended.

II.2 Total income to the Institute in 2007-08 was c. £8.5m, of which the activities associated with Public Programmes, International Summer Schools, and the Hall made up the majority (36%, 21%, 20% of total income respectively). The Chest provided c. £1.3m of this income in direct allocation in support of Public Programmes. Total expenditure was just below or close to income in both 2007-08 and the two previous years, and the financial position of the Institute improved marginally during this period. The Institute holds reserves of c. £7m (decreasing to £6.3m by July 2009), close to the annual turnover and about five times the annual Chest allocation. There has already been some staff (particularly support staff) restructuring, assisted by central funds, and significant investment in IT and business processes has commenced. Its reserves should enable ICE to fund investment in the areas proposed in this report (without additional calls on the Chest).

II.3 ICE is a General Board, non-School institution with a Management Board, the duties of which (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 616) include annually reporting to the General Board (reports which the Board have hitherto received in Board Circulars). The Management Board is supported by Committees for Teaching and Learning, Awards and Qualifications, and Finance. (The first of these is advised by a Scrutiny Sub-Committee (for new course proposals) and the second by Moderation Panels (comparable to Boards of Examiners).) It is advised by a Management Team comprising the Director and Deputy Director, the Heads of the Divisions, Dr Oosthuizen, and the Finance Manager.

II.4 Academic activity is organized through three Divisions: Public Programmes, Professional Studies, and the International Division.

Public Programmes (based at Madingley Hall) now includes what was the Community and Outreach Division. It offers courses for credit and not for credit. Fees for public programmes were previously determined on an historic basis but steps are now being taken, using a costing model under development, to begin to reflect market and real costs. (Residential weekends, for example, are (the Committee was told) to increase from £200 to £350.)

Public Programmes has a wide regional range in its activities, including long-standing relationships with c. 40 local study centres. ICE's academic staff work in this Division. It is this area which will be most affected by HEFCE's ELQ policy, although the Committee was given to understand that many of those taking public programmes do not do so primarily to gain formal credits or qualifications.

Professional Studies is a relatively new Division offering credit and non-credit continuing professional development (CPD) courses in, for example, notarial practice and legal studies. It has no academic staff of its own and is based in Greenwich House. Currently some 33% of provision is funded by employers.

The International Division (also based at Greenwich House) is primarily concerned with two- and four-week International Summer Schools (taught on the Sidgwick Site, with participants housed in a number of Colleges).

II.5 Most links with other University institutions are through individual UTOs in Faculties and Departments and CTOs (some of whom serve on Moderation Panels), although M.St. provision is overseen through the relevant Degree Committees and the Director sits on the Faculty Board of Education. The extent to which ICE's academic staff are involved in the work of the institutions related to their own subject specialism varies.

III. ICE's future role in Cambridge, the region, nationally, and internationally

III.1 There is general agreement, shared by ICE staff, that the Institute's principal role should be to make the University's teaching and research accessible to a wider audience. (It is one of a number of University providers in this respect.) The draft Strategic Plan acknowledges the difference in ICE's academic nature (in comparison with Faculties and Departments). ICE should primarily be seen as a conduit for transmission of the University's knowledge and research. In particular, it should act to enable the University further to engage with the public. It therefore follows that ICE's provision should be relevant to, and anchored in, the University's academic activities.

This principle should set the parameters within which ICE should work. It is accordingly important that ICE enhance, on a systematic basis, its relationships with other University institutions. (The Committee notes that Oxford's Department for Continuing Education appears better integrated into its university than ICE is.) At present the nature of these relationships varies. In the area of CPD, for example, there is ongoing, informal dialogue with CPD providers in the School of Technology (i.e. Judge Business School (JBS), CPSL, and the Institute for Manufacturing (IfM)). There are close links with the Faculty of Education. In other cases, however, links appear to be through particularly committed individuals (e.g. Divinity and Law) or of an administrative nature principally through the M.St. programmes. Building up relationships requires better and more systematic engagement by both parties, including a two-way commitment with incentives for both sides to collaborate. The Committee recommends the formal, full, and regular involvement in the appointment process of relevant Faculties when academic appointments within ICE are to be made. In the current funding climate there may well be other University institutions interested in exploring teaching options that could expand income: ICE ought to become the natural partner for this purpose.

The view was expressed to the Committee that Executive Education and Continuing Professional Education more generally could expand to become a central feature of the University's educational provision during the 21st century. JBS, CPSL, and IfM form a large-scale coherent federation for Executive Education in the School of Technology. There is scope for ICE to interact with and complement the work of this group through assisting other institutions outside the School of Technology (including the Colleges) providing (or interested in providing) continuing education: but this requires a better knowledge, on ICE's part, of University institutions and vice versa. The Committee is aware that there have been from time to time discussions about the organization of Executive Education in Cambridge. The Committee recommends that when the next Director of ICE is in post, further investigation of ICE's relationship with providers in the School of Technology takes place. The Committee regards it as vital that different elements of the University's provision in this area are complementary, and maintain standards of quality of teaching and learning appropriate to the Cambridge brand.

III.2 There is at present a heavy emphasis on regional provision. This is perhaps unsurprising, in that community engagement and the provision of liberal education to the local public was the basis on which departments such as ICE were founded, as an element of a university's 'civic duties'. But this activity is resource intensive and unlikely ever to cover its costs. With its emphasis (predominantly) in Arts and Humanities subjects (reflecting public interest), regional work does not represent the full spectrum of the University's academic output. Much of it is taught through Tutors with no Cambridge association other than a contractual one with ICE. The absence of a large urban population, the number of other regional providers, and the absence of a Cambridge route to a part-time undergraduate degree are all factors arguing against such a continued emphasis in this area. The Committee does not wish to propose the introduction of a part time B.A. Degree. ICE's draft Strategic Plan acknowledges the need to slim down its regional activities into selected 'regional hubs'. The Review Committee doubts that the current emphasis given to this activity is appropriate in terms of the University's other academic activities and of the other providers within the region (including the Open University, Anglia Ruskin University, University of the Third Age, and the Workers' Educational Association). ICE's regional activities should be geared to complement those of other providers. The Committee acknowledges that a reduction in its contribution in this area - the most longstanding aspect of ICE's provision - would need careful management. But ICE will always be at a disadvantage compared with other higher education institutions in the region, in not being able to offer a part-time degree. More detailed discussion of these issues is presented in Section IV below.

III.3 The Review Committee recommends that ICE should give further attention to the contribution it could make to the University's international activities through, for example, developing sustained links via its Summer School programme, by offering continuing education, CPD, and Executive Education (in areas not covered by other providers in Cambridge) for leading alumni around the world, and generally extending its international profile. The Committee was struck by the scale of the Oxford Department's activities and international alliances in this area. Care should, of course, be taken to ensure that development of ICE's international activities is consistent with the University's overall International Strategy and that due attention is paid to branding and reputational risk. Investment would be required here but there is a need at the top end of this market, capable of realistic pricing, into which ICE could tap.

IV. Future provision

IV.1 The Committee recognizes the need for ICE to be proactive in terms of the range of partners with which it works, to be able to respond to changing circumstances, and to be aware of market sensitivities. However, a clear distinction needs to be made between sensitivity to market trends and needs, and what can be perceived as inappropriate opportunism. It accepts that there needs to be a certain flexibility to allow ICE to be involved in new subject areas: but it reiterates its firm view that ICE's future provision must be firmly anchored to teaching and research undertaken elsewhere in the University. By its nature, the University's provision is constantly developing: but if, in the process whereby ICE seeks to propose courses (existing or new) for University awards, a Faculty Board capable of endorsing the proposal cannot be identified, the Committee would be surprised if the General Board, through their Education Committee, felt comfortable in approving it on the University's behalf.

The market research commissioned by ICE (which confirms the competitive nature of the market in which ICE must operate) suggests that (a) certain types of activity (particularly regional) are more appropriately undertaken by other, non-Cambridge, providers; (b) there should be an increased focus on the top end of each market, with provision priced accordingly; (c) ICE's activities should complement the Schools' plans; and (d) ICE should decide more clearly with which partners it wishes to work. The Committee strongly concurs with these recommendations. In brief, it recommends that ICE should become more competitive, more focused, and leaner. Currently there appears to be too great a volume and diversity of relatively low-level activity.

IV.2 ICE's own view is that currently only approximately 20% of those students on credit-bearing courses ('accredited provision') actively require credit. There is general support within ICE, as a means of enhancing its standing within the University, for the transfer of its awards into University awards: but ICE acknowledges - correctly in the Committee's view - that this process will lead to a reduction in award-bearing courses and that the process might mean a longer lead in time for the approval of new courses. It will certainly lead to a greater scrutiny, on the University's part, of new credit-bearing course proposals (including their examination arrangements) than has hitherto been the case. There are currently too many different courses carrying credits and too many with too few students, involving a disproportionately large administrative overhead. The number of courses needs to be slimmed down and explicitly linked to other Cambridge provision. Fee levels for award-bearing courses should take into account the additional administrative load falling on the central University. The fact that a cognate Faculty Board will need to endorse proposals to translate ICE awards into University awards should prove a valuable step in ICE's greater integration within the University. The Committee accepts the continuing need for a General (i.e. non-subject specific) Certificate on the understanding that this comprises approved modules from approved subject-specific programmes.

ICE needs to determine priorities in areas where numbers (who actively need credit) are buoyant and where realistic fees can be charged. This is consistent with the market research's finding. There is potential for the expansion of accredited CPD work in Professional Studies (where provision is not sufficiently covered elsewhere in the University) but the same principles (in relation to prioritization, market needs, linkage within the University, and pricing) should apply.

ICE should take full administrative ownership (including registry functions) of all M.St. programmes, which are seen as academically desirable and financially viable, and which should help with their integration with participating Degree Committees. As now, new M.St. course proposals, educational changes to existing courses, and their means of delivery should be the responsibility of participating Faculties, Departments, and Degree Committees. ICE must also be capable of persuading other institutions of the value of offering part-time Masters' courses and of demonstrating its capacity for providing an effective operational infrastructure to facilitate running such courses. (The Committee notes Oxford's apparent success in this regard.)

IV.3 There is scope for an increase in non-credit bearing provision (and this accords with ICE's own experiences and its market research), including an increase in CPD provision. ICE appears to welcome such an increase. This is a valid route for University and College staff to communicate their work to a broad audience. There are aspects of University activity which could be exploited here, for example in enhancing public understanding of science. Again, priorities should be determined, aiming at high-quality provision and priced realistically (although such provision should generate a lower administrative overhead). The bulk of this provision can be signed off internally by ICE (within the governance structure proposed by the Review Committee), but with suitable risk management and reputational safeguards.

IV.4 Both types of provision, that is credit and non-credit bearing, should make greater use of the expertise of the University's and the Colleges' academic staff, with a corresponding reduction in the use of external Tutors (whose employment status with ICE and the University is unclear). This rebalancing will take time: it can only be achieved through other University institutions building solid relationships with ICE, and with tangible incentives for forging those relationships and for releasing University Teaching Officers (UTOs) to contribute to ICE's work.

IV.5 Although a formal Division no longer exists (the activities having been subsumed within Public Programmes), ICE remains engaged with Community Education and Outreach which (according to ICE's website) 'focuses on issues of inclusion and equality ... often working with community, voluntary and publicly-funded organizations'. Much of this operation seems to the Committee either on the margins of what Cambridge should be doing or in areas which would seem closer to other University institutions (were they to wish to be involved with them). Examples of the first category include Finance and Fundraising; and, in the second, training provision in Post-Compulsory Education. Whilst there may well be external funding available for such activities, this type of activity does not appear to the Committee financially viable. It is not obvious that it should be continued.

IV.6 ICE, understandably, has an interest in, and commitment to, widening participation (WP). But, so far as undergraduate admissions is concerned, it is not obvious that ICE's focus on non-standard age students matches the needs of the University (in terms of the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) agreement and its associated milestones). If a Cambridge part-time undergraduate degree and/or a part-time Foundation degree are not available - and the Committee sees no realistic prospect of either - then the resource which ICE devotes to WP activity for entry to an undergraduate degree must be limited, and there needs to be an agreed understanding (via the Undergraduate Admissions Committee) of what ICE can and should contribute in this area.

IV.7 The Committee strongly supports ICE's endeavours to invest in, and improve, its registry functions (with improved course and student management data systems) and other business processes (for its own and the University's benefit).

V. Research

V.1 The RAE 2008 return from ICE staff represented a commendable improvement from the zero return in the previous exercise. Six staff were returned: two each in Archaeology and Education and one each in History and Theology. The draft Strategic Plan envisages all academic staff being entered in the Research Excellence Framework (REF) (although it does not articulate how this is to be achieved). The current Director aims for a mix, within academic staff, of subject specialists and those specializing in post-compulsory education. The draft Strategic Plan envisages no increase in the Institute's UTO establishment before 2012-13, unless externally funded. The Committee was told that ICE has received two very small research grants in the last two years. There is a certain amount of research seminar activity, involving guest external speakers (a number of them high profile).

V.2 The current academic staff appear to deliver a relatively limited proportion of the Institute's overall educational provision (although a number of those who wrote in expressed concern at what was perceived to be an increased load in this area, to the detriment of their research activity and work with their cognate Faculty). 'Programme Managers' are frequently - in contrast to most other University institutions - not members of the academic staff (although some are academically qualified). It was put to the Committee that this was because of the complexities of course organization: nonetheless, this seems to contribute to academic staff perceptions of a prevailing 'administrative culture'.

V.3 ICE should have greater access to academic staff elsewhere in the University but this, as indicated earlier, requires collaboration (at institutional, rather than solely individual, level) and incentives. As noted above, the Committee recommends that there should be greater Faculty involvement in new academic appointments at ICE.

V.4 The current Director is very committed to establishing a 'Cambridge Programme for Research in Continuing Education and Lifelong Learning'. A number of the external experts in Continuing Education wrote in support of this view. However, the Committee was unable to identify, from other sources within ICE or elsewhere in the University, significant support for this proposal and it is not persuaded that all ICE academic staff are fully engaged with it. In any case, with at present only two academic staff specializing in this field, there is not the critical mass of research activity which Cambridge would expect. Were the University to wish to invest in research in Continuing Education per se, this would be more appropriately done through the Faculty of Education, perhaps using the students enrolled at ICE as an appropriate research sample: but the Committee understands that at present that Faculty does not regard this area as a high strategic priority. In any event, the Committee was informed, through a number of sources, that the field of younger academics teaching and researching in Continuing Education is limited. It is the Committee's view that it would not be appropriate to teach Continuing Education as a discipline in Cambridge (and not consistent with the Committee's view of ICE's future direction), and the appointment of those pursuing research only in this field would be equally inappropriate. The Committee thought it indicative that whilst the idea of such a research Centre had been mooted for some time, no fully developed proposal had been produced. The Committee does not believe it is practical for ICE to become a focus of research in the same way as Departments and Faculties in the University. The staff of ICE should engage in research but this should be done in association with their cognate Faculties, and in the case of research into adult education, this should be the Faculty of Education.

VI. Madingley Hall

VI.1 The Hall has been the administrative centre of ICE since 1975 and caters for residential courses (for which the Committee was told there remain good levels of demand), other University activities, and external conferences. It provides office accommodation for those academic staff who want it (though not all do). It is not used for the International Summer School nor for Professional Studies activities. The Committee was told that it was an attractive venue for those taking public programmes, apparently reflecting the importance given by the University to part-time students. Residential weekends make up a significant proportion of Public Programmes income.

VI.2 Currently usage and costing and pricing policies are determined by the Warden, responsible, through the Director, to the Management Board. As indicated in Section VII, the Committee recommends the establishment of a Hall Committee to oversee these matters. According to the draft Strategic Plan, University usage of the Hall is intended to increase from 51% to 75% (with a corresponding decrease in conference usage from 49% to 25%). In its present state the Hall is suitable for certain types of teaching. Improved IT and executive educational facilities would make it more attractive. ICE has, subject to the outcome of this Review, plans for further development and modernization of the Hall at a cost of c. £1.5m. The Committee recommends that these plans should be put on hold until the new management structure proposed below is in place.

VI.3 The Committee considers that there remains a University need for a residential, academic facility. The Hall should continue to be used as a centre of learning, and continue to be directed by an academic arm of the University. There is potential for using the Hall, appropriately upgraded, as a residential facility for Executive Education and CPD-related 'retreats'.

VI.4 However, the Hall is not the most effective or efficient base for ICE's operations. Many of those operations do not use the Hall. Its use for many types of provision is constrained by limited transport links. It is too far from the centre of Cambridge for significant use by other Departments. The draft Strategic Plan acknowledges that the Institute's association with the Hall can be flexible. The Committee recommends that ICE and the Hall be formally separated, although ICE should remain responsible for its management. The draft Strategic Plan suggests that a centre for Continuing Education within the North West Cambridge development would be valuable: the Committee believes that a more central location is necessary. It was constantly struck by the disadvantages, to both ICE and the University generally, of the Institute's physical separation from the rest of the University. In the longer term ICE must benefit (as would the University) from relocation to central Cambridge (and to accommodation capable of bringing in all staff) so as to facilitate integration with the Faculties and Departments and improve the Institute's own coherence. For the present the Committee recommends that ICE should continue to have first call on the usage of the Hall and continue to enjoy revenues from the Hall. However the Committee considers that the finances should be decoupled and that a future business plan for the Hall should be determined after the appointment of a new Director.

VII Governance and Organization

VII.1 Issues to do with governance, management, and organization featured regularly in the documentation and in the meetings with ICE staff and others. The Review Committee's view that current arrangements need to be changed was one shared by many of those whom the Committee met and certain of the ICE staff who submitted written evidence. Notwithstanding Professor Taylor's achievements in this regard, ICE requires better integration with the rest of the University, a situation for which it is not solely responsible but which is not assisted by its current location. There is a need to develop governance and organizational arrangements which contribute to increased mutual trust and recognition between the Institute and other parties in the University. The translation of its awards to University awards, and the consequent involvement of Faculty Boards in this, should help in this respect.

So far as the Review Committee can judge, ICE does not wish formally to be attached to a School nor is any School likely to wish to take responsibility for ICE. The Review Committee has concluded that it would not be feasible to include ICE within one of the Schools. Instead it recommends that the Strategic Committee which it proposes should include engaged representatives of all Schools.

There must be closer and more structured liaison with Faculties in the decision-making structure, better internal governance arrangements, and better means of reaching a strategic, consensual, view of the overall portfolio of ICE's activities.

VII.2 The Committee was told that the Management Board's primary functions are to approve strategy, sign off the Annual Accounts, and consider the reports of its various committees. The Committee notes that the relationship between the Board and the Director (who by Ordinance acts as Secretary to the Board) is not clear to some members; that the current draft Strategic Plan is not supported by all members of the Board (or the Management Team); that the academic staff are not widely represented on the Management Board (and a number do not appear to have been involved in developing the draft Strategic Plan); and that, although it includes UTOs from elsewhere in the University whose contributions have been beneficial, the Management Board has limited external input. The Board's Minutes do not at present get formally considered by any central body. Some current members of the Board acknowledge its limitations, including the need for its role and responsibilities to be clarified and for it more effectively to monitor ICE's affairs. The draft Strategic Plan acknowledges, implicitly, the need to reform governance arrangement, noting, for example, that at present the Board is de facto an advisory body. The Review Committee is not persuaded, however, that the draft Strategic Plan's proposal to both increase the size of the Management Board and introduce an Advisory Committee will lead to better governance, although it does accept that better external input is advisable.

VII.3 The Review Committee is not persuaded that the current organizational arrangement of Divisions is optimal, leading as it does to divisional independence (also fostered by physical separation), limited communication between certain Divisions, and a lack of consensus as to where the Institution, as a whole, should be heading. To an extent the draft Strategic Plan recognizes this, in its proposals for a more function-based organizational structure. (That proposal, however, is not fully supported within the Management Team.)

VII.4 There is a need better to engage ICE's academic staff in the decision-making process. It appears that those staff have, over a number of years, felt estranged from that process and from ICE's 'management', leading a number of them to turn increasingly to either their College or their cognate Faculty. The Committee heard concerns from a number in this constituency about what they perceived as a predominantly 'administrative' culture in ICE, as well as concerns that insufficient time and attention was accorded to their research activity.

VII.5 The number of administrative staff seems (certainly in comparison with other University institutions) very high, even allowing for complexities of course organization and the quasi-tutorial function some of them fulfil. The draft Strategic Plan recognizes this in its proposal to reduce staff numbers in this area by 25% by 2012-13. This is consistent with the Committee's view that the administrative overhead for course delivery must be reduced.

VII.6 It was not clear to which body/individual the current Director felt he should report. ICE has benefitted from a Chair of its Management Board who is very well experienced in University matters and procedures and who has been prepared to devote a considerable amount of time to the Institute's affairs, not least in the last few months when ICE has been preoccupied with the impact of ELQ: but it cannot be assumed that future Chairs, as ICE is presently organized, will be prepared to do likewise. The Director should be invited to attend the General Board and its principal committees whenever ICE business is on the agenda and should, in any event, attend for a substantive discussion of ICE's Annual Report.

VII.7 The Director should be supported by the following bodies:

A Strategic Committee (chaired by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education)), replacing the Management Board, which should meet termly to discuss policy matters, consider financial plans and reports from the other committees listed below. The Committee should undertake the functions of a Council of a School. It should include the Director, the Head of the Faculty of Education, the Director of JBS, representatives of the academic staff, representatives from each of the Schools (who should be prepared to engage positively with ICE's activities) and, by invitation, senior academic-related ICE staff. Its minutes should be considered by the General Board's Education Committee.

There should also be a Finance Committee, chaired by the Director, and including the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Resources) or a member of the Planning and Resources Allocation Office and the Warden of Madingley, to produce financial plans, be responsible for course costing and pricing, and sign off ICE's and Madingley Hall's accounts.

The current Teaching and Learning Committee - responsible for course content, approval of new courses, and local quality assurance arrangements - is (and this is accepted by ICE) too large and requires more academic balance. The Committee is presently chaired by the Deputy Director: the next Director should assume the Chairmanship. It should have sufficient representation of ICE academic staff, and deal with course development and monitoring, local quality assurance arrangements, academic links with other University institutions, and with the Education Section of the Academic Division. The composition of the Committee should be reviewed when ICE's 'local' awards become full awards of the University, to include sufficient non-ICE representation from elsewhere in the University.

There should be a Hall Committee, chaired by the Warden, including representatives of ICE (particularly the Finance Manager), CPSL, and major users of the Hall, to decide Hall plans, usage, and pricing, reporting through the Finance Committee. It should, either in its membership or through those in attendance, have access to facilities management expertise.

VII.8 The Review Committee has given considerable thought to the role of Professor Taylor's successor. Professor Taylor himself and a number of the external experts in Continuing Education who (at his invitation) commented to the Review Committee, consider it necessary to have another high-profile academic leader for ICE with a national (and international) reputation. The externals considered this important for the national profile of the discipline. Professor Taylor sees this as essential if ICE is to remain a credible academic institution, not least on the basis of his experience elsewhere. The Review Committee is not convinced that this need necessarily be the case. What is required is an active, effective, and authoritative manager who has a good understanding of the market within which ICE must operate, an authoritative presence within, and knowledge of, the University and the Schools, the ability to develop ICE's full integration within University processes, the ability to prioritize and to take what are often, in effect, business decisions about ICE provision. (The Committee notes that historically the Institute has been able to flourish under non-academic leadership.)

VII.9 The role of the Deputy Director, as presently constituted, is one which is principally concerned with freeing up the Director's time, the drafting of policy documents, and interaction with the University's central administration. The Deputy Director currently chairs the Teaching and Learning and the Awards and Qualifications Committees. The next Director should consider the remit of a Deputy.

VII.10 Given ICE's funding circumstances, reputational issues, and the need for increased integration with the rest of the University, an Advisory Board by itself would not be sufficient. The Council for Lifelong Learning might suitably be turned into an Advisory Board for ICE with some adjustment to its membership and a clearer indication of where that Council fits in the University's central governance structures. As a separate matter falling outside the Committee's brief, the central bodies may wish to consider the current remit of the Council for Lifelong Learning and whether that Council fulfils that remit.

TONY MINSON (Chairman) January 2009


Institute for Continuing Education: current award-bearing courses
Qualification Course title
Certificate CE (Continuing Education) Management Concepts and Skills in Planning
Certificate CE Planning Enforcement
Certificate CE Town Planning Support
Certificate CE Legal Practice for Paralegals
Certificate CE Legal Studies
Certificate CE Social Enterprise Management
Certificate CE Third Sector Management
Certificate CE Islam, Judaism, and Muslim-Jewish Relations
Certificate CE Principles and Practice of Assessment
Certificate CE Theological Studies
Certificate HE (Higher Education) Neighbourhood Policing
Certificate HE Coaching
Certificate HE Legal Practice for Paralegals
Certificate HE Legal Studies
Certificate HE Alternative Dispute Resolution
Certificate HE Grief and Bereavement Studies
Certificate HE Voluntary and Community Studies Eclectic Certificate
Certificate HE Community Development
Certificate HE International Development
Certificate HE Post-Compulsory Education
Certificate HE Supporting Equality and Diversity
Certificate HE Teaching and Training in Community and Voluntary Contexts
Certificate HE Archaeology
Certificate HE Counselling
Certificate HE Creative Writing
Certificate HE Egyptology
Certificate HE History of Art
Certificate HE Science: Genetics
Certificate HE Practical Horticulture and Plantsmanship
Certificate HE Historic Building Conservation
Certificate HE Psychology as a Social Science
Certificate HE Voluntary and Community Business Development
Certificate HE Film Studies
Certificate HE English Literature
Certificate HE Medieval Studies
Certificate HE Orthodox Christian Studies
Certificate HE Anglo-Saxon Studies
Certificate HE Cultural Studies
Certificate HE Garden History
Certificate HE Interdisciplinary Studies (the CITY)
Certificate HE Landscape History and Field Archaeology
Certificate HE Local History
Certificate HE Science: Ecology
Certificate HE Shakespeare Studies
Certificate HE Science: Astronomy
Diploma HE Post-Compulsory Education
Diploma HE An Introduction to English Law and the Law of the European Union 2008
Diploma HE Landscape History and Field Archaeology
Diploma HE Archaeology
Diploma HE Garden History
Diploma HE History of Art
Diploma HE Modern English Studies
Diploma HE Local History
Diploma HE Notarial Practice
Diploma HE Orthodox Christian Studies
Adv Diploma Community Leadership
Adv Diploma Training, Learning, and Development
Adv Diploma Entrepreneurship
Adv Diploma Local History
Adv Diploma Counselling
Adv Diploma Garden History
Adv Diploma Landscape History and Field Archaeology
Adv Diploma Archaeology
Adv Diploma History of Art
Adv Diploma Orthodox Christian Studies
PG (Postgraduate) Certificate Professional Practice in Architecture
PG Diploma Property Investment
PG Diploma Applied Criminology, Penology, and Management (Prison Studies)
PG Diploma Applied Criminology and Police Management
PG Diploma Notarial Practice 2008
PG Diploma Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment
PG Diploma Manufacturing Leaders' Programme
PG Diploma European Union Law
PG Diploma Counselling
PG Diploma Counselling in a Primary Care Setting
M.St. programmes (relevant Degree Committee in brackets)
Applied Criminology and Police Management (Law)
Applied Criminology, Penology, and Management (Law)
Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment (Architecture and History of Art)
International Relations (International Studies)
Jewish-Christian Relations (Divinity)
Local and Regional History (History)
Modernism (English)
Social Enterprise and Community Development (Business and Management)