1. Introduction

1.1 At its meeting on 16 December 2009, the University Court agreed that the University should
proceed to implement a new structure on 1 August 2010 based on four College constituencies.
The University Court also agreed that

• there will be one Graduate School in each College
• College Support Teams will be established in each College headed by a College Secretary

1.2 During January and April 2010, the Senior Management Group agreed the College structures,including the constituent Schools and the Research Institutes as detailed in Table 1 below.

These were subsequently endorsed by Senate.

Table 1: College constituencies

1.3 This paper sets out the roles and responsibilities of the College, School (and subjects) and Research Institutes. These have been drafted in the context of the Objectives of Restructuring, which are detailed in Section 2 below.

1.4 In adopting this structure, the University will comprise 5 large budgetary units: the 4 Colleges and University Services. This has led to questions being raised about the role of the ‘Centre’. The ‘Centre' describes several entities – virtual and other, depending on the context of its use. Of course, the Colleges and the Schools and Research Institutes within them are subsidiary
components of the University corporate and, as such, play their part in developing and implementing the University's strategic direction as set out in its strategic plan. Central service support (managed within University Services) is being reviewed as part of the implementation of restructuring and some aspects of services managed by University Services (e.g. components of Human Resources, Finance) will be devolved to provide improved 'local' support for Colleges
and Schools. These University Services functions will retain their corporate roles in developing and implementing the range of policies and procedures required as well as ensuring that a strategic overview is maintained including through good dialogue with the Colleges.

1.5 In terms of academic strategy and policy development, implementation and monitoring, the University (i.e. corporate) structure for developing educational and research strategy and policy will remain. Academic governance (1) and interfaces between University committees (e.g. Education Policy & Strategy Committee, Research Planning & Strategy Committee, etc) and College and School committees, and their effectiveness were considered as part of the governance work stream of the restructuring project. Corporate processes (such as e.g.
programme approval, use of plagiarism detection software etc) were also considered, although many of these are the subject of ongoing external review (e.g. Enhancement Led Institutional Review) and will only be subject to relatively minor change. The governance arrangements for Colleges, Schools and Research Institutes are detailed within Sections 3 to 5 with academic governance described in Section 8.

1
Revised academic governance arrangements were considered and approved by Senate at its meetings on 29 April (see https://frontdoor.spa.gla.ac.uk/commdoc/senate/SEN/Papers/SEN09041.pdf) and 3 June 2010 (see https://frontdoor.spa.gla.ac.uk/commdoc/senate/SEN/Papers/SEN09055.pdf). These documents provide further detail and background on the new governance arrangements.

2. Objectives of Restructuring

2.1 In order to meet the challenges, exploit the opportunities identified, and deliver the benefits, we must develop structures that are enabling, nimble, facilitate the creation of cross-disciplinary teams, and have the financial flexibility to allocate resources in-year and drive strategic development. The proposals for restructuring, creating a smaller number of budgetary units, must meet therefore the following objectives:

• Facilitate collaboration, multi-disciplinarity and joint working
• Enhance efficiency and effectiveness of academic units
• Facilitate improved research performance
• Improve communication to stimulate creativity
• Enhance the postgraduate research student environment
• Support strategies to improve student success
• Build on the high quality student experience
• Improve administrative support and efficiency

2.2 Success criteria aligned with these objectives have been drafted (see Appendix 1). It should be noted that achievement of the success criteria for the restructuring project will be coupled with the objectives of the University’s Strategic Plan for the period 2010-2014, with planned improvements to the performance management and development of staff, and implementation of the new student information system, Campus Solutions.

3. The College

3.1 Role and responsibilities of the College

3.1.1 A College is a major organisational sub-division of the University with strategic, financial and managerial responsibilities for a group of Schools and Research Institutes. A College is represented on the Senior Management Group of the University by the Head of College, who holds its budget and is responsible for it. Colleges are responsible for establishing and delivering the strategic direction for their academic ‘territory’ within the University’s stated ambition as defined in the University strategy and its supporting Research and Knowledge
Transfer, Learning and Teaching, and Internationalisation strategies. Much of the work of the College is, of course, delivered by the Schools, and in some cases Research Institutes, of which the College is comprised. However, the following are the specific duties of the College (as opposed to the Schools and Research Institutes).

3.1.2 The College will:

a) Promote the development of, and agree strategic plans and financial and human resources plans with, its constituent Schools and Research Institutes;

b) Allocate budgets to Schools, Research Institutes and College-level initiatives;

c) Align Schools and Research Institutes towards University objectives; set the strategic direction of research and teaching across the College within the University’s strategic framework, with specific attention paid to inter- and multi-disciplinary activity;

d) Drive research and educational innovation within Schools and foster collaborative efforts between Schools, Research Institutes and Colleges;

e) Support the development of multi-disciplinary research and teaching e.g. through coordinating bids, establishing business plans, and/or forming groups to address specific matters;

f) Ensure the academic standards of all programmes managed within the College;

g) Manage the allocation and shared use of infrastructure and facilities, both general and specialised as may be assigned to the College by the University;

h) Provide a professional support structure to support the development of the College, advancing the planning, operation and administration of the constituent Schools and Research Institutes and formalising their processes;

i) Promote, develop and manage the development of strategic partnerships, including international developments;

j) Oversee the deployment of administrative, technical and support staff to provide the best service to the College, Schools and Research Institutes and promote good career development opportunities for such staff;

k) Promote knowledge exchange across the Schools and Research Institutes;

l) Promote a high performance culture across all of the College’s activities and demonstrate that through reporting against University performance indicators;

m) Promote inclusive and transparent decision making processes, and ensure that the University’s commitment to equality and diversity is embedded in all activities

n) Ensure the efficient use of the College’s resources; Roles and Responsibilities of the College, School (and subject) and Research Institute

o) Manage Graduate School activities and development;

p) Ensure that procedures are in place, consistent with University-wide policies and procedures, for all aspects of the College’s business;

q) Interface with University Services to ensure the development of a fit for purpose support service to both students and staff (this will be at School level for some services)

3.2 The Head of College

3.2.1 The Head of College is the budget holder, reporting to the Principal, and is responsible for:

• leadership and development of research and knowledge exchange in the College
• provision of a range of high quality undergraduate and postgraduate programmes which meet the needs of students
• leadership and development of innovation in teaching and learning and curriculum design
• enhancement of the quality of the student experience
• development of the College’s international profile and internationalisation activities
• management and development of all of the College’s resources: financial, people, infrastructure, and external relations
• contributing as a Vice-Principal and member of the Senior Management Group to the management and development of the University.

3.2.2 The Head of College should appoint a deputy to assume responsibility in their absence.

3.2.3 Fuller details on the responsibilities of the Head of College are detailed in Appendix 2A.

3.3 Governance

3.3.1 The Head of College is accountable to the Principal and Vice Chancellor for the activities of the College.

3.3.2 The Head of College is responsible for the academic activities within the College but, in practice, these are delegated to College Deans (e.g. for Learning & Teaching, Graduate Studies, Research).

3.3.3 The Head of College will be supported and advised by a College Management Group (CMG). The CMG will have the following ex officio membership: Heads of Schools, Directors of Research Institutes, Deans with delegated responsibilities and the College Secretary, Head of Finance and Human Resources Manager. Given that Colleges will vary in size and constitution, there may need to be a number of agreed models for the composition of the CMG and best practice in how a College should be managed. A diagrammatic representation of the basic model for the College Management Group and for the College Support team is given in Appendix 2B.

3.3.4 The College academic committee structure has been designed in conjunction with the University academic committee structure and is detailed in Section 8.

4. The School

4.1 Role and responsibilities of the School

4.1.1 Schools plan, manage and deliver teaching and research either within a single discipline or within a group of cognate disciplines with a budget devolved from the Head of College. The Head of School is responsible for managing the staff assigned to it. Heads of Schools report to Heads of College and sit on the College Management Group. Given its disciplinary focus and responsibility for teaching and research, a School has an indefinite life subject to review and reconfiguration by the University. The School is accountable to the College, and ultimately the University, for the management and expenditure of the resources allocated to it.

4.1.2 The School will

a) Be responsible for the design, delivery, assessment, and quality enhancement of courses which contribute towards degree programmes and in some cases for the delivery of entire degree programmes.

b) Deliver innovation in teaching, learning and assessment practices to promote student learning and success

c) Undertake high quality research, ensuring significant levels of external funding.

d) Engage in knowledge exchange activities in line with University and College strategies.

e) Support the research and scholarly activities of its staff by providing a stimulating, creative and appropriately resourced environment, mentoring new staff and young researchers, streamlining non-academic tasks, managing workloads appropriately, and providing opportunities for developing its staff.

f) Promote internationalisation of School activities

g) Develop strategic and operational plans, aligned to those of the College and University, linked to the university planning cycle, which will address

•  
  • Research, educational, and knowledge exchange activities, priorities, plans and initiatives so as to ensure the sustainability of the School;
  • Budgets and resource allocation;
  • Staff planning.

h) Set the strategic direction of research and teaching across the School within the College and University framework, aligning subjects (where they exist) towards School and College objectives.

i) Ensure the academic standards of all courses and programmes offered by the School.

j) Ensure the effective engagement of students in delivering a high quality learning experience

k) Ensure quality enhancement of the student experience, taking cognisance of the differing needs of the diverse student community.

l) Manage and develop the School’s staff in an equitable manner and in accordance with the University’s equality and diversity policies.

m) Ensure the efficient use of the School’s resources.

n) Ensure that effective procedures are in place, consistent with College and University policies and procedures, for all aspects of the School’s business.

o) Interface with the College Support team and University Services as appropriate to ensure a fit for purpose support service for students and staff.

p) Nurture subject disciplines through engagement with subject leaders as appropriate

4.1.3 The School will operate using a 3-5 year strategic plan and associated financial and human resources plans based on revenue and expenditure projections.

4.1.4 The School strategic plan, and annual operational plans arising from it, will be agreed with the College and approved by the SMG. The detailed planning, implementation decisions, and day-to-day operations of a School will then be a matter for the School itself, provided it operates within these agreed plans and according to the statutes, regulations, policies and guidelines of the University.

4.1.5 The School plan will be

• developed and prioritised by the School, in a process facilitated by the College;
• reviewed and approved by the College and the University;
• adjusted in the light of actual revenues and expenditures.

4.1.6 The Schools will be supported in this planning activity by

• Professional services and advice provided by the College
• Clear and accurate information, especially on the revenues generated by and the true costs of the activities of the Schools.

4.1.7 Annual budgets and implementation plans based on this framework will be developed, agreed and approved through same process.

4.2 The Head of School

4.2.1 A School will be led by a Head of School. This position will be a Court appointment on recommendation of the Principal and the Head of the College. The staff of the School will be consulted and represented in the selection process. The Head of School will be appointed for a period of 4 years in the first instance.

4.2.2 The Head of School will lead the research activity, teaching provision, planning and resource allocation, investment and development and academic staff within the School.

4.2.3 The Head of School should appoint a deputy to assume responsibility in their absence.

4.2.4 The responsibilities of the Head of School are detailed in Appendix 3. Details of the process agreed by the University Court for the appointment of Heads of Schools are included in Appendix 6.

4.3 Governance

4.3.1 The Head of School is accountable to the Head of the College for the activities of the School.

4.3.2 The Head of School will be supported and advised by a School Executive. The Executive must be representative of the discipline basis of the School. Given that Schools will vary in size and the range of disciplines they encompass, there may need to be a number of agreed models for the composition of the Executive and best practice in how a School should be managed. A diagrammatic representation of the basic model for the School Executive is given in Appendix 3B.

4.3.3 The Head of the School should hold periodic meetings of all staff to promote collegiality and to ensure good two-way sharing of information. Academic governance is detailed in Section 8.

5. The Research Institute

5.1. Role and responsibilities of the Research Institute

5.1.1 A Research Institute is responsible for thematic, multidisciplinary research requiring a critical mass of academic staff and resources, centrally co-ordinated and directed, to deliver its mission. Institutes are formally constituted bodies that may cross College boundaries where the need arises and have a competitively appointed Director. Academic staff assigned to an Institute will be managed by its Director and will have teaching responsibilities within Schools; Performance and Development Reviews (P&DR) will be signed off by both the Director of the Institute and the Head of School. Institutes will provide DTC-like environments for the development of PGR students, and will initiate and contribute to new PGT programmes associated with their research programmes. The constitution for a Research Institute follows below. Institutes will be subjected to rigorous quinquennial review and expected to achieve financial sustainability.

a. Purpose

i) Institutes will conduct large-scale, long-term, thematic research addressing strategic research questions demanding multi-disciplinary collaboration and dedicated orchestrated resources.

ii) The mission of an Institute will be to establish international leadership in most if not all aspects of its research programme. Leadership will be evidenced by the volume of high quality publications the Institute produces, the esteem of its academic staff, its output of trained, employable people at Masters, Doctoral and Postdoctoral level and the impact of its outputs on academic and non-academic stakeholders.

iii) Whilst the primary purpose of an Institute will be to conduct and manage research, Institutes will be expected to develop and contribute to delivering postgraduate training at Masters level (by teaching &/or research) under the auspices of an appropriate Graduate School, and contribute to undergraduate teaching through cognate Schools.

b. Scope and Scale

i) The multi-disciplinary nature of the research to be conducted in an Institute implies that it will at least cross School, and in many instances will cross College, boundaries.

ii) Research Institutes must be of sufficient size and scale to achieve their mission and be self-sustaining on the basis of income generated from research funders and other sources including teaching. Stage I Institutes will be expected to achieve selfsustainability after an agreed period of growth, normally within the first quinquennial review period. Only in exceptional circumstances will research institutes receive long-term subsidy from Colleges; they must stand alongside Schools in terms of financial viability, and not drain resources from them.

iii) A Stage II Institute will generate income with a portfolio of funding from multiple sources, including teaching activities, sufficient to cover its costs and appropriate contributions to College and University services.

iv) An Institute will not be established if its anticipated lifetime is less than 10 years. However an Institute which is not delivering its mission may be closed prematurely (see Review).

v) Ideally, the staff and resources of an Institute will be co-located, but this may not be possible in the short term.

c. Governance

i) Institutes will be autonomous within the College framework (i.e. they will not be subordinate to Schools)

ii) Each Institute will appoint a full-time Director through a competitive process, open to external applicants where appropriate; and Deputy Director(s) with authority to take and enact decisions in the absence of the Director.

iii) Directors will normally hold office for a period of 5 years (renewable, normally for 2 years).

iv) Institute Directors will report directly to Head(s) of College.

v) Institutes will maintain a 5 year business plan for research, teaching supply and innovation, reviewed annually with the Head(s) of College

vi) The support for a Stage I Institute will normally be for a period of 5 years to guarantee stability and allow the Institute’s objectives to be met.

vii) Teaching contributions will be agreed annually with relevant Heads of School.

viii) The Institute Director will chair a management group of senior academic and administrative staff selected to represent principal research areas and functions of the Institute. The management group will include representatives of schools through which the Institute delivers its teaching. The management group will oversee the day-to-day operation of the Institute. A diagrammatic representation of the basic model for the management group is given in Appendix 4B.

ix) Institutes will appoint International Advisory Boards comprised of international research leaders in relevant fields and representatives of relevant user communities including industry, government bodies etc. Institute Advisory Boards will meet at least twice annually, with one of these meetings being face to face and the other by teleconferencing if necessary, and will be required to approve annual reports from the Institute to the University.

x) Institute Directors will hold ex-officio membership of the lead College Management Group

xi) Institutes will be represented on the relevant committees of the Schools through which they deliver teaching.

d. Sub-structures

An Institute may establish Research Centres / Centres of Excellence to create identity, community and provide leadership to key research groupings. Heads of Centres will normally be responsible to Institute Director and hold seats on the Institute Management Committee. Such centres will be subject to periodic review.

e. Operation

i) Institutes will maintain [ie regularly update] a website to promote their research to external and internal stakeholders and liaise with Corporate Communications to publicise their achievements to the media.

ii) Institutes will plan and deliver seminars and workshops to develop their research interests.

iii) Institutes will be expected to attract leading researchers to work at the University for extended periods, enhancing the University’s reputation amongst the international academic community.

iv) Academic staff belonging to an Institute will contribute to undergraduate teaching and will be expected to develop & deliver (under management from the appropriate School(s)) postgraduate training (MSc, MRes) in areas relevant to their research theme, thereby contributing to financial sustainability.

v) An Institute may establish Doctoral Training Centre-like structures for the purpose of PGR training in addition to normal Graduate School activities. PG student education will be overseen by a lead Graduate School but day-to-day responsibility for a quality PGR experience rests with the Institute.

vi) Institutes will participate in activities intended to enhance the reputation and business of the Schools to which they contribute, including promotion and recruitment, as required by the Head of the relevant School(s)

f. Review

i) Institutes will undergo quinquennial review by expert panels comprised of internal and external members in alignment with any review undertaken by external funders wherever possible. External members will include research leaders of international standing, representatives of major funders and representatives of user communities. No more than one member of the review panel may be members of the Institute Advisory Board.

ii) Each review will assess past performance and the future strategy of the Institute.

iii) Continuation of Institute status will depend on the outcome of the quinquennial review. Review panels will have the power to recommend closure of the Institute, reconfiguration or continuation for a further period.

iv) Where it is determined that an Institute should close, a wind down period of one year will be applied during which the redistribution of staff and resources will be agreed.

g. Finance

i) The Director will control a budget, devolved from Head(s) of College, covering (a proportion of) all staffing costs. Given the developmental state of Stage I institutes, it is likely that many staff will be associates rather than full members. Staff costs will therefore be shared with Schools. Stage II institutes will have full responsibility for staff costs.

ii) The Director will be provided with tools to monitor and manage the finances of the Institute, comparable to those available to Heads of School.

iii) Core funding (R- grant, KT-grants, T-grant, student fees) related to the Institute’s activities will be attributed as income.

iv) Separate Income and Expenditure statements will detail income and costs for Institutes.

h. Membership

i) Academic staff will join an Institute as full members if it is in their, the University’s and the Institute’s interests for them to do so. Proposed membership of Institutes must be agreed at Vice Principal/Head of College level.

ii) Institute members will be affiliated with the relevant Schools for teaching. Proper attention will be paid to the importance of ensuring the visibility of this relationship on web-pages and in external reports2.

iii) Academic staff may join Institutes as Associate Members if the majority of their research is not located in the Institute but contributes to it. Income generated by such Associate staff, together with costs, will remain within School budgets.

iv) When full members retire or leave, the Director will negotiate re-appointment with the appropriate Head of College and relevant Head of School.

i. Approval Process

i) Proposals to form Institutes must be approved by SMG on the recommendation of Vice Principals and relevant Heads of College.

5.2. Role and responsibilities of the Director of Research Institute

See section b) Governance above and Appendix 4. Details of the process agreed by the University Court for the appointment of Heads of Directors of Research Institutes are included in Appendix 6.

2
For example, for recruitment purposes and for statistical returns to HESA.

6. The Subject

6.1 The role of the Subject

6.1.1 Subjects will exist in multi-disciplinary Schools where there is a need to maintain the development of the subject per se. Subject areas will not normally have dedicated administrative structures; the agreed management unit is the School.

6.2. The role of Head of Subject

6.2.1 The Head of Subject will provide academic leadership in the development and maintenance of the Subject area both within and outside the University, under the direction of the Head of School. They will be responsible to the Head of School and have due regard to the requirements of the relevant Degree Programme.

6.2.2 The Head of Subject will be accountable to the Head of the School for the activities of the Subject. The responsibilities of the Head of Subject are detailed in Appendix 5.

7. Other Research Structures

7.1 A Research Centre/Centre of Excellence is typically a sub-unit within a School or Research Institute but may, where the need arises, cross School (possibly College) boundaries for example if the Centre is on the development path to Institute status. Centres create an identity and a shared environment for specialist thematic, possibly multi-disciplinary, research, bringing together academic staff and postgraduate students working together on common interests. The Director of a Centre will be appointed formally to plan and deliver and report on an agreed programme of research. Further work on the constitution of Research Centres is being undertaken and will be approved by SMG, following consultation with Senate, at its meeting on 21 July 2010.

7.2 A Research Group typically comprises one or more academic leader(s) and a team of postdoctoral researchers and/or research students pursuing research in a single discipline.

7.3 A Research Cluster may be established, typically within a School or perhaps crossing School boundaries, to bring research groups together to promote and develop research in a discipline or collection of disciplines. Clusters are open, and fluid in membership, but the activities might develop into a formally constituted Research Centre.

7.4 A Research Network brings together a large number of researchers (academic staff, postdoctoral and graduate students) to develop their common interests in an emerging or strategically significant research theme. Networks will have part time Directors and administrative support to build the community, establish internal and external presence, organise activities including workshops, seminars and conferences, and promote bids for research funding.

8. Academic Governance

Principles

8.1 In April 2010, Senate approved a set of principles that underpin the academic governance framework within the new University structure

i) The overall role of any committee is to fulfil effectively and efficiently a remit that contributes to the development and delivery of University strategy and policy

ii) The structure should avoid multiple consideration of matters, subject to reasonable workloads.

iii) Responsibility should be devolved where possible, consistent with the requirements of good governance (including externality and matters such as Equality & Diversity).

iv) Committee compositions should be broad enough to allow representation of relevant constituencies and provide a critical mass of members to allow business to be dealt with, while not being so large as to become unwieldy and/or expose the group to the danger of becoming a talking shop.

v) Student membership should be the norm for committees dealing with any aspects of the student experience

vi) There should be an appropriate balance between academic, student and administrative representation in memberships. Academic Governance –Senate

Academic Governance – Senate

8.2 Senate is the senior academic body of the University of Glasgow. Legally and constitutionally Senate is responsible for the academic activity of the University – that is, its teaching and research. Senate is also responsible for the maintenance of the University’s academic standards.

8.3 Related detailed matters are delegated to key functional committees of Senate - Education Policy & Strategy (or EdPSC), and Research Planning & Strategy (or RPSC). These committees provide Senate with regular reports, and Senate considers the academic and policy dimensions and implications of any proposals. In practice, most major University developments come before Senate via one of these committees. Senate also receives regular reports from the Student Support & Development Committee.

8.4 The Vice-Principal (Research and Enterprise [R&E]) has overarching responsibility for setting the strategic direction for research and knowledge transfer and for enhancing the PGR student experience. S/he convenes RPSC.

8.5 The Vice-Principal (Learning & Teaching [L&T]) has overarching responsibility for setting the strategic direction for learning and teaching and for enhancing the experience of students on taught programmes (jointly with the VP [R&E] for PGT students), and convenes EdPSC.

8.6 The Clerk of Senate has responsibility for matters concerned with the regulation of academic policy and practice, including functions such as the development of degree regulations and their embodiment in the University Calendar and the provision of advice and adjudication thereon. The Clerk of Senate also has oversight of the management of University Codes for Student Complaints, Appeals and Discipline and the Student Advisory system. He convenes the Student Support & Development Committee (SSDC)

8.7 Senate is ultimately responsible for academic quality and therefore has endorsed the University’s systems for setting and maintaining academic standards. The setting and maintaining of academic standards is one of the two key purposes of the University’s Academic Quality Framework (3), enhancement of the student learning experience being the other.

8.8 The overall approach is to strike an appropriate balance between University-wide approval and subject-specific scrutiny by experts to provide a system which is reliable, robust and efficient. The Academic Standards Committee, a sub-committee of EdPSC, also reports directly to Senate on some matters and has evolved authority to approve new and revised programmes of study on Senate’s behalf. It has oversight of and monitors the four key processes for setting and maintaining academic standards for taught provision, and ensures that clear guidelines and/or regulations are in place for each. These are:

• The approval and revision of programmes of study
• Periodic subject-level review of learning, teaching & assessment
• The annual monitoring of taught provision
• The external examiner system

While responsibility for certain functions is devolved to School/RI or College level, ASC audits or receives reports on processes to ensure standards are being maintained. The ASC also advises on regulatory matters for postgraduate research degrees, while the RPSC reports to Senate on other matters associated with research.

Learning & Teaching

8.9 It is the role of the EdPSC, working on its own and through its sub-committees, to advise Senate on educational policy, strategy and resource issues (undergraduate, postgraduate and other). (The full remit is available at www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/committees/edpsc/remit/#d.en.87757).

8.10 EdPSC is supporting in its work by two sub-committees:

• the Learning and Teaching (L&T) Committee
• the Academic Standards Committee (ASC)

The remits of these committees are available at:

www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/committees/

Research and knowledge transfer

8.11 RPSC is supported by the Deans of Graduate Studies (DoGS) Committee in its role of promoting and implementing strategy and policy relating to research students.

8.12 The Researcher Development Committee has been formed by combining the training & development responsibilities currently overseen by the Skills Training Forum (PGR and PostDoc generic skills) and the HR Subcommittee for Research Staff (implementation of the Concordat). This Committee will be responsible for overseeing the development of policy and strategy in relation to all aspects of training and career development for research staff (up to and including senior academics). It would have dual reporting to RPSC and an appropriate HR Committee

3
See www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/qae/aqfguide/

Colleges & Schools/Research Institutes

8.13 The agreed responsibilities of Colleges and their constituent Schools and Research Institutes under the new University structure are:

• Colleges are responsible for establishing and delivering the strategic direction for their academic ‘territory’ within the University’s stated ambition as defined in the University strategy and its supporting Research and Knowledge Transfer, Learning and Teaching, and Internationalisation strategies.
• Schools plan, manage and deliver teaching and research either within a single discipline or within a group of cognate disciplines with a budget devolved from the Head of College and within the agreed strategic direction of the College.
• Research Institutes plan, manage and deliver multidisciplinary thematic research within an agreed strategic plan. Academic staff assigned to an Institute will have teaching responsibilities within Schools. Institutes will provide Doctoral Training Centre-like environments for the development of PGR students, and will initiate and contribute to new PGT programmes associated with their research programmes.

8.14 It is the role of the Head of College, Head of School and Research Institute Director to oversee these responsibilities, respectively. The Head of College bears overall responsibility for all academic activities. There is provision for the delegation of responsibility to College Deans for Learning and Teaching, Graduate Studies and Research. Where appointed, Heads of Subject also carry responsibility for associated academic provision, delegated by the Head of School.

8.15 College Deans for Learning & Teaching, Graduate Studies and Research are members of the key functional committees of Senate and will chair key College committees so that policy or practice identified and agreed within the Senate committees is communicated locally in Colleges for implementation, thereby maintaining a strong link and alignment between Colleges and Senate.

8.16 The responsibilities of Colleges and Schools in relation to L&T, includes ensuring academic standards and the enhancement of the student learning experience. This is achieved though a learning and teaching strategy developed within the University strategic framework and plans that are aligned with that of the University and (for Schools) the College.

Academic Governance – Colleges

8.17 The following Committees will be established within Colleges. Standard remits are provided in Appendix 7.

College Council

8.18 Each College shall establish a College Council which is a forum for the consideration of College business and for consultation and communication with staff and associated student representatives in the Colleges on academic planning. The Head of College will convene the College Council, which should meet twice each academic session.

Learning & Teaching Committee

8.19 Each College shall establish a Learning & Teaching Committee to discuss, advise and make
recommendations to College on all matters relating to teaching across the College, including
educational policy, strategy and resource issues in relation to the development and
enhancement of Learning and Teaching activities. It will be chaired by the Dean of Learning &
Teaching.

Boards of Studies

8.20 It is the responsibility of Boards of Studies to

• discuss, advise and make recommendations to College on all matters relating to the taught provision within the scope of the Board.
• consider, monitor, review and maintain academic standards and the quality enhancement and assurance of educational provision on the associated degree programme(s).

8.21 The configuration of Boards of Studies in the four Colleges will vary:

• the College of Arts will have two Board of Studies, one for undergraduate courses and programmes and another for postgraduate;
• the College of Social Sciences will have one Board of Studies for postgraduate courses and programmes and at undergraduate level it will operate Boards of Studies for each of its degree programmes;
• in the College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences each School (Medicine, Veterinary Medicine, Life Sciences and Graduate) will have a Learning and Teaching Committee that will additionally serve the role of Board of Studies. The College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences may propose that the Graduate School oversees programme development for PGT;
• in Science and Engineering, Engineering will have its own Board of Studies.
• From 1st August 2010, Science and Engineering and MVLS will each establish its own Board of Studies with responsibility for courses within the BSc (Science) curriculum. These Boards will have representation from the other College to ensure cross-college issues are considered during programme approval.

8.22 Senate agreed that the arrangements for the operation of Boards of Studies, and the need for greater consistency across the University, be delegated to EdPSC to review.

8.23 Appropriate dialogue should be maintained between Learning & Teaching Committees, Graduate School Boards and Boards of Studies – it is likely that L&T Committees will be involved in commissioning curriculum development. It is expected that responsibility for the scrutiny and endorsement of programme proposals on behalf of the College is devolved to the relevant BofS, prior to submission to the ASC.

Research & Knowledge Transfer (R&KT)

8.24 Each College shall establish a R&KT Strategy Committee which will be convened by the Dean for Research. Consideration may need to be given to whether the remit requires a more explicit focus on knowledge exchange and impact.

College Graduate School Board

8.25 Each College shall establish a Graduate School Board which will be convened by the Dean for Graduate Studies. The role of the Graduate School includes responsibility for the pastoral support for postgraduate students, both PGTs and PGRs. The Graduate School Board will, however, be accountable to the College Management Committee for policy, procedures and practice in relation to the Graduate School.

8.26 The Graduate School Board will provide oversight on behalf of the College to ensure PGR and PGT programmes are in-line with the College strategic objectives relating to PG Education. In this regard, the Board will provide reports to, and receive reports from, the College Research & Knowledge Transfer Committee and the College Learning & Teaching Committee.

For research degrees: The Graduate School Board fulfil the function of the former Higher Degrees Committees: ensuring policy and procedures in relation to individual student’s supervision, progress and examination are followed. In some Colleges, these functions may be devolved to a distinct Higher Degrees Committee (that will report to Senate via the Graduate School Board and RPSC).

For taught postgraduate degrees: PGT programme approval and amendment is proposed to be dealt with by a relevant College Board of Studies (with dialogue between the Graduate School and College L&T Committee).

8.27 Responsibility for PGT course approval will remain with College Board(s) of Studies to ensure the University is complaint with existing quality management practices and to allow for shared oversight of UG and PGT course development but there should be sufficient flexibility to allow for College specific requirements to be met within a proposed framework. For example, some Colleges have distinct Boards of Studies for UG and PGT whereas others may combine these.

College Graduate Schools; their relation to the College L&T Committee/Board of Studies

8.28 Responsibility for curricular matters for PGT will be assigned to the L&T side of the University. In practice, this means that PGT programme approval and amendment will be dealt with by the relevant College Board of Studies rather than, as presenting the previous structure, a Higher Degrees Committee/equivalent. Again, however, there will be a need for appropriate dialogue between the College Graduate School, Learning & Teaching Committee and Board of Studies, given that the Graduate School as well as the L&T Committee is likely to commission new programmes. The addition of the Convener of the Deans for Graduate Studies Forum to the composition of EdPSC will help ensure there is appropriate correspondence on relevant matters between the two bodies at institutional level.

8.29 Programme monitoring for PGT will continue to be dealt with through the Quality Enhancement & Assurance Officer system. Programme review for PGT provision would continue to be dealt with through periodic subject review (previously, DPTLA). The latter is administered by the Senate Office; correspondingly, the new system of Graduate School reviews will be administered by the VP(R&E)’s Office.

College Appeals Committee

8.30 A College Appeals Committee (convened by Head of College or their nominee4 ) will replace the Faculty Appeals Committee. The Code of Procedure for Appeals to a College Appeals Committee will be published in the University Calendar in August 2010.

8.31 Senate agreed that the revised Code of Assessment and Codes of Appeal should be applied to all students with immediate effect after publication in August 2010. The Senate Office should be contacted for advice meantime.

College Research Ethics Committee

8.32 Discussions are being held by current Faculty Ethics Officers and Faculty Ethics Committees, but it is likely to be proposed that the current Faculty Ethics Committees, and a number of existing departmental committees, are replaced by one College Research Ethics Committee (CREC) in each College, and by School committees where required, for example where there is a large volume of applications in a particular School or academic area. In order to ensure business is manageable, the CRECs/School RECs will require a similar number of members as Faculty Ethics Committees/Departmental Ethics Committees. This will be particularly important where undergraduate programmes generate large numbers of proposals. This will also allow for appropriate representation from all Schools/disciplines within the College. It is not proposed to add a further layer through the creation of School Committees as a matter of course, unless this is required because of the volume of applications. The expectation is that there would be at least three lay members (external to the University) per CREC (transferring from the relevant Faculty Committee) and a member from another CREC.

Academic Governance – Schools and Research Institutes

8.33 Senate agreed that Schools and RIs* shall establish:

• A Learning & Teaching Committee
• A Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committee
• A Student:Staff Liaison Committee
• A Fitness to Practise Committees, as appropriate

* as appropriate to RI

The remits of the Learning & Teaching and Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committees should reflect those of the equivalent College Committees (see Appendix 7). These Committees will report to the School Executive.

8.34 Boards of Studies may operate at School (or Subject) level in some Colleges if this is the level at which degree programmes are managed (eg the LLB and BAcc in the College of Social Sciences).

8.35 As far as possible, Schools should maintain a single Student/Staff Liaison Committee (SSLCs), which reports to the School L&T Committee. Guidance on the operation of SSLCs, including a generic remit, is available at http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_129536_en.pdf (this document will be updated shortly to reflect the changes brought about by restructuring but the remit is unlikely to change).

4 It is acknowledged that the use of nominees is likely, with Deans of Learning & Teaching and Graduate Studies likely to take on this role.

8.36 It is also agreed that:

i) Schools should appoint a Head of Learning &Teaching and a Head of Research and Knowledge Exchange, who would each convene the relevant associated committee.

ii) a Quality Enhancement and Assurance Officer is appointed for each School. It would be expected that the QO would sit on the School/College L&TC. Separate individuals may be appointed as College level QOs (under consideration).

iii) normally, no individual should be appointed as a School or College Quality Officer at the same time as being School or College L&TC Convener.

iv) Where appropriate, Fitness to Practise procedures will operate within the new School structures as there is a straightforward alignment of the professional faculties into new Schools (the procedures previously operated at Faculty level). This is the level at which the professional subject expertise lies (see University Calendar or contact Senate Office).

Appendix 1: University Restructuring: Success criteria

The objectives of the academic management reorganisations are to:

• Remove internal barriers to collaboration and multi-disciplinarity in both research and teaching
• Bring together academically coherent groupings to optimise the University’s ability to deliver its strategic objectives
• Provide the best opportunities to improve our research performance, developing our activities to better align with funding opportunities and thereby ‘future-proofing’ the University
• Improve communication of research activities and interests, enabling the development of successful research and teaching initiatives
• Provide the best possible environment and support for postgraduate researchers
• Facilitate approaches to improve student retention and progression
• Continue to build on the high quality student experience
• Improve administrative efficiency and support in conjunction with implementation of the new student information system (Campus Solutions).

Success criteria must, therefore, be aligned with these objectives.

It should be noted that achievement of the success criteria for the restructuring project will be coupled with the objectives of the University’s Strategic Plan for the period 2010-2014, with planned improvements to the performance management and development of staff, and with the development and embedding of a number of new IT systems (eg a new student information system, Campus Solutions, and a new integrated HR/payroll system). Consequently, some of the success criteria are closely associated with strategic objectives and their associated KPIs.

Short term (1 year)

• Establishment of functioning Colleges
• Establishment of 19 functioning academically coherent Schools (removal of existing internal barriers)
• Establishment of 4 functioning Graduate Schools
• Establishment of functioning Research Institutes
• Sustainability of student satisfaction measures in 2008/09 (measured through National Student Survey (NSS), First Year Student Learning Experience Survey (FYSLES), Postgraduate Research Student Experience Survey (PRES) and International Student Barometer (ISB) results)

Medium term (3-5 years)

• Increased performance against KPIs related to strategic plan
• Increased collaborative and multi-disciplinary applications for research funding
• Increase in collaborative awards
• PGT portfolio aligned with market demand (evidence base from programme application student numbers)
• Increase in the number of PGT student enrolled/programme
• Sustained or improved (as appropriate) performance at KPI for student satisfaction
• Improved student satisfaction in the postgraduate student experience
• Improved administrative support for staff at School level (assessed through a staff survey)
• Improved co-ordination between services provided centrally or at College/School level (assessed through a staff survey).
• Continued evolution of quality enhancement within the University
• Increased external interest in vacant or new posts and the appointment of high quality ‘new blood’
• Retention of top staff
• Improved quality of management information

Long term (5 years)

Year on year improvement in each of the following:

• Improved success rates for research awards
• Increased research income (including increased market share)
• Greater number of staff securing research awards
• International student recruitment targets met
• Improved University performance in national and international league tables
• Financial sustainability

Appendix 2A: Head of College – Role and Responsibilities

Appointment of Deputy

The Senior Management Group agreed that Heads of College, Heads of Schools and Directors of Research Institutes should appoint a deputy/ies to assume responsibility in their absence.

It should be understood in appointing individuals in this capacity that the nature of the duties that may be expected and associated with any temporary responsibility is not expected to be onerous. Specific activities might include - acting as authorised signatory; taking short term operational decisions; convening a College Committee; representing the College both within the University and externally and so on.

As these are not broadly substantive roles they will not be associated with additional remuneration; the duties should be taken into consideration as part of College workload allocation models. This role is likely to be assumed by someone with a substantive role as part of the management team.

Heads of College should ensure that, when they are absent from the University and their deputy is acting on their behalf, that information is communicated to the College management team and to the Principal's Office and the Secretary of Court's Office.

Should you have any questions around the appointment of individuals to such roles, please consult the guidance which is available on the Restructuring website - www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_151113_en.pdf - developed for the appointment of school functional support teams.  Alternatively, feel free to contact the Human Resources Manager.

Appendix 2B i) College Management Group

Appendix 2B ii) College Support Team

Appendix 3A: Head of School – Role and Responsibilities

Appointment of Deputy

The Senior Management Group agreed that Heads of College, Heads of Schools and Directors of Research Institutes should appoint a deputy/ies to assume responsibility in their absence. It should be understood in appointing individuals in this capacity that the nature of the duties that may be expected and associated with any temporary responsibility is not expected to be onerous. Specific activities might include - acting as authorised signatory; taking short term operational decisions; convening a School Committee; representing the School both within the University and externally and so on.

As these are not broadly substantive roles they will not be associated with additional remuneration; the duties should be taken into consideration as part of College workload allocation models. This role is likely to be assumed by someone with a substantive role as part of the management team. Heads of School should ensure that, when they are absent from the University and their deputy is acting on their behalf, that information is communicated to the School management team and the Head of College's Office and College Secretary's Office. Should you have any questions around the appointment of individuals to such roles, please consult the guidance which is available on the Restructuring website - www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_151113_en.pdf - developed for the appointment of school functional support teams. Alternatively, feel free to contact the Human Resources Manager.

Appendix 3B – School Executive

Appendix 4A : Director of Research Institute – Role and Responsibilities

Appointment of Deputy

The Senior Management Group agreed that Heads of College, Heads of Schools and Directors of Research Institutes (RI) should appoint a deputy/ies to assume responsibility in their absence. It should be understood in appointing individuals in this capacity that the nature of the duties that may be expected and associated with any temporary responsibility is not expected to be onerous. Specific activities might include - acting as authorised signatory; taking short term operational decisions; convening a RI Committee; representing the RI both within the University and externally and so on. As these are not broadly substantive roles they will not be associated with additional remuneration; the duties should be taken into consideration as part of College workload allocation models. This role is likely to be assumed by someone with a substantive role as part of the management team. Directors of RIs should ensure that, when they are absent from the University and their deputy is acting on their behalf, that information is communicated to the RI management team and the Head of College's Office and College Secretary's Office.

Should you have any questions around the appointment of individuals to such roles, please consult
the guidance which is available on the Restructuring website - www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_151113_en.pdf - developed for the appointment of school functional support teams. Alternatively, feel free to contact the Human Resources Manager.

Appendix 4B – Research Institute Management Group

Appendix 5: Head of Subject – Role and Responsibilities

Appendix 6: Procedure for the Appointment Heads of School and Heads of Research Institutes (approved by University Court 10 February 2010)

A. Procedure for the Appointment of Heads of Schools

1. The role of Head of School occupies a central position in the leadership structure of the University. It carries with it a significant set of accountabilities for which he or she is responsible, through the Head of College, to the Principal and, ultimately, the University Court. These include a shared responsibility for College and University interests as well as statutory and legal responsibilities. Equally importantly, the role embodies a set of responsibilities to, and for, academic staff and students in the School.

2. The appointment process for Heads of School is as follows:

i) These will be Court appointments.

ii) They will normally be recommended to the Court by the Head of College.

iii) The position of Head of School will be advertised at least internally with a defined job description and person specification. There may be circumstances where external advertisement is chosen for strategic reason providing that (a) a post is fully funded from within the existing salary budgets and (b) that the initial period as Head of School is limited to the same period as for internal appointments (although the underlying academic appointment would be open-ended). Where a vacancy exists, the Head of the College, in consultation with the Principal, will determine through review and consultation whether the position should be advertised externally.

iv) The appointment panel will normally consist of:

•  
  • The Principal or his/her nominated Vice-Principal (Convener)
  • the Head of College,
  • a cognate Head of School
  • a representative from the School
  • a Senate Assessor on Court.

For the initial round of appointments, however, the panel will comprise:

Where a Head of College has been appointed they will also be a member of the appointment panel.

v) The appointment will be for 4 years, subject to satisfactory performance, and may be renewed on a mutually agreeable basis, normally for 2 years.

vi) Process for identifying School representative: The School will elect the staff member of the panel (level 9 or 10); it will be for the School to organise any election. Staff in Schools will be made aware of applicants for the role before interview(5). The elected representative on the interview panel is expected to consult with staff in School thereby enabling the School representative to feed in the views of the School staff to the panel.

3. Details of remuneration for Directors of RI are included in the annex.

4. In the event of poor performance as Head of School, evidenced inter alia through performance and development review (P&DR), a Head of School appointment may be terminated. Such a recommendation to Court will normally be made by the Head of College with support from the Principal.

To benefit from existing experience and leadership and to facilitate a smooth change to the new structure and phased appointments, current Heads of Department or current Deans as appropriate will be considered for the Heads of School positions. Where the roles of the Head of School and Head of Department or Dean match well, confirmatory interviews will be held.

5
Following feedback from staff, SMG altered the appointment process for Heads of School to ensure that staff in Schools were made aware of applicants for the role before interview. This change was implemented in time for the initial Head of School appointments in the College of Arts and the College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences

B. Procedure for the Appointment of Director of Research Institute (RI)

1. The role of Director of Research Institute occupies a central position in the leadership structure of the University. It carries with it a significant set of accountabilities for which he or she is responsible, through the Head of College, to the Principal and, ultimately, the University Court. These include a shared responsibility for College and University interests as well as statutory and legal responsibilities. Equally importantly, the role embodies a set of responsibilities to, and for, academic staff and students in the Institute. The role holder has the same status in the University as Head of School.

2. Following consultation with the Secretary of Court and the Principal, it is proposed that the appointment process for Heads of Research Institute should be as follows:

i) These will be Court appointments.

ii) They will normally be recommended to the Court by the responsible Head of College.

iii) The position of Director of Research Institute will be advertised at least internally with a defined job description and person specification. There may be circumstances where external advertisement is chosen for strategic reason providing that (a) a post is fully funded from within the existing salary budgets and (b) that the initial period as Director of RI is limited to the same period as for internal appointments (although the underlying academic appointment would be open-ended). Where a vacancy exists, the responsible Head of College, in consultation with the Principal, will determine through review and consultation whether the position should be advertised externally

iv) The appointment panel will normally consist of:

•  
  • The Principal or his/her nominated Vice-Principal (Convener)
  • the Head of College
  • a Head of School
  • RI staff representative
  • a Senate Assessor on Court

For the initial round of appointments, however, the panel will comprise:

Where a Head of College has been appointed they will also be a member of the appointment panel.

v) The appointment will be for 5 years, subject to satisfactory performance, and may be renewed on a mutually agreeable basis, normally for 2 years.

vi) Process for identifying RI representative: The RI will elect the staff member of the panel (level 9 or 10). Staff in RI will be made aware of applicants for the role before interview(6). The elected representative on the interview panel is expected to consult with staff in RI thereby enabling the RI representative to feed in the views of the RI staff to the panel.

3. Details of remuneration for Directors of RI are included in the annex.

4. In the event of poor performance as Director of RI, evidenced inter alia through performance and development review (P&DR), a Director of RI appointment may be terminated. Such a recommendation to Court will normally be made by the responsible Head of College with support from the Principal.

6 Following feedback from staff, SMG altered the appointment process for Heads of School to ensure that staff in Schools were made aware of applicants for the role before interview. This change was implemented in time for the initial Head of School appointments in the College of Arts and the College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences

6
Following feedback from staff, SMG altered the appointment process for Heads of School to ensure that staff in Schools were made aware of applicants for the role before interview. This change was implemented in time for the initial Head of School appointments in the College of Arts and the College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences

Appendix 6 - Annex: Remuneration of College and School Academic Managers

1. General Approach

Heads of College will be appointed through open competition and their salaries will be determined by an appointing panel. However, most academic management posts within Schools and Colleges will be filled by an internal member of academic staff, who will take on management responsibilities for a 4- or 5-year period. For all such appointments, the member of staff should retain his/her existing salary and, for the period of appointment, this should be enhanced by a responsibility allowance.

2. Heads of School and Directors of Research Institutes

.1 Heads of School and Directors of Research Institutes will receive a salary enhancement in one of 3 bands, reflecting the scale of the management job.

.2 Amounts paid annually will be: Band A £5,000; Band B £7,000; Band C £10,000.

.3 The responsibility allowance will be superannuable, but will not be consolidated into future salary.

.4 Heads / Directors will participate in the annual professorial review exercise. They will receive any general, University-wide, cost-of-living salary increase, and will be considered for performance-based awards, in respect of their performance in the role of Head of School / Director of Research Institute.

.5 Heads of School (but not Directors of Research Institutes) will be entitled to a year's sabbatical in the year following the period of office; details to be agreed with the Head of College.

.6 In the year following the period of office, and subject to the Head of College receiving satisfactory reports on sabbatical activity, the former Head/Director will receive a transitional payment equivalent to 50% of the responsibility allowance (i.e. £2,500; £3,500; £5,000).

3. Deans of Colleges

.1 Each College will have Dean of Learning & Teaching, a Dean of Graduate Studies and a Dean of Research.

.2 Deans will be expected to retain an academic home in their School and to contribute a proportion of their time (most likely 50%) to College duties.

.3 The central College budget will fund the cost of the time (most likely 50%) devoted to College duties, so providing the relevant School with funds to finance additional teaching support.

.4 Deans will receive a responsibility allowance (superannuable) of £3,000 per annum.

.5 Annual salary review for Deans will consider their performance across the full range of their College and School duties. as approved by Remuneration Committee, 15.3.10

Appendix 7: Academic Governance in Colleges, Schools and Research Institutes

College ex officio postholders and nominated representatives are members of Senate committees. A summary of the College, School or RI representatives on these committees is detailed in Table 7.1.

Standard remits and compositions are provided for the following:

• College Councils
• College Learning & Teaching Committees
• College Boards of Studies
• College Research & Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committees
• College Graduate School Boards

The remits of the School Learning & Teaching and Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committees should reflect those of the equivalent College Committees

The Code of Procedure for Appeals to a College Appeals Committee applies to the operation and composition of College Appeals Committees (see University Calendar or contact Senate Office). Senate agreed that Fitness to Practise procedures will operate within the new School structures as there is a straightforward alignment of the current professional faculties into new Schools, and this is the level at which the professional subject expertise lies (see University Calendar or contact Senate Office).

Information and guidance on the operation of Staff Student Liaison Committees and student representation, including a generic remit for SSLCs, is available at www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/qae/studentrepresentation/

Diagrammatic representations of the committee structures are also provided – see Diagrams 7A-7C.

Table 7.1 College Membership of Committees of Senate

1
Details of the current composition is available at http://www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/committees/senate/senateanintroductionfornewmembers/#Who%20is%20Senate

Committee Remits

College Council

Convener: Head of College

Remit:

1. Each College shall establish a College Council(8) which is a forum for the consideration of College business and for consultation and communication with staff and associated student representatives in the Colleges on academic planning.

Remit:

• To provide a forum for the discussion of College strategies, plans, policies and
  performance
• To help facilitate the fulfilment of the agreed duties of Colleges
• To the foregoing ends, the College Council will receive for discussion reports from members of the College Management Group on the development and delivery of College strategy and of performance against existing targets. The Council may also receive for discussion associated University-level plans and reports.

2. The Head of College should convene the College Council. It is suggested that discussion is led by the Head, together with the Deans of College as appropriate. Consideration could be given to the Vice-Principals who are not Heads of College attending to present associated University strategic planning updates on an annual basis.

3. The Council’s composition should be: all staff of the College, together with the associated student representatives.

4. The Council should meet twice each academic session.

5. Formal responsibility for academic activity in each College should be discharged in accordance with the agreed statement of Roles and Responsibilities of Colleges. In so doing, the functional committees within the College Learning & Teaching and Research & Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committees, etc, will correspond with their Senate equivalents, and will be overseen by the College Management Group.

6. The effectiveness of the remit and operation of College Councils should be reviewed two years after their establishment.

8
The term ‘College Council’ has been adopted partly to help avoid confusion and distinguish such College fora from the Colleges as a whole.

College Learning & Teaching Committee

Composition:

Convener: Dean of Learning & Teaching

Ex officio: The Head of College

Membership: n representatives from each School within the College (including conveners of School L&T Committees/equivalent); College Chief Adviser(s); Cognate College Dean of Learning & Teaching as appropriate; College Quality Enhancement & Assurance Officer, other College office bearers as appropriate; College SRC Convener or alternate; n. College students, representing the range of programmes embraced by the Committee.

Remit:

To discuss, advise and make recommendations to College on all matters relating to teaching across the College, including educational policy, strategy and resource issues in relation to the development and enhancement of Learning and Teaching activities.

Specifically to:

1. Contribute to and implement the College Learning and Teaching Plan.

2. Disseminate and recommend implementation of good practice in relation to Learning and Teaching, with reference to the development and delivery of key themes identified in the University’s Learning and Teaching Strategy.

3. Review, develop and progress the implementation of Learning and Teaching strategies and action plans, e.g. employability, retention, internationalisation.

4. Highlight and promote innovations in learning, teaching and assessment which enhance the student learning experience and promote effective and efficient use of resources.

5. Respond to consultations, to disseminate information and to implement recommendations from Education Policy and Strategy Committee (EdPSC), Academic Standards Committee (ASC), Learning and Teaching Committee (LTC) and the research Planning & Strategy Committee.

6. Develop and maintain effective communications about Learning and Teaching matters with staff and students in the College and Schools.

7. Receive reports and to review and disseminate best practice in relation to student advising, student progress, student transfers, student study off-campus and appeals and complaints from undergraduate and taught postgraduate students.

8. Consider and make recommendations to College in relation to proposals for new taught degree programmes within the College, with appropriate dialogue with the Graduate School.

9. Receive periodic reports from the College Quality Enhancement & Assurance Officer, and other College office bearers as appropriate.

Reporting:

The Committee reports to the College Management Group.

Board of Studies

Composition:

Convener: Dean of Learning & Teaching

Ex officio: Head of College

Membership: n. representatives from each School contributing to teaching in the programmes within the coverage of the Board (normally including the School representative on the College Learning & Teaching Committee); Chief Adviser(s) of Studies in the area concerned; n. representatives of other College Boards of Studies; College SRC Convener or alternate, n. student representatives studying on programme(s) embraced by the Board of Studies.

Remit:

To discuss, advise and make recommendations to College on all matters relating to the taught provision within the scope of the Board. To consider, monitor, review and maintain academic standards and the quality enhancement and assurance of educational provision on the associated degree programme(s).

Specifically to

1. Undertake the College and University processes for scrutiny and approval of changes to degree programme provision overseen by the Board. In operating this process, scrutinise and approve on behalf of College proposals for new courses and changes to courses contributing to the associated degree programme(s) and minor changes to the associated degree programme(s). Scrutinise and endorse on behalf of College major changes to associated degree programme(s) and forward such proposals to the Programme Approval Group (PAG) of Academic Standards Committee (ASC) for approval on behalf of Senate.

2. Consider proposals for changes to associated degree programme(s) in light of the College and University Learning and Teaching Strategies.

3. Revise and develop academic regulations in relation to the associated degree programme(s), taking account of the University’s academic regulatory policy and processes.

4. Provide information that may contribute to the formulation of Draft Resolutions with regard to revision of associated degree programme(s) as required by Academic Standards Committee (ASC).

5. Consider any other relevant matters that may be remitted by College or Senate.

Reporting:

The Committee reports to the College Management Group.

College Research & Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committee

The remit of the Committee focuses on research and knowledge transfer activity across the College as a whole. The Committee reports to the College Management Group and meets approximately every [x] months. It is chaired by the Dean for Research.

Composition

• Dean for Research (Chair)
• College Research Administrator (Clerk)
• Head of College
• VP (Research & Enterprise)
• College Secretary
• College Head of Finance
• Research Institute Directors or an appropriate representative
• Heads of School or appropriate representative
• Dean for Graduate Studies
• Director of Research & Enterprise
• Others as appropriate

Remit

1. To define, promote and implement the College's Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy with reference to the University’s Research & Knowledge Transfer Strategy

2. To monitor progress towards the delivery of the College’s Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy.

3. To identify key areas of research and oversee the strategic use of investment to ensure they are developed in the future.

4. To make recommendations to the College Management Group to enable the delivery of the Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy.

5. To co-ordinate the College's return to the Research Excellence Framework

6. To report to RPSC through Dean for Research

7. To consider Institute / School research strategies and ensure that the College has a balanced and affordable research portfolio supported by a management structure endorsed by the College Management Board

8. To promote issues relating to knowledge transfer and ensure that cross-linkage between Schools provide best value

9. Working with Research Institutes / Schools to deliver funding based on their Research & Knowledge Transfer Strategy and supported by the College Management Board

10. Monitoring post description and ensuring representation on appointment panels to facilitate the best quality staff members are recruited

11. Annual review of the Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy in conjunction with the College Management Board and the University Research Planning and Strategy Committee

12. Transparent reporting at the grass roots level

13. To liaise with appropriate services on matters relating to the Research and Knowledge Transfer Strategy

14. To help advise on the strategic allocation of Equipment and Scholarship Funds when appropriate

15. To act as an advisory body on applications for large pieces of equipment

16. To promote collaboration with other Colleges and external organisations directly and through the Research Planning and Strategy Committee

College Graduate School Board

The Graduate School Board is accountable to the College Management Group for policy, procedures and practice in relation to the Graduate School. The Board provides oversight on behalf of the College to ensure PGR and PGT programmes are in-line with the College strategic objectives relating to PG Education. The Board provides reports to, and receives reports from, the College Research & Knowledge Transfer Strategy Committee and College Learning & Teaching Committee. The Board is responsible for ensuring that policy and procedures are followed in relation to higher degrees including progress and selection of examiners. In some Colleges these tasks may be delegated to a Higher Degrees Committee. The Graduate School Board considers proposals for new PGT development in collaboration with the College L&T Committee.

Composition

• Dean of Graduate Studies
• Academic Deputies (for PGR, PGT, Internationalisation)
• School / Institute PG (R/T) Conveners (or their equivalents)
• Administrative Lead for Graduate School
• SRC representative with a PGR focus
• SRC representative with a PGT focus
• Others as appropriate (including representatives from RIO, or other central services as
  required)

Remit

1. To provide coordination and oversight of all Graduate School matters

2. To promote, implement and monitor compliance with relevant University and College strategies and policy relating to PG students.

3. To identify opportunities to enhance the College PGT portfolio and to advise and work with the Schools, Research Institutes and the College Learning and Teaching Committee in taking these forward.

4. To oversee the provision of generic and research skills training for PGR students.

5. To ensure appropriate training is provided for PG supervisors and programme coordinators.

6. To contribute to the definition of University and College strategies and policies in relation to PG students.

7. To determine the strategic allocation of PGR scholarship funds for cross-college schemes.

8. To maintain a high-quality, distinctive, Graduate School environment by overseeing all aspects of the postgraduate experience within the College from induction to graduation.

9. To work with Schools, Research Institutes and other College Graduate Schools to enhance practice in all areas of postgraduate delivery.

10. To coordinate/advise on PG recruitment and publicity activities (with RIO), including maintaining Graduate School web-pages.

11. Where appropriate, to coordinate reporting on PGR and PGT matters, with committees and university services.

12. To periodically review and update College Codes of Practice for Postgraduate Research Degrees.

13. To establish working groups as may be necessary to fulfill the Board's remit and to receive reports from them.

14. Establish systems and monitor performance relating to PGT student experience, including examiners and advisers; progress and assessment; and student induction.

15. Establish systems and monitor performance relating to PGR student experience, including admissions; the appointment of supervisors, examiners and advisers; supervisor training; examinations, progress and assessment; and student induction.

16. To consider proposals for amendments to regulations.

17. To approve the prima facie case for candidature for higher degrees (including by published work)

18. To approve the appointment of the examiners for all postgraduate research degrees

19. To review the reports and recommendations of examiners, approve awards, and appoint third readers of theses as appropriate.

20. To consider applications for research furth of Glasgow and requests for early or late submission of theses for examination.

21. To monitor the progress of all supervised research students by means of an annual reporting mechanism.

Diagram 7A – Key Functional Committees of Senate

Only the key functional committees of Senate are illustrated below.  For a full list of Senate Committees see www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/committees/committeestructure/#d.en.100185

Diagram 7B – Key Functional Committees of Colleges

Only the key functional committees of Colleges are illustrated below.  It is recognised that other committees may be established.

Diagram 7C – Key Functional Committees of Schools

Only the key functional committees of Schools are illustrated below.  It is recognised that other committees may be established.

* only as appropriate to the School.