No 6509
Wednesday 6 June 2018
Vol cxlviii No 33
pp. 661–688
The Council and the General Board beg leave to report to the University as follows:
1. In 2014–15, the General Board’s Education Committee and the Board of Examinations established a working group, chaired by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education), to conduct a review of examination processes and strategies for all examinations, except those examinations by thesis and oral. A consultation was launched by Notice published in the Reporter on 29 July 2015 (Reporter, 6395, 2014–15, p. 820).
2. The review reported to the Council and the General Board in the Michaelmas Term 2017. This Report seeks to take forward recommendations made by the review in respect of the governance arrangements for the oversight of examinations and assessment. The recommendations have the support of the Council, the General Board, the Board of Examinations, the Applications Committee, the Education Committee, and the Senior Tutors’ Committee.
3. The review considered the roles of the bodies currently responsible for examinations. It noted that responsibility for examinations and assessment is currently split between the Education Committee of the General Board, the Board of Examinations, and the Applications Committee of the Council. The Council and the General Board endorsed the review in its conclusion that the fact that there is no single body with responsibility for examination and assessment matters poses a risk to the University both in terms of the integrity of examinations and academic standards.
4. In response to the review, the Council and the General Board recommend that a single body be established to assume responsibility for examinations. To this end it is proposed that the Board of Examinations be dissolved and that a new Examination and Assessment Committee be established in its place. This new Committee would assume responsibility for quality assurance of examinations, maintenance of standards, and for ensuring the integrity of the examination process for all courses of study except those graduate courses assessed by thesis and oral only which would remain under the jurisdiction of the Board of Graduate Studies. Terms of reference and membership for this new Committee are given in Annex A of this Report.
5. Examination access arrangements for individual students are currently the responsibility of the Board of Examinations, whilst consideration and remedy of mitigating circumstances fall to the Applications Committee. Currently consideration of case work is divorced from examination policy and quality assurance. The review concluded that this separation of responsibility is unhelpful, and poses risks to the integrity and fairness of the system. The Council and the General Board therefore recommend that a new Examination Access and Mitigation Committee be established to take responsibility for, and bring together, the examination adjustments procedures of the Board of Examinations that deal with pre-examination applications and the post-examination work of the Applications Committee. To ensure integration of policy and operational matters and case work, this new body would be a sub-committee of the Examination and Assessment Committee. The Examination and Assessment Committee would be responsible for overarching policy, and the Examination Access and Mitigation Committee for the enactment of that policy. It is not currently proposed to alter the arrangements for consideration of cases by the Board of Graduate Studies. The Examination and Assessment Committee, once established, will consider future arrangements for taught Master’s degree examinations (and those leading to postgraduate diplomas and certificates) in consultation with the Board of Graduate Studies. Proposed terms of reference and membership of the Examination Access and Mitigation Committee are given in Annex B of this Report.
6. The General Board has broad oversight of student issues and equality legislation, and responsibility for teaching quality. Given the importance of the links between teaching and assessment, the Council and the General Board recommend that the proposed Examination and Assessment Committee should report to the General Board through its Education Committee.
7. The Board of Examinations is established by Special Regulation and has two main roles: (i) to assign lecture-rooms under authority delegated by the Council; and (ii) to take responsibility for the arrangements for the conduct of all University examinations, other than those under the authority of the Board of Graduate Studies. On dissolution of the Board, it is proposed that responsibility for operational aspects of examinations – providing and preparing suitable rooms for examination;* examination timetabling; instruction and payment of supervisors, invigilators, and attendants; and recording attendance of candidates at examinations – should fall to the Registrary. The new Examination and Assessment Committee would take responsibility for issuing rules for the guidance of candidates and the prevention of misconduct and for fines. Proposed amendments to Ordinances and procedures to reflect these changes are set out in Annexes D and E.
8. With the creation of the new Examination Access and Mitigation Committee as a sub-committee of the Examination and Assessment Committee, it is proposed that the current powers of the Council to make allowances to candidates for examinations be transferred to the General Board, with the current procedures as set out in the Council’s Notice and published in Ordinances largely unchanged. The new Examination Access and Mitigation Committee would also assume responsibility for alternative modes of assessment as detailed in the General Board Code of Practice: Reasonable Adjustments for Disabled Students.
9. As part of the review, some amendments to the Ordinances covering allowances are proposed (see Annex C). These simplify the wording of the regulations and bring them into line with established practice. More substantive changes, which have been endorsed by the Applications Committee and the Senior Tutors' Committee, are proposed to simplify the range of allowances as set out in Regulation 3 of the regulations for Allowances to Candidates for Examinations (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 244). It is proposed that:
(a)consideration of whether or not to declare a candidate to have deserved honours would be restricted to those candidates who are in their final year of study and in a position to graduate;
(b)consideration of other candidates in earlier years of study will be in respect of whether or not to allow them to progress to the next year of study.
In line with guidance from the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, Regulation 3(d) has been amended to make provision for the Examination Access and Mitigation Committee to require Examiners to move a candidate’s name to a higher class provided the Examiners are satisfied that the candidate has performed at the standard of the higher class in all but a relatively small part of the examination, rather than simply giving the Examiners authority to do so as currently.
10. Under current arrangements the Council does not have the power to allow candidates to offer non-standard combinations of papers. This responsibility rests with the General Board. It is proposed that, in future, these powers are exercised through the new Examination Access and Mitigation Committee.
11. Although it is established practice that the Applications Committee may set conditions for return after a period of intermission, this is not currently codified in the Ordinances nor in the notice of procedure. It is proposed that the regulations be amended to give the General Board explicit powers, exercised through the new Committee, to set conditions for return to study.
12. The Council and the General Board recommend, with effect from 1 October 2018:
I.That paragraph (ii) of Special Ordinance A (vi) (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 69) be rescinded and the remaining paragraphs renumbered.
II.That the regulations for the Board of Examinations (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 120) be rescinded.
III.That authority to make allowances to candidates for examinations be transferred to the General Board and that the regulations for Allowances to Candidates for Examinations (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 244) be amended as shown in Annex C.
IV.That Regulation 1 of the regulations for the B.A. Degree (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 438) be amended to reflect the transfer of responsibility for allowances from the Council to the General Board by replacing the references to the Council with references to the General Board.
V.That the changes to Ordinances as set out in Annex D be approved.
|
4 June 2018 |
Stephen Toope, Vice-Chancellor |
Anthony Freeling |
Fiona Karet |
|
Ross Anderson |
Nicholas Gay |
Susan Oosthuizen |
|
|
Richard Anthony |
David Greenaway |
Michael Proctor |
|
|
R. Charles |
Jennifer Hirst |
John Shakeshaft |
|
|
Stephen J. Cowley |
Nicholas Holmes |
Sara Weller |
|
|
Daisy Eyre |
Darshana Joshi |
Jocelyn Wyburd |
|
6 June 2018 |
Stephen Toope, Vice-Chancellor |
Martha Krish |
Susan Rankin |
|
Abigail Fowden |
Patrick Maxwell |
Helen Thompson |
|
|
A. L. Greer |
Martin Millett |
Graham Virgo |
|
|
Nicholas Holmes |
Richard Prager |
Mark Wormald |
|
|
Darshana Joshi |
*7 June 2018: An correction has been made to paragraph 7 of this Report. The words 'lectures and' were originally included in the italicised wording in error and have now been removed.
1. The Examination and Assessment Committee shall be a sub-committee of the Education Committee of the General Board.
2. The Committee shall consist of:
(a)a member of the General Board, appointed as Chair, who shall also be a member of the Education Committee;
(b)three persons appointed by the General Board;
(c)two Senior Tutors appointed by the Senior Tutors’ Committee;
(d)a person nominated by Cambridge Assessment who has expertise in assessment;
(e)a member of the Proctorial body nominated by the Proctors;
(f)two student members appointed by the Education Committee.
Members in classes (a)–(d) shall serve for three years. The Secretary shall be appointed by the Registrary.
The Chair shall have authority to invite others to attend meetings, where relevant to the discussion.
A meeting of the Committee shall be quorate if at least four of the members in classes (a)–(c) are present.
3. The Examination and Assessment Committee shall be responsible for oversight of the quality assurance of all examinations except those for graduate courses assessed by thesis and oral which are the responsibility of the Board of Graduate Studies. Such oversight shall include:
(a)oversight of policy for assessment and examination (including development of new methods of assessment; and review of volume of assessment);
(b)quality assurance of examinations to ensure appropriateness of assessment and maintenance of degree standards (including review of External and Senior Examiners’ reports including adequacy of Faculty Board and Degree Committee responses; and identification of good practice and areas of concern);
(c)policy in respect of examination access arrangements, including reasonable adjustments and alternative modes of assessment pre-examination; and in respect of mitigating circumstances post-examination;
(d)oversight of implementation of policies, and annual reporting to the General Board and Council on cases managed by the Examination Access and Mitigation Committee;
(e)the integrity of the examination process (including setting of rules for candidates to ensure proper conduct of examinations and imposition of fines for infringement of the rules for candidates; receiving reports from the Proctors; examination security, cheating, and procedural irregularities; and the budget for examinations).
4. Minutes of the Committee’s meetings, and such other reports as may be requested from time to time, shall be provided to the Education Committee.
1. The Examination Access and Mitigation Committee shall be a sub-committee of the Examination and Assessment Committee.
The Committee shall consist of:
(a)a member of the Examination and Assessment Committee appointed by the Education Committee who shall be Chair;
(b)three Senior Tutors appointed by the Senior Tutors’ Committee;
(c)six Medical Advisors;
(d)a member of the Health and Wellbeing Committee;
(e)two persons appointed by the General Board.
Members in classes (a)–(e) shall serve for three years.
A meeting of the Committee shall be quorate if seven of the members are present.
2. The Committee shall develop and maintain oversight of procedures to implement policies and associated guidance from the Examination and Assessment Committee relating to all students except those under the authority of the Board of Graduate Studies, concerning the following:
(a)examination access arrangements (including consideration of examination adjustments and alternative modes of assessment);
(b)coursework extensions;
(c)disregarding terms;
(d)examination allowances including resit examinations (including consideration of mitigating circumstances; allowances to enable students to progress, or to receive the award, or to have paper(s) disregarded or permission to attempt an examination);
(e)remission of University Composition fees in respect of all courses except those under the authority of the Board of Graduate Studies.
3. The Committee may delegate to the Secretary of the Committee or to other persons or bodies the processing of applications under procedures (a)–(e) and decisions made on the basis of the Committee’s published guidance. Where applications fall outside the guidance, the Committee will consider applications. In exercising its responsibilities for oversight, the Committee will receive reports regarding the outcomes of applications made under its procedures and make recommendations regarding improvements to those procedures and associated processes, guidance, and policies.
4. Minutes of the Committee’s meetings, an annual report of cases managed by the Committee, and such other reports as may be requested from time to time, shall be provided to the Examination and Assessment Committee.
1. The General Board shall have power:
(a)to admit to candidature for an examination or for a University Studentship, Scholarship, Exhibition, Prize, or Medal, a person who is not qualified by Ordinance to be a candidate, and
(b)to determine that for the purposes of candidature for an examination or competition one or more terms may be disregarded in reckoning the standing of a particular candidate,
(c)to refer for consideration under the Procedure to Determine Fitness to Study any person in respect of whom an application is made under these regulations; and
(d)to set conditions for a student to resume keeping terms by residence following an authorized period of intermission.
2. No person who is not qualified by Ordinance, or under the foregoing regulation, or by special Grace, shall be admitted to an examination leading to a degree, diploma, or certificate, except with the approval of the General Board who shall have power to determine the conditions of such admission and the fee, if any, to be paid for such admission. The name of a candidate admitted under this regulation to an Honours Examination shall, if he or she satisfies the Examiners, be published in a separate list under the heading:
The following, who are not candidates for honours, have satisfied the Examiners.
3. The General Board, on satisfactory evidence supplied by a candidate’s Tutor that the candidate has been hindered by illness or other grave cause in preparing for or taking any University examination, except one for which candidates are required to be Graduate Students or one leading to the M.B., B.Chir. Degrees, or the Vet.M.B. Degree, shall have power, when they think fit to:
(a)allow the candidate to progress to the next academical year, where the candidate would otherwise not be of standing;
(b)where the candidate is a candidate for the B.A. Degree, and if the candidate has kept the requisite number of terms to qualify for the degree:
(i)declare the candidate to have attained the honours standard; or
(ii)declare the candidate to have deserved the Ordinary B.A. Degree;
(c)where the candidate is a candidate for a degree other than the B.A. Degree:
(i)declare the candidate to have attained the honours standard; or
(ii)approve the candidate to receive the degree or such other award as may be allowed under the regulations for the degree.
(d)to require the Chair of Examiners, or a deputy appointed by the Chair from among the Examiners, to move the candidate’s name to a higher class, provided that such an amendment shall not be made unless the Chair of Examiners or deputy, after consulting at least two other Examiners, is satisfied that the candidate has performed at the standard of the higher class in all but a relatively small part of the examination.
4. The General Board shall consider the cases of candidates who for sufficient reasons apply to be examined under other than the ordinary conditions, or at other times than those previously advertised, and shall give or withhold permission for them to be examined otherwise. It shall also determine the conditions under which such permission may be given.
5. When the General Board allows a candidate an examination which is an Honours Examination, such a candidate shall thereby have obtained honours therein.
6. The General Board shall not, save in exceptional circumstances, normally make an allowance to a candidate for the B.A. Degree of an examination under Regulation 3 on more than one occasion, save that, for the purpose of this regulation, an allowance under Regulation 3(d) shall not be regarded as such an allowance.
7. The names of students to whom the General Board make allowances under Regulation 3 shall not be appended to the lists of successful candidates for the examinations for which they were severally entered, but shall be published by the Registrary in accordance with the regulations for the publication of lists of successful candidates in examinations.
8. Where the regulations for an examination provide for a candidate to submit by a specified date a dissertation, thesis, essay, or other coursework in addition to the written papers or in substitution for one or more of them, the General Board may, with the concurrence of the Chair of Examiners or the Senior Examiner, grant a brief extension to a specified date by which the work shall be submitted. A dissertation, thesis, essay, or other coursework submitted later than the date specified by the General Board, or in the regulation concerned if no extension has been granted, shall not be accepted.
9. In the case of a candidate who has been declared to have deserved honours under Regulation 3(b), the following statement shall be appended to any certificate issued by the Registrary relating to that examination:
This candidate, who was absent from part of the examination for good cause, performed with credit in a substantial part of it. In accordance with the University’s regulations the authorities concerned are of the opinion that it would be unfair to classify the candidate on the basis of the incomplete performance since they believe that this would not adequately represent the candidate’s attainment. They have accordingly agreed to declare the candidate to have deserved honours in this examination.
10. A student may request a review of a decision made under these regulations. A request for review shall be made under the Procedure for the Review of Decisions of University Bodies established by the General Board.
1. By replacing references to the Board of Examinations with references to the General Board in the following regulations and adding a footnote to indicate the delegation by the General Board of its authority to the Examination and Assessment Committee:
Regulation for Fines (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 196)
Natural Sciences Tripos (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 405): Regulation 30
General Regulations for the degree of Master of Research (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 547): Regulation 2
2. By deleting references to the Board of Examinations in the following regulations and adding a footnote to indicate the delegation by the General Board of its authority to the Examination and Assessment Committee:
General Regulations for Preliminary Examinations (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 258): Regulation 2
3. By replacing references to the Board of Examinations or receipt by the Board of Examinations or the Secretary to the Board of Examinations with references to the Registrary or receipt by the Registrary in the following regulations:
Entries and Lists of Candidates for Examination (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 246): Regulations 2, 4, 6, and 8–15
Dates of Examinations and Publication of Class-lists (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 249): Regulations 1 and 2
Regulation for Interviews (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 252)
General Regulations for Examiners and Assessors (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 254): Regulation 7
Payments to Examiners and Assessors (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 255): Regulations 5 and 6(a)
Evans Prize Fund (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 827): Regulation 4
Jeremie Prizes (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 865): Regulation 3
4. By amending Regulation 6(c) of the Procedure to Determine Fitness to Study (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 239) to read as follows and adding a footnote to indicate the delegation by the General Board of its authority to the Examination and Assessment Committee:
(c)from the General Board or the Board of Graduate Studies.
The following changes will be made if the recommendations of this Report are approved.
1. The Examination and Assessment Committee will adopt the Rules for the Guidance of Candidates and for the Prevention of Misconduct in Examinations (reproduced in Statutes and Ordinances, p. 121) made by the Board of Examinations.
2. The General Board will replace the reference to the Board of Examinations in the first sentence of its University-wide statement on plagiarism (reproduced in Statutes and Ordinances, p. 194) with a reference to the Examination and Assessment Committee.
3. The General Board will replace the reference to the Board of Examinations in paragraph 4.7 of the Examination Review Procedure (reproduced in Statutes and Ordinances, p. 212) with a reference to the Examination and Assessment Committee.
4. The General Board will amend the Procedure for the Review of Decisions of University Bodies (reproduced in Statutes and Ordinances, p. 216)
(a)to replace the references to the Applications Committee of the Council with references to the Examination Access and Mitigation Committee in Schedule A; and
(b)to replace the references to the Board of Examinations with references to the Examination Access and Mitigation Committee in Schedule X.
5. The General Board will adopt the revised Notice on Leave for Allowances to Candidates for Examinations (reproduced in Statutes and Ordinances, p. 245) as set out below, retaining footnotes.
The General Board has approved the following procedure for dealing with applications under these regulations through its Examination Access and Mitigation Committee (the Committee):
(i)No application is considered unless it is submitted by the candidate’s Tutor.
(ii)An application must state under which regulation or regulations it is made.
(iii)An allowance made under Regulation 1(b) is normally granted in respect of up to three terms of an academical year. Exceptionally it may be granted in respect of the terms of more than one academical year.
(iv)Where a student has been out of residence for more than a term, the Committee shall make such recommendations to the student’s College as the Committee thinks fit and shall have the power to set conditions for return, including, but not limited to, one or more of the following:
(a) satisfactory evidence of fitness to study, as determined by the Committee;
(b) in the case of a disabled student, ensuring reasonable adjustments, as appropriate, to support the student in her or his study and examination are in place;
(c) in the case of a medical or veterinary student, confirmation from the relevant Fitness to Practise Committee that the student is currently fit to continue on the course of study.
(v)An application made on medical grounds must be supported by medical evidence. The Committee may determine which type of evidence it requires in relation to applications under particular regulations.
(vi)An application must include a detailed statement of reasons and be accompanied by copies of all supervision reports.
(vii)An application for exemption from an academic condition for taking a particular examination is not normally approved unless the Faculty Board or similar body concerned have given their concurrence, and that concurrence is indispensable in the case of examinations forming part of the requirements for a professional qualification.
(viii)The Committee is empowered to give permission for a candidate to offer a non-standard combination of papers, whether within one examination or from more than one examination, which is not provided for by Ordinance or by regulations made under Ordinance. Such permission will not be granted unless the Faculty Board or other authority concerned are in agreement.
(ix)The Committee shall issue notes on procedures adopted in its consideration, on behalf of the General Board, of applications for allowances under these regulations.
(x)The Committee is authorized to agree a procedure for referral of cases to the Fitness to Study Panel.
6. In the footnote attached to paragraph 7 of the Notice of the Council and the General Board concerning additional payments for administrative responsibility (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 689) the reference to the Board of Examinations will be replaced with a reference to the Registrary.
The Council and the General Board beg leave to report to the University as follows:
1. Under Special Ordinance C (ii) 12 and Regulation 1(f) of the General Regulations for University Officers (Statutes and Ordinances, pp. 72 and 675), University officers may be appointed for a fixed term, provided that the competent authority has determined that there is objective justification for doing so, and there is no provision in Statute or Ordinance prohibiting such an appointment. Special Ordinance C (vii) A. 6 (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 77) enables a Professorship to be established for a fixed term, which is anticipated to expire after a specified period. This Report proposes an amendment to Special Ordinance C (vii) A. 6 so that the term of such a Professorship can expire in any of the circumstances prescribed by law, including the occurrence or non-occurrence of a specified event.
2. The Council and the General Board support these changes, which have been proposed by their HR Committee in order to enable coterminous appointments to be made in circumstances where it is appropriate for the holding of a Professorship to be contingent on the holding of another specified role. In those circumstances, if the individual concerned decides to relinquish that other role, or that other role terminates for any reason, the Council and the General Board agree that the University should not be expected to continue to fund the Professorship, potentially until retirement.
3. The Council and the General Board recognize that there will be limited circumstances in which a coterminous appointment will be the most appropriate arrangement. Examples of the circumstances in which a coterminous appointment would be made under the proposed amendment include an appointment to a Professorship of the holder of another role within the University, and where the other role is an external contract, such as an honorary contract from an NHS body which is required to enable that officer to undertake clinical duties and responsibilities.
4. The Council and the General Board recommend:
I. That Special Ordinance C (vii) A. 6 (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 77) be amended to read as follows:
6. Subject to the provisions of Statute C and this Special Ordinance regarding the age of retirement, the University shall have power to establish a Professorship limited to a fixed term, including to the tenure of one Professor only, or to direct that election to a Professorship (being neither a Professorship to which appointments are made by the Crown nor a Professorship governed for the time being by a trust expressly providing otherwise) shall be for a fixed term.
|
22 May 2018 |
Stephen Toope, Vice-Chancellor |
Jennifer Hirst |
Susan Oosthuizen |
|
Ross Anderson |
Nicholas Holmes |
Michael Proctor |
|
|
Richard Anthony |
Alice Hutchings |
John Shakeshaft |
|
|
R. Charles |
Darshana Joshi |
Susan Smith |
|
|
Stephen J. Cowley |
Fiona Karet |
Sara Weller |
|
|
Anthony Freeling |
Umang Khandelwal |
Mark Wormald |
|
|
Nicholas Gay |
Mark Lewisohn |
Jocelyn Wyburd |
|
|
David Greenaway |
|
6 June 2018 |
Stephen Toope, Vice-Chancellor |
Martha Krish |
Susan Rankin |
|
Abigail Fowden |
Patrick Maxwell |
Helen Thompson |
|
|
A. L. Greer |
Martin Millett |
Graham Virgo |
|
|
Nicholas Holmes |
Richard Prager |
Mark Wormald |
|
|
Darshana Joshi |
The Council and the General Board beg leave to report to the University as follows:
1. The Council and the General Board have recently reviewed the role of the Academic Secretary and the administration undertaken by the Academic Division. At present, administration relating to research, education, and strategic partnerships sits within the Academic Division under the supervision of the Academic Secretary. However, the demands placed upon administrative activity relating to education and research have grown significantly in both size and complexity. For example:
(a)since 2011–12, research income has increased by 52%1 and the number of research contracts processed by 83%. Since January 2014, research income has increased by 14% with research contract transactions doubling over the same period. This indicates that research funding is becoming much more complex to manage with a trend towards larger, multidisciplinary, multi-partner projects requiring a significant level of contract support;
(b)undergraduate applications have increased by 10% (16,431 to 18,126) since 2015;
(c)postgraduate applications have increased by 32% (16,456 to 21,716) since 2015;
(d)in the Disability Resource Centre, 1,890 students disclosed a disability in July 2015; this has increased to 2,705 in 2018 – or 43% increase in 2½ years, leading to an advisor to student ratio of 1:564;
(e)undergraduate admissions assessments have been introduced and scripts and results for c. 8.5k applicants are now processed; and
(f)new student complaints procedures have been introduced in response to the new OIA Framework; new procedures have been developed in the light of the global debate on sexual misconduct and a new office (the Office of Student Conduct, Complaints, and Appeals) has been established to handle these matters.
This increase in activity in these areas of administration has exacerbated some of the disadvantages with this arrangement. In particular, as research and education are one level below that of other Divisions within the Unified Administrative Service (UAS), the voices within these teams are much less strong, leading to differential and often disadvantageous treatment in the Planning Round. Submissions for resource to support the two core areas of the University’s activity first have to be judged against one another before the collated bid is assessed against other needs within the UAS.
2. In light of these challenges, the Council and the General Board have agreed to propose that three new Divisions of the University Offices be established to strengthen the University’s administrative structures. The three new Divisions would sit alongside the other Divisions (including the Academic Division) within the UAS. The new Divisions would be established as follows:
(a)an Education Division, including Educational and Student Policy, Student Operations and Registry, Student Counselling, the Disability Resource Centre, and Admissions;
(b)a Research Division, including the existing Research Strategy and Research Operations Offices; and
(c)a Strategic Partnerships Division.
3. The Academic Division would remain the Division with responsibility for School, faculty, and departmental administration under the supervision of the Academic Secretary (hence the retention of the title Academic Division). The objective of the Division would be to integrate School, departmental, and faculty activity more closely together and also to interweave them more effectively with the rest of the UAS, with the other Non‑School Institutions (NSIs), and with the Colleges. The Academic Secretary, as Head of the Academic Division, would have responsibility for providing support for academic strategy and planning across the University, and in particular to ensure that there are effective connections across the Schools and also between the Schools, the NSIs, the Colleges, and the University’s administration.
4. The Academic Secretary would be the principal administrative support for the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Strategy and Planning. However, given the cross-cutting and co-ordinating nature of the role, the Academic Secretary would also work very closely with the other Pro-Vice-Chancellors and the Heads of Schools. The Academic Secretary would also have a strong working relationship with the Academic and Financial Planning and Analysis team within the Finance Division so as to rebalance the emphasis of that team onto academic objectives. Duties currently attached to the role of Academic Secretary will be reviewed to consider whether they remain appropriate to the role in its revised form.
5. Each of the new Divisions would be led by a Director. The Director of the Research Division and the Strategic Partnerships Division are already in place, whilst the Director of the Education Division is a new position, the funding for which was approved in the 2016 Planning Round. The Directors of the new Divisions would report to the Registrary, as is the case for other Directors of Divisions within the UAS.2
6. As a consequence of the new structure, the Pro-Vice-Chancellors would each have a principal senior administrator with whom they would work closely on matters within their remit.
7. The proposals are resource-neutral. Funding for the Academic Secretary, and for the Directors of the Education, Research, and Strategic Partnerships Divisions are already accounted for within the UAS budget.
8. The Council and the General Board recommend, with effect from 1 August 2018:
I. That the arrangements for the administration relating to research, education, and strategic partnerships be as described in paragraphs 1–4 of this Report.
II. That Regulation 1 of the regulations for the Unified Administrative Service (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 693) be amended so as to read:
1. The staff of the University Offices shall form a Unified Administrative Service which shall be under the supervision of the Council and shall comprise the following Divisions:
Academic Division
Education Division
Estate Management
Finance Division
Health, Safety, and Regulated Facilities Division
Human Resources Division
Registrary’s Office
Research Division
Strategic Partnerships Division
1Not adjusted for inflation.
2See Regulation 3 of the regulations for the Unified Administrative Service (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 693).
|
4 June 2018 |
Stephen Toope, Vice-Chancellor |
Nicholas Gay |
Michael Proctor |
|
Richard Anthony |
David Greenaway |
John Shakeshaft |
|
|
R. Charles |
Jennifer Hirst |
Sara Weller |
|
|
Daisy Eyre |
Darshana Joshi |
Jocelyn Wyburd |
|
|
Anthony Freeling |
Fiona Karet |
|
6 June 2018 |
Stephen Toope, Vice-Chancellor |
Darshana Joshi |
Richard Prager |
|
Philip Allmendinger |
Martha Krish |
Susan Rankin |
|
|
Abigail Fowden |
Patrick Maxwell |
Graham Virgo |
|
|
A. L. Greer |
Martin Millett |
Institutions in the University are either under the supervision of the Council or the General Board; as such University Governance has a bicameral nature. Traditionally the Academic Secretary has been Secretary of the General Board and, more importantly, like the Registrary, has been one of the administrative officers in the University with a broad and comprehensive understanding of the University. This arrangement, with both the Registrary and the Academic Secretary having the right to attend key committees, has worked well. Whilst the arrangement might suggest an element of duplication, when both posts were filled it meant that an officer with a holistic view of the University was present at key meetings (which has not always been the case in recent months). De facto, it is now proposed to dilute the role of Academic Secretary.
Further, having had years of devolution from the Central Bodies to the Schools, we now learn that the ‘objective of the [reformed Academic] Division would be to integrate School, departmental and faculty activity more closely together and also to interweave them more effectively with the rest of the UAS, with the other Non-School Institutions (NSIs), and with the Colleges’. How? No details are given.
For many years, the Planning and Resource Allocation Office (PRAO) worked well. It was part of the Academic Division, and was one of the jewels in the administrative crown. Following the move of the PRAO to the Finance Division, it was recently reported to the Council ‘many have commented that, in their view, the academic planning function has been diminished rather than enhanced’ by this move. Presumably in response, the Report states that there is a need to ‘rebalance the emphasis of that team onto academic objectives’, but there is no suggestion of, say, reversing the move of the PRAO, or by what means or with what tools this rebalancing is to take place.
Further, one of the arguments for the creation of the two new Divisions is that ‘submissions for resource to support the two core areas of the University’s activity first have to be judged against one another before the collated bid is assessed against other needs within the UAS’. This is not an argument for two new Divisions, but instead possibly indicates a planning failure within the Unified Administrative Service; ‘possibly’ because evidence might suggest otherwise. Administrative posts in the UAS and the Vice-Chancellors Office have risen from 283 in 2012 to 474 in 2018. With a 67% increase, it would appear that submissions for increased resource within the UAS have already been successful (as evidenced by the pre-emptive funding of the post of Director of Education).
In 2004 there were Reviews of the Personnel and Research Services Divisions, with detailed reports published in the Reporter (https://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2003-04/weekly/5972/4.html). By comparison, the case for the changes proposed in this Report, which are arguably more far-reaching, has not been made.
|
5 June 2018 |
Ross Anderson |
Stephen J. Cowley |
Susan Oosthuizen |