Present: E.G. Clark (Chair), G. Boys-Stones, R.K. Gibson, P.R. Hardie, N.J. Lowe, D.G.J. Shipley, E.E. Pender, N.K. Rutter, C.J. Smith, D.J. Spencer.
The new members of the committee, Dr P.R. Hardie, Prof. S. Mitchell, and Ms G. Partington, were welcomed.
1.1 CUCD consultation on QAA
The Chair pointed out that the QAA process was not quite complete and that there had as yet been no reply from departments to the previous Chair's letter regarding a CUCD response to the review. There was discussion on whether to ask QAA reviewers for their feedback on the process. There was general agreement that the overall benefit of QAA to teaching quality had been small and that whatever benefits gained had been dwarfed by the pain of the process. Scottish representatives pointed out that the "lighter touch" version of the audit had resulted in such high costs in Scotland that the future of this version of the audit was also in doubt. It was agreed that once the process was completed, the matter would be reviewed.
2.1 AHRB nominations
It was agreed that the two lists of nominations approved by Council in 2000 and 2001 should be publicised via the CUCD website. Contacts would be informed of the proposal to publicise the lists so that any concerns could be resolved before publication. It was noted that Professor Buxton's institution was not Exeter, as stated in the 2001 list, but Bristol.
2.2 National Classics Prospectus
NL reported on developments. In the light of input from the Classical Association Charlotte Roueche was tightening the proposal, which would go before the CA AGM in April 2002. Since at this stage the CA had not approved the appointment of an editorial board, NL and CR would continue with the project as a working party.
2.3 Bulletin distribution for 2002
The overall purpose of the Bulletin was discussed and it was agreed that the printed version of the Bulletin was important for keeping departments informed about CUCD. With its Chair's report and Statistics report, the Bulletin was part of official Council business. The committee reviewed production costs, print run and arrangements for delivery and distribution at Council 2002
2.4 League tables
The Chair would seek input from Contacts for the letter to The Guardian regarding its "league table" of Classics departments and would circulate the final version to members of SC before sending it to the newspaper. The Chair thanked Roy Gibson for his research on the league table.
4.1 Member Institutions 2001-2
The current website list of 28 member institutions needed to be updated to take account of recent changes: Keele and St. Mary's University College were no longer members but two new institutions had joined CUCD in the autumn - Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London and Roehampton, University of Surrey. The Institute of Classical Studies would be contacted again for its decision. The updated list, with contact addresses, would be sent to the Treasurer for the new round of subscription requests.
4.2 Membership and rotation of Standing Committee for 2001- 2 and 2002-3
In accordance with the revised constitution, the number of officers was now six and the number of elected members also six.
4.3 Co-opted members and representative from JACT
Co-options were now being made on an annual basis. The co- options of Roy Gibson (Media affairs) and Christopher Smith (Scottish Universities) should be continued for 2002-3 to allow them to complete the three-year term of office for which they were originally elected (2000). JACT had chosen Gill Partington as their representative, although other members had agreed to substitute where necessary. Notification of changes would be passed on to the webmaster for posting on the website.
6.1 Revised questionnaire
Positive feedback had been received on the revised questionnaire but it was agreed that minor changes might still be needed to ensure that the format was clear for Scottish universities, which used a different system of levels of study (with level 3 as a General level and level 4 for Honours). It was agreed to leave the wording as "level" (instead of "year") for the moment but GS would solicit further feedback and offer advice to those completing the returns.
The questionnaire would again be posted on the CUCD website, as this new system of compiling returns had proved effective last year. GS was thanked for all his work on the questionnaire.
11.2 A briefing document from the Co-ordinating Committee for Classics was received with thanks.
11.3 On behalf of CUCD Nick Lowe had attended (24/1/02) a meeting of representatives of the subject associations in the Humanities, organised by History at the Universities Defence Group. The meeting was a briefing by consultants commissioned by HEFCE to report on the infrastructure of Arts and Humanities research. Their report would review institutional infrastructures (in the form of building and space) and subject- specific infrastructure (in the form of equipment needed for research). It was agreed that the Humanities had been undervalued and under-resourced: the consultants had identified a culture of 'excellence in poverty'. The report would seek the reasons for the chronic under-investment in the Humanities and how the situation of the Humanities differed from that of Science. The report would also establish the remedial figure needed to address the under-investment. The meeting identified the sums of £4.6 billion for teaching and £0.5 billion for research.
The meeting also offered an opportunity for the subject associations to begin to share information and to discuss the formation of a unified subject association to represent all Arts and Humanities. NL agreed to represent CUCD in any subsequent discussions.
|Standing Committee:||May 18th 2002|
October 12th 2002
|Annual Council:||November 16th 2002.|
The meeting closed at 1.40 pm.
E. E. Pender
School of Classics
University of Leeds