The Higher Education Academy Board of Directors

The Higher Education Academy Board of Directors

Unreserved minutes of the thirty second meeting held on 14 April 2011 at 10.00 am at Woburn House, Tavistock Square, London

1.0Present

Directors

Professor Sir Robert Burgess (Chair)

Mr Robert Barlow

Mr Anthony Carey

Professor Tony Chapman

Mr Geoffrey Donnelly

Professor Janice Kay

Professor Mike Mannion

Mr Johnny Rich

Mr Rama Thirunamachandran

Professor Dianne Willcocks

Observers

Ms Helen Bowles, GuildHE

Ms Fiona Hoban, UUK

Mr William Locke, HEFCE

Ms Jayne Mitchell, QAA

Ms Cliona O’Neill, HEFCW

Mr Ewart Wooldridge, LFHE

In attendance

Professor Craig Mahoney, Chief Executive

Ms Jane Clarkson, Head of Public Affairs

Professor Sue Law, Director (Academic Practice)

Professor Duncan Lawson, Subject Centre Director (MSOR)

Mr Sean Mackney, Deputy Chief Executive

Ms Caroline Thomas, Company Secretary

Apologies

Mr Aaron Porter

Mr Brian Baverstock, SFC

Ms Patricia McVeigh, DELNI

2.0Welcome and introductions

2.1The Chair welcomed everyone to the Board meeting and advised that an item of Chair’s business would be introduced after item 4 of the agenda.

3.0Declarations of interest

3.1No declarations of interest were reported.

4.0Minutes of the meeting held on 2 February 2011

4.1RESOLVED (HEABD08/11) – That, with the addition of Professor Tony Chapman as present at the meeting held on 2 February 2011, the minutes be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

5.0Matters arising

5.1There were no matters arising.

6.0Chair’s business

6.1The Chair of the Board advised members of the details of a recent campaign by a small number of Subject Centre Directors aimed at reversing the Board’s decision to cease grant funding subject and discipline work through host institutions and instead deliver it through directly employed academic staff in a single Academy management structure.

6.2It was reported that representations had been made directly to Rt. Hon. David Willetts MP, Minister of State for Universities and Science in England and copied to senior officers of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), and Universities UK and GuildHE.

6.3The Chair of the Board and Director (Education and Participation) at HEFCE had each separately met with the 6 Subject Centre Directors responsible for the campaign during March 2011 and listened openly to the issues raised. A further meeting hosted by the Chair of the Board had been held with the Academy’s Executive and the 24 Subject Centre Directors on 7 April 2011. This meeting had discussed the future opportunities that would be available to institutions and individual subject centre colleagues, as well as the wider sector, as part of the Academy’s future strategy.

6.4The importance of focusing on the benefits and opportunities of the Academy’s new structure and the fact that work at subject level to academics in their discipline communities would remain at the heart of the Academy’s strategy was key and needed to be communicated more effectively across the sector.

6.5Subject Centre colleagues had also been encouraged to seek the support of their own learned societies and professional bodies and the Vice-Chancellors of their own institution in pursing viable future business plans as independent centres of expertise. The Academy was keen to draw on the best expertise from across the sector wherever it was based and welcomed future discussions on how it could work collaboratively with any institution in its new model of delivery. Five institutions had already indicated that they would like to explore some form of formal partnership beyond the grant funding for 2011-12. Each Subject Centre had since been sent an outline of the opportunities available with the Academy for subject based organisations from 1 August 2011 which included:

• £2.4 million (up to £100,000 for each Subject Centre) available to undertake specific activities to support planned annual activities at subject and discipline level for 2011-12.
• Employment opportunities for expert staff, with two thirds of substantive roles being academic posts, which included 28 discipline leads across the subjects with the greatest staff and student numbers.
• Joining a community of Academic Associates to deliver and develop support for learning and teaching, from which the Academy planned to commission approximately 4,500 days of specialist support, two thirds of which would be allocated to the development of academic practice including subject and discipline work.
• £1.5 million fund for teaching development grants in 2011-12.
• £200,000 international scholarship and UK travel fund.

[Further details of these opportunities are provided as an appendix to the Minutes for information].

6.6The Chair of the Board also reported that he had hosted a dinner for a number of Vice-Chancellors the previous evening to discuss the Academy’s work and institutional perceptions. Similar events would be held in the coming months to which a cross-section of Board members would continue to be invited.

7.0Chief Executive’s report – (a) Overview

7.1The Chief Executive introduced a written report which gave an overview of key activities and matters of importance since the Board’s Away Day in February, with a particular focus on the progress in managing the transition to a single management structure by 1 August 2011.

7.2Twenty submissions (from 24 Subject Centres) for up to £100,000 transition funding had been received. It was noted that the English and Physical Sciences Subject Centres did not intend to continue post July 2011. Access to the resources of these centres to support and continue their legacy was a condition of the current funding agreement and was being pursued with the nominated institutional contact as a priority as part of the transition process.

7.3The Executive had announced the new structure to directly employed staff on 20 January 2011 and published job descriptions for all 120 full time equivalent (FTE) posts on 23 February. An internal redeployment exercise was underway with 38 staff being directly matched into roles. A competitive internal process was being undertaken for all remaining positions that existing staff were eligible to apply for. Following the internal process, jobs would be advertised externally towards the end of the month. The call for expressions of interest in Academic Associate positions had been issued on 31 March.

7.4Discussion ensued on the way in which the model of using Academic Associates would work, including how they would work collectively and across Academy teams. The Board requested further detail on the structure and operation of the model to a future meeting. In relation to staffing, a summary of the human resource position was also requested once the interview process was complete, detailing the number of directly employed staff appointed to academic and non-academic posts; the number of applicants for new positions from subject centres; and the number of directly employed staff being made redundant from 31 July 2011 and the mechanisms in place to support those staff.

7.5The communications update was noted and Board members each agreed to provide a quote in support the Academy to use in promoting and building the profile of the Academy.

7.6The report was noted.

(b) Operating Plan 2010-11 – Half-year report on performance

7.7The Deputy Chief Executive presented performance against the operating plan for 2010-11.

7.8All objectives under the four areas of Better Teaching, Flexible Learning, Graduates with Impact and Organisational Effectiveness were on track to be achieved, with any variation in intended outcomes scheduled to be recoverable within the current year or not predicted to have an impact upon the achievement of overarching objectives.

7.9The Board agreed that these achievements were a testament to the commitment of Academy colleagues, both directly employed staff and those currently working in Subject Centres, at a time when the organisation was going through a significant change process.

7.10In particular the increased demand for themed change programmes in areas including enhancing learning through technology and inclusion were noted and were having a positive impact on institutional practices.

7.11RESOLVED (HEABD09/11) – (a) That the half-year progress report on performance against the delivery of the Operating Plan 2010-11 be noted.

(b) That the congratulations of the Board be extended to all staff for their achievements, particularly at a time of significant change and uncertainty.

(c) Strategic Risk

7.12The Chief Executive introduced a paper highlighting the key strategic risks associated with the delivery of the Academy’s Strategic Plan under the headings of reputation, finance and human resources following a detailed discussion at the last meeting of the Audit Committee (Item 13(b), Minute 2 refers).

7.13In particular, the changing nature of the Academy’s service delivery in the new structure and the need to successfully embrace new ways of working through the use of technology, intellectual property and the sharing of information was highlighted as an emerging risk being mitigated by the enhancements of the Academy’s technological platforms to improve service and the development of an Information Strategy.

7.14It was reported that a new strategy for the Academy which would include marketing the Academy’s services on an international level as well as generating alternative sources of income would require the Board to consider its ‘risk appetite’ in more detail.

7.15Improvements were being made to the way in which the Executive reviewed and recorded risk, including the development of a ‘corporate dashboard’ which would enable risk management to be embedded across the organisation and used to support decision making.

7.16Discussion ensued on any potential employment related risks arising from the transition process, the full extent of which would not be know until after 1 August 2011; the potential for future partnerships with institutions and professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs) and the need for an overarching strategy in this area; and the potential challenges and opportunities that could arise from working internationally. It was reported that a piece of work on partnership arrangements was currently being undertaken by Professor Dorothy Whittington and would report to the Executive at the end of July 2011. This would be brought to the Board in due course in addition to a discussion on commercialisation as part of the development of the Academy’s Strategic Plan 2012-16.

7.17The Board welcomed the opportunity to consider the headline risks in this manner, following the more detailed scrutiny of the Audit Committee at each of its meetings.

7.18RESOLVED (HEABD10/11) – That the key risks and mitigation in place, in addition to the recent and continued development of the Academy’s approach to risk management alongside the development of the new Strategic Plan, be noted.

8.0UK Professional Standards Framework (PSF) Review: Consultation report and timetable

8.1The Director (Academic Practice) presented the Board with an overview of the responses to the UKPSF consultation which had taken place between November 2010 and January 2011.

8.2205 responses were received from across the sector and comprised 90 from HEIs, 80 from individuals and 30 from other sector bodies and organisations.

8.3The majority of proposals had gained in principle support, although it was noted that in a number of cases, this was framed by reservations which included suggestions for refinement or amendment to a number of details which the Academy was considering further.

8.4Through the presentation of the responses it was noted that the key feedback had:

• Emphasised the need to refer to teaching and to acknowledge thatteaching and learning took place within a wider academicand increasingly international, context
• Signalled strong support to the alignment of Senior Fellowship with Standard Descriptor 3 of the Framework and the introduction of Standard Descriptor 4 as a ‘professional pathway’ for continuing professional development (CPD) and aproductive way of encouraging those leading teaching and learning at a variety of levels to engage with the UKPSF and HEA Fellowship.
• Valued the Academy’s enhancement role and recognised the potential for engagement with the UKPSF to be a key indicator of the sector’s commitment to the professionalisation of teaching, particularly in the context of higher fees, increased marketisation, while maintaining institutional flexibility and autonomy.
• Considered important the provision ofillustrative material and examplars of the broader academic context within which higher education staff worked, including guidance materials on effective mentoring practice and observational teaching observation, including peer observation as part of the Framework guidance.
• Supported the Academy’s enhancement activity in support of external examiners and institutions and suggested that explicit reference be made to engagement in external examining in the Framework asan activity that supported other aspects of an academic’s teaching and learning.

8.5The potential market for the Academy in the recognition and accreditation of the professional development of teaching both through private UK providers and overseas HE providers was discussed and was an area that was developing fast and that the Academy was exploring in more detail and would be discussed at the Board in due course.

8.6Reference was made to the potential use of anonymised information about higher education teaching staff qualifications and Fellowship. It was agreed that the Academy would work closely with the Higher Education Public Information Steering Group (HEPISG) as well as the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) in relation to their intentions to use data on staff holding a recognised teaching qualification, in order to support institutions and to inform and enhance the professionalisation of teaching.

8.7The Board welcomed the Action Points identified for the Academy as striking an appropriate balance between sector consensus and recognition of its diverse nature, while not resulting in professional standards of the lowest common denominator.

8.8It was noted that manyrespondents had regarded the tone of the consultation document as prescriptive and suggesting the Academy wished to acquire a new regulatory role. It was agreed that this had been unintentional and that the Academy did not seek such a role. It was further agreed that the strength of the Framework was in its flexibility and adaptability to institutional autonomy and procedures and the Academy remained committed to working closely with institutions, sector organisations, Funders and Owners in refining, agreeing and disseminating the UKPSF as a sector-owned framework.

8.9It was noted that the Academy’s processes for accreditation and professional recognition would be amended in line with the revised UKPSF and that suggested criteria for reward and recognition would be taken into consideration in the development of the Academy’s future plans in this area.

8.9RESOLVED (HEABD 10/11) – (a) That the feedback from the UKPSF consultation report and associated action points be noted.

(b) That the final UKPSF be provided to the Board by correspondence and approved by Chair’s action in June 2011, following consultation with representative sector bodies in finalising the Framework, to enable the new UKPSF to be implemented by September 2011.

(c) That a reflection on the lessons learned from the UKPSF consultation be considered at a future meeting of the Board.

(d) That the thanks for the Board be extended to the Director (Academic Practice) and colleagues at the Academy for a positive and comprehensive piece of work which was critical to the sector and the role of the Academy.

9.0Horizon Scanning 2011 – 2014

9.1The Chief Executive introduced a discussion on the future context and key issues facing the Academy in the next three years. It was noted that Finance and General Purposes Committee had considered this paper in more detail at its meeting on 15 February (item 13(a), Minute 5 refers) and it was also being discussed internally to inform Executive decisions in the development of the Strategic Plan.

9.2Discussion ensued on how ambitious the Academy’s income generating activities should be and whether diversifying into the private higher education provider and international markets would detract from the organisation’s core Mission. There was a minority view that if the Academy focussed on a small number of strategic areas and made a real impact it could remain a core function of the UK university sector and income generation would become less important.

9.3The majority view was that entering new markets would not exclude but rather enhance the Academy’s core Mission in support of UK HE learning and teaching and the future strategy in this regard needed to be predicated on what the future funding and learning and teaching landscape was likely to look like in 5-10 years’ time. The hypothesis was that as UK HE looked increasingly to internationalise its partnerships, curriculum, recruitment and the outlook of its graduates. If the Academy was to maintain its position as supporting leading developments in learning and teaching, it would need to be involved in partnership with leading learning and teaching practice internationally. Furthermore,if funding council income were to diminish substantially and there wereto be a greater reliance on subscription income and chargeable services, this highlighted the need for a strategy that pursued greater independence, income generation from alternative sources including international activity. The importance of the Academy’s brand would become increasingly important in this regard.

9.4The Executive was encouraged to think broadly, widely and ambitiously in pushing the Academy’s thinking in relation to its Mission, priorities, values and what it stood for and the Board looked forward to seeing a draft Strategic Plan in due course.

10.0Articles of Association

10.1The Company Secretary introduced a written report which sought approval to a number of changes to the Academy’s Articles of Association, following the discussion of ‘in principle’ amendments at the February meeting of the Board.

10.2The proposed changes reflected the development in company and law and best practice since the Articles were last amended in 2008 and also reflected the new focus and structure of the Academy seeking to simplify and clarify procedures wherever possible, particularly in relation to the retirement and reappointment of Directors.

10.3In particular, discussion centred around Article 34 in relation to the constituent membership of the Board and the proposal that up to six persons with expertise or professional experience in or beyond higher education could be appointed. It was reported that his provision was designed to give the Board maximum flexibility to ensure a suitably diverse range of skills and expertise to meet the requirements of the organisation both now and in the future. However, there was a view that the higher education sector must recognise the membership of the Academy’s Board and that the majority of Board Directors should be drawn directly from the higher education sector, as was currently the position, and that the drafting of the Articles should make this an explicit requirement.