School of Humanities - Archaeology and History, and School of Humanities - Classics

School of Humanities - Archaeology and History, and School of Humanities - Classics

Consultation Panel:

  • Convener: Professor Murray Pittock, Vice-Principal and Head of College of Arts
  • Ken Brown, Lay member of Court
  • Professor Simon Ball, Head of School of Humanities

Clerk: Val Stringfellow

Terms of Reference of Consultation Process

Terms of Reference of Consultation Process

The University's Senior Management Group (SMG) has a wide range of data on the performance of individual subject areas with respect to the Key Performance Indicators contained in the strategic plan, relative performance of the unit in the last Research Assessment Exercise, current research income and publications, student demand and performance in the UK subject league tables.

The process of consultation should consider these data and also answer the following points, as a minimum, through consultation with students, the SRC, staff and other stakeholders: 

  • The SMG proposition is that the current activity is not well aligned with the University’s strategy. Is there evidence that rebuts this proposition? 
  • What is the impact across the University of withdrawing/reshaping this activity on the student experience and the development of new interdisciplinary undergraduate or taught postgraduate courses? Are there alternative methods of addressing demand, including other providers in the City of Glasgow, the West of Scotland or Scotland? 
  • How will the education of students currently on degree programmes in the area be protected?
  • How does the current research in the unit align with the priorities of the research councils or other major funders of research?
  • What would be the impact of withdrawing/reshaping this area on the University’s interdisciplinary research agenda?
  • To what extent does research in the unit inform the development of teaching programmes in the University? Is this commensurate with an excellent research intensive university?
  • What is the impact across the University of withdrawing/reshaping this activity on our global reach and reputation including the recruitment of international students
  • Who are the stakeholders, in addition to staff and students, who will be affected by the proposed changes? What are their views? Can their needs or wishes be met in other ways if the proposed action is taken?
  • Are there other features arising from the  University withdrawing/reshaping this activity which Court should be mindful of in terms of the University’s impact on the national and regional community?
  • Does the Equality Impact Assessment on students or staff of the proposed changes require mitigating actions to be taken?

Please remember that if you want your views to be taken into account in the first report by the consultation panel, you will need to submit written contributions, by email or letter, by 4 April 2011.

Extract from Court Paper

Extract from Court Paper

1.1.1      School of Humanities – Archaeology and History

The subject areas of Archaeology and History form part of the School of Humanities. Archaeology currently has an RAE score at the bottom of the Russell Group and a relatively low number of postgraduate research students. There are significant opportunities to achieve efficiencies in the delivery of undergraduate and postgraduate teaching through the rationalisation and sharing of modules between these two areas. The proposal is to merge these two areas into a single subject area. This rationalisation is likely to lead to the need for fewer staff.

1.1.1      School of Humanities - Classics

The subject area of Classics in the School of Humanities is underperforming in terms of research output. It currently has an RAE score at the bottom of the Russell Group and a low number of postgraduate research students. The proposal is to review the subject area for research sustainability and to explore options for cross-teaching elsewhere in the School. This would be facilitated by the co-location of Classics staff with staff from Archaeology. The review is likely to lead to the need for fewer staff.