SOAS BOARD OF TRUSTEES AGENDA - SOAS University of London

SOAS BOARD OF TRUSTEES

AGENDA

Thursday 17 May from 15:00 hours (Conference Room, SG36)

There will be a presentation from the School of Arts 14:00-15:00

BoT 17/18 5 A Declaration of Interests [Oral Update]

BoT 17/18 5 B Minutes To approve: The minutes of the meeting held on 10th April 2018

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 C Actions Taken [Oral Update]

BoT 17/18 5 D Matters Arising / Matters for Report [Oral Update]

BoT 17/18 5 E Chairs Report Attached: Chair’s January summary report on the Board’s priorities and forward plan for the 2018.

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 F 3.15-3.45

Directors Report and Strategy on a Page To consider

Registrar’s Report and Financial Sustainability. To consider

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 G 3.45 to 4.15

Student experience and OfS Registratiom To approve and to note

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 H 4.15 to 5.15

Students Union: Student experience at SOAS and Progress on SU objectives To consider

BoT 17/18 5 I 5.15 to 5.30

Tracking student experience at SOAS Attached for information: Keeping a pulse on Student Experience mapping and example of a data information pack To consider

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 J Freedom of Speech strategy To note

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 K Language Strategy To note. This was approved at Academic Board

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 L Draft Almanac for 2018-19 To note

[Attached]

BoT 17/18 5 M Date of Next Meeting 10th July to be followed by Trustees Annual Dinner

1

2

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 B

SOAS BOARD OF TRUSTEES

AGENDA

Tuesday 10 April

Board of Trustee Meeting

Attendees: Marie Staunton (Chair), Kofi Adjepong-Boateng, Valerie Amos, Andrew Atherton Medhdi Baraka, Tamsyn Barton, Dimitri Cautain, Michael Charney, Matthew Craven, Gautam Dalal, Martin Harris, Chris Ince, Deborah Johnston, Helen Pennant, Andrew Popham, Alfredo Saad-Filho, Steve Tinton, Nizam Uddin

Apologies: David Skinner, Stephen Hopgood and Geoffrey Robertson

Conflicts of Interest BoT 17/18 4 A

The Chair of the Board declared that she was a member of a TEF panel.

The Sabbatical Officers declared that they were also trustees of the Students’ Union and the Students’ Union had a policy to boycott the Prevent Duty and its implementation at SOAS. Therefore, they would not participate in the discussion and would step out of the room prior to the discussion.

Minutes BoT 16/17 4 B

The Board approved the minutes on 27 November 2017 as an accurate record.

Actions Taken BoT 16/17 4 C

BoT 17/18 2 F. Provide update on review of process and timing of offers at April Board of Trustees meeting.

The Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) outlined that the new student record management system would improve the School’s ability to quickly respond to offers. This was currently under procurement. The current service level agreement enabled offers to be processed within 5 weeks and this would be reviewed to speed up the process prior to the implementation of the new student record management system.

BoT 17/18 2 F. Present business plan and business case on partnership with university in Singapore.

The Pro-Director (International) would provide an update to the July meeting.

Action: Present business case on partnership with university in Singapore.

BoT 17/18 2 H. Review events policy to incorporate lessons learnt in relation to external speakers.

The Freedom of Speech working group had been reviewed by the working group. It would be reviewed alongside the events policy to ensure consistent guidance. This would be brought to the next Board meeting

3


Action: Board to review revised Freedom of Speech Policy at next meeting. BoT 17/18 2 J. Provide Students’ Union and School progress report for Welcome Week 2018. The sabbaticals had been invited to the Welcome Week working group. A progress report on Welcome Week would be provided at the July meeting. Action: Provide an update on Welcome Week The Board noted that all other actions were completed. Chairs Report BoT 16/17 4 E Prevent The Board noted the Students’ Union Policy on Prevent and the SU Sabbatical Officers left the room for this item. Action: Circulate the Students’ Union’s policy on Prevent to the Board. The Chair and Vice-Chair of the Board had met with the CEO of HEFCE and discussed the School’s position and what actions were required to demonstrate compliance. HEFCE had outlined that the School had not provided sufficient information in its responses, however, it was agreed that HEFCE had not been clear enough on the information it required. The CEO outlined all the information required from the School to demonstrate compliance. The Chair of the Board wrote to HEFCE and provided responses to all queries and included all information requested. The response was submitted the day before HEFCE was closed however the School had confirmed with the Office for Students that the letter was received and would be dealt with by its Prevent team. The School would receive a response within the next few months. The SU Sabbatical Officers returned to the meeting. Lead Trustee assurance model The proposal was discussed at the Governance and Nominations Committee in January and was based on the dual assurance model of governance introduced at the University of Exeter. The Committee proposed to implement the model in 4 areas: Learning and Teaching, Research, International and Finance. Progress on the model would be reported termly through Governance and Nominations Committee and to the Board. The Board discussed how the work would strategically support the School’s priorities and how the methodology would be developed through the partnerships between Trustees and link staff. The Board agreed that transparency was salient and therefore a written record was required but the process would be streamlined and less formally recorded. Director's Reports BoT 16/17 4 F Sustainability A financial presentation from the Director was tabled. The Director outlined that 75% of the School’s income was students’ fees. The figures were based on 2016/17 expenditure and outlined exactly how the School’s budget was spent. The estates costs included externally engaged staff, which would move to a self-delivery model from 2018/19. The

4


historic position showed that the School had an operating annual surplus in 2011/12 which changed to an operating deficit in 2016/17. The change to the financial contribution was attributed to a number of factors including the drop in research income as a result of REF deduction; investment in additional staff including additional postgraduate programmes which did not recruit sufficient students to breakeven; increases above inflation for pensions and NI; changes to student number controls and increased sector competition. There was a significant decline in postgraduate taught student numbers, which slightly recovered following the introduction of PGT loan scheme. The number of PGR students had also declined. The Director outlined that the crictical challenge related to cash balances; by 2021/22 the School would have used its cash reserves and would be running at deficit. It was agreed that the School’s position was critical. The School had identified a number of actions to rectify the position including achieving growth through PGT numbers; targeted savings through the recent voluntary severance scheme; reducing operating costs; ensuring that self-delivery was cost neutral and that catering did not run at a loss. The School had secured £1.5million savings to date through the voluntary severance scheme and would identify another £1.5million by 2019/20. A further £1.6million would be saved through the Professional Services restructure. The investment strategy had been changed and the planned estates investment had been rephased to a later date. Greater efficiencies in teaching would be secured through the introduction of a workload model and curriculum review in each academic department. Professional services budgets would be reviewed line by line to identify savings, £2.3million savings would be identified through this process. The School would also build partnerships to increase the School’s income. A proposal for partnerships in Singapore and a business plan for a new foundation-level provision had been developed. An academic working group, a sub set of Executive Board, had been established to review the size and shape of SOAS. The initial proposals and priorities were outlined. The Director reported that the current proposals were h conservative and did not include any growth in undergraduate numbers, however the risks in achieving the targets would not be unsubstantial. The Board discussed whether the proposal was strong enough and risk adverse enough to be achieved and what assurances it would need. The Board noted that the Executive Board wasaligned in its position on the financial crisis and would be aligning the departmental plans to meet targets. The increased focus on finances meant that budgets had been more transparent and comparisons had been made. The Board discussed if the proposed savings would be sufficient and if additional savings would be required. The Board considered whether it would ask the Executive Board to identify an additional £1million in savings for 2021/22 from academic departments. The Board discussed the School’s tariff strategy and the possibility of changing it for next academic year. Other institutions lowered their tariffs but went up in the league tables as a result of other indicators. The Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) outlined the School had a more sophisticated approach to data and would provide tailored offers this academic year, protecting widening partifipation applicants and strategic languages. The Board agreed it would like additional information on the external revenue strategy and long term income generation. It discussed the risks of international partnerships, the delay in securing income

5


through these channels and how to maintain academic standards when working with an external partner.

The Board discussed what more it could do to support the process and it was agreed that high quality dual assurance, through the Lead Trustee Model, would support the School’s work.

The Board discussed the implications of the new Office for Students (OfS) requirement of a Student Protection Plan. The Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) outlined that the School adhered to the deliverance of existing programmes which resulted in staggered teaching of some modules to ensure sufficient support of students.

The Sabbatical Officers outlined that it would be important to engage and inform students of changes to reduce the possibility of complaints and issues. The OfS would enforce the consumer rights of students and staff and curriculum changes would be part of that. Students would be keen to engage with curriculum design and the School would receive support from the SU to ensure the preservation of the student experience. Cuts do not come across as a way of improving things and would stress that the additional million should come from income revenue rather than additional cuts. It would recommend an impact assessment on cuts and on student facing services. Investigating additional ways to use the SOAS estate to increase income would be beneficial.

The Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) outlined that students would be crucial in the curriculum reviews and Sabbatical Officers had been involved in the process already. The reviews incorporated the perceptions of existing students and alumni. The reviews had provided a better insight into allocation of resource and where it was not having the maximum impact for students.

Action: Present report to provide assurance on how the additional £1.5million savings on voluntary would be secured at the July meeting.

Action: Provide detailed business case on the external revenue strategy, including TNE at the July meeting.

The Board agreed that the dual assurance work would provide focused assurance on each area of focus. International partnership would look at the viability of the £8million income. The academic partnership would look at the tariffs set for undergraduate programmes.

The Board agreed that management would provide additional assurances to the proposal and would consider plans to find an additional £1million in savings.

Action: Present report providing additional assurances to the proposal and options to find an additional £1million in savings.

Progress against School’s strategy

A RAG rated progress report was tabled by the Director.

International The School would be focusing on particular aspects of transnational education and the business plan would be presented to the Board in July. The School had also developed a proposal for an academic institute for creative art and innovation in Africa. The Proposal was developed with alumni and current students. An early draft of the proposal would be consulted on.

Voice A compelling brand strategy had been developed and the Director of External Engagement and pPublic Affairs would be interviewed later in the week. This role would be key to the implementation

6


of the strategy. The School would continue to contribute to the decolonisation and freedom of speech agendas. Research Research impact would remain the priority area for the team and it would be embedding this throughout the institution, this would require a change in the School’s culture. The Board discussed whether Trustee recognition would improve the way impact was perceived throughout the School. Action: Consider how Trustee recognition could support the perception of impact. Learning and Teaching There had been significant improvements in the proportion of staff with teaching qualifications and this work would continue. It had been integrated into the promotions process. A key challenge had been the UCU strike and the impact on the student experience. A cirtical area would be TEF and the implementation of any related action plans. The School would be developing a joint Student Experience action plan with the SU. It was agreed that a plan for the priorities within the joint plan would be presented at the July meeting. Action: Present a plan for the priorities within the joint plan would be presented at the July meeting. Effect of UCU Strike Action The members of the Board who would be affected by the outcome of the UCU strikes declared their interests. A student progression working group had been established to review the impact on student progression and what mitigating actions would be implemented. The SU had supported the working group by focusing student requests. The next UCU ballot would close at 2pm on Friday and if the proposal was rejected then additional strike activity would impact the revision and exam marking period. There had also been a number of resignations from visiting examiners. If the strikes were to go ahead then the student progression working group would look at other ways to progress students. The School would continue to engage with other institutions about mitigating actions to reduce impact. The Board noted that noted that not all exam papers had been set as the scrutiny deadline had been pushed back to enable colleagues to reflect on the content. Copies of the Director’s report since the last meeting The Board noted the reports. Registrar’s Report BoT 16/17 4 G Mid-Year Financial Forecast and Outturn The Board noted this update. OFFA Access Agreement Alongside the Access Agreement the School would jointly develop a long term access strategy with Students’ Union. The strategy would be used to help write plans each year.

7


The Board noted that the OFFA Access Agreement would be submitted before the next Board meeting. HEFCE Letter on Institutional Risk The Board noted the letter from HEFCE. Annual Report on Student Complaints & Appeals The Board noted that a revised report would be presented at the July meeting and would include the changes made to the complaints procedures. The Board noted that one PhD complaint had received national publicity. The School would review the handling of this complaint and identify more general recommendations to improve process. The Board requested an update on the progress of the development the School’s IT environment at the July meeting. Action: Provide update on the progress of the development the School’s IT environment. Student Union Reports BoT 16/17 4 H Annual Report The report was compiled by the SU general manager and focused on finance. The finances included an additional Sabbatical Officer role, which was agreed by the students last academic year and paid for by the Students’ Union this academic year and would be funded by the School going forwards. The Sabbatical Officers outlined how the priorities were agreed and that they lasted for three years. The SU had six priorities and the SU executive agreed a KPI against each. Action: Present a progress report against each KPI and outline any further action required. The Board agreed that student accommodation would be discussed at the next Estates and IT governance development board. Action: Include student accommodation on the next Estates and IT governance development board agenda. Financial Statement The Board noted the Students Union Reports Sub Committee Reports/Minutes BoT 16/17 4 I

• HR Committee • Equality & Diversity Committee

The Board noted the inclusion of equality in the Trustee induction.

• Governance & Nominations Committee The Board approved the Governance & Nominations Committee’s recommendation to reappoint Sir Martin Harris as the Vice Chair. The Board discussed the proposed code of conduct. The Board agreed that clarification was required as to the relationship between School policy and Trustees; formal compliance requirements and elected guidance and the duty of care requirements. The Board agreed that the wording would be changed to outline that the Board would seek

8


consensus, where appropriate. Action: Revise the code of conduct and return it to the Governance and Nominations Committee.

• Academic Board • Audit Committee • Resources & Planning Committee

Action: Present the proposals to amend the Investment Advisory Panel at the July meeting.

• Estates & IT Governance Development Board Action: Present Estates strategy at the next Resources and Planning Meeting. The Board noted the Sub Committee reports and minutes. Meeting Schedule for BoT & Committees with Lay Members 2018/19 BoT 16/17 4 J The Board noted the update. Fundraising Regulator BoT 16/17 4 K The Board agreed that the School would register with the Fundraising Regulator and the School would abide by the Terms and Conditions of registration with the Fundraising Regulator. Next Meeting of the Board of Trustees BoT 16/17 4 L The next meeting would be 17th May and the following meeting would be 10th July.

9


Item Action Deadline Owner BoT 16/17 4 C

Present business case on partnership with university in Singapore.

10/7/18 SH

BoT 16/17 4 C

Provide an update on Welcome Week 10/7/18 CI/MB/DC

BoT 16/17 4 E

Circulate the SU policy on Prevent to the Board. 12/4/18 SP

BoT 16/17 4 F Sustainability

Present report to provide assurance on how the additional £1.5million savings on VA would be secured at the July meeting.

10/7/18 VA/PS


Provide detailed business case on the external revenue strategy, including TNE at the July meeting.

10/7/18 PS/SH


Present report providing additional assurances to the proposal and would find an additional £1million in savings.

10/7/18 VA/PS

BoT 16/17 4 F Research

Consider how Trustee recognition could support the perception of impact.

10/7/18 MC

BoT 16/17 4 F Learning and Teaching

Present a plan for the priorities within the joint plan would be presented at the July meeting.

10/7/18 DJ/DC/MB

BoT 16/17 4 G Provide update on the progress of the development the School’s IT environment.

10/7/18 PS

BoT 16/17 4 H Annual Report

Present a progress report against each KPI and outline any further action required.

10/7/18 DC/MB

BoT 16/17 4 H Annual Report

Include student accommodation on the next Estates and IT governance development board agenda.

8/5/18 ST

BoT 16/17 4 I Governance & Nominations Committee

Revise the code of conduct and return it to the Governance and Nominations Committee.

10/5/18 CI

BoT 16/17 4 I Resources & Planning Committee

Present the proposals to amend the Investment Advisory Panel at the July meeting.

10/7/18 GD

BoT 16/17 4 I

Present Estates strategy at the next Resources and Planning Meeting.

12/6/18 ST

10

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 E

1

BOARD & COMMITTEE PLAN. JUNE – DECEMBER 2018 Standing Items for all Committee Meetings

• Declarations of interest • Minutes of last meeting, actions and matters arising

Standing Items for Board Meetings

• Director’s report • Registrar’s Report • Risk Overview • Sub-committee minutes/reports

Thursday 24 May – Lead Trustee (Finance) Meeting

• Gautam Dalal meeting with Graeme Appleby Tuesday 05 June – Lead Trustee (International) Meeting

• Helen Pennant meeting with Stephen Hopgood

Wednesday 06 June 2018 – 14:00-16.00 – Academic Board

• Implementation of Safeguarding Policy Action Plan • Decolonisation Project Plan • Research Impact Report • Review of student complaint case study and recommendations for amending the

structure and resourcing of procedure • Equality and Diversity plan whole school alignment • Proposal to amend Equality and Diversity Committee membership • Learning, Teaching and Student Experience Strategic plan and risk register • Research Strategic plan and risk register • Student Protection Plan

Tuesday 12 June 2018 – 14:30-17:00 – Resources & Planning Committee

• Update on BI tool and analysis process • CEDEP • CEFIMS • Credit card charges • Catering project • Financial projections: Costed options paper with recommendations for next steps • Facilities management project • Options paper on the size and shape of SOAS • Efficiencies dashboard by department to enable comparison, breaking the analysis

down by PGT and UG. • HR Strategic plan and risk register

11


2

• Infrastructure strategic plan and risk register

Tuesday 10 July 2018 – 14:00-15:00 – Senior Staff Remuneration Committee

Tuesday 10 July 2087 – 15:30-18.00 – Board of Trustees

• Revenue & Capital budgets for 2018/19 • Financial forecasts • Sustainability

o Assurance on additional £1.5m savings on VA will be secured o Detailed business case on external revenue, including TNE o Additional assurances that extra £1m in savings can be found

• KPI Reports (to include further action required) • Professional Services Plan • Board of Trustees Membership • Equality & Diversity Annual Report • Emeritus Status • Risk Policy • Academic Promotions • Valedictions • Business case on partnership with university in Singapore • Research – How can Trustee recognition support the perception of impact • Teaching & Learning – Plan for priorities with in the joint plan • Update on School’s IT environment • Welcome Week Update • Report – Additional assurances • Proposal to amend the Investment Advisory Panel •

Tuesday 17 July 2018 – 14:00-16:00 – E&IT Governance Development Board

• TBC •

Wednesday 19 September 2018 – 15.00-18:00 – Board of Trustees

• Membership & Terms of Reference • Procedures for the conduct of meetings • Annual Plan of work • International update • Update on Strategy • Senate Annual Report • Formal report from SSRC

12


3

Tuesday 09 October 2018 – 14.30-17:00 – Resources & Planning Committee

• Membership & Terms of Reference • Financial statements • Revised Budget forecast • Director’s Report • Investment Advisory Panel minutes • Capital and Debt statement and cash flow • HR Strategic plan and risk register • Infrastructure strategic plan and risk register • Estates and IT Committee termly report

Thursday 11 October 2018 – 10.00-12:00 – Audit Committee

• Membership & Terms of Reference • Deep dive: Head of a department (department to be confirmed) • Internal audit report • Internal audit plan for academic year • Plan for Audit Committee Annual Report • Role of Board in Quality Assurance • Risk Register

Monday 15 October 2018 – 14.00-15:00 – E&IT Governance Development Board

• TBC

Wednesday 31 October 2018 – 14.00-16:00 – Academic Board

• Membership & Terms of Reference • Research Impact Report • Implementation of Safeguarding Policy • Learning, Teaching and Student Experience Strategic plan and risk register • Research Strategic plan and risk register

Thursday 01 November 2018 – 09.00-10:00 – Governance & Nominations Committee

• Membership & Terms of Reference • Lay Trustee committee membership • Lay Trustee committee engagement • Committee vacancies, as required • Skills matrix and diversity matrix

13


4

• Governance strategic plan and risk register • Lead Trustee progress update

Thursday 01 November 2018 – 10.00-11:00 – Honorary Degrees & Fellowships

• Membership & Terms of Reference • TBC depending on nominations received

Tuesday 06 November 2018 – 10:00-12:00 – Audit Committee

• External Audit Report • Draft Audit Committee Report • Internal Audit report: Chosen subject • Draft financial statements • Risk Register • Summary Quality Assurance Report • Draft Value for Money Report and Plan

Thursday 15 November 2018 – 14:30-17:00 – Resources & Planning Committee

• Financial statements • Revised Budget forecast • Director’s Report • Investment Advisory Panel minutes • Capital and Debt statement and cash flow • HR Strategic plan and risk register • Infrastructure strategic plan and risk register • Estates and IT Committee termly report • Annual Assurance return • ASSUR Report • Prevent return • External Auditors Exec Report & Management Letter • Annual Report of Audit Committee • Draft Value for Money Report and Plan

Tuesday 20 November 2018 – 15:00-18:00 – E&IT Governance Development Board

• TBC

14


5

Tuesday 27 November 2018 – 10:00-12:00 – Board of Trustees

• Key Performance Indicators • Financial Statements • External Auditors Executive Report & Management Letter • The Revised Budget • Faculty & Institute plans • Annual Internal Audit Report • Annual Report of the Audit Committee • The Annual VfM Report • The Health & Safety Annual Report • ASSUR Report

Wednesday 05 December 2018 – 10:00-12:00 – Academic Board

• Research Impact Report • Implementation of Safeguarding Policy • Learning, Teaching and Student Experience Strategic plan and risk register • Research Strategic plan and risk register • Widening Participation Report

December 2018-Jan 2019

• 1-2-1 meetings to be arranged for Chair of the Board with all Committee Members

Chairs of Committee meetings

• Will be added to this doc as soon as they have been planned.

Lead Trustee Meetings

• Will be added to this document as they are planned.

15


SOAS Board Priorities 2017/8 Note from Strategy Awayday Jan 2018 The SOAS Board at its Strategy Awayday analysed what progress had been made on the Board’s priorities from last year, discussed achieving academic excellence including a review of the School’s competitive position, discussed the academic vision for the School and a vision for student experience and were briefed on the School’s research impact. The Board discussion was informed by a briefing on external trends in the sector by Nick Hillman of the Higher Education Policy Institute and on Freedom of Speech by Professor Alison Scott-Baumann. Overall the Board reaffirmed the School’s commitment to excellence and the need to invest in order to achieve excellence while recognizing the challenges of a changing environment and the financial deficit. The Board welcomed two new members Helen Pennant, Director of the Cambridge Trust, and Professor Andrew Atherton a SOAS alumnus and currently Deputy Vice-Chancellor Lancaster University. The Board agreed to pilot a model of dual assurance based on termly meetings with a lead trustee and a lead staff member in the areas of Research excellence, Teaching excellence, International and Finance Progress on Board priorities 2017/18

▪ International Strategy. Good progress has been made with the appointment of the Pro-Director International, a series of initial visits made to potential international partners and work ongoing on transnational education and online learning. Lead trustee Helen Pennant recruited

▪ Public Voice. Discussions held at the Board on Decolonisation, Anti-semitism and Prevent. Lead Trustee Nizam Uddin

▪ Student Experience. Some progress. Capital spend – plan refocused on improving the student experience. Board briefed on Student Union’s priorities. School to continue working with SU and students on improving the student experience

▪ Languages. No significant progress. Language strategy still under development. Catalyst bid secured for strategically vulnerable languages. Fundraising ongoing. EB working group to consider and report back on a comprehensive Languages Strategy

▪ Academic Leadership. Good progress with new Heads of Department in place and training programme being implemented.

▪ Estates Some progress. Strategy refocused on student experience, decision made on self-delivery of facilities management including catering

▪ Financial sustainability. Position worsened with budget to deliver 5% surplus not delivered. Mostly driven by the decision to keep high tariff, which has reduced income. Staff cost reductions of c £4 million needed

After discussion the Board developed the following priorities for 2017/18 which are in addition to the ongoing priority of Financial Sustainability

▪ Student experience Continue to review:

16


A. partnership between management of SOAS and the student body, to improve

the student experience and give students a sense of contributing to the development of SOAS, through formal and informal channels

B. Monitor hard data on the student journey. How are students experiencing university life and how the awareness of academics on how to support students is being improved

C. Cost transparency-agree a format to show students how their fees are spent

▪ International Strategy Build teaching delivery capacity in the regions in which SOAS specialises and Invite more academics from those regions to London. Monitor concrete outcomes -2 new transnational partnerships, Secure £2million additional income by 2019

▪ Teaching excellence a. Review the quality of teaching, going beyond the TEF to identify where academic staff are engaging seriously with new and different models of pedagogy and staff are well trained. b. Make the curriculum review “real" thus freeing up resources, including by reviewing unviable courses, to innovate in education delivery. c. Benchmark with other universities including using league tables

▪ Research Excellence Monitor the visibility of SOAS research, its impact and partnership with other institutions internationally and outside academia. Ensure we are on course for an excellent REF submission

▪ SOAS voice Support a distinctive, integrated and coherent SOAS voice so the School contributes to the debate on Freedom of Speech and does further work on the decolonisation agenda. Agree a one-page narrative that encapsulates what SOAS does -looking at the global through the local and the local through the global

17

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 F

Director’s Report Introduction Below please find an update on the School’s strategic priorities monitored against the KPI’s.

Commentary:

Since our last report in April, the promotion round has finished and we are evaluating the success of the new teaching-focused process and criteria. At the same time LTQC has recommended new thresholds for the student evaluation of modules and new midsession evaluations which will produce a broader set of teaching data. First tranche of teaching away days to place at the end of April, with new data and guidance. We have begun work on a new access strategy, which will give the context for our annual access plans. The fundraising component of this has already been successful. Curriculum review continued with the last of the FLTCs of the session. These recommended a substantial suite of amendments and changes to modules and programmes that will improve sustainability and student outcomes. It should also be noted that we saw the end of the first year of our new PGT structure, which was designed to make our PGT programmes more competitive. This has been successfully implemented and we expect will continue to support the attractiveness of our pgt offer. The inclusive assessment project entered its final phase with an audit of programs at both PGT and undergraduate level in each of our departments. This has been complimented with a new workshop on teaching qualifications, focusing on inclusivity evidence. The decolonising toolkit has been completed, with recommendations about the inclusion of decolonising related questions in all key processes. Capital plans for the catalyst-related expenditure are being completed. These have the aim of improving learning spaces for students on language programs and options, as well as benefiting shared teaching and learning areas of the school generally.

Learning, Teaching and Student Experience Key Achievements against KPIs and strategic objectives • Teaching effectiveness has been clearly incorporated in promotion and probation process. • New Access and Participation Plan has been agreed with working group and students Union. • Academic and professional support plans have been integrated. • Safeguarding Working Group met and agreed revisions to the annexes and guidance and approach to

implementation of School Safeguarding training. • Associate Directors for Learning and Teaching within the new structure have been appointed, including: Learning

Environment and Student Outcomes; Student Welfare; Teaching Quality (UG) and Teaching Quality (PG) Risks • Comprehensive departmental review structure is underway and will form part of departmental plans, however 2

out of 3 due to take place in term 2 were postponed due to strikes. • Strategic plan for the future of PASS has not yet been developed. Development of an online bridging course was postponed due to staff turnover. New staff are in place however other work has been prioritised.

18


Research Key Achievements against KPIs and strategic objectives • Internal funding has been awarded to strategically important projects via the Seed Corn Fund; in addition, the

Engagement and Impact Fund and Knowledge Exchange Fund have been launched and funding will be awarded by July.

• REO have run their REO Workshop series, including for the first time a specialist programme on understanding research impact, writing impact case studies and gathering evidence of impact. Online training is being scoped for implementation in 2018/19.

• Executive Board and Academic Board have reviewed the REF engagement data and strategies and will be monitoring ongoing engagement. A tailored approach has been developed to support applications for large-scale multi-partner grants. The total value of applications in the first half year has nearly reached last year's total volume of about £39m with an awarded amount of £12m secured compared to £13m in total for FY 16/17

Risks • Work on-going with IT and Finance to establish WT/Agresso interface • To ensure enhanced contracts and post award systems there is a dependency on resource being in place for further

system improvements.

Commentary:

We await notification from Research England of our Research and Knowledge Exchange allocation for 2013-19 the outcome of which should inform us of our relative success in efforts to increase the level of our HEIF funding.

We have begun the annual review of REF preparations with meetings organised with the REF coordinators and Heads of Department for each Unit of Assessment. In the meetings thus far the UoAs concerned have completed their review of all current outputs and show themselves to be close to their target of 4* outputs with indications that there are more to come. They also have draft environment strategies in place and have shortlisted their impact case studies. It is anticipated, however, that not all UoAs will be in that position, and that illness and absence of critical staff members will have set back the review process in one or two UoAs. We are also currently revisiting the staff assigned to the Area Studies UoA with a view to enhancing its strategic focus.

The main area of concern is in the development of effective impact case studies. Whilst we have marginally benefitted from UKRI’s recent decision to reduce the number of impact case studies required, and whilst we have in aggregate terms enough potential impact case studies a cross the board, the main focus of attention over the next 12 months will have to be the development of impact activities and associated data capture.

Meanwhile, of the eight or nine members of staff initially nominated for panel membership four have thus far been appointed (Wen-chin Ouyang– Main Panel D; Matt Craven – Law; Edward Simpson – Anthropology; Lutz Marten – Area Studies). We are expecting that further appointments will be made in due course.

We continue to organise and strategically manage submissions for large grant funding calls and our GCRF Research Hub application led by Prof Ben Fine has made it through the first round. We are in the process of developing funding bids for the ESRC Large Grant call and the Research England E3 fund. Although the latest data suggests that we are only 7% below our spending targets on existing grants, this is mainly due to additional funding secured in year. Delays in project start and delivery therefore remain a matter of significant concern in the REO, particularly in respect of the large GCRF/ERC grants given the complexities of managing such grants post award.

SOAS continuous to be successful in securing funding. Most recently we won a bid as part of the Bloomsbury Set consortium led by the Royal Veterinary College under Research England’s Connecting Capability Fund (CCF) designed to implement the Industrial Strategy and drive forward university commercialisation. The project focuses on the development of low-cost, portable diagnostic tools to counter infectious diseases. SOAS scholars will take a key role in testing whether proposed public health interventions in developing countries are acceptable socially, economically and politically – a vital but often overlooked aspect that ultimately determines their success in the real world.

19


People Key Achievements against KPIs and strategic objectives • Suite of Recruitment, Secondment, Acting Up and Equalities frameworks agreed and in place • New Reward Strategy in Place • Revised 1PS Business Case agreed at Academic Board • New Leadership Development offer in place. Risks • Equalities framework including key charter marks. Need for wider management buy in and follow through on key

changes and working practices • Develop core recruitment processes. Work might be hampered by capacity and turnover across all areas. • Delays in the 1PS Consultation process have resulted in key recruitments not being made within agreed timeframe.

Resistance to change remains an ongoing risk. • Staff Turnover precipitated by ongoing changes presents some continuity and capability risks. Key work is

being managed and prioritised accordingly, but some risk of development activity slowing down. Wider buy in is needed to ensure change

Commentary:

Key development planning is ongoing within HR as a basis for taking forward all aspects of the strategy and providing for key risks. Resource and capacity issues are being addressed, and the Directorate is working hard to identify relevant efficiencies. Short term resource is in place to support essential improvements across key areas. The Directorate is keen to engage more actively with clusters of Heads of Department through the Pro Director leads and to use regular meetings to create understanding and buy in across key themes.

We need to build on the existing equalities framework as a basis for supporting the career development of staff from protected groups and enhancing gender and race /ethnicity balance across senior groups. Key action plans are in place but there is a need to bring these together as a basis for senior institutional approval and support and to create a greater sense of how we all contribute to this important agenda.

1PS remains an important development and the School remains confident that key changes will be in place at the beginning of 2019. Appointment have been made to the roles of Director of EEPA and the Chief Information Officer, with short term additional change support planned for other areas of the School.

20


Voice Key Achievements against KPIs and strategic objectives • Director of marketing candidates have been shortlisted. • A Director of External Engagement, Policy and Alumni has been appointed. • Revised Freedom of Expression and conduct of events policy and guidance has been approved and circulated to the

School. Risks • Delays in the recruitment of key posts have resulted in significant delays to key pieces of work including the

external engagement and marketing plans. • An increased number of student complaints and requests, as a result of strikes, have impacted on the capacity

within the SAE team. • Unforeseen student incidents have resulted in some challenging press coverage of the School.

Commentary:

It has been a key priority for the School to transform its approach and concept of engagement- both internally and externally. We have reviewed the School’s brand, ensuring we have an accurate and evidence based understanding of how the School is perceived both in the UK and internationally. A review has also been undertaken our position and future opportunities across international markets.

A key decision in improving the School’s approach to engagement and public perception was the development of the role Director of External Engagement, Policy and Alumni which will bring together effective horizon scanning, engagement in policy and a consistency in our external engagement which will position SOAS effectively for the future.

A separate paper on SOAS Voice has been developed and was consulted upon across the School in late 2017 and early 2018. It sets out the rationale for an updated brand strategy, which establishes a values-led, marketable and distinct proposition for SOAS - reassessing and reviewing the last Reputation & Identity Review in 2010/11. This will drive future marketing, advancement, corporate communications, public affairs and engagement work. It builds a significant piece of work to challenge and refine our brand which was presentation to the Board of Trustees, Executive Board and Academic Board last autumn. Additionally, key messages have been developed which represent a toolkit for future communications and move us some way from previous, highly reactive nature of some of our previous communications.

A potential roadmap towards a new integrated professional advancement, corporate communications and public affairs directorate at SOAS University of London has been written and will form particularly useful to newly appointed Director who joins the team in September.

21


Infrastructure Key Achievements against KPIs and strategic objectives • Signing of rental agreement for Vernon Squared is imminent. • FM Self-delivery group are on track for delivery as per mandate. • Academic and Professional Departmental savings targets agreed. • Initial department information packs (with planning, finance data, analysis and student numbers) shared to inform

departmental planning. Plans are due to be submitted on 11th May. • Demonstrations of SITs student records presented to key stakeholders • New Academic Committee structure confirmed and induction plans in place. • Action plan has been developed for the Office for Students registration. The gaps have been identified and key

stakeholders are engaged in ensuring school wide compliance by the submission deadline. Risks • The Brunei Gallery project has a tight programme, with long lead times for the summer works order items. • Listed building consent required for changes, to facilitate the department support office in Philips, and the

counselling expansion, could prohibit or limit any of the required changes. A review of all submissions, will be undertaken, to ensure they are as in keeping with the buildings as possible, to limit the possibility of non-approval.

• Target savings likely to increase in light of student number projections for 2018 - Department Heads are aware of this

• The list of School policies has been prioritised for review, however a number of the policies will require union consultation and therefore will take at least 12 months to update and approve.

Commentary:

The Brunei Gallery project is currently on programme. The full design for the lower ground floor is due for completion and tender within the next two weeks. The design consultation for the ground, first and second floors is continuing with key stakeholders with a paper to be presented to Executive Board to agree the final design due on 4 June.

The focus of the FM self-delivery group has been on the key areas of; TUPE transfer and the application of SOAS terms and conditions; the balance between self-delivered services and specialist contracts and the financial imperative of not exceeding the budget envelope. The shaping of the services has been discussed, predominately around the SOAS catering offer which has focused on three key areas of; financial sustainability; quality assurance and meeting the customer needs. Operationally we are focusing on our readiness to integrate the new staff body of 130 plus staff.

Professional Service budgets have now been submitted and reviewed through a detailed process of presentation and scrutiny. Consolidation of those plans indicates that we are on track to achieve savings targets but more review is needed to understand the relative risks involved in reducing operational capacity in some areas. Voluntary severance could potentially release £0.5m and these savings are being considered in line with for example, reducing our cost base through ending fixed term contracts. This work is being balanced against the on-going One Professional Services restructure and in line with requirements for investment in some targeted areas: REF, TEF, and International. Detailed plans will be presented to June RPC.

Academic Department plans including plans to achieve their individual savings targets are in the process of being submitted. These will be reviewed by Executive Board at their away day on 21 May prior to their presentation to June RPC.

We are utilising a framework agreement to procure a new student records system allowing us to move quickly, while still securing a competitive price. We began negotiations with Tribal SITS, one of the main suppliers, in March. Tribal provided a demo to key stakeholders on the 23rd March which was well received. The Tribal system is likely to offer us savings in operating costs and deliver significant improvements to our student record processes and integrations with our other key systems. The first module we launch will target student retention and outcomes.

22


International Key Achievements • A potential partnership has been identified with an organisation in Singapore and the project is progress on

schedule. • Other potential TNE initiatives have been identified and the partnerships are being scoped. Risks • This is the first partnership of this nature SOAS have undertaken. • Capacity and experience within the team. • A substantive international strategy has not yet been established.

Commentary:

The international strand of the School’s strategy has become a key priority as it offers the School with the opportunity to grow and establish new income streams. This is a new area for the School and therefore poses certain risks around precedents and ensuring all partnerships will have the intended benefit for the School. These risks are being mitigated by thorough due diligence processes and consultation with experienced specialist who have undertaken similar projects before. The Pro-Director International with the operational support from the Registrar is making significant progress with a partnership with a Singapore institution to deliver SOAS programmes in Singapore. The organisation is well established and experienced which is aided the progress of the project. Additional initiatives are being reviewed at present ensuring that all decisions are well-informed and strategically made in the interest of SOAS; these include a 2+2 with Thammasat- the highest rated institution in Thailand- and joint delivery of Islamic Studies with Aga Khan Institute in London. The project plan developed following the Singapore partnership will be utilised as a template for future partnerships.

Currently there is limited resource to support the development of international partnerships and how SOAS staff support this work will need to be considered to ensure all partnerships receive the required scrutiny. A separate international strategy and aligning risk register will be developed to ensure that all work under the international umbrella is effectively captured and monitored.

Valerie Amos

May 2018

23


Registrars Report May 2018

Contents

1. Update on Savings and Efficiency targets- Please see Appendix A 2. IT infrastructure update

As requested at the Board of Trustees meeting on 10th April 2018. 3. One Professional Services 18-month plan – update

i. Strategy on a page and supporting operational plans ii. Supporting New Head of Department through Transition iii. Professional Services Realignment iv. Efficiency and Effectiveness Review v. Planning Framework vi. International Strategy vii. A strategic response to policy and public engagement

Appendices

Appendix A Update on Savings and Efficiency targets Appendix B One Professional Service 18-month plan Appendix C Strategy on a Page and strategic plans

1. Update on Savings and Efficiency targets- Please see appendix A

2. IT infrastructure update

IT's greatest opportunity in the near future is the appointment of the CIO who will start with us shortly. SOAS has secured a strong IT leader with considerable sector experience who has guided teams through often difficult times. For SOAS, having an inspiring leader in this new position will allow us to shape a new direction for IT and bring IT's views to the top table in a credible and structured way. Deconverging from the Library will also provide IT the 'voice' it didn't have previously. Over the last 12 to 18 months IT has replaced a significant amount of its legacy systems with more standards based tools for cyber-security and network performance. These have yielded strong benefits in terms of up-time and reliability especially around network and wireless availability. However, some IT staff are still adjusting to using these tools and a hearts and minds exercise is needed to ensure staff are fully engaged. SOAS began negotiations with Tribal SITS in March 2018 for a student records replacement. Tribal provided a demo to our staff on the 23rd March which was well received. SOAS aims to procure off a framework allowing us to move quickly and secure a good price. SITS will

24


save SOAS over £120K per annum and deliver significant improvements to our integrations and processes. The first module we launch will target student retention and outcomes. We are upgrading the Finance system this summer and replacing some of our custom integrations notably between Finance and the Student Records system to ensure student payment processes work more effectively for this year's enrolment. The existing system can cause confusion to students due to delays in systems updating and is the root cause of around 70% of IT support requests. Significant work has been undertaken on module sign up, which again causes issues for students and staff. Over the next 6 months this will be updated to ensure students cannot select clashing modules, we will also update our backend interfaces and ensure the front end system looks modern and engaging. The new Workload allocation model has launched. Almost all Heads and Departmental Administrators have been trained and shown the system and had data loaded in. We are currently soft launching it this year and feedback has been positive. Our major risks in IT are related to staff retention and morale. We have had three resignations in the last 6 months (higher than normal) and staff are very split on the current direction we are taking with our systems. To help with this we have undertaken three Away Days in the last 12 months and reached out to staff via a survey to get their feedback. Staff have also been invited to feed into our strategic direction and help complete a welcome pack for the new CIO. A key objective for the CIO will be around unifying the team, bringing them out of the Library and getting them to pull together in a common direction. The cyber-security landscape continues to change and evolve and many threats exist that could impact SOAS. Ensuring our systems are up to date and can adapt to threats is a key priority but educating staff in how to identify and mitigate threats will be key. 3. One Professional Service 18-month plan. Summary The 18-month One Professional Services plan that I developed shortly after arriving at SOAS is, well, almost 18 months old and it, therefore, feels an appropriate time to update the Board of Trustees on progress. Fittingly, one of the key objectives of the plan was the development of a Strategy on a Page and supporting operational plans. This objective has been delivered and ongoing actions are now embedded into the Strategy on a Page and strategic plans that support them.

Priority area Outline context is lifted from the original One Professional Service

May 2018 Progress Update

Next steps

25


Paper agreed through EB in Jan/Feb

2017 (attached at Appendix A). KEY PRIORITY 1 STRATEGY There is a fundamental need to create engagement in our vision, internally and externally, leading others to engage with what is uniquely SOAS and to frame strategic priorities for investments. This is the ‘light on the hill’ to balance the benefits being achieved through the financial sustainability agenda and to highlight the purpose of the drive to generate reserves. The shortened Strategy will include measurable performance indicators that define not only our financial ambitions but also the size, shape and quality metrics that we will achieve.

We have developed a Strategy on a Page, attached at Appendix B. The Strategy links directly to operational plans at a directorate level. Template operational plans have been embedded into the planning framework for both directorates and academic departments with the expectation that operational planning with include academic department from summer 2018. We have attached a copy of the strategic plans which sit under the Strategy on a Page. These demonstrate the comprehensive nature of engagement. The plans are evolving and considered ‘living’ documents; therefore they are a means of measuring and monitoring progress and outcome. They have now been aligned into risk management processes and will form the basis of senior staff SDRs this year. The Strategy has additionally been distilled into a single page KPI document for us in updating the Board of Trustees on progress towards our strategic aims.

We recommend that this priority is closed as the strategy is in place and being embedded across the School. The next steps with the strategy are incorporated with Priority 5 Updated Planning framework.

KEY PRIORITY 2 SUPPORTING NEW HEADS OF DEPARTMENT THROUGH TRANSITION The new academic structure is likely to be finalised in February 2017 and there are concerns that professional service structures will need to move quickly to align with that structure. In reality, the HR processes and policies around restructuring and redeployment will mean a transitionary year. In that context, we need to provide more immediate support to new Heads of Department and this is proposed through additional professional staff support and a toolkit of services as follows:

Professional Service restructuring has been slower than we had intended and are still operating interim structures across many teams. Business partnering is well embedded in some service areas e.g., planning, finance and HR. More work is needed before ‘partnering’ is embedded as a new way of working but feedback is generally good and progress positive. Additional Planning and Finance Business Partners were added into structures in 2017 and have supported heads with business planning processes. In response to feedback from Heads, administrative support at a departmental level has been maintained. This includes a commitment to maintain departmental managers at a time when professional service budgets have and continue to be reduced.

We recommend that this priority is closed the structures are now embedded to support new heads of department in their development. The further development plans will be integrated into the staff development and governance processes.

26


• Regular

departmental/directorate level management information in relation to core support functions: finance, HR, marketing and recruitment, admissions, etc.

• Initial consistency and/or improvements in administrative support in academic departments

• A ‘business partnering’ or other dedicated, transparent support structure for Heads of Department. The creation of a management team approach.

• A workload planning tool • A structured leadership and

management development programme for Heads of Department.

We have worked with Ranmore to deliver executive leadership development to EB over two separate events, including a residential in January. Every other EB is preceded by topic specific information sessions which aim to provide Heads of Department with information on policy and process induction and updates. In addition to leadership development for the Executive Board, we have introduced a new online, facilitated leadership programme and to date c.50 mainly professional staff have engaged. Progress towards an institutional workload planning tool is positive. A tool has been introduced and will be populated with 2018/19 allocations by June. A draft Workload Allocation Policy has been developed and was approved by Academic Board in March.

PRIORITY 3 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REALIGNMENT

My strong recommendation is that 2017 is used to review not only the structure of professional services staffing, but also the effectiveness and priorities of teams, ensuring that these are aligned to the needs of students and staff. There is a need to align professional service staff with new academic structures and to ensure that directorates are structured to deliver services that meet the needs of students and academic colleagues in a dynamic external environment. The review will include review of structures and roles for effective professional service delivery and include central and faculty-based professional services. It is the intention to bring professional service teams together into one professional service whilst

The ‘One Professional Service’ restructuring has been slower than we had intended and remains a School wide priority. The very senior level structure is now defined with the organisational structure agreed and the first two levels of the structure determined. We have recently made two new senior hires: Director of Development. External Engagement and Policy and Chief Information Officer. We failed to appoint to the post of University Librarian but are now engaging executive search support. In the meantime, we are looking to the broader sector to support a vision for change for the Library and we are appointing a library specific senior change manager to begin a process of reorganisation. A detailed structure is emerging for Student and Academic Services. Senior posts within the Directorate has been consulted upon and the process of recruitment has begun, this includes a permanent Director of Marketing and Director of Student and Academic Support..

This priority remains ongoing. The delays in the restructuring have had resource implications for other work and therefore it remains a priority that this process is completed as soon as possible.

27


embedding support at a departmental level. This is likely to involve greater use of Business Partners and the creation of management teams for each of the ten new schools. Restructuring inevitably results in additional costs in the year of restructuring. Those costs need to be modelled and restructuring needs to be right first time given SOAS financial constraints. Known costs are outlined in the financial resources section of this paper. Restructuring needs to be supported by a strong programme of staff development – both leadership and skills based if we are to support teams through organisational change and ensure that the institution can draw on skills and competencies that will deliver our strategic aims and meet with a changing sector.

Other Directors are visioning and documenting their refreshed or restructured services. A deterioration of our finances is creating a new challenge for the service and in some areas we are revisiting our proposed structures in order to achieve savings targets. We have, throughout the 18 month period of change, ensured a focus on staff development. In addition to the introduction of the Emerging Leaders and Managers programme, a comprehensive programme of team development has been rolled out and has included the use of soft psychometrics to improve team working and dialogue.

PRIORITY 4 EFFICIENCY and EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW PROCESS One approach to the challenges outlined above in relation to data and processes would be a programme of activities addressing:

• Data Management • Process Improvement • Student Journey

Mapping

These are substantial projects in terms of both investment and time.

An alternative approach, one that reflects our financial constraints and the one that I am proposing spans the three themes of data,

This is an area where progress has been good, particularly in relation to data management. Student Experience project management and support: The School implemented a staff survey and subsequently held a facilitated workshop alongside Deputy COO (Student and Academic Experience) to generate ideas (and enthusiasm) from academic and professional services staff for an improved student experience. The remainder of this workstream was oriented around the business of the Working Group (part of the One Professional Services consultation). Sub-groups have been formed to improve prioritised processes. These groups met and have made recommendations for improvements to administrative processes that will measurably improve the student

This is an ongoing priority. Whilst work to improve our data submissions to the league tables is largely complete and now embedded into day to day working, we now need to turn our attention to process improvement and to mapping and improving our student journey. We are looking to LEAN as a methodology for embedded process improvement and have included a small budget under One PS to continue work that has been started in 2017/18.

28


process and student journey poses the question – “what problems must we fix, what improvements must we make?” This situational assessment approach has the benefit of quickly identifying a smaller number of significant priorities that will most positively impact our performance and prospects. This approach would help us to prioritise the business process issues, data/management information improvements and elements of the student journey that are really in need of major change first. The approach can also work hand in hand with structural realignment to ensure that processes are designed to complement the work of the new teams. A reasonably quick and consultative approach along these lines, combined with a more intense look at institutional performance via public and internal data, should unearth priorities for improvement, allow us to focus investment on our highest priorities and to re-apply the approach to the next order priorities.

experience. The Working Group will reconvene to review the sub-group recommendations. Academics will be encouraged to attend, support the proposed changes and encourage wider academic buy in. UK League Table Data review: Discussions were held focusing on SOAS business processes relating to HESA data, addressing the 4 main relevant returns to HESA: staff, student, graduate destinations (DLHE) and finance. The purpose of each discussion, held with the main business lead for each return, was to clarify current business process for data that face one or more of the 3 UK league tables, and to examine future scope for any further optimisation of the data, whilst remaining always compliant with HESA guidelines. Outcomes: • Finance – following a review of the HESA

guidance and existing SOAS practice, a substantial amount of expenditure was re-assigned to support spend per student, in particular in the academic services category (which supports all 3 UK rankings).

• Staff – a technical opportunity was identified to re-assign a limited fte towards the staff:student ratio. It was noted that this would have only a very modest effect.

• Student – This focused on entry tariff. A recent in-house review had identified (limited) scope for improved business process for the collection of additional tariff not always captured by UCAS. The tariff improvement from that process was modest, at 2 tariff points. **Check with SC**

• DLHE – a well-managed return, all the main steps that support a strong and compliant outcome were being taken. N.B. that the return in question is the last of its type; HESA will in future directly oversee the Graduate Outcomes survey, with

The implementation of SITS will include robust process review and a mapping and improvement of our student journey. Additionally, the system offers opportunities for significant improvements in data along the student journey, including the potential for predictive analytics.

29


institutional input primarily about enhancing response rates.

(In addition, an analytical session on SOAS’ strengths and weaknesses in the UK tables was given to the Executive Board at its away day.) Global League Tables advisory: This project focused on identifying focal points for business processes that could impact on data that face the global tables, and to provide a wider assessment on SOAS’ standing in the global rankings. Strategically, strengths were apparent in proportions of international staff and students, and also in the number of publications relative to staff numbers. More broadly, the analysis indicated a gap between SOAS’ reputation ranking and that in citations. With citations continuing to be lower (worse) than reputation, there is a risk to evaluate and manage that reputation could take a downwards trend if the performance as seen in citations stays at the current low levels. The concluding section in the report offers useful inputs to future strategic thinking around international positioning and research strategy. Operationally, a checklist specific to SOAS was identified and discussed with the Director of Research and Enterprise, including for example ‘affiliations’ that can have an impact on citation counts.

PRIORITY 5 UPDATED PLANNING FRAMEWORK The development of a fully articulated planning cycle that brings together the full breadth of the institutional cycle and supporting functions and that links resource allocation to strategic priorities.

The planning framework will extend beyond the financial planning cycle and include the full remit of the academic cycle

A new planning framework has been developed, aligned to Strategy on a Page, to support the implementation of the School’s strategy. The planning framework has three main elements: 1. A Planning Cycle summary that identifies

on a single page the key planning activities throughout the year across the School in both academic departments and professional services units. The Planning Cycle also shows key governance meetings relating to Planning, and statutory reporting requirements.

This priority is considered delivered. We will continue to make improvements in the planning framework as part of everyday operation and will embed annual operational plans into our staff SDR process from 2018.

30


including admissions, the academic calendar, programme development and management; marketing cycles; decision making processes through key committee meetings and other key decision -making bodies. It is intended to introduce a structured approach to planning, which is adaptive to changes in the external policy environment and aligned to:

• the School’s vision and mission

• internal and external reporting requirements

• the annual admissions cycle

This will include the introduction of embedded operational plans for all departments and professional service functions.

2. A framework to implement Strategy on a Page at the School level. Each component of Strategy on a Page (Learning, Teaching and the Student Experience; Research; People; Voice and Infrastructure) is supported by a strategic plan, risk register, and associated performance indicators, which will be reported to the relevant committee(s) on a termly basis.

3. An annual operational planning round for all departments and professional services directorates to implement Strategy on a Page at the local level.

The operational planning round is currently in progress. To help inform their planning, each academic department has received a departmental information pack containing programme, student and financial data and analysis. All academic departments and professional services directorates are required to complete a set of planning products, including a short position analysis that provides an opportunity to reflect on performance over the past year and identify opportunities and threats going forward. Action plans have been aligned to the five strategic components in Strategy on a Page; and updates to student number targets, staffing levels and the departmental financial model. The departmental plans will be reviewed as part of the Executive Board Away Day on 21st May. Next steps with the planning framework include incorporating the School’s international strategy into Strategy on a Page; continuing to review and refine Performance Indicators and Key Performance Indicators at all levels of the School; and implementing the Comprehensive Departmental Reviews that will also be aligned to Strategy on a Page. These activities will be taken forward as part of operational plans for the coming year.

PRIORITY 6 INTERNATIONAL STRATEGY Development and implementation of a

Progress on our international vision has been excellent. Since this paper was written, we have recruited to the newly created Pro Director International post and strong progress has been made on

Our International work has become a key priority for the institution and offers one of our strongest opportunities for growth and new

31


comprehensive, data informed International Strategy.

• A review of current demand

for SOAS subjects across international markets.

• A review of nation state workforce planning, demographics and/or other national policy environments that demonstrate future demand for SOAS subjects.

• An exploration of international research collaborations and international funding opportunities that also align with potential student markets.

• Developing strategically important partnerships, understanding our existing partnerships

• Development of a TNE Strategy for SOAS that includes 3-4 potential TNE initiatives for short to medium term implementation.

• Enhanced opportunity for SOAS students to gain high quality international experience in languages, study, work experience and volunteering.

A key objective of the strategy is to increase capacity through the various funding initiatives aimed at improving UK University engagement in new international markets including UUK/British Council initiatives.

developing TNE initiatives which are both income generating and raise the reputation of the institution overseas, particularly in emerging markets. Most significantly, we are close to delivering a substantial partnership in Singapore through which we expect to have over 600 students on programme in Singapore in the medium term. Other TNE initiatives include a double degree with Thammasat in Thailand and a partnership agreement with Aga Khan in London to deliver Islamic Studies.

income streams. This, along with work to rethink our online offer and our enterprise income is being led by the Pro Director International with operational support from the Registrar

PRIORITY 7 A STRATEGIC RESPONSE TO POLICY and PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT A response to Horizon scanning that is informed by policy and

We have made good progress towards a new

approach and new strategy for engagement.

Over the last 12 months, a review of our

‘brand’ has been undertaken, as has a review

This work is now embedded as one of the five core priorities within our Strategy on a page. The operational plan needs to be developed and will be owned by the

32


strategic choice. This priority area would also see more a more proactive approach to managing difficult communications and would work to position SOAS more strategically in a changing sector.

A clear ambition of the development of this area, is more proactive engagement in public events that would benefit the institutions. It’s an area that is well covered in other institutions but that lacks any supporting resource at SOAS.

Additional support has already been factored into professional service budgets but the reality is that the grading of that resource doesn’t meet the strategic needs of the area of work. This work requires expertise that does not exist within the current team.

of our position and future opportunities across

international markets.

A separate paper on SOAS Voice has been

developed and presented. It sets out the

rationale for an updated brand strategy, which

establishes a values-led, marketable and

distinct proposition for SOAS - reassessing and

reviewing the last Reputation & Identity

Review in 2010/11. This will drive future

marketing, advancement, corporate

communications, public affairs and

engagement work. It builds a significant piece

of work to challenge and refine our brand

which was presentation to the Board of

Trustees, Executive Board and Academic Board

last autumn. Additionally, key messages have

been developed which represent a toolkit for

future communications and move us some way

from previous, highly reactive nature of some

of our previous communications.

A potential roadmap towards a new integrated

professional advancement, corporate

communications and public affairs directorate

at SOAS University of London has been written

and will form particularly useful to newly

appointed Director who joins the team in

September.

new incoming Director of EEPA.

Paula Sanderson May 2018

33

Targeted cost savings

18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/2222/23Reduction in Academic Salaries

Reduction in recurrent cost base

1.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Industrial relations risks throughout restructuring. Loss of talent, particulalry during extended periods of uncertainty. Failure to achieve adequate reduction in numbers.

Voluntary severance has currently achieved £1.5m in recurrent savings. We are now actively targeting a further £1.5m in savings for the 19/20 academic year. with a further £xx expected through targeted conversations. Academic vacancies are being held unless critical to core module.

Reduction in Central overhead including reduction in Professional Service staff.

Reduction in recurrent cost base

0.2 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 Industrial relations risks throughout restructuring. Loss of talent, particulalry during extended periods of uncertainty. Failure to achieve adequate reduction in numbers.

Professional Service budgets have now been submitted and reviewed through a detailed process of presentation and scrutiny. Consolidation of those plans indicates that we are on track to achieve savings targets but more review is needed to understand the reltive risks involved in reducing operational capacity in some areas. Voluntary severance could potentially release £0.5m and these savings are being considered in line with for example, reducing our cost base through ending fixed term contracts. This work is being balanced against the ongoing One Professional Services restructure and in line with requirements for investment in some targeted areas: REF, TEF, and International. Detailed plans, along with a consolidated SWOT will be presented to June RPC.

£m 1.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7

Efficiency savings (enhanced options not yet included in our forecast)

18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23Action Rational £ impact Key Risks Progress RAG

Action Rational Key Risks Progress£m impact RAG

Non pay budget review Initiatives include zero based budgeting, procurement review (procura). Focused investment only in initiatives that positively impact student experience or our REF submission.

0.1 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 Economy of scale. Interuption to service/ reduced levels of service. Failure to adequately invest in strategic priorities - REF, TEF, income generation.

Procura currently being contracted. Agreement to hold a scrutiny session with KPMG's Education team. Current budgets setting process includes 2 complete days of scrutiny at a line by line basis by COO/DCOOs. Directors have now submitted plans and these are being consolidated for review/scrutiny meetings on the 19th and 20th April.

Curriculum redesign Efficiency of teaching patterns. Increase cohort size. Streamline options.

0.8 1 1 Timescales to achieve curriculum reform could mean savings are achieved too late.

Heads have been provided with information on modules sizes, accompanied by a pilot tool to estimate module and programme returns. A decision flow chart has been developed that helps set out how heads should assess module change, and link it to curriculum rationalisation where appropriate. This has led to significant changes in some departments, such as Law, LCL and Anthropology. In other departments, progress has been more limited - with heads needing greater support to understand the interaction of staff resource and financial return. 626 modules or programmes have been updated, developed or withdrawn to meet student demand.

Workload Planning Efficiency of teaching patterns. Transparency.

0.8 1 1 Professional Service budgets have now been submitted and reviewed through a detailed process of presentation and scrutiny. Consolidation of those plans indicates that we are on track to achieve savings targets but more review is needed to understand the reltive risks involved in reducing operational capacity in some areas. Voluntary severance could potentially release £0.5m and these savings are being considered in line with for example, reducing our cost base through ending fixed term contracts. This work is being balanced against the ongoing One Professional Services restructure and in line with requirements for investment in some targeted areas: REF, TEF, and International. Detailed plans, along with a consolidated SWOT will be presented to June RPC.

The soft-launch of the Workload Allocation Management System (WAMS) is ongoing, with departments expected to have entered 2018-19 allocations into the system by mid-June. A draft School Workload Allocation Policy was approved at Academic Board in March, subject to final decisions about the recording of research grant data. Questions that need resolving in the longer term to improve the effectiveness of WAMS include the data flow between it and other key systems (e.g. UNITe, ResourceLink); the way in which data relating to research grants is recorded; use of WAMS for TRAC purposes; use of WAMS for equality reporting; and ownership of the system in the new Professional Services structure. Further cultural change is required in departments (including the training of academic end-users) to reach a point where WAMS is used both for planning and recording academic workloads.

Efficiency and effectiveness - Lean and other systems based improvements in Professional Services

0.4 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.8 Skills/experience within teams to deliver effective and embedded change. Requires some investment in upfront support.

KPMG team are supporting a brainstorming session in July with the Senior team to identify tools and processes that might be deployed (eg BPE). As part of our international partnerships work we are looking for key partners through which we can increase recruitment and share costs/risk. The implementation of SITs (now in procurement) will be accompanied by a student journey mapping exercise and be a significant element of process efficiency work.

Income generation

18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23Progress RAGAction Rational £ impact Key Risks

Transnational Education initiatives

Entering new markets. International Access. New teaching modes (compressed)

-0.4 0.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Achieving a viable new teaching model. Adequate skilled staff capacity, particularly in relation to TNE QAA.

Work to establish a partnership with Ngee Ann Academy in Singapore is progressing well. Initial business plans indicate a small investment in year 1 (18/19) of £225k with contributions in the following 4 years of £150k, £966k, £1.4m, £2.3m. Our franchise agreement with Aga Khan, whilst modest in terms of income generation adds a further £xxx to new income streams and has allowed us to establish a model and develop expertise towards further franchise agreements. Singapore is the first and most well developed of a number of TNE partnership models that are available to us. We have commissioned further work through Hanover to identify potential partnerships and are looking to develop a complete TNE roadmap with the support of the British Council network. We have now recruited specialist TNE QAA support on a part time, interim basis to bring capacity to the team.

Development of a new Foundation School

-0.2 -0.2 1.0 2.0 4.0 Highly competitive space. Need for disruptive (compressed?) models. Resistance to change.

Concept note and feasibilities being worked up. Potential to deliver Foundation programmes in Singapore also now being explored.

18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23

-0.1 0.4 5.9 8.3 11.3

Impact on Professional Services salaries line 0.7 2.2 3.0 3.0 3.0

Impact on Academic salaries line 1.5 3.0 4.6 5.0 5.0

Bottom line saving £m


Appendix B

One Professional Services Planning for the period to August 2018 CONTENTS 1. Summary 2. Situational analysis and rationale for change 3. Priority areas 4. Resource requirements 5. Exclusions 6. Next Steps APPENDICES A. Indicative Costing Author: Paula Sanderson Position: Registrar Date: January 2017 Version: V1.15 Filepath/Location:

34


Appendix B 1. Summary 1.1 The coming 18 months are pivotal to the ability of SOAS to thrive in the dynamic external

environment. Internationalisation, marketisation and massification are defining the sector at a global level and significant and disruptive policy change is refocusing our attentions at a national level.

1.2 The coming 18 months are also an opportunity for us to draw on our unique profile, to define what it means to be SOAS, to articulate in words and images our culture and the force for positive, disruptive change that makes SOAS respected globally.

1.3 This proposal outlines the most immediate priorities for Professional Services, focused on the provision of strong, professional support to our students and academic community. Short to medium-term plans for the coming 18 months are presented in the form of focused priorities that start to position SOAS most effectively for current and future changes in the HE environment.

1.4 The first priority is to provide support and management tools to restructured academic departments and to align professional services to support the achievement of strategic goals.

2. Situational analysis and rationale for change 2.1 The Higher Education sector is experiencing unprecedented change. It is a message that we have

heard many times in the sector and this, to some extent, acts to desensitise us to the internal and external opportunities and challenges of those changes. That is a potentially damaging perspective and it is my firm belief that this truly is a tipping point that could determine the future of both the sector, and of SOAS, and that we fail to respond at our peril.

The Sector

2.2 The sector is increasingly massified and (whether we like it or not) marketised. While the UK domestic sector has seen relatively modest growth since the turn of the century, the global flow of international students has increased rapidly. Demand for higher education will continue to grow but the pace will slow (Lawson et al 2013), the distribution of students and the mobility of students will also change as Asia continues to rise and new middle-classes seek to remove barriers to education for their children.

2.3 Current policy changes in the form of the HE & Research Bill signal the further withdrawal of

government funding for the sector, with the burden of financial responsibility shifting to the student. Notably, the HE bill also opens the doors to private providers to confer degrees in the UK, exposing the sector to commercial competitors who, newly emerging and agile, are likely to come with few of the constraints that burden historical institutions.

2.4 New models and modes of learning are disrupting traditional teaching. Inward mobility is slowing

while Transnational Higher Education (TNHE), the mobility of programmes and institutions across national boundaries, is increasing (perhaps advantageously given Brexit and the threat of greater immigration controls) In addition, the evolution of MOOCs and online Distance Learning courses puts greater pressure on the sector to provide for an international student base. Continual technological developments are exposing traditional institutions to competition from providers of digital learning platforms, providing new opportunities for students to blend their own learning experiences.

35


Appendix B

SOAS

2.5 SOAS is unashamedly value-focused with a commitment to social justice, equality and diversity. Continuing to thrive in an increasingly marketised, regulated sector presents specific challenges for the institution as those challenges are not just business challenges – they are often at odds with the very values of the organisation. A commitment to leadership that is distributed and to consultation as a way of working means that change can be complex and potentially slower than others in the sector. This creates an inherent risk and one that needs careful thought if we are to remain agile and responsive to changes, particularly in the external policy environment.

2.6 An updated vision and strategy document is in place, one that captures the essence of SOAS, ‘a

specialist global institution with regional experience, providing a balanced portfolio and maintaining excellence in all areas of research and scholarship’. There is a need for ownership of that strategy throughout the organisation, distilling key messages, operationalising the strategy and linking deliverables to organisational performance indicators.

2.7 There has been a sustained period of focus on financial viability. Executive Board and the Board of

Trustees have focused efforts on producing 5% returns with the intention of building resilience and reserves for reinvestment into strategic priorities. That focus has created an impetus for change. Bringing together the refreshed strategy with that motivation for change presents the very best opportunity for us to define a future for SOAS that resonates with and gains the support of the SOAS community.

2.8 In so far as league tables are an indicator of quality in the sector, our institutional position is mixed

but generally indicates a declining trend at a national level, particularly in those tables in which research performance is weighted highly. Our niche position makes it difficult to rank highly and subject level rankings present a more positive picture, however, the overall downward trend is an amalgamation of discipline level performance and has the potential to undermine our reputation and impact recruitment. Improvements in 2016 are based on an improved NSS score. Given the recent boycott of the NSS and a lack of clarity regarding how league table compilers will overcome the absence of data in this area, we may well see a further decline.

36


Appendix B

2.9 Our academic community is restructuring: removing a tier of management and enabling leadership

and decision making to be embedded more deeply into the institution. In that context, it is essential that Professional Service staff are also realigned to the needs of students, academic colleagues and our institutional vision and strategy.

Professional Services

2.10 The principal function of professional services staff is to support students and academic colleagues as our primary stakeholders; a strong professional services function is pivotal to the success of an institution.

2.11 Professional services staff are no longer ‘administrators’. They are teams of highly-qualified,

experienced individuals, specialists in their areas and able to impact and influence the outcomes of students and the effectiveness of academic colleagues. Over time there has, quite rightly, been a blurring of the traditional distinction between academic and professional staff and PS staff increasing work in the ‘third space’, designing technology enhanced teaching platforms, delivering outreach and engagement, understanding and navigating increased finance and funding complexity, preserving the Institution through massification and commercialisation.

2.12 My initial impressions of SOAS professional services are that they are a team under significant

pressure. Attrition at 12.2% (excluding voluntary redundancy) is markedly above the sector average of 9% and while this can be partially attributed to the use of fixed term contracts ahead of any structural change in the service, it is nonetheless high (attrition in academic staff sits at 2.8%). The 2016 staff survey showed that 36% of staff in professional services planned to leave the School in the next twelve months (this figure was 11% for academic staff).

2.13 Having said that, HESA data indicates that 24.4% of annual income is spent on Professional Service

salaries. That places us 26th highest in terms of spend of the 163 UK institutions (for Academic Salaries, at 37.5%, we are 5th highest in rank for spend as a percentage of income). This needs more investigation and we have commissioned benchmark data through Tribal in order to understand better the various constraints and tensions, including those that arise from system limitations.

37


Appendix B 2.14 There are two PS staff structures at SOAS. The majority of staff sit centrally, reporting ultimately to

the Registrar through ten Directors. The senior structure is flat and this has, in some areas, created silos in the operating environment. Additionally, there is a distributed team of Professional Service staff in faculties, with reporting lines through to the Dean. Communications between the two teams are not always effective. Arguably, this has caused challenges in both process and culture and the concept of ‘One Professional Service’, a joining up of professional service staff across the School into one structure, is one that has already seen enthusiasm at Executive Board. Academic restructuring – removing faculties and, with them, a layer of management – has further driven an imperative to realign support more effectively to new Academic Departments.

2.15 Recent reviews, for example the Admissions process, have highlighted an urgent need for skills

development which is unlikely to be restricted to one area of delivery. There is a need for investment in staff development so that teams are better equipped to manage complexity in the changing regulatory environment as well as in new technologies.

Data 2.16 EB will already have seen examples of how the poor management of data is impacting not only our

ability to operate efficiently but also the reputation of the School in the recent 4-day review of our Admissions processes. A lack of data ownership, poor procedures over the quality of data, a failure to verify or validate data and a lack of understanding of where data flows has, without doubt, resulted in the understatement of our tariff in the annual HESA return. That data directly feeds the collation of the published leagues tables. This means our league table position is understated as is the quality of students entering SOAS. The management of data is directly and significantly impacting the reputation of the institution. Public information upon which students make decisions on choice of institution understates our performance relative to the sector.

2.17 This is just one example, but a powerful one, of the need for investment in data management. A

further example, and one that EB is also familiar with, is the inaccuracies of data which were included in our initial TEF metrics. Data cleansing after the submission, in particular concerning the continuation of students in the Language Centre, had the potential to move the School from a bronze to silver rank and while our appeals on that basis were not successful, we should not lose sight of the underlying issue. Had the data been accurately stored, managed and returned, the outcome could have been different.

2.18 There are further examples. To be very clear, these failures directly impact our reputation, our

ability to recruit and therefore our income.

Process Improvement 2.19 Academic restructuring and subsequent professional services restructuring creates an imperative

to review existing processes, ensuring that they meet the needs of restructured units and provide customer-focused support to new Heads of Department. The current process environment varies from faculty to faculty, and potentially one of the largest causes of inefficiency within the institutions is the lack of standardisation in processes. That lack of standardisation, extended to 11 schools, has the potential to create a fundamental breakdown in services.

38


Appendix B 2.20 Additionally, there are areas of process that we know we need to improve. One obvious area is the

management of fractional contracts and payments. Others relate to the experiences of our students in navigating some of our core areas of activity. These are essential to the success of the institution and need to be positioned at the heart of our activities.

2.21 In that context, there is an urgent need to review and standardise core processes, ensuring that

they are customer-orientated, easy to navigate and deliver value.

Public Engagement and Policy 2.22 The unique positioning and highly politicised reputation of the institution means that SOAS, more

than other institutions, attracts media attention. An observation is that on some of the most complex and most controversial topics, we are highly reactive in our communications and in the way in which we engage in policy development in the sector. There are some significant examples of this reactivity that have had the potential to cause significant reputational risk to the institution.

2.23 We need to get better at developing public engagement strategies that inform our relationships

with key stakeholders including: Unions; government, sector bodies and policy makers; the media; activist groups. At the moment, our responses are reactive and this risks incoherent positioning, as well as ineffective prioritisation of resource.

2.24 We are not currently resourced to manage the policy and public engagement space and

increasingly, our reactionary responses are eating into resource that should be engaged in other operational priorities. It is essential that we develop a more strategic response to policy and to media if we are to position ourselves as the enablers for impactful global change, in order to mitigate the risk associated with reactive communications and to benefit from that exposure.

Internationalisation

2.25 Despite the international profile of our student body and the international focus of curriculum and research at SOAS, there is no International Strategy. Our international recruitment profile is heavily reliant on Europe and on the United States. Given recent changes in the political environment including Brexit, Trump, our status in TEF, there is a need to address this gap and to capitalise on identifiable opportunities. Despite being a globally-focused institution we do not feature prominently in international outlook rankings.

2.26 Some emerging markets are notably missing from both our student numbers and our recruitment activities. Changes in the external policy environment mean that this poses both opportunities and threats but a coordinated strategy is needed if we are to maintain/grow our international profile. Given our international student profile, we are particularly susceptible to changes in policy and/or other events impacting the international flow of students. This is at a time when UK students in the system are also falling.

39


Appendix B

2.27 The BIS 2014 report ‘The value of TNE to the UK’ estimated income of at £496 million from

Transnational Education. HESA International Study data recorded 701,010 (2014/15 - 663,915) students registered with a UK higher education provider, studying wholly overseas in 2015/16. TNE student numbers have grown by 15% in the three years to 2014/15. Growing demand is markedly. Demand for TNE shows an upward trend whilst international student numbers are largely stagnant.

2.28 At SOAS, TNE activity is largely through distance learning provision through the University of London. We currently have in the region of 2490 students studying with us at distance. These students are an important part of our provision, brought £4.5m in income in 2015/16 (16/17 forecast £5.1m) and overcoming barriers to access for students that are unable to study on campus. One potential way to develop this provision and one that is considered to be the general direction of travel is through blended solutions, marrying online with face-to-face provision. More and more institutions are offering those options overseas at locations led by student need.

40


Appendix B 2.29 Other current international activity is based upon inward mobility and we have little TNE activity

that offers a blended learning solution. We know from our own experience that distance learning is an important and growing element of higher education provision. There is every indication that the demand for blended learning will increase at a more substantial rate than distance learning has historically. Those researching the international landscape point towards greater twinning or other partnership arrangements as an increasing trend for the sector.

2.30 Understanding international HE data trends and international patterns of demographic change in

the context of SOAS curriculum and research is essential as are well-developed partnerships and relationships with ministries and institutions overseas.

3. Recommendations Prioritisation

3.1 During my first two months in post, I have maintained an issues log. It brings together conversations and reflections of a broad range of the SOAS communications and is also informed by a review of the volume of email correspondence and of diary time committed to specific issues during that time. McKinsey’s 7s framework has been used as a diagnostic tool and has informed some of my thinking around prioritisation.

3.2 While I am not suggesting that the diagnosis is a complete analytical review, it does capture a

range of voices from across SOAS. This, combined with an understanding of the national and international picture, has framed the prioritsation process for professional services for the coming 18 months.

Priorities 3.3 This proposal outlines a potential framework and points towards new ways of working that could

help to position SOAS strategically to respond to changes in both the internal and external environment. It includes reference to a restructuring of staff within professional services and a detailed Draft Change Proposal will be presented in addition to this paper which supports that proposition. Consultation on how services may be structured to best support student and academic endeavour will commence on 24th January 2017.

3.4 The specific context for this proposal is that professional services at SOAS needs to respond to:

• A more discerning student body, savvy to new technologies and new modes of learning; • A more innovative sector where change is a constant and the need to respond to an evolving

external environment is pivotal; • The continued reputation of the institution is rested in our ability to represent externally the

excellence of our research and teaching and our unique position in the HE landscape positively and constructively;

• Increased pressure on resources and the need to focus services on those that have maximum benefit to our students and academic colleagues within a restructured service.

3.5 While it is imperative that we structure services to support new Heads of Department, it is

essential that short term fixes do not undermine the overall ambitions to address current weaknesses in systems and structures, and hence I am proposing a transition period that has a focus on providing a toolkit of services, with focused services to new Heads, but provides capacity to address underlying problems.

41


Appendix B 3.6 The professional services plan for the coming 18 months will have 7 key strategic projects. These

are essential if we are to support our students and academic colleagues effectively and if we are to position ourselves for success given the current political, social and economic factors that are impacting the sector.

3.7 An indicative Programme Plan is being developed in conjunction with project leads with the

intention of having all priorities delivered within 18 months.

KEY PRIORITY 1 STRATEGY There is a fundamental need to create engagement in our vision, internally and externally, leading others to engage with what is uniquely SOAS and to frame strategic priorities for investments. This is the ‘light on the hill’ to balance the benefits being achieved through the financial sustainability agenda and to highlight the purpose of the drive to generate reserves. The shortened Strategy will include measurable performance indicators that define not only our financial ambitions but also the size, shape and quality metrics that we will achieve.

KEY PRIORITY 2

SUPPORTING NEW HEADS OF DEPARTMENT THROUGH TRANSITION The new academic structure is likely to be finalised in February 2017 and there are concerns that professional service structures will need to move quickly to align with that structure.

In reality, the HR processes and policies around restructuring and redeployment will mean a transitionary year. In that context, we need to provide more immediate support to new Heads of Department and this is proposed through additional professional staff support and a toolkit of services as follows: • Regular departmental/directorate level management information in relation to core support

functions: finance, HR, marketing and recruitment, admissions, etc. • Initial consistency and/or improvements in administrative support in academic departments • A ‘business partnering’ or other dedicated, transparent support structure for Heads of

Department. The creation of a management team approach. • A workload planning tool • A structured leadership and management development programme for Heads of

Department. PRIORITY 3 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REALIGNMENT

My strong recommendation is that 2017 is used to review not only the structure of professional services staffing, but also the effectiveness and priorities of teams, ensuring that these are aligned to the needs of students and staff. There is a need to align professional service staff with new academic structures and to ensure that directorates are structured to deliver services that meet the needs of students and academic colleagues in a dynamic external environment.

The review will include review of structures and roles for effective professional service delivery and include central and faculty-based professional services. It is the intention to bring professional service teams together into one professional service whilst embedding support at a departmental level. This is likely to involve greater use of Business Partners and the creation of management teams for each of the ten new schools.

42


Appendix B

Restructuring inevitably results in additional costs in the year of restructuring. Those costs need to be modelled and restructuring needs to be right first time given SOAS financial constraints. Known costs are outlined in the financial resources section of this paper. Restructuring needs to be supported by a strong programme of staff development – both leadership and skills based if we are to support teams through organisational change and ensure that the institution can draw on skills and competencies that will deliver our strategic aims and meet with a changing sector.

PRIORITY 4 EFFICIENCY and EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW PROCESS

One approach to the challenges outlined above in relation to data and processes would be a programme of activities addressing: • Data Management • Process Improvement • Student Journey Mapping

These are substantial projects in terms of both investment and time.

An alternative approach, one that reflects our financial constraints and the one that I am proposing spans the three themes of data, process and student journey poses the question – “what problems must we fix, what improvements must we make?” This situational assessment approach has the benefit of quickly identifying a smaller number of significant priorities that will most positively impact our performance and prospects.

This approach would help us to prioritise the business process issues, data/management information improvements and elements of the student journey that are really in need of major change first. The approach can also work hand in hand with structural realignment to ensure that processes are designed to complement the work of the new teams.

A reasonably quick and consultative approach along these lines, combined with a more intense look at institutional performance via public and internal data, should unearth priorities for improvement, allow us to focus investment on our highest priorities and to re-apply the approach to the next order priorities.

PRIORITY 5 UPDATED PLANNING FRAMEWORK

The development of a fully articulated planning cycle that brings together the full breadth of the institutional cycle and supporting functions and that links resource allocation to strategic priorities. The planning framework will extend beyond the financial planning cycle and include the full remit of the academic cycle including admissions, the academic calendar, programme development and management; marketing cycles; decision making processes through key committee meetings and other key decision making bodies. It is intended to introduce a structured approach to planning, which is adaptive to changes in the external policy environment and aligned to: • the School’s vision and mission • internal and external reporting requirements • the annual admissions cycle

43


Appendix B

This will include the introduction of embedded operational plans for all departments and professional service functions. I am conscious that frameworks can be difficult to conceptualise and will table, in confidence, template models used by other institutions.

PRIORITY 6 INTERNATIONAL STRATEGY

Development and implementation of a comprehensive, data informed International Strategy. • A review of current demand for SOAS subjects across international markets. • A review of nation state workforce planning, demographics and/or other national policy

environments that demonstrate future demand for SOAS subjects. • An exploration of international research collaborations and international funding

opportunities that also align with potential student markets. • Developing strategically important partnerships, understanding our existing partnerships • Development of a TNE Strategy for SOAS that includes 3-4 potential TNE initiatives for short

to medium term implementation. • Enhanced opportunity for SOAS students to gain high quality international experience in

languages, study, work experience and volunteering. A key objective of the strategy is to increase capacity through the various funding initiatives aimed at improving UK University engagement in new international markets including UUK/British Council initiatives.

PRIORITY 7 A STRATEGIC RESPONSE TO POLICY and PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

A response to Horizon scanning that is informed by policy and strategic choice. This priority area would also see more a more proactive approach to managing difficult communications and would work to position SOAS more strategically in a changing sector. A clear ambition of the development of this area, is more proactive engagement in public events that would benefit the institutions. It’s an area that is well covered in other institutions but that lacks any supporting resource at SOAS. Additional support has already been factored into professional service budgets but the reality is that the grading of that resource doesn’t meet the strategic needs of the area of work. This work requires expertise that does not exist within the current team.

4. Resource Requirements 4.1 Indicative costs are attached at Appendix A. The proposal seeks investment in years 1 to 3 (being

the remainder of 2016/17, 2017/18 and 2018/19) of the programme totalling £1.78m and is intended to generate savings of £1m per annum from 2019/20. £750k in savings from salaries and £250k savings through the reduced use of agency, temporary staffing. The plan is intended to deliver £2.2m in savings in the period to 2021/22. There is some potential to restructure more rapidly and this could result in savings being crystallised in 2018/19. These additional savings are not reflected in the budget, which takes a prudent approach, and reflects the industrial relations landscape of the institution.

44


Appendix B 4.2 This proposal covers revenue streams only. Capital spend on systems is also essential to the

proposed strategy. While more work is required in order to scope these costs more accurately, an initial investment of £2.84m over the next 2.5 years would be needed to implement the VT2000 fractional payroll system (£40k), a workload allocation model (£40k), a new student records system (£2.21m) and further improve online systems (£550k). The last financial forecast included capital provision of £2.76m, hence there is further requirement of £80k.

4.3 Costings include requests for additional resource to ongoing prioritisation work for TEF and REF.

Given the significant reputational impact of both frameworks, additional support is required to both the Teaching Excellence Framework and Research Excellence Framework.

Teaching Excellence Framework

4.4 The introduction of the TEF has necessitated a sharp focus on performance in the NSS survey, levels of non-continuation and graduate destinations (measured via DLHE). Our initial ‘Bronze’ status as an outcome of the quantitative metrics has demonstrated the real and significant challenges faced by SOAS in an environment where other institutions have seemingly made faster strides in the development of their undergraduate provision (or at least in those aspects measured through the TEF).

4.5 Whilst the TEF Strategy and Operational groups - supported with EA resource from within the

Directorate - are currently preparing the first SOAS TEF submission, it is clear that a specialist and dedicated resource to this important strategic area of work is required. Such a resource will enable a clear and consistent focus on the TEF metrics, the development of systems and approaches that can be designed to improve the metrics, and engagement in regional and national networks to inform our work in this area.

4.6 The TEF is evolving all the time, with likely developments to include the inclusion of PGT students

in the scope of the metrics and a departmental level assessment in the future. Discussions regarding the inclusion of DL provision continue, although this does seem to be high on the list of priorities currently. A dedicated resource of this kind will also remain responsive to the ongoing evolution of TEF and work to mitigate risks associated with the broadening of the TEF scope into the future.

4.7 Internally, we have begun to plan for TEF improvements at Departmental level, although

engagement in the issues has been less than consistent across the School. This role holder will work in support of teaching developments at this level and work closely with colleagues in professional services and departments to this effect.

4.8 Given the crucial importance of NSS within the TEF metrics, it is proposed that this officer also

takes a lead role in the planning and implementation of NSS and all other student surveys. We now have an annual commitment to UKES, PTES and PRES through our HEA membership and need to ensure that we gain maximum possible benefit from this range of student engagement opportunities. It is highly likely that these additional surveys will be brought into the scope of TEF in the future.

Research Excellence Framework

4.9 An increase in the volume and complexity of research applications and awards has created additional pressure on the team that is now a cause for concern. Pressure in the Research and Enterprise Office is largely the outcome of our success in promoting more research applications and in securing more awards but also arises out of our success in securing large-scale, multi-partner grants.

45


Appendix B 4.10 As a result, support on grant applications is sub-optimal and is also impacting on due diligence

(budgets, ethics, etc.). There is a risk to the delivery of existing grants, including some obligations which are contractual in nature. Capacity issues are creating delays in contract negotiation and contract execution that in turn lead to delays in funding. There are significant opportunity costs in not resourcing the team adequately which include failing to submit for large and thematically relevant calls like GCRF or H2020 and ERC.

4.11 REF remains one of the most significant strategic priorities for the institution. The outcomes of the

REF are fixed for the following five plus years and impact the reputation of the institution, it’s position in the league tables and the ability to attract and retain the very best academics and students.

Communications

4.12 Alongside those projects is the need for improved communication across the service and with academic colleagues. An internal communications strategy is being developed and will be brought to EB at a future date.

5 Exclusions 5.1 This proposal specifically excludes either the implementation of a new Student Information System

or other substantial investment in systems infrastructure in the short to medium term. This is a strategic decision

5.2 That is not to understate the importance of improvements to the SIS or to ignore feedback on the

poor operation of the existing system but reflects the need to first invest in the business processes and data management that are essential to the effective implementation of a new system.

5.3 To succeed in today’s market place SOAS needs systems that offer students a modern and efficient

way to interact with the institution using digital tools they can readily access. SOAS also needs systems that staff can use effectively to ensure we can run lean operations that respond to evolving requirements.

5.4 The key system at the heart of our student operations at present is UNIT-e. UNIT-e has been in use

at SOAS for over 10 years and is built on the previous incumbent system HEMIS. Over that time investment from SOAS has been relatively limited in the core product with development concentrated on external systems to enhance functionality. At the same time Capita have also not taken significant steps forward with the product. This has led to the system becoming dated and there has been a reduction in staff confidence in its ability to deliver. This has forced SOAS into a circle of investing more in external add-ons to augment core functionality resulting in a complex estate that does not integrate well. The student facing elements of UNIT-e have also been quite complex and look dated, though work was done in 2015 to update them and make them responsive for use on a mobile phone. UNIT-e also lacks any mobile apps for students or staff.

5.5 An extensive review encompassing 16 teams over a 3-month period has identified over 500 issues

with the use of the current suite of student focussed systems. Some of these relate to failings in the software and some of these relate to inefficient processes.

5.6 The key findings of the report are as follows:

• The number of systems in use means data is complex, siloed and often contradictory

46


Appendix B

• Teams work in silos, partially due to poor processes but partially because of limitations inUNIT-e

• A single source of truth for information is difficult as data can be held and changed in differentlocations. The complexity of UNIT-e forces many staff to use workarounds such asspreadsheets.

• Data is held in different locations and sometimes it needs to be manually entered severaltimes

• The number of IT systems has increased substantially but no new resource has beenonboarded meaning the amount of FTE assigned to any single system is less now than 4years ago.

• Key data is held outside of UNIT-e in unsupported and undocumented Access Databases• The manual processes in place cause significant additional work and SOAS relies on staff

goodwill to work additional hours to compensate – this is especially true during Clearing &Enrolment

• SOAS routinely struggles to recruit staff (development or business) with any UNIT-e experiencemeaning onboarding new staff is difficult and adding capacity for certain periods is verychallenging as the training for business staff can take up to 14 weeks.

• Simple processes like programme changes take significant time to process, this coupled withthe large volume of students who make changes leads to a heavy workload during WelcomeWeek.

• SOAS has not effectively engaged with the incumbent supplier and will need to improve thisrelationship either with the current or with a new partner.

5.7 Options for a new SIS system need to be explored. Significant work has been undertaken to explore and understand options for the ‘upgrade’ or implementation of Student Information System at SOAS based three possible routes forwards: • Re-install the student records suite and re-factor the integrations between the existing

systems• Procure a new student records system and reduce the number of supporting systems• Procure or retain a limited functionality student records system and build out on a CRM

platform

5.8 There are pros and cons to each of the three approaches. The continued patching of Unit-e, alongside a lack of confidence in the system is pointing heavily towards the needs for the implementation of a new system. Continued review is planned and a full project scope will be developed, however, it is anticipated that this work will flow from the work outlined in Priority 4 above.

6 Next Steps 6.1 I am initially seeking feedback on the 7 priorities outline above in paragraph 4.

6.2 Directors of Professional Services have already helped to shape the prioritisation list and have been asked, subject to approvals, to partner with me in delivering one priority each.

6.3 Following input from the Board of Trustees at our away day on the 2nd February, I would like to consult further with the Pro Directors to incorporate their plans and spending priorities so that EB can review a complete prioritisation plan and consider investment priorities.

6.4 The proposal will be represented following a short period of consultation at which point EB is asked to approve the 18-month plan and associated resource.

47


Appendix B

Paula Sanderson January 2017

48

SOAS - STRATEGY ON A PAGE

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS BYEstablishing an integrated marketing, communication, engagement, development and fundraising strategy - targeted at shared objectives, delivered by a robust, high quality operation. This will include:

4A - Implementing a marketing and brand building strategy - to underpin sales, recruitment and strategic partnerships in key markets.

4B - A programme of community building programme/s with staff, students and alumni

4C - The "Questions Worth Asking" campaign - focused on major strategic projects and financial objectives.

4D - A public policy and political engagement programme - led by the SOAS Director

WE WILL HAVE SUCCEEDED WHEN- We have a strengthened brand profile, reputation and perception

- We have delivered fundraising targets

- We have met UG and PGT targets

- We have transformed engagement with and between staff, student and alumni communities.

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS BYEstablishing a strong business infrastructure, robust investment strategy and strong, operational backbone to deliver business priorities. These will include:

5A - Developing and implementing a property strategy and investment programme to create and manage the right physical environment to realise our aims

5B - Employment of robust financial management that generates surpluses for future investment into key strategic priorities

5C - Accurate, robust and timely management information that is made easily accessible to inform decision making

5D - Delivering modern and flexible teaching and learning tools, spaces and services

5E - Embedding secure and trusted systems that protect and enhance the delivery of our services by using our core systems as platforms for growth

5F - Building a strong governance framework that maintain agility and responsiveness at a time of sectoral change

WE WILL HAVE SUCCEEDED WHEN- Infrastructure maintains high survey condition and scores highly in the NSS learning community metric

- There is a sustainable and funded capital plan

- The School delivers a 5% surplus for reinvestment by 2020/2021

- We have minimum cash balances to meet financial covenants

- We have met our performance indicator on Internal audit confidence

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS BY

1A - Producing high quality graduates, postgraduates and researchers who understand and engage with the world and the regions in which we specialise

1B - Developing well-rounded individuals who can make a difference in their communities and the world

1C - Staff and organisational capability for lifelong learning and ongoing renewal

1D - A unique and fulfilling Student Experience

WE WILL HAVE SUCCEEDED WHEN

- We deliver an attractive and sustainable teaching portfolio where we meet our recruitment targets consistently while maintaining quality, measured by indicators that reflect our intake and student experience

- Our teaching is recognised worldwide through informal and formal rankings, so that we achieve and sustain upper quartile domestic league tables by 2025, plus TEF Silver by 2020 and Gold (or equivalent) by 2025

- The impact of our students is visible through informal and formal measures, such that we achieve and sustain upper quartile of graduate destinations by 2025

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS BY2A - Transforming the way we do research by transitioning from individual to more collaborative and cross-disciplinary research projects building on our unique regional and global research portfolio and strengths

2B - Establishing innovative structures, systems and processes that increase efficiency of research support and administration to maximise research outcomes

2C - Bidding for research funding directed towards global challenges, building on our unique regional and global research portfolio and strengths

2D - Developing a new generation of academic leaders through tailored support for our academic community whether early career researchers or senior academics striving for large collaborative grants

2E - Expanding our national and international presence by engaging with HEIs, industry and the third sector to achieve meaningful and lasting research impact

2F - Building SOAS as a leading institution with a holistic approach to collaboration beyond research, ie strengthening local infrastructures, research support and governance

2G - Targeting our research at the highest quality outlets possible and making it available Open Access wherever possible.

WE WILL HAVE SUCCEEDED WHEN- Research income continues to grow beyond our target of £7.5m in 2020 (considering both historic data and income secured & grants awarded)

- Our research is recognised worldwide through improved league table rankings and REF performance indicated by an increase in international co-authorship and production of at least 200 peer-reviewed journal articles per year

1. SOAS TEACHING, LEARNING & THE STUDENT EXPERIENCEDELIVERING AN EXCEPTIONAL SOAS STUDENT LEARNING EXPERIENCE THAT CHALLENGES TRADITIONAL PERSPECTIVES AND

DEVELOPS GRADUATES WHO MAKE AN IMPACT2. SOAS RESEARCH

IMPACTFUL RESEARCH THAT APPLIES A GLOBAL LENS TO THE CRITICAL ISSUES OF OUR TIME AND CREATES NEW INTELLECTUAL AND STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

4. SOAS VOICETO PROJECT OUR CORE VALUES CLEARLY, CONFIDENTLY AND CONSISTENTLY - CHALLENGING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND DRIVING SOCIAL JUSTICE

5. INFRASTRUCTURETO MAXIMISE THE USE OF PHYSICAL, FINANCIAL AND DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO ACHIEVE OUR SHARED PURPOSE

ENABLED BY

WE WILL ACHIEVE THIS BY3A - Developing SOAS as an employer of choice both internally and externally

3B - Developing models and strategies for pay and reward structures that incentivise and motivate staff

3C - Organisational development and change

3D - Developing a culture of quality and high performance

WE WILL HAVE SUCCEEDED WHEN

- We attract and retain the brightest and the best, measured through high quality teaching and research metrics

- We see improvements in the biennial Staff Survey

3. SOAS PEOPLETO ATTRACT, DEVELOP AND RETAIN A DIVERSE & SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY OF STAFF THAT SUPPORTS THE SCHOOL IN ACHIEVING ITS SHARED PURPOSE

Strategic Plan for Learning, Teaching and the Student Experience

Success Criteria Relevant PIs / KPIs (? Are measures that need to be developed)

Milestones Timeframe for Milestones

Progress (RAG) - to be completed

Progress - commentary Support requested of other departments/areas.

Develop a research-informed teaching (RIT)strategy. Plan to be presented to ADC.

May-18 Green To be developed - element of Inclusivity@SOAS? Paper currently being written to workshop

PDLT, PDR, REC, ADC

Refresh teaching metrics for assessment of teaching quality. Plan to presented to LTQC.

May-18 Green In progress - AB has asked LTQC to make proposals….. Teaching effectiveness has been clearly incorporated in promotion and probation process. The next iteration of teaching metrics needs agreement by union and academic board, and future development requires a responsive student record system.

LTQC, AB

Development and enhancement of curriculum content to ensure attractiveness and distinctiveness of the SOAS 'offer'.

Apr-18 Amber Comprehensive departmental review structure underway. Also forms part of departmental plans. 2 out of 3 due to take place in term 2 were post poned due to strikes.

Academic departments; planning; Marketing

Development of a decolonisation academic plan. Toolkit trial is implemented, feedback is collated and recommendations reported to ADC.

Jun-18 Amber Implemented through working group. Programme delayed by strikes Decolonise working group, AB, Depts, PDLT

Set school-wide guidance on establishment of mid-term student evaluation of modules. Presented to LTQC.

May-18 Green Underway. Schoolwide guidance for December 2018. LTQC

Development of a suite of data to identify programme and module performance and circulated to departments.

Apr-18 Green data already with departments. PDLT; QA, HoDs, Planning, Finance

Implementation, embedding and monitoring of student retention plan.

Mar-18 Green Plan has been signed off by ADC however progress was delayed by the strikes and staff turnover.

Academic departments; Senior Tutors; Retention Working

Evaluate the peer to peer learning, support and mentoring approaches, and to continue piloting in participating departments.

Jun-18 Green To build on successful academic PASS scheme and existing SAaW mentoring scheme. PASS expanded from 1 course in 16/17, to 3 courses in 17/18 with an aim of 4 courses by 18/19. Departments have been asked to identify candidate modules

Academic departments; ADTLs; Retention and success co-ordinator

Develop Strategic plan for the future of PASS. Jun-18 Amber Information is being collated to inform plan but proposals for 18/19 have not yet been developed

Development of an online bridging courses. Jul-18 Red Staff turnover has resulted in delays in the production of a report and action plan. Other work has been prioritised.

Retention Working Group; LTD

Development of Distance and Blended Learning provision action plan.

Mar-18 Green Strategy in place, key monitoring points need to be identified. Marketing, Recruitment, Admissions; DLA; Registry; ULIA; All academic depts; PDI International

Implement HEA Inclusive Assessment project so that (1) assessments are appropriately structured and set; and (2) feedback frameworks consider pedagogical and academic progress

Jul-18 Green HEA project commenced July 2017. The deadlines have been restructured and deadlines have be met, the project has been rescoped as engagement changed as a result of the deadline changes.

QA; LTD; SU; ADTLs; Inclusivity WG ; Student Advice and Wellbeing

Development and implementation of a new access agreement and WP plan with refreshed targets

May-18 Green To continue OFFA steering group, but to create a wider access strategy WP

Mentoring scheme with a particular focus on BME students. Feedback to be collated and fed into project.

Jun-18 Green Piloted in 17/18, to be developed further in 18/19. All SOAS community; WP; LTD

Scope of inclusion audit to be established. Jul-18 Green PDLT, ADLTs, SU

5 Review of curricula, co-curricula and extra-curricula activities to promote an international experience or

exposure

Develop new international study opportunities for all students Needs to be followed up with Stephen Hopgood

International strategy in place All academic depts.; registry; LTD

1A. Produce high quality graduates, postgraduates and researchers who understand and engage with the world and the regions in which we specialise1. Distinctive, research-enriched teaching portfolios at undergraduate and postgraduate levels based on our

specialisms, complemented by undergraduate-foundation and pre-masters programmes.

- NSS Assessment and Feedback

- NSS Academic Support

- PTES

- % Young students from LPN

- Retention

- % Mature students from LPN

- ? % of students having an international experience

- SEM Scores

2. Regular curriculum review that involves students, considers inclusivity and ensures space for language,

region and inter-disciplinary study.

3. Delivery of programmes through innovative learning and assessment methods.

4 Widening Participation activities to ensure access and outcomes for promising students, whatever their

background, complemented by inclusive teaching, learning and assessment methods.





6 Exposure to the wider environment through guest speakers, case studies, interpreting national and

global trends, and interactions with alumni working in relevant fields.

Careers produce an annual plan for employer engagement. Aug-18 Green Plan is in line with student sector interests from Careers registration Cross School approach; Marketing;

1 Expansion of internships and other opportunities for work experience

Develop internship and placement provision , including a SOAS Graduate Internship programme. Development of expansion plan for 2018-19.

Jun-18 Successful accreditation and implementation of final year professional placement module in Development Studies. To developed further across the school.

HR;Aacademic depts.; PS teams where internships can be provided; employers for work based placements; Careers

Include careers focus as part of schools outreach work Aug-18 Current work ongoing with Careers and WP team WP; Offa steering group; Careers; Student Recruitment

Action plan developed to increase robust data on students' career thinking and destinations, and increase profile of Careers Registration around the school

TBC- timeframe for milestone to be confirmed.

Robust nature of data has increased as careers registration is now compulsory, however the data tracking system has not been updated to reflect the new academic structure. Inconsistent engagement with the careers data system is reducing the capability and impact of the system, and career thinking is not consistently collated for all graduating students because the end of year career thinking is only collected from graduates who attend the ceremonies

Careers; Planning

Action plan to be developed to increase social media presence for SOAS career service


Campaigns have been run over the academic year in relation to events, enterprise, alumni engagement and feedback. The service has the highest Twitter following in UoL. Future developments planned to increase reach via other platforms

Careers; Marketing

Action plan to developed to use Careers Registration data to align activities


Careers registration project implemented; dashboards in place and used in departmental level planning

all academic depts.; ADTLs; Careers

Develop plans for Student Enterprise based on research and good practice

Feb-18 Green Enterprise support now embedded within careers team and Student Enterprise Strategy agreed by ADC Feb 2018

REO; alumni; LTD; QA

Instigate projects to support students' affective and social development


Enhanced information and guidance in Careers service for students interested in volunteering opportunities. Make a Difference Celebration is flagship event for this. Further ideas in development by LTD & Careers.

SU; LTD; Careers; Student Advice and Wellbeing

Development of a comprehensive set of study skills resources. TBC- timeframe for milestone to be confirmed.

24 Moodle study tip videos recorded to Date; 40+ video eventual aim. Other projects to be developed

L& T Project Officer; LTD; Moodle Team; Careers

Academic writing and skills development activities including in all departmental plans.

May-18 Deadline for plans is 11th May 2018 Academic departments; IFCELS; Library; LTD

Support graduate employability through learning, teaching and assessment approaches in the curriculum


Career related plans for departments in place for 2017/18 Academic depts.; ADTLs; employers; LTD; Careers;

Documentation of the SOAS Pedagogy, and consult with internal and external audiences. A proposal will be submitted to ADC and AB.

Jun-18 Green The proposal is being developed and is on track to be presented to ADC. PDLT, ATD

Review of the School Prize for UG & PG and recommendations submitted to ADC for this academic year.

Jun-18 Green Recommendations are on track to be presented to ADC in June. Registry; Alumni Team; Marketing Comms; Academic Depts.; SU; Events team

Review of the School Prize for UG & PG and recommendations submitted to ADC for next academic year.

Jun-18 Green Recommendations are on track to be presented to ADC in June. Registry; Alumni Team; Marketing Comms; Academic Depts.; SU; Events team

NT

EXPE

RIEN

CE

[L

ead:

Dep

uty

COO

(SAE

), w

orki

ng in

par

tner

ship

with

PDL

T]

1B. Developing well-rounded individuals who can make a difference in their communities and in the world.

2 Increased engagement with the career service and key employers across the student journey to ensure

strong outcomes for all students.

4 Enhanced pedagogy to facilitate participation, critical reflection and skills development, as well as

robustness and resilience.

- DLHE Employment or Further Study

- DLHE Highly-skilled Employment or Further Study

- ? Stage of career thinking (source:

Careers Registration)

- ? Measure related to the work of the 'Centre for Student

Development'

3 Enhanced opportunities for student-led activities, undertaking group projects, for voluntary work and to

develop leadership skills for all our students.

1C. Staff and organisational capability for lifelong learning and ongoing renewal





Increase number of academic staff with teaching qualifications, achieving 50% by 2020/21. Aim for 15 SFHEAs to be appointed in 18 months. Increased PDHEP support. Target achieved for January 2018.

Jan-18 Green Plans for new structures within SAE in development; workshops delivered; HEA support to PDHEP (ongoing)

All academic departments; HR; external consultant, Academic Teaching Developer; Staff Development

Review of peer observation of teaching (1st Year Modules) Proposed Red Scope of review and recommendations to be reported Summer 2018. To be discussed at LTQC. The scope of the project needs to be reviewed.

Staff Development; PDLT; Deputy COO (SAE)

The support and training for Careers Liaison Tutors actrion plan is developed and presented.

Jun-18 All academic depts.; ADTLs; HR; Careers

The use, support and training for Personal Tutors action plan is developed and presented to LTQC.

Jun-18

Embed Learning & Teaching goals in SDR process Dec-18 HR; Faculty admin.

2 Effective sharing of good practice in teaching and learning across SOAS, and ongoing review of external

HEI environment and our programmes to identify opportunities and challenges for the delivery of

teaching programmes.

Position Directors Teaching Prizes to align with core learning & teaching themes and as a journey towards HEA recognition & the UK Professional Standards Framework. Plan presented to TLSOC.

Oct-18 DTP for 2018 launched and further develops planned for 2019 cycle. LTD; Comms

Respond to strategic academic and structural developments by ensuring academic regulations are relevant, flexible and agile within a framework supporting quality.


QA.; Dr School; ADTLs; Registry

Academic regulations working group is revising regulations as required. Revisions presented to LTQC.

Jun-18 Green

Marking system report developed Dec-18

Improvement of marking turnaround time. 2017/18 targets set at dept. level in range 80-100%; 100% target in all depts. in 2018/19

Feb-19 Red The automatic processes are not in place for tracking it. The change in deadlines impacts on the School's ability to track this data. We will not track this this year as it is not a fair reflection.

HoDs, DMs; LTD

j experience plan. Develop process for the development of a Joint Student

Experience Plan. Jul-18 To include SU and School priorities and enable reporting against key areas;

also to enable and support new sabbatical induction each year, and to maintain continuity.

SU; SAE Directorate; PS teams; Academic Depts.

2 Increased opportunities for students to provide feedback (‘Student Voice’).

Development of 'You said, we did campaign' (Student Voice) Proposed Red Campaign to be launched, identifying number of student requests made, and % answered

Marketing, Comms; DMs

Develop action plan to improve student feedback and engagement with the academic process.

Oct-18

Student representatives code of practice approved and implemented.

May-18 Green

Develop multi faith advisory service and activities Oct-17 Red Initial ideas in development SU; SAaW

Develop the student experience plan and present to Student Engagement and Experience Committee.

Oct-18 New structures for SAE approved and further consultation planned for Summer 2018. Process improvement groups formed and recommendations being actioned. Further student journey mapping required once new teams are in place.

HR; Faculty admin; IT; Registry

LEAR

NIN

G, T

EACH

ING

AN

D TH

E ST

UDE

N

1 Effective mechanisms and opportunities for staff learning and development, impacting on the quality

of learning and teaching.

- NSS Teaching on my course

- % of staff with a teaching qualification

- Domestic league table ranking

- Average tariff

- Enrolments compared to targets

- Marking turnaround time

3 Making timely decisions and implementing any resulting changes (e.g. updating programmes to ensure relevance and attractiveness, improving

administrative operations, creating new programmes to respond to new market needs, closing programmes

that are no longer relevant).

1D. A unique and fulfilling Student Experience

- NSS overall satisfaction

- PTES

- % Young students from LPN

- % Mature students from LPN

- ? % of students having an international experience

3 Enhanced student engagement within and out with the curriculum, including improved course





Review and develop academic personal tutor system, ensuring connectivity to engagement points and wellbeing services, academic success, basic carers advice and improvement in support and advise for student programme and module choice


Initial ideas in development including including the role of tutor before students make choices; and improving website information

All academic departments; Welcome Week organising committee, HoDs, LTQC

Review and improve admissions processes and the 'applicant journey'

TBC- timeframe for milestone to be

Quick wins identified within effectiveness and efficiency project; learning accrued in 17/18 cycle.

Admissions. Planning, MR; Registry processes

Innovate within the admissions process to identify 'best fit' of potential applicants to our curriculum. Pilot approaches in place.

Jan-18 In development WP; academic departments

Buildi alumni networks. TBC- timeframe for milestone to be confirmed.

E-mentoring platform is live which connects alumni to professional graduates. Alumni in professional fields have been invited back to give talks. SOAS Law alumni networking opportunities available, through LinkedIn. 'What I wish I'd known when I was a student at SOAS' informal chats in Careers. Plans to increase engagement further

Careers; Alumni team

Support alumni early in their career with a view to maximising their engagement with the School and support for current students


Alumni have access to Careers services indefinitely after graduation. Further initiatives in development.

Alumni team; Careers

6 Increased support for student health and wellbeing, through strong and accessible pastoral support,

advice and guidance.

Review and increase levels of provision in mental health and counselling services, and benchmark with other institutions.

Jun-18 Additional resources identified for 17-18 pending review and re structure in summer term 2018

SU; SAE; SAaW

7 Enhancing our accommodation strategy, to provide students with the best possible options. Accommodation strategy to be developed Autumn 2018

Existing accommodation strategy to be reviewed and developed Estates; SAaW; SU; External providers

To form part of other plans

Development of Teaching @ SOAS webcasts - A series of webcasts f Ongoing. Need timeframe Need to check on status

Marketing; LTD Team to provide input; along with dept. HoDs and DMs

Develop and implement new student recruitment and marketing plan

Plan in place January 18 New team structures to be developed Consultancy with all departments

Development of teaching @ SOAS podcasts - A series discussing contemporary topics with our academics and profiling our teaching.

Ongoing. Need timeframe

Need to check on status Marketing; ACADEMIC; SOAS Radio

IT

Increase quality of student record data to enable academic developments and projects

Implementation of new SRS

Project Board established and reviewing IT; Registry; academic depts.; Dr School

Marketing

- Programme transfer rate

- Module transfer rate

the curriculum, including improved course

representative system.

4 Maintaining an efficient and effective application system.

5 Supporting alumni engagement, to develop a mutually beneficial relationship.

Page 6 of 11/05/2018

Strategic Plan for Research

Success Criteria Relevant PIs / KPIs Milestones Timeframe for Milestones Progress (RAG)


All relevant policies relating to research grant applications and authorship adjusted to place significant emphasis on need for international collaboration

July 2019

Amber Paper considered at REC Feb 18; Publications Fund launched March 18 which emphasises importance of internationally co-authored outputs

Reearch Coordinators and HoDs to communicate changed policies across Departments and contribute to policy development. Library to support policy development re co-authorship.

Internal funding schemes in place with a focus on building collaborations (Seed Corn, EIF, KEF). Outputs/outcomes of awarded projects monitored, including requirement to apply for external funding at end of project (Seed Corn, KEF)

July 2018 (to have launched all internal funds); terms of reference for each to be reviewed within next 12 months

Green All funds for 2018/19 launched Departmental administrative support needed to run the projects

SOAS Regional Centres and Research Groups/Centres structure revised to ensure appropriate cross-disciplinary interactions and close match with funder priorities and themes

New academic strategy for 2018/19

Green New policy for setting up and closing Research Centres approved at REC February 2018; approved by Academic Board March 2018

PDRE and PDI to lead review

Dedicated support for large collaborative grant applications established: centrally co-ordinated large grant schemes with thorough project management, clear objectives, and strong peer review

July 2018 to be fully established; online training for applicants to be launched by July 2019

Green Appropriate support currently provided by RDM and RFOs at pre-award stage

Requires stronger collaboration between, RO, EO and post award; academic input, particularly from HoDs, RCs and PDRE required

Sound post award processes established; improved initiation, management and close-down of collaborative grants

July 2018 - all current grants to have been reviewed; July 2019 - system and processes in place for profiling and forecasting grants which is visible to all stakeholders

Red External research finance review completed; work scheduled on implementation of recommendations

Support from Finance and HR and academic departments (administration)

Contracts appropriately negotiated and put in place in a timely fashion with risks fully considered and managed

July 2019

Amber Significant progress has been made: external contracts benchmarking exercise completed, School wide contract internal review completed, paper to go to EB 23/4/18

Governance (Chris Ince); HR; DEEP; LIS; Registry

Process / system in place to review and report on research outputs, collaborations, co-authored outputs, publication routes used (eg which journals) to inform strategies

December 2020

Amber

Good manual processes in place (e-Prints) but with high transaction costs

Library, IT

2A. Transforming the way we do research by transitioning from individual to more collaborative and cross-disciplinary research projects building on our unique regional and global research portfolio and t th

Increased number of collaborative cross disciplinary projects

At least 25% of research grant applications to have international partners/collaborators (volume in £ in FY, as recorded in Worktribe)

Internationally co-authored outputs recorded in Scopus to reach UK Sector average by 2022

Number of outstanding 4* impact case studies to total 17 by 2020

Number of non-academic partnerships to increase from an established baseline year

2B. Establishing innovative structures, systems and processes that increase efficiency of research support and administration to maximise research outcomes

Page 7 of 11/05/2018



Ability to report on current, past and forecasted research & enterprise income and other performance indicators (applications and awards), both at School and Departmental level, with appropriate benchmarks in place

All grants profiled by end of FY18/19; library of reports on external activities (grant applications etc) etsbalished by same date

RedWork on-going with IT and Finance to establish WT/Agresso interface. It is now possible to set up projects in Agresso test with the budget amounts against the right account codes, and if desired against certain workspells. The intention is that this will allow for forecasting in the future of live research grants.

We are able to report on numbers of applications and awards going back to 2013 and the value of the applications and awards. However 2013-2017 data is based on historic Excel spreadsheets whereas moving forward reporting is from Worktribe data and there are ongoing discussions with IT about IT providing automated reports from Worktribe for REO/HoDs/Senior Managers.

Finance, IT

Intranet (MySOAS) and internet content revised/improved to meet information/training needs of SOAS researchers

July 2019 Amber Pre-award, scholarly communications and REF information currently available.

IT, Communications

Incentives in place for staff to lead on and engage with research excellence agenda, Research and REF Coordinator and academic impact champion roles to work closely with REO RIS team

July 2019

Green Academic Performance Framework and Academic Promotion Procedure recognise engagement with the research excellence agenda. Other incentives: Research Leave scheme; Director's Research Prize (to be launched 2018/19). Research/REF Coordinators in place in all Departments/Units of Assessment

PDRE

All staff granted research leave to have clear objectives, outputs and outcomes set which are monitored on return by Departments

July 2019

AmberInformation currently held by faculty administrators; outputs of research leave not consistently captured

PDRE; Heads of Departments

Efficient and effective REO structure in place to ensure maximum efficiency and effectiveness (e.g. pre-award support, flow of information from pre-post award, contracts, due diligence, projects conducted in accordance with contractual terms and internal policies)

Dec 2018

Green

Significant process improvements have taken place over the last 2y; further alignment is expected from the One PS initiaitve

Other PS and academic departments

Sound support structures for REF2021 in place including annual reviews; REF Steering Group and Working Groups operating efficiently; REF Action Plan implemented; progress monitored

November 2020

Green Annual reviews of outputs taking place. Formal review of impact case studies scheduled 2018/19. REF Steering Group and Working Group membership reviewed and regular meetings taking place. REF Action Plan reviewed and updated at each meeting of REF Steering Group

PDRE; REF Coordinators; Heads of Departments

Efficient research support and administration structures, systems and processes established

A reduction in research support staff FTE as proportion of research income from 2018/19 baseline year

Page 8 of 11/05/2018



Worktribe embedded across institution, options for purchase of other systems reviewed (Outputs/REF, SciVal, impact repository, automated production of reports on research and enterprise activity

July 2019

Amber

Worktribe Pre-Award module embedded. Trial of VV Impact Tracker Tool scheduled summer 2018.

Library, IT, Finance

Enhanced contracts and post award systems in place

July 2019

Amber Improvements on contracts with joined up spreadsheets; dependency on resource availability for further system improvements; external research fiannce review completed; implementation of recommendations started

Governance directorate, Registry, Finance

REO contracts team developed into a central contracts function with sound contract approval and review processes in place and a central library of all contracts established

December 2018

AmberInternal School-wide contracts review and external UK-wide benchmarking exercise completed; revised approach to be presented to EB in April 2018

Governance directorate, Registry

QR GCRF Strategy approved and implemented

August 2018Green Strategy submitted in March, awaiting

feedbackPDRE

Dedicated support for large collaborative grant applications established: centrally co-ordinated large grant schemes with thorough project management, clear objectives, and strong peer review

July 2018 to be fully established; online training for applicants to be launched by July 2019

Green Research Development Manager has been appointed for 10 months and has established good project management processes for internal selection of candidates for grant applications with demand management in place and for during the development of the project including coordinating network meetings with partner institutions, advisory boards, and substantial peer review comments.

Increased support from Enterprise

Sound post award processes established; improved initiation, management and close-down of collaborative grants

July 2018 - all current grants to have been reviewed; July 2019 - system and processes in place for profiling and forecasting grants which is visible to all stakeholders

Red External research finance review completed

Support from Finance and HR and academic departments

Grant budgets more effectively used for strategically important support roles eg Research Data Management, Impact and Engagement, where permitted by funders

July 2019

Amber Large grant budgets are currently used to support Project Administrator/Coordinator/Manager roles

Support required from PDRE, HoDs

2C. Bidding for research funding directed towards global challenges, building on our unique regional and global research portfolio and strengths

Developing consistent stream of bids for research funding with focus on

global challenges

Annual research income reported to HESA to total £7.5m by 2020

Annual research income per fte academic (research) staff reported to HESA to total

£25,785 by 2020

Volume of successful awards in £ in FY (with contract signed) to total £10m;

percentage awarded in FY by number to total 20% (as recorded in Worktribe)

2D. Developing a new generation of academic leaders through tailored support for our academic community whether early career researchers or senior academics striving for large collaborative grants

Page 9 of 11/05/2018



High quality research and enterprise training and development programme in place (face-face and online) with sessions and materials to meet needs of different audiences - PhD Students, ECRs, established researchers, P.I.s - using external and internal facilitators, including some of our academic staff, 'best practice' scenarios in each session

July 2019

AmberREO Workshop Series takes place each year. Weekly drop in sessions are available for all academic colleagues to focus on electronic submission portals, Research Professional, Worktribe, Impact and Public Engagement, and general research related questions. Online ethics and impact training offered (Epigeum). Other online training in development

Doctoral School, Departmental academic staff

Dedicated research impact training programme and materials in place leading to improved impact planning, tracking of impacts and retention of evidence

July 2019

Amber Institutional Research Impact Training Programme delivered during 2017/18.

Communications, IT (retention of evidence)

All researchers (staff and students) have appropriate understanding of ethics and research integrity and have undertaken online Epigeum training

July 2019

Amber Ethics Policy and Procedure have been updated to reflect the requirement for academic staff to now complete the Epigeum online course prior to a research grant starting.

Ethics approval for externally funded research grants is now completed through Worktribe making the process far more transparent and simpler to complete and monitor.

Research Governance Officer post has been advertised. 8 potential applications and hope to recruit early May 2018.

All PGR students have to pass the online Integrity course before the upgrade process. This is mandatory and a good take up of PGR and PGT students have passed the course already.

There is a relatively low number (c.15%) of research staff who have passed the course.

Every large grant holder to have received appropriate support and training to be capable of managing their grant(s) successfully

July 2019

Amber Kick off meetings in place

Mentoring provision for academic and research staff in all departments

Amber Mentoring Guidance published and circulated to Departments 2017

Led by PDRE; support from all PDs and HoDs

An increase in the number of large grants with junior staff involvement

Green

SOAS

RES

EARC

Had

: Dire

ctor

of R

esea

rch,

Ent

erpr

ise,

Inno

vatio

ns a

nd P

artn

ersh

ips i

n pa

rtne

rshi

p w

ith P

DR]

High quality tailored support delivered to researchers at all career

stages. Establishing mechanisms whereby younger scholars may learn

to manage larger, more complex grants

Annual PhD completions per fte academic (research) staff reported in HESES return

to be in the top quartile across all our UoAs from REF 2014

PhD student on time completions within 4 years (F/T) and 7 years (P/T) reported to

HESA to total 80%

The percentage of staff involved in large collaborative grants to increase from established baseline year (2017/18?)

2E. Expanding our national and international presence by engaging with HEIs, industry and the third sector to achieve meaningful and lasting research impact

Page 10 of 11/05/2018



Contracts database of engagement with other HEIs, industries, the third sector in place and maintained

July 2019

Green A review of the central MoU and MoSE database has been completed.

The REO has a database of Research and Enteprise contracts.

DEEP has a database of the donations agreements.

A contracts review working group was established and a School wide review has been undertaken to understand types of contracts and processes currently being done.

A proposal for a central contracts office is due to go to EB April 30th 2018. If approved a task and finish group will be established to centralise all partnership information into one place.

Higher than average sector growth in our key areas of KE (CPD and consultancy) achieved, and our position with regard to contract and collaborative research strengthened

July 2020

Green Benchmarking exercise taking place in April 2018; significant in-house growth of activities

PDRE, HoDs

Increased involvement of academic staff in KE activities by creating a favourable environment with quantifiable outputs

Green PDRE, HoDs

Strategic partnerships developed with key commercial, government and not-for-profit organisations in the UK and overseas to achieve sustainable relationships and income streams.

Green PDI

Summer school activities enhanced and grown

July 2019Green Paper presented to EB in 2018 PDRE, PDI

SOAS CPD provisions reviewed and revised

December 2019Green Review on-going as part of HEIF

strategyPDRE, Dep COO ASS

Improved management and accountability of KE up to the most senior levels of the institution and across the School

December 2019

Green PDRE

Impact Case Studies with highest potential for submission to REF formally reviewed

July 2019

Amber Meetings with Departments and UoAs to agree which ICS have most potential are taking place during April-July 2018

Research/REF Coordinators; Departments (academics to sit on review panel)

[L

ea

Increased long-term mutually beneficial engagement with HEIs,

industry and the third sector

Internationally co-authored research outputs to reach UK Sector Average by

2022

Outstanding (4*) impact case studies to total 17 by 2020

At least 25% of research grant applications to have inernational

partners/collaborators (volume in £ in FY, as recorded in Worktribe)

Annual volume of KE activity reported to HEBCIS to grow faster than sector average

Annual new non-academic partnerships to increase from an established baseline

year

Page 11 of 11/05/2018



Impact embedded into academic policies and procedures

July 2019

Green Academic Performance Framework and Academic Promotion Procedure recognise engagement with impact; time for impact activities eligible in new Workload Allocation Model; REC approval February 2018 for Director's Research Prize - to include one for impact and public engagement with research

PDRE; Heads of Department

Impact/PER Strategies and implementation plans published and implemented

July 2019Amber Internal Impact Strategy drafted and

feedback receivedPDRE/Research/REF Coordinators/Departments/Communications/Marketing

Partnership activities embedded and support that aligns engagement with each of our regions across research, teaching and outreach

December 2019

Green Lead by PDI, input from all PDs

An increase in equitable partnerships to enhance the capacity and capability of partners (implementation of GCRF Strategy)

July 2020

Green We have submitted a QR GCRF strategy paper describing how we will work towards delivering equitable partnerships. If approved this will enable a number of activities including Knowledge Exchange visits between Professional Services staff and International partners to establish clear working guidelines and establish training ,aterial appropriate for the partner country.

Part of this strategy is also to Initiate British-African Research Support – Good Practice Exchange (BARS-GPE) - joint initiative with Univ Kent & Leicester and in collaboration with Wellcome Trust, the African Academy of Sciences and the four African Research Management Associations and ARMA

PDRE, PDI, HoDs, Finance, HR

All research/enterprise content of website reviewed to meet needs of SOAS partners/potential partners etc

July 2020

Green Some impactful research projects are highlighted on the Research web pages under "Our Research" and "Centenary Research Themes". There are some CPD/training case studies on the Enterprise website. The Research Engagement Manager is supporting two public engagement with research (PER) projects which should result in better understanding of the needs of some of our partners

Enterprise, IT, Communications

Identification of possible KE and service tenders to allow transfer of knowledge to other countries/sectors

December 2019Green Supported through HEIF and QR GCRF

strategyPDs and academic departments

2F. Building SOAS as a leading institution with a holistic approach to collaboration beyond research, ie strengthening local infrastructures, research support and governance

Developing internal capacity to enable the enhancement of local

infrastructure, research support and governance through collaboration

Outstanding (4*) impact case studies to total 17 by 2020

Annual volume of KE activity reported to HEBCIS to grow faster than sector average

Annual new non-academic partnerships to increase from an established baseline

year

Page 12 of 11/05/2018



Enhanced understanding of League Tables and the use of metrics and development of action plan to improve SOAS rankings

December 2019

Green Participation in DORA. Engagement with Forum for Responsible Metrics

PDRE

Effective dissemination of Publications Strategy

December 2018Green Strategy approved at REC/AB spring

2018PDRE, HoDs, RCs

All academic and research staff to have ORCIDs July 2020

Green 377 staff and PhD students currently have an ORCID

Library

Sound Scholarly Comms established at SOAS:Open Access - a continued increase in full-texts added to repository up to 2020; annual increase in RCUK compliance ; PhD students consistently adding full-texts to SOAS Research Online; backrun of SOAS PhD theses to be available Open Access via SOAS Research Online; monitoring and engagement with UKSCL as appropriate) - Research Data Management - increased no. of datasets shared in trusted data repositories e.g. UK Data Archive or Zenodo and logged in SOAS Research Online; 100% compliance with funder requirements for data management and sharing - Publishing - Responsible Metrics Statement adopted and published; Metrics guidance available via Scholarly Commons website; ORCID records fully synced with SOAS Research Online)

July 2020

Green Processes in place to support and monitor Open Access (REF and Funding Compliance; Institutional Repository supporting Green Open Access; Funds to support Gold Open Access (RCUK and Institutional)Support for Research Data Management Planning Consultation and Review of Funding Applications; Full Suite of RDM Training delivered every academic year; Support for meeting Funder Data Sharing Requirements; Data Management is integrated fully into PhD training and processes e.g. through Upgrade and Ethical Review to thesis submission Publishing - Advice provided on Copyright and IPR, Publishing Agreements and Policies; Some metrics support; support for ORCID registration Open Research - Open Academy Training each year on Open Research landscape available to all researchers, Open Research Champion Scheme launched; bespoke events take place each year, e.g. challenges of Open Research in Anthropology scheduled May 2018

Library, IT

Annual reviews of outputs fully embedded in School annual cycle and reported on

July 2018Green Annual review took place in 2017 and is

under way in 2018PDRE, REF Coordinators, Departments (academic reviewers), Library (Scholarly Comms)

Scopus data to be provided quarterly to Director of REO; HoDs, EB and other relevant committees and DoPs to be sent REF compliance data by department quarterly using REF Compliance Checker in E-Prints and IT/RISU support for automated reports

December 2018

Green Quarterly Report on potential REF items incl. Open Access compliance submitted to REF Steering Group; Scopus data provided as requested-usually annually SOAS wide

Library, Publications and Research Data Officer

2G. Targeting our research at the highest quality outlets possible and making it available Open Access wherever possible

Increasing numbers of research outputs published in high quality

journals and made freely and openly available immediately

Annual number of peer reviewed outputs recorded in Scopus to be 200 per year

Total of world-leading (4*) outputs since 1 January 2014 to total 325 by 2020

Field-weighted citation rates to reach UK sector average by 2022

100% compliance with SOAS Open Access policy (i.e. proportion of articles

deposited in SOAS Research Online with 3 months of acceptance)

Strategic Plan for SOAS People

Success Criteria Relevant PIs / KPIs Milestones Timeframe for Milestones(incl any intermediate milestones)

Progress (RAG)


Develop core recruitment materials, including online provision.

Aug-18 This has started but there is a need to adapt core templates to all key roles.

Key liason role with the Communications Directorate.

Review and develop existing recruitment processes.

Aug-18 + ongoing review and training support

R&S Policy reviewed, Secondment and Acting Up Policy in place, Shortlisting practice in development. Action Planning ongoing.

HR will lead but collaboration with key Heads essential.

Comprehensive framework for the development of equality practice including key chartermarks.

Aug-18 + ongoing development of key milestones and progress indicators

Draft framework in place; requires EB approval and buy in. Action Plan pending. AS bronze renewal submitted. REC action plan pending. Promotion Done Better - staff engagement piece pending. Action plan in place.

Requires key buy in from EB and ongoing support across the school.

Develop a comprehensive Reward Strategy. Apr-19 Terms of reference for project still to be drafted.

Enhance and simplify grading review process. Aug-18 Action planning and recommendations pending.

Develop and enhance recognition provisions. Aug-18 Exisiting arrangements reviewed and updated. Need to scope potential for further changes. Action Plan to follow.

Develop core pay principles and review all arrangements relating to the management of senior and any discretionary pay in accordance with revised governance frameworks.

Oct-18 In progress - Director to report to SSRC.

Review employment and pay arrangements for fractional staff.

Aug-18 + ongoing Initial systems development in place, subject to further enhancement. Wider review of the positioning of fractional staff to follow, next year.

Review all emerging structures ensuring they reflect appropiate career pathways and undertake salary benchmarking.

Ongoing to July 2019 In place - key feedback meetings with SDT working well.

Review and develop staff development offer on a regular basis.

Ongoing

OPS - milestones reflected in OPS plan. Review Dec-18 First phase concluded on schedule; Top level S+AE structure approved. Senior posts on track to be filled by May. On track to run other PS Change Programmes in parallel.

Project led by Paul Doyle.

SMS - milestones reflected in planning documents.

Sep-18 On schedule Part of Estates led project.

Develop a comprehensive Employee Engagement Plan including staff survey provision.

Review Dec-18 Recommendations and action plan to be drafted.

Staff Development support for new staff groups and to support changes emerging from OPS.

Sep-19 SDT support in place as part of the planning for SMS and OPS.

Review Staff Development Policy. Aug-18 Action planning and recommendations pending.

Develop mechanisms for sampling the operation of existing frameworks and develop recommendations for change.

Review Apr-19

Terms of reference for project still to be drafted.

Requires collaboration across the School.

Review SDR tool based on feedback from key managers and staff and ensure online provision. Aug-19

Changes agreed. Implementation pending system support.

IT Support needed

To recommend a framework for the introduction of behavioural competancies.

Dec-18

Draft competencies in place. Key recommendations and action plan to follow.

Requires collaborative working across the School.

To implement a comprehensive leadership development offer across all groups.

Review Aug-18 E Lamp and EB programmes in place. Review ongoing.

Review career development, mentoring and job shadowing schemes.

Review Aug-18 In place, includes external support/provision.

3D. Developing a culture of quality and high performance Demonstrable success and recognition in relation to key contribution frameworks (e.g. REF, TEF, KEF, NSS) *To review, develop and support relevant performance/contribution frameworks *To review Staff Development Review processes and ensure greater participation * To develop a system of behavioural competancies to inform key HR processes, actions and leadership development.

*Review SDR compliance and quality of practice *Report on key competancies and how these should be applied (metrics to be developed at later stage). These will be included in the Annual SD Report.

SOAS

PEO

PLE

[Lea

d: D

irect

or o

f Hum

an R

esou

rces

]

3A. Developing SOAS as an employer of choice both internally and externallyEnhanced employer profile and reputation - Increased volume of quality applications from all groups *Showcase facilities and benefits (including reward) ensuring relevant access and reach (global through to local) *Enhanced recruitment and related marketing processes, and materials *Demonstrable equality of access and opportunity.

Annual Report to HRC, RPC (BoT) *Monitor numbers and quality of applications across all levels *Monitor key equality data across all recruitment activity *Monitor internal progression.

3B. Developing models and strategies for pay and reward that incentivise and motivate staffTransparent and fair reward/career structures, evidenced through enhanced staff progression and reduced staff turnover in key roles *Relevant and competitive renumeration and reward at all levels *Relevant and supportive career development structures and pathways *Comprehensive Staff Development Offer.

*Annual rewards report to BoT *Annual Staff Development Report to HRC/RPC.

3C Organisational Development and ChangeTo support change in ensuring sustainable and relevant services *To implement One Professional Service * To ensure implementation of self managed services for facilities staff *To promote and develop further a positive and respectful working environment and to facilitate feedback as appropiate.

*Regular narrative through HRC *Review key HR indicators - Turnover -Sickness absence - Key equality data (HRC to RPC to BoT).

Strategic Plan for SOAS Voice TO BE COMPLETED FOLLOWING ARRIVAL OF NEW DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL ENGAGEMENT AND POLICY

Success Criteria Relevant PIs / KPIs Milestones Timeframe for Milestones(incl any intermediate milestones)

Progress (RAG)


4D. A public policy and political engagement programme - led by the SOAS Director

SOAS

VO

ICE

[Lea

d: D

irect

or o

f Ext

erna

l Eng

agem

ent a

nd P

olic

y]4A. Implementing a marketing and brand building strategy - to underpin sales, recruitment and strategic partnerships in key markets

4B. A programme of community building programme/s with staff, students and alumni

4C. The "Questions Worth Asking" campaign - focused on major strategic projects and financial objectives.

Strategic Plan for Infrastructure



Estate Strategy approvedJul-18 Green

Ongoing review at E&IT linked to student and staff consultation and evaluation of estates utilisation data

SOAS community wide

Agreement of key projects from Estate strategy

Dec-19 GreenSOAS community wide

Languages HEFCE project completion Mar-19 Green

Programme generated to meet deadline, timeline is exceedingly tight.

SOAS community wide

Student experience projects including, Main reception, G1, and Student union works.

Sep-18 AmberListed building consent submitted, awaiting Camden approval.

Creation and sign off, of a PS move proposal to generate more student space and align office needs to 1PS, including generating the new local departmental support offices.

Apr-18 Amber

Plan outlined. Awaiting feedback on scope to confirm budget and move forward.

Re-organisation of the PSs to generate more student space and align office needs to 1PS.(implementation of above) Sep 2018 (phase 1) Amber

Agreement of proposal required.

Release of 36-38 Gordon square Sep-20 GreenSenate house 4Q development Sep-22 GreenPhilips building, windows and roof replacement project Sep-22 Green

Timeline to be agreed

BHP replacement Sep-22 GreenCreate and develop a 25year cyclical programme, that establishes a longer term assets replacement programme over a 5 year period.

Aug-18 Green

Develop a longer term property strategy, which is sustainable and meets the needs of student experience at SOAS Oct-18 Green

VS achieves staff savings of £3m Aug-19 RedVS now closed, anticipated release of £1.5m staffing savings over next two financial years

HR, All Academci Departments

Savings of £1m to be achieved within professional services

Aug-19 AmberDepartmental targets agreed, £100k achieved to date

All Professional Services Directorates

Zero based budgeting employed to prepare 18-19 budget

Jun-19 GreenGuidelines & template drafted. Presenation to DoPs w/b 10 March

All Professional Services Directorates

Rental of Vernon Square Mar-18 GreenSigning of rental agreement with Courtauld imminent

Realisation of £2m of income from TNE by 20-21

Jul-20 AmberDiscussions ongoing with Singaporean Institute for delivery of FIM programmes from Jan 2019

Pro-Director International, FIM, QAA

5B. Employment of robust financial management that generates surpluses for future investment into key strategic priorities

5C. Accurate, robust and timely management information that is made easily accessible to inform decision making

Our estate meets the expectations of key stakeholders

HESA maintanence return, NSS results, Specific staff and student survey, EMR return, Service delivery customer satisfaction and performance against budget

To be refined by Estates and Infrastructure Committee

PI 5B.1 Surplus/Deficit PI 5B.2 Cash balances- Liquidity days PI 5B.3 Operating cash flows PI5B.4 Staff costs as % of income

5A. Developing and implementing a property strategy and investment programme to create and manage the right physical environment to realise our aims



Initial Dept Information packs (with Planning and Finance data and analysis) created to inform Full Planning Round

Mar-18 Green

On track to provide Planning and Finance information to Departments

Planning, Finance

SOAS Info Hub populated with information from across the School

Jul-18 Green

Info Hub already populated with Planning data. Need to add MI from other parts of the School and communicate changes to users

Planning, Finance, HR, Research, Admissions

Improved quality of Distance Learning reporting

Jul-18 Amber

Planning has not had a chance to consider improvements to DL reporting due to competing priorities and limited team resource

DLA, Registry, IT, Finance

Information developed to support Comprehensive Department Reviews (CDRs)

Oct-18 Green

Type of information to be provided for Comprehensive Reviews identified. To be provided for departments according to CDR schedule.

Planning, QA, Finance, HR, Research, Estates, Marketing

Comprehensive Dept Information packs created (including data and analysis from across the School) to inform future Full Planning Rounds

Mar-19 Green

Planning, Finance, HR, Research, Estates

Develop a strategy to increase the number/size of teaching spaces approved.

Dec-18 Green

Implementation of Strategy Sep-22 GreenTo self deliver service currently provided by Bouygues under the FM arrangements

Sep-18 Green

To develop and deliver a self sustaining catering service, that meets the needs of eth SOAS community.

Sep-18 Green

5E. Embedding secure and trusted systems that protect and enhance the delivery of our services by using our core systems as platforms for growth

5F. Building a strong governance framework that maintain agility and responsiveness at a time of sectoral change

New academic committee structure confirmed.

Apr-18 Green

Revised terms of reference have been developed and shared with the Chair of the working group. The working group will meet this term to review amendments and make recommendations for review at ADC and AB.

INFR

ASTR

UCT

URE

[Lea

d: D

eput

y CO

O (R

&P)

]

1. Standing Orders and Charters & Articles are up to date and support

the effective governance of the school.

5D. Delivering modern and flexible teaching and learning tools, spaces and services

Increased external stakeholder engagement with the School's mission and strategy, whilst reducing time commitment in committees. All stakeholders have an accurate understanding of School structures, their governance roles and

Decision-makers able to access a standard set of Management Information covering key areas across the School. The information and analysis is accessible (where possible, via self-service) and clearly presented to help inform decision-making. As a result, ad hoc requests for basic data and analysis reduce, enabling Professional Services to focus on providing more complex analysis and insight as required to support decision-making.

Committees have a clear understanding of their terms of references and their role within the School. Committees receive paperwork.

N/A

Fit for purpose teaching space sizes and furniture

Timetable can be created without the need to use external spaces



Revised standing orders, charters and articles presented to Board of Trustees.

Apr-18 GreenWorkshop held with Registry on committees and processes. Outcomes to be discussed at Academic Board and working group.

2. Paperwork meets governance guidance and is circulated within agreed timeframe.

Revised committee guidance developed and circulated.

Jun-18 Green

Draft templates for annual agenda items schedules and decision making process have been developed.

3. All School policies are updated, compliant and monitored through a central record.

All policies collated onto central record.

Aug-18 Amber

Content changes is required to a number of policies and the committee approval process means that their approval is restrained by agreed committee dates. Some policies will not be updated in time to meet the spring term committee dates. Date changed to reflect this

5. Successful registration with the Office for Students.

Action plan developed to address registration for Office for Students crtieria.

Mar-18 Green

The framework for registering with the Office for Students has not yet been published and therefore an action plan cannot be developed. If the framework aligns with current expectations and Prevent compliance is a criteria, the School does not currently fulfil this.

6. Increased Trustee engagement with 'themed' area of responsibility

School's approach to 'dual assurance/lead Trustee model' signed off and evaluation methodology confirmed.

Apr-18 Green

Paper presented at GNC on 30th January The committee recommended the proposed pilot to the Board of Trustees.

7. Audit reports evidence improved process and provision. Recommendations from reports are efficiently implemented to impact on practice.

Spring term audit reports are presented to Audit Committee and demonstrate improved practice. Updates on the implementation of recommendations are provided at the Summer term Audit Committee and demonstrate progress and if possible, improvements.

Feb-18 (May 2018) Green

2017-18 programme of audits has been agreed.

Revised strategic plan template and risk monitoring template approved.

Feb-18 GreenTemplates presented and in use. Can be closed

Each strategy component has a completed plan approved by the relevant committee.

Apr-18 Amber

Revised strategic plan template has been shared with EB and component holders. The SOAS Voice component needs significant development and there is currently disparity between the content and the aligning risks. The responsibility for the strand will sit with incoming posts.

8. Revsied strategic plan and risk monitoring templates implemented

and utilised to shape relevant committee agendas.

their governance roles and responsibilities within the strategy.

Committees have a clear understanding of their terms of references and their role within the School. All committee paperwork is consistent, clear and enables efficient decision making.

External assessments of the School - regulator, auditors, TEF etc- align with the School's self-assessment and any recommendations are efficiently implemented.

Increased profile and understanding of governance framework and alignment between planning process and risk monitoring.



Revised strategic plans and risk assessments are tabled on the spring term agenda for the relevant committee.

Apr-18 Amber

Strategic plan and aligning risk assessments are being developed by component holders. The lack of capacity to develop the SOAS Voice strategy will reduce the likelihood of meeting the April milestone.

Decision maps for statutory committees are developed and circulated.

Apr-18 Amber

Academic structures are not yet finalised. Once finalised there will be more clarity on where key decisions sit and the documents can be created.

All statutory documents submission deadlines align with the 2018/19 Almanac. Audit reports evidence improved process and provision. Recommendations from reports are efficiently implemented to impact on practice. Increased Trustee engagement with 'themed' area of responsibility

Key item workflow developed and approved

Apr-18 GreenOn track. Detail available in governance & compliance action plan.

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 G

Office for Students Registration

The Board of Trustees is asked to note the progress with the School’s registration with the Office for Students and to approve the governance self-assessment section of the

submission and the Access & Participation Plan.

Executive Summary

The attached paper provides a summary of the role of Office for Students (OfS), the registration requirements for providers and the implications for the School. It also outlines the registration requirements the School’s position against these requirements and aligning risks. This paper was agreed at Executive Board on 16 April and circulated to the Board of Trustees on 19 April.

Following this document are the following sections, these will form part of the School’s submission to the OfS, and this must be completed by 23 May 2018.

• Self-Assessment of Governance & Management• Access & Participation Plan• Student Protection Plan (this should be read last as it reflects the risks highlighted

within the other documents)

The School’s self-assessment of compliance with the CMA regulations for higher education will be finalised w/c 14 May and will be provided at the Board meeting.

Following the submissions of the documents on the 23 May, there will be an iterative process with Office for Students where they may ask us to provide additional information on particular aspects of our application prior to registration in September 2018.

Recommendations & Next Steps

To note the progress on registration, this must be completed by 23 May 2018. The Board is asked to approve the section of the submission that relates to the School’s self-assessment of its governance arrangements along with the Access & Participation Plan. Other sections will be signed off by the Director before submission to the OfS.

Financial Impact

None from this paper. The School’s future ability to charge student fees is based on a successful submission and registration with the OfS.

Risks

If the School was unsuccessful in its registration for Approved (fee cap) with OfS we would no longer be eligible for OfS public grant funding and would have to undertake a separate eligibility process for UKRI public grant funding provided by Research England and Research Council funding and students would not have access to the same level of support

50


funding The Office for Students could impose additional conditions on the School if they are unsatisfied without our submission. Please see detailed risk section within the paper.

Equality implications None

Consultation The School’s approach to the submission has been discussed at Executive Board and circulated to the Board of Trustees. The sections that form the basis of the submission have been discussed with relevant internal stakeholders. The Student Protection Plan and the Access and Participation Plan have both been developed with student input.

51

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018BoT 17/18 5 K

Office for Students Registration

EB is asked to note the progress with the School’s registration with Office for Students and to approve the timeline for the development of the registration document.

Executive Summary

The paper outlines a summary of the role of Office for Students (OfsS), the registration requirements for providers and the implications for the School.

Annex A outlines the registration requirements the School’s position against these requirements and aligning risks. Annex B outlines a proposed timeline for the creation of the School’s registration.

Recommendations & Next Steps

- The Executive Board confirm that they are happy with proposed timeline for thecreation of the OfS registration.

- The Executive Board consider how they would like to support and monitor theprocess.

Financial Impact

N/A

Risks

- If the School were unsuccessful in their registration for Approved (fee cap) withOfS we would no longer be eligible for OfS public grant funding and would have toundertake a separate eligibility process for UKRI public grant funding provided byResearch England and Research Council funding and students would not haveaccess to the same level of support funding.

- The School need to ensure there is sufficient resource and capacity to support thedevelopment of the registration.

- Office for Students could impose additional conditions on the School if they areunsatisfied without our submission.

- Please see detailed risk section within the paper.

Equality implications

None

Consultation This paper has not been consulted on another meeting.

52


Registration with the Officer for Students (OfS)

Background

The Office for Students (OfS) will be the new sector regulator, replacing both HEFCE and OFFA as well as a few other functions from 1st April 2018. The Office for Students was initially proposed in the Higher Education and Research Act 2017 (HERA). The Act outlined the creation of two new bodies to regulate and fund higher education providers: the Office for Students (OfS) and UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). A consultation on the function and remit of the body was launched in autumn 2017 with submissions required in December, which the School responded to. The finalised guidance was published in February 2018, there were minimal changes from the original proposal.

The OfS will be an independent body that will regulate the quality and standards of providers, incorporating the function of the Office for Fair Access (OFFA). The OfS will have powers to monitor the financial sustainability and efficiency of providers and powers to impose a number of sanctions when providers are deemed to be high risk or not meeting the required conditions.

OfS aims to differ from HEFCE by supporting students and their interests rather than those of the institutions or the sector and they focus on the whole lifestyle of the student from choosing an institutions through to their destinations after graduation. They aim that all students, from all backgrounds, and with the ability and desire to undertake higher education are supported to access, succeed and progress. All students receive a high quality academic experience and their interests are protected while they study or in the event of a provider, campus or course closure. Students are able to progress into employment, further study and their qualifications hold their value over time. Students receive transparent and accurate information and value for money throughout their time with an institution.

Registration overview

To register providers have to submit information against 5 initial categories:

- Access and participation for students from all backgrounds- Quality, reliable standards and positive outcomes for all students- Financial sustainability- Protecting the interests of all students- Good governance

A combination of existing data and self-assessment inform the registration. The registration will utilise data the School has already submitted to the Higher Education Statistics Agency and HEFCE.

All providers will have to register with Office for Students by 24th May 2018 to be included on the September 2019 register- institutions with early UCAS application deadlines have to register before 24th April.

Providers who successfully register by the earlier deadline will be included on the register before institutions who are subject to the later deadline. Therefore submitting our registration application early could offer a market advantage as we would be included earlier as an option for potential applicants.

53


Registration process

Annex A outlines a full breakdown of the registration conditions and the actions the School need to undertake to fulfil the registration requirements. The paper outlines the key actions and the potential risks associated with each action. The OfS published guidance on the transition period outlining how OfS will monitor on-going conditions in advance of full implementation from August 2019. The transition arrangements propose that OfS will undertake all responsibilities of HEFCE and institutions will submit data returns through the same processes. Data submissions will change once OfS has been fully implemented.

Key areas for the registration process are outline below:

1. Quality & standards – This will be assessed by current documentation and is notanticipated to present any challenges.

2. Financial information – This will be assessed by current documentation, in this case viathe 2016/17 audited financial statements and the July 2017 submitted financial forecasts.However, this is a potential area where the OfS may come back with additional questions asthey will have seen more recent information that highlights the financial challenges theSchool is facing.

3. Access & Participation Plan

The OFS make it clear that their approach to Access & Participation Plans will develop over time. This first year there is a strong sense of continuity from the previous regime of OFFA and Access Agreements. For example, the format of the plans is similar to that of the most recent access agreements, and there is also broad similarity in approaches to targets, investment, coverage and frequency of plans. The OfS however stress the following differences:

• An increased focus on outcomes, with expectations based on a combination of aprovider’s assessment of current performance and the credibility of that assessment

• A stronger focus on reducing the gaps in success and progression, as well as access• A broader range of regulatory powers which can be used as ‘tools and levers’ to

influence access and participation• An expectation that providers will secure continuous improvement through their

evaluation strategies and reflective practice

The guidance is also generally more prescriptive than has been the case in the past, particularly when it comes to the use of data (clearly a priority) and the requirement of consultation with students.

A key difference is also that the OfS intend to use a risk-based approach to access and participation. Exactly how they do this will be considered in a strategic review of Access & Participation Plans which will start shortly and report to the OFS board in November. It seems likely that lower-risk providers will be able to submit plans less frequently than the current annual submission, and will have less onerous reporting requirements, for example. Initial comments from the Director of Fair Access also suggest that all providers may be asked to reset and rethink their targets to be more ambitious.

4. Consumer protection – We will be required to submit a self-assessment against the CMAguidelines for the HE sector. A template for this has been provided and in addition to theself-assessment we will be able to link to any internal documents/policies to evidence our

54


compliance and practice. This section will need to include an outline of our overall approach; what information is made available to students- both prospective and current; our approach to student “contracts” and how we ensure we have clear and fair student complaints procedures. We are confident that we have this information in existing documentation.

5. Student protection plan – Each provider has to have an individualised School’s StudentProtection Plan (SPP), which will have to be approved by the OfS. The plan will include anassessment of a range of risks the School faces and the likelihood of each. This can includeclosure of a course or department through to the extreme of closure of a campus orinstitutional failure. For each area they will expect us to cover any mitigation or, whererequired, compensation and how this would all be communicated. We will need to highlightspecific issues if they are known e.g. planned department or campus closure. We do notcurrently have a formally SPP so one needs to be developed and agreed as a matter ofurgency.

6. Governing documents – The requirements overlap with our existing documentation,including requiring links to the Charter, Articles & Standing Orders, Scheme of Delegationand key policies. However, we will need to review the OfS Public Interest Principles, howthese are and can be evidenced and then comment on any additional principles.

7. Management & governance – We will be required to submit another self-assessmentoutlining how we uphold the public interest principles. The evidence will focus on ourfinancial statements and compliance with the CUC Code. We will also reference ourgovernance reviews, processes for engaging external bodies for assurances and validationand key outcomes.

As outlined there are a number of other areas where the School is expected to be compliant at the point of registration or as part of its ongoing registration. This includes taking part in the TEF, registration with the OIA, QAA compliance. New areas include clear approaches to student transfers (so could be mid-degree) and electoral role registration. Although not yet specified it likely that future conditions may cover areas such as Prevent and senior staff pay.

The guidance for fees payable to be registered was issued by the Department for Education and will become payable from 1 August 2019. These will be new costs to the School as HEFCE and OFFA do not currently levy a direct charge. The School’s banding is expected to give rise to a charge of around £99,000pa.

Submission and sign off of registration

OfS have not specified that the sign off process for the registration documents or outlined the role of Board of Trustees or governing body, however we would like to engage the Board with our submission to ensure alignment with the School’s strategy and priorities. The timeline for submission may not align with our committee schedule, however a proposed timeline for the creation and sign off for the registration documents has been included in Annex B.

Application assessment and outcomes

The School has to submit its application by 23 May 2018 and this should lead to an outcome decision by mid-September. The registration process will be an iterative one for which we will have a named OfS contact to resolve any questions from either party. We will need to submit all components before they start assessing our application.

55


The OfS will have a risk based approach and will categorise providers based on their confidence in providers being able to meet students’ needs. Additional conditions or monitoring can be imposed on institutions if OfS believe that they are high risk.

The OfS will risk assess all 24 conditions and notify of any additional specific conditions or those that are on-going as part of its decision.

If providers are successful there are two categories they can be registered to: Approved (fee cap) and Approved. We will be applying for Approved (fee cap) as this category guarantees eligibility for OfS public grant funding, UKRI public grant funding provided by Research England, Research Council funding, student support funding and ability to charge higher fees. The Approved category would mean that a provider is recognised as a higher education provider in England but they would not be eligible for OfS public grant funding and would have to undertake a separate eligibility process for UKRI public grant funding provided by Research England and Research Council funding and students would not have access to the same level of support funding.

If the OfS are unsatisfied with our initial submission they will request additional information from the institution to evidence our registration prior to imposing conditions.

Risks for SOAS

1. The development of an individualised access and participation plan and statementwith the support of the Students’ Union could be difficult in the short timeframe,particularly in the UCU strikes go ahead as planned after Easter.

2. Student Protection Plans need to be sufficiently detailed to transparentlycommunicate the School’s position to staff and students, however we would not wantto circulate a plan that concerns present students and puts off prospective students.

3. The development of an effective Student Protection Plan is the most significant pieceof work required for our registration, we need to ensure there is sufficient capacity todeliver this in the short time. Similarly to the access and participation plan,engagement with the Students’ Union could be difficult in the short timeframe,particularly in the UCU strikes go ahead as planned after Easter.

4. Our financial statements will face significant scrutiny and the OfS could question thedisparity between the July forecasts and December statements. The registrationtimeline means that our 2018 financial forecasts and commentary are likely to bepublished during the registration period. This could highlight additional risks to Officefor Students.

5. The value for money criteria has become increasingly focused on ‘saving money’rather than the effective spend in the interest of the students.

56


57


Initial conditions of registration

Registration will be assessed on: Any actions required: Risks

Access and participation conditions

1. Individualised access and participation plan2. Individualised access and participation statement

1. Agree a process and timeline fordevelopment, review and sign off of theaccess and participation plan andstatement

2. Draft wording for access andparticipation plan and statement.

3. Establish SU engagement in thedevelopment of an access andparticipation and statement.

1. Adhering to the timeline for thedevelopment of access andparticipation plan and statement

2. Securing the engagement of keystakeholders, including the SU.

Quality and standards conditions

1. 2016-17 Annual Provider Review process2. Existing data submitted to Higher Education Statistics

Agency3. Outcomes of any Quality Review Visit (SOAS’ last visit was

3 years ago)4. Progress against action plans following Quality Review

VisitsGuidance on consumer protection law condition

1. Self-assessment consisting of:- Explanation of overall approach to compliance with

consumer protection law- Explanation of approach to providing information to

applicants and students: research and applicationstage, offer stage and enrolment stage and how weensure it is clear and accurate

- Explanation of the terms and conditions the Schooluse to govern relationships with students and how weensure they are fair and transparent

- Explanation of the complaints handling process andpractices

2. Individualised Student Protection plan (a template hasbeen provided but does not have to be used)

1. Draft wording for the self-assessmentbased on the School’s policies,procedures and terms and conditions

2. Identify the key stakeholders andprocess for reviewing and signing offthe content.

3. Form working group to develop astudent protection plan

4. Establish SU engagement in thedevelopment of a student protectionplan

1. There is insufficient capacity andresource available to develop aneffective student protection planwithin the required timeframe.

2. If the USS strikes continue, SUrepresentatives may be unavailableto participate in the development ofthe plan.

58


- Outline of the range of risks to the continuation ofstudy for students, how these may impact differentstudents and the likelihood these risks will crystallise

- Outline of the measures in place to mitigate the risks- Information about the policy in place to refund costs

to students in the event the School is no longer ableto preserve the continuation of study

- Information about how the School will communicatethe student protection plan to students

Financial viability and sustainability condition

1. Financial statements submitted to HEFCE in December2017

2. Financial forecasts and commentary submitted in July2017

1. Office for Students could questionthe disparity between the Julyforecasts and December statements.

2. The registration timeline means thatour 2018 financial forecasts andcommentary are likely to bepublished during the registrationperiod. This could highlightadditional risks to Office forStudents.

Management and governance conditions

1. Self-assessment of how the School’s governing documentsuphold the public interest governance principles. Theprinciples are:

Academic freedom Accountability Student engagement Academic governance Risk management Value for money Freedom of speech Governing body Fit and proper Degree awarding power

records Independent members of governing body

Regularity, propriety and value for money

1. Draft wording for the self-assessmentbased on the School’s policies,procedures and terms and conditions

2. Identify the key stakeholders andprocess for reviewing and signing offthe content.

1. The value for money criteria hasbecome increasingly focused on‘saving money’ rather than theeffective spend in the interest of thestudents.

-

59


Proposed timeline for the development of Office for Students Registration Document

The deadline for submission is 24th May 2018 however guidance suggests that early submission would be beneficial for institutions.

Contributors Deputy COO (Finance and Planning) Graeme Appleby Head of Widening Participation Julien Boast Deputy COO (Student and Academic Experience) Ian Pickup Director of Governance and Legal Services Chris Ince Special projects consultant Kea Horvers Governance and Risk Officer Sally Priddle

Action Responsible Dates Milestone 1: Gap analysis of registration requirements undertaken and work priorities identified.

Governance team 27/03/2018

Action plan is developed to collate information required for registration, draft responses and develop additional evidence and agreed by stakeholders.

Contributors 27/03/2018

All stakeholders understand their responsibilities and agreed timeframe for the development and collation of documents.


Draft self-assessment forms are completed. Governance team Milestone 2: Registration for 2019-20 will open on 3 April 2018 N/A 03/04/2018 Milestone 3: Executive Board review summary paper, action plan and gap analysis and agree role in reviewing and signing off the submission.

Executive Board 09/04/2018

Summary of Executive Board feedback is collated and circulated to Board of Trustees.

Executive Board Secretary 09/04/2018

Board of Trustees review summary paper, action plan and gap analysis and agree role in reviewing and signing off the submission.

Board of Trustees 10/04/2018

Role of Students Union in supporting the development of additional documentation is confirmed.

Governance Team and Sabbatical Officers

10/04/2018

Feedback from Executive Board and Board of Trustees shared with stakeholders and next steps for amending the submission are agreed.


Self- assessment forms are revised following feedback from Executive Board and Board of Trustees.

Governance Team 10/04/2018-18/04/2018

Representatives from SAE team meet with SU representatives to develop additional documentation.

SAE Team

Revised self-assessment forms and additional documentation are submitted to Executive Board Secretary.

Governance Team and SAE Team

18/04/2018

Milestone 4: Executive Board review draft additional documentation and revised self-assessment forms

Executive Board 23/04/2018

Feedback from Executive Board and Board of Trustees shared with stakeholders and next steps for amending the submission are agreed.


Submission is revised following feedback and finalised. Contributors 23/04/2018- 04/05/2018

Milestone 5: Submission is signed off by XXXXXXXXXXXX 04/05/2018 Milestone 6: Registration is submitted. Director of Governance

and Legal Services 11/05/2018

60


61


Annex G: Template for producing a self-assessment on management and governance: higher education institutions funded by HEFCE

Provider’s name:

Provider’s UKPRN:

Your management and governance arrangements

This information is set out in a Statement of Corporate Governance in our published financial statements on page 14, 15 and 16.

Since the publication of the financial statements the membership of the Board has changed, in line with the expected cycle of membership. Full membership can be found the School’s website in the School Governance section (https://www.soas.ac.uk/board-of-trustees/).

The School’s full governance arrangements are outlined in the School’s standing order and charters and articles (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersintroduction/). The charter of incorporation (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscharterarticles/) sets out the School’s legal and governance arrangements and the objects and powers of the School and the Board of Trustees.

Appropriateness, adequacy and effectiveness of your management and governance arrangements

Provide an evidenced assessment of how your management and governance arrangements are adequate and effective. An arrangement is ‘adequate’ if it is capable of delivering a stated or implied objective and ‘effective’ if it is delivering its stated or implied objective.

This information is set out in a Statement of Corporate Governance in our published financial statements on page 14, 15 and 16. As outlined in this statement the Board review their effectiveness in line with Higher Education Code of Governance which identifies key values and practices on which the effective governance.

The Board’s arrangements are also outlined in the School’s standing orders, Standing order XXI Statement of Primary Responsibilities A1 confirms that the Board are required ‘[t]o conduct its business in accordance with best practice in higher education corporate governance and with the principles of public life drawn up by the Committee on Standards in Public Life.

The size and complexity of the governing body is outlined in Article V of the Charter of incorporation (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscharterarticles/). Criteria for selecting lay members, the selection process and removal from office are outlined in Standing Order XXIII (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgovbodymembership/)

‘We have used this code for 7 years, since academic year 2011-12, and conduct a review of compliance every 4 years. The last review was undertaken in Summer 2016 by the Good Governance Institute. The review identified that there needed to improve and develop Trustee engagement with the School and wider priorities; review of terms of reference and committee structure in light of School’s academic restructure; review how Board of Trustee meetings are facilitated and information is disseminated; develop a code of conduct and clearly align business of the Board of Trustees to institutional strategy and key risks. A plan 62

https://www.soas.ac.uk/board-of-trustees/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscharterarticles/


https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgovbodymembership/


was developed and approved by the Board, the implementation of the plan was monitored by Governance and Nominations Committee on the Board’s behalf. The action plan was fully implemented by Autumn 2017. We also undertake annual informal reviews of effectiveness, including the members of the Board undertaking an appraisal with the Chair. The Chair also receives feedback on their effectiveness from members annually.

Public interest governance principles

The School’s Charter and Articles set out how the School uphold the public interest governance principles, the School adhere to the Higher Education Code of Governance as well as the principles of public life drawn up by the Committee on Standards of life, as set out in Standing Order XXI A1. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderspolicystatements/) and reiterated in the criteria for selecting Lay members of the Board of Trustees (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgovbodymembership/) The School’s adherence to the Higher Education Code of Governance and the principles of public life is supported by the School’s own core values which underpin all activities (https://www.soas.ac.uk/corevalues/)

Standard public interest governance principles: applicable to all providers

Academic freedom: Academic staff at an English higher education provider have freedom within the law: (a) to question and test received wisdom; and (b) to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions; without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs or privileges they may have at the provider.

This is covered by our compliance with our chosen governance code, the Higher Education Code of Governance, which outlines that governing bodies will commit to ‘Academic freedom and high-quality research, scholarship and teaching. (pg 8, the higher education code of governance, http://www.universitychairs.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Code-Final.pdf) Academic Freedom is also embedded in the School’s core values (https://www.soas.ac.uk/corevalues/) and the School’s Freedom of Speech policy (Policy link) The Board of Trustees receives advice from Academic Board on the academic scope and academic structure of the School, and any changes to such scope or structure. The responsibilities and remit of Academic Board is set out in Standing Order II (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersacademicboard/)

Accountability: The provider operates openly, honestly, accountably and with integrity and demonstrates the values appropriate to be recognised as an English higher education provider.

The School’s commitment to accountability is set out in Standing Orders XXI: Statement of Primary Responsibilities. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderspolicystatements/) XXI, A1 outlines that the Board commits: ‘To conduct its business in accordance with best practice in higher education corporate governance and with the principles of public life

63

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderspolicystatements/


https://www.soas.ac.uk/corevalues/

http://www.universitychairs.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Code-Final.pdf



https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersacademicboard/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersacademicboard/




drawn up by the Committee on Standards in Public Life’

This is also covered by our compliance with our chosen governance code, higher education code of governance which outlines that governing bodies will commit to: ‘The publication of accurate and transparent information that is publicly accessible’; ‘A recognition that accountability for funding derived directly from stakeholders requires HEIs to be clear that they are in a contract with stakeholders who pay for their service and expect clarity about what is received.’ And ‘Full and transparent accountability for public funding.’ (pg 8, the higher education code of governance, http://www.universitychairs.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Code-Final.pdf)

Student engagement: The governing body ensures that all students have opportunities to engage with the governance of the provider, and that this allows for a range of perspectives to have influence.

The Students Union have 4 full time co-presidents and 15 part time officer roles (shared between 20 students). Two sabbatical officers sit on the Board of Trustees as outlined in Standing Order XIII (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgovbodymembership/)

Sabbatical Officers sit on 9 Boards and Committees and SU Officers sit on 7 Boards and Committees. Officers also support the development of priority agenda items.

Student representatives are asked to sit on working groups that support specific School initiatives, for example the School’s decolonisation of the curriculum working group; safeguarding working group and widening participation working group. Students from across the Student body are invited to contribute and attend these working groups.

Students within particular departments are asked to support the review of its effectiveness and quality. This includes the whole school curriculum reviews that the School are currently undertaking to ensure that resource is being invested appropriately to ensure maximum benefit to students.

Engagement with students is also included in the School’s Student Charter which was developed by staff and students and is a reference for all members of SOAS. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/about/studentcharter/)

Academic governance: The governing body receives and tests assurance that academic governance is adequate and effective through explicit protocols with the Senate/Academic Board (or equivalent).

This information is set out in a Statement of Corporate Governance in our published financial statements on page15.

64




Further detail on the School’s academic governance structure are outlined in our Standing Orders. The Academic Board responsibilities and sub committees that support Academic Board to monitoring and provide assurances on the academic provision are outlining the Academic Board’s Standing Order II. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersacademicboard/). Each sub-committee’s explicit contribution to academic governance is outlined in annexes I-VIII of the School’s Standing Orders. Annex I: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/academicdevelopment/ Annex II: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersenate/ Annex III: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersequalitydiversity/ Annex IV: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/fltcs/ Annex V: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/researchcommittee/ Annex VI: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/learningteaching/ Annex VII: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/studentexperience/ Annex VIII: https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersfacultyprogramme/

Risk management: The provider operates comprehensive corporate risk management and control arrangements (including for academic risk) to ensure the sustainability of the provider’s operations, and its ability to continue to comply with all of its conditions of registration.

This information is set out in a Statement of Corporate Governance in our published financial statements on page 17-18. The School’s approach to risk management is also set out in the School’s risk management policy which can be found on our website. (policy link) The Audit Committee have the responsibility for monitoring and testing assurances of the risk procedures, which are subsequently reported to the governing body. The Audit Committee’s responsibility is outlined in Standing Order III ( https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersauditcommittee/ )

Value for money: The governing body ensures that there are adequate and effective arrangements in place to provide transparency about value for money for

This information is set out in a Statement of Corporate Governance in our published financial statements on page 19.

65

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/academicdevelopment/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/academicdevelopment/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersauditcommittee/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersauditcommittee/


students and (where a provider has access to the student support system or to grant funding) for taxpayers. Freedom of speech: The governing body takes such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured within the provider.

The School’s commitment to Freedom of Speech is embedded within the School’s Core Values. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/corevalues/) The School’s approach to Freedom of Speech is outlined in the School’s policy. (policy link)

Governing body: The size, composition, diversity, skills mix, and terms of office of the governing body is appropriate for the nature, scale and complexity of the provider.

The membership of the Board of Trustees (Governing body) is outlined in Article V of the School’s Charter of incorporation (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscharterarticles/) Board of Trustee arrangements are outlined in Standing Order I (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgoverningbody/) The current membership of the Board of Trustees is publicised on the School’s website in the Administration and Governance section. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/board-of-trustees/) ADD SKILLS MATRIX AND DIVERSITY

Fit and proper: Members of the Governing Body, those with senior management responsibilities, and individuals exercising control or significant influence over the provider, are fit and proper persons.

The School have a robust application and appointment process to ensure that members of the Board of Trustees are fit and proper and understanding the expectations and values of the School. The criteria for selecting lay members of the Board of Trustees is set out in Standing Order Standing XXIII: (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgovbodymembership/) Members of the Board of Trustees are required to submit an annual Register for Interest, their responsibility to do this is set out in Standing Order XXV: Register of Interests. (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscorporategovernance/)

Additional public interest governance principle: providers authorised with degree awarding powers

Records: Where degree awarding powers are solely contained in the provider’s governing documents, and no order either under section 76 of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, or under HERA exists, the provisions setting out those powers must be retained and may not be altered without the consent of the OfS

The School were granted Degree Awarding Powers on 28 July 2011 from Privy Council, on the recommendation from Quality Assurance Agency. These powers were exercised from 1st August 2012. The School annually subscribe to QAA. 66




https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgoverningbody/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersgoverningbody/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/board-of-trustees/



https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscorporategovernance/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscorporategovernance/


The School is subscribed to the OIA.

Additional public interest governance principles: providers in receipt of financial support Independent members of the governing body: There must be at least one external member of the governing body who is independent of the provider, and whose term of office is normally limited to a maximum of three terms of three years or two terms of four years. For providers with large governing bodies, or more complex legal forms, additional independent members may be appropriate.

This is set out in Article V in the School’s Charter of Incorporation (https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingorderscharterarticles/) The Article V 1b outlines the number of external members on the Board and Article V 3 outlines the terms of those members.

Regularity, propriety and value for money: The governing body ensures that there are adequate and effective arrangements in place to ensure public funds are managed appropriately, in line with the conditions of grant and the principles of regularity, propriety and value for money, and to protect the interests of taxpayers and other stakeholders. This also applies to any funds passed to another entity for the provision of facilities or learning and teaching, or for research to be undertaken.

This information is set out in our Financial Statements page 18-21. The Statements outline the School’s approach to:

- internal controls - VfM - Disclosure of information to the auditors - Opinion on the financial statements - Basis for opinion - Conclusions relating to going concern - Opinion on other matters required by the

Higher Education Funding Council for England Audit code of practice

- Responsibilities of Board of Trustees - Auditors responsibility for the audit of

financial statements

67




1

SOAS University of London 2019-20 Access and Participation Plan

Contents Page Introduction

2

Assessment of performance

2

- Access

- Student success

- Progression

- Intersectionality

- Assessment of performance summary

Ambition and strategy

5

- Equality and diversity

- Priority underrepresented groups

- Monitoring the delivery of our Access and Participation Plan

- Ensuring continuous improvement through evaluation

- Collaborative working

- Student consultation and involvement

Access, student success and progression measures

12

- Access measures

- Fair and contextualised admissions

- Student success measures

- Progression measures

- Financial support

Investment

16

68


2

Provision of information to students 17

Introduction

1. SOAS University of London is one of the world’s leading institutions for the study of Asia, Africa and the Near and Middle East. SOAS uniquely combines language scholarship, disciplinary expertise and regional focus. We have the largest concentration in Europe of academic staff concerned with Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

2. We continue to strengthen our importance in the UK and abroad in understanding the world, and excelling in teaching, learning and research. Having recently celebrated our centenary, our vision for the next hundred years will continue to be underpinned by internationalism, justice, diversity and equality.

3. It is within this framework that we evidence our continuous commitment to widening access and

participation across all three phases of the student lifecycle: access to, success in, and progression from higher education. Our ambition is that all SOAS students graduate with the ability to challenge and interpret the world, connect communities and culture, and change and impact society. This is particularly something we aim to achieve for students from backgrounds underrepresented in higher education.

4. The strategic approach taken since 2012-13 has resulted in an overall improvement in our

performance against the targets set out in previous Access Agreements. We remain committed to our revised and refined targets and milestones developed for 2017-18, and which will ensure we continue to make progress for some of the hardest to reach groups. SOAS will continue to target our access, student success and progression activities (including financial support) at the most underrepresented students, and will continue to improve our evaluation and monitoring strategy to ensure we are best able to measure impact and deliver outcomes.

5. This 2019-20 Access and Participation Plan provides an assessment of our performance in

widening access and participation (paragraphs 6 to 32), a statement of our ambitions and strategy (paragraphs 33 to 73), the access, success and progression measures we will put in place to achieve these ambitions (paragraphs 74 to 108), the investment we will put in place to deliver these measures (paragraphs 109 to 111), and our approach to the provision of information for students (paragraphs 112 to 114).

Assessment of performance

6. SOAS is committed to increasing the rates of access, student success and progression for students from backgrounds underrepresented in higher education. We continue to assess our performance using HESA widening participation and non-continuation performance indicators where possible as they provide a robust measure comparable across years, and across the sector. Where relevant, we also use other external and internal sources of data to provide the most appropriate framework for our assessment, which is also made with consideration to our specific institutional context – in particular our diversity, our relatively small size, our distinctive subject mix and our London location. Access

7. In assessing our performance in the access phase of the student lifecycle, we use HESA widening participation performance indicators, Indices of Multiple Deprivation data, and institutional analysis of UCAS applications. This enables us to benchmark our performance and to use a basket of measures in order to ensure an accurate assessment.

69


3

8. Since 2012-13 we have steadily increased the proportion of students from state schools, consistently above our benchmark, and at a faster rate than the England average. The overall trend is upwards. This demonstrates good performance.

9. Since 2012-13 we have increased the proportion of young students at SOAS from Low Participation

Neighbourhoods, and most recently have met our milestone as well as narrowed the gap between our performance and the HESA location-adjusted benchmark to just 0.1%. This demonstrates we are steadily improving performance. However, an analysis of UCAS data showed a recent decrease in the number of SOAS-placed applicants from POLAR Quintile 2 which is statistically significant. This will be further investigated by the School.

10. As a London institution with a high proportion of our home undergraduate intake based in London

and the South East we consider it vital to use other measures alongside POLAR in order to accurately measure access for those living in areas of low household income or socioeconomic status, as in London there is a greater proportion of income-deprived children than anywhere else in the country, but young participation rates in London, as reflected in POLAR, are higher than elsewhere (HEFCE 2014/01). An internal analysis of our intake matching home postcodes with Indices of Multiple Deprivation areas shows that since 2012-13 the proportion of our intake from the most deprived 20% of postcodes has averaged 21% and the proportion of our intake from the most deprived 40% of postcodes has averaged 47%. Although this latter figure was 44% in 2017-18, this still reflects that our intake is broadly representative of the population in terms of socioeconomic status. This demonstrates sustained good performance.

11. Based on our analysis of UCAS data for SOAS-placed applicants, we note that in 2017-18 the

proportion of BME students in this group increased to 61.9%, higher than both the previous year and the average of the previous five years. This demonstrates sustained good performance. However, one ethnic group – Asian (defined as applicants who identified their ethnicity as Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese, or Other Asian background) – did experience a fall in proportion, and this will be investigated further.

12. Whilst the percentage of UK domiciled full-time undergraduate entrants who are mature has been

stable over the past 5 years, HESA data demonstrates the percentage at SOAS has dipped below the England average in 2015-16 and 2016-17 after several years of strong performance. Although an analysis of UCAS data for the 2017 intake suggests the proportion has risen, this remains a concern and the impact of measures that are being undertaken currently will be monitored closely.

13. At SOAS, since 2014-15 we have significantly increased the percentage of UK domiciled mature

full-time undergraduate entrants who are from Low Participation Neighbourhoods and we are closing the gap to our HESA location-adjusted benchmark. This stands in contrast to a dip in the average proportion in England over the same period.

14. We have increased our proportion of students in receipt of DSA above the HESA benchmark and

England average since 2012/13, with an overall upwards trend. This demonstrates sustained good performance and we will maintain our efforts in this area of work.

15. An internal analysis of UCAS applications over the past 6 years has indicated little progress made

in increasing the proportion of our intake who have experience of being in care, and the percentage of offer holders with experience of being in care has remained below 1% since 2012-13 (in comparison, almost 5% of all participants in our outreach activities in 2016-17 had experience of being in care). This is an area requiring improvement, including developing our capacity to collect data and monitor progress in this area.

Student Success

16. In assessing our performance in the student success phase of the student lifecycle, we use HESA non-continuation performance indicators, together with commissioned research undertaken by

70


4

Continuum, the Centre for Widening Participation Policy Studies. This research took into account what can broadly be described as “widening participation characteristics” including (but not limited to) ethnicity, social class, disability, previous academic achievement and the different learner progression routes into the institution. As a result, it provides a more detailed understanding of our student body and student success outcomes.

17. We note that HESA data for non-continuation rates of young learners from Low Participation

Neighbourhoods shows that in 2015-16 we performed better than both our benchmark and the England average. However, using the measure of parental experience of higher education as an additional proxy indicator for low household income or socioeconomic status, the Continuum research project identified that students with no parental experience of HE were more likely to withdraw. To further develop our understanding we will work to identify the most appropriate and robust measures to assess student success gaps for learners from areas of low higher education participation, low household income and/or low socioeconomic status in the future.

18. The Continuum research we commissioned identified a clear and substantial gap in both non-

continuation and degree attainment for students of particular ethnicities. With prior attainment and other factors controlled for Black students were 18% less likely to achieve Firsts than White students, and 16% less likely to achieve a 2:1 than White students. Asian students were 13% less likely to achieve Firsts than White students, and 12% less likely to achieve a 2:1 than White students. Further context to these gaps is provided by the Degrees of Racism research undertaken by the SOAS Students’ Union which uses a qualitative approach to understand the causes of the attainment gap. This area is a high priority requiring significant improvement, as a result of the size and impact of the existing gap.

19. Our non-continuation average for UK-domiciled mature full-time undergraduate entrants with no

previous HE qualification has been worse than our benchmark since 2012-13, but our performance since 2013-14 is improving and closing the gap to both our benchmark and the England average. Despite this better performance, this continues to be an area requiring attention.

20. Similarly, the non-continuation percentage for all UK-domiciled mature full-time undergraduate

entrants has been worse than our benchmark since 2012-13 and in this measure our performance has worsened in the most recent year for which HESA data is available (2015-16). This remains an area requiring improvement.

21. As for assessing student success for students with disabilities, the Continuum research report

identified wide variance in rates of non-continuation depending upon the nature of the disability declared by students (though where there were the largest gaps, the sample size was extremely low). This is an area requiring improvement and we will continue to invest in support for students with disabilities.

22. We are currently developing approaches to more robustly identify care leavers within our student

body; this is a priority to enable us to accurately report on student success rates for these learners in the future.

23. It is worth noting that the non-continuation rates for young UK domiciled full-time and for all UK

domiciled full-time students have worsened from 2013-14 to 2015-16 and are worse than both our benchmarks and the England averages. This further underlines that student success outcomes are an overall priority for the School, requiring improvement, in alignment with our widening access and participation aims.

Progression

24. In assessing our performance in the progression phase of the student lifecycle, we use Destination of Leavers from Higher Education survey data together with the most recent TEF year three metrics

71


5

provided. The former enable us to track change over time, and the latter provide benchmarks against which to gauge absolute performance.

25. The percentage of our graduates from POLAR Quintiles 1 or 2 in employment or further study is 1.1% above the benchmark in the most recent TEF metrics but the percentage in highly skilled employment or further study is 1.8% below the benchmark. However, the percentage of our graduates from IMD Quintiles 1 or 2 in employment or further study is above the benchmark (by 1%) as is the percentage in highly skilled employment or further study (by 2%). Overall, this demonstrates good performance.

26. Considering performance over time in the percentage of graduates in highly skilled employment or

further study, the gap between POLAR Quintile 1 or 2 and POLAR Quintile 3, 4 or 5 students, and between students with parental experience of HE and students with no parental experience of HE closed between 2012-13 and 2014-15 before widening in 2015-16. We will monitor this closely to identify if this widening is the start of a trend, or the result of an anomalous year.

27. For students from BME backgrounds, the percentage of our graduates in employment or further

study, and in highly skilled employment or further study is narrowly below the TEF benchmark in both cases (by 0.5% and 0.8% respectively). Performance over time in the proportion of BME graduates in highly skilled employment or further study shows sustained consistent improvement.

28. In terms of mature students’ progression outcomes the picture is mixed, with the proportion of

graduates in employment or further study only 0.2% below the TEF metrics benchmark and the proportion in highly skilled employment or further study 0.7% above the benchmark. More concerning is the performance over time, which indicates a worsening trend in outcomes for graduates who were 21-30 and 30+ when they started their studies. This is an area requiring further investigation.

29. For students with disabilities, our performance in terms of progression outcomes is similarly mixed.

The proportion in employment or further study is 1.2% below the TEF metrics benchmark, but the proportion in highly skilled employment or further study is 0.2% above the benchmark. Performance over time fluctuates considerably, most likely due to relatively small sample sizes.

30. As with the student success phase, we are currently developing approaches to more robustly

identify care leavers within our student body; this is a priority to enable us to accurately report on progression outcomes for these learners in the future.

Intersectionality

31. We recognise the importance of examining the intersections of characteristics to identify more accurately gaps in access, success and progression for particular groups of students at SOAS and will develop our capacity in this area through further ongoing quantitative and qualitative research co-created with students. This will inform future Access and Participation Plans. Assessment of Performance Summary

32. The assessment of our performance above provides a robust measure of performance in access, student success and progression at SOAS University of London, taking into account our institutional context and the performance of the sector overall. Whilst there are elements of good performance across the student lifecycle, there are also clear areas requiring improvement. Most significantly, the gaps in student success outcomes, especially for students of particular ethnicities, are the highest priority for improvement. Performance at both the access and progression stages is overall good and must be maintained as a minimum with specific areas of required improvement identified as above. Further to this there is a need to establish measures and procedures for monitoring outcomes for certain groups of students (in particular care-leavers) at all stages of the student lifecycle.

72


6

Ambition and strategy 33. SOAS is a remarkable institution. With our vast repository of knowledge and expertise focusing on

Asia, Africa and the Middle East, we are uniquely placed to inform and shape current thinking about the economic, political, cultural, security and religious challenges of our world. As such we have academics and students with a passion and expertise in some of the most interesting and exciting regions in the world. Our work in widening access and participation draws upon this passion, niche and specialism to create engaging, innovative and academically rigorous access, student success and progression programmes. Our aim is to work with students to become global citizens who can understand and engage with the world.

34. In the academic year 2018-19 we will develop a whole-school Access and Participation Strategy to build on progress to date and be cognisant of best practice across the School and the sector, as well as the internal and external drivers at large, including the identified priorities of the Office for Students. The strategy will connect with the School Learning, Teaching and Student Experience Strategy, the School Careers Strategy, and the School’s International Strategy, and will bring together various strands of existing activity and practice. The Access and Participation Strategy will identify specific aims and objectives and associated measures of success, and will play a key role in shaping future Access and Participation Plans.

35. The current strategic approach taken is embedded within the SOAS Vision and Strategy 2016-2020, which has two overarching aims focused specifically on students. Firstly, to produce high quality graduates who understand and engage with the world and the regions in which we specialise. Underlying this is a desire to provide students with an internationalised experience and a global perspective together with an interconnected view of the world. This desire is fundamental to our widening access and participation approach, which reflects and is strengthened by the School’s specialism. Secondly, to develop well rounded individuals who can make a difference in their communities and in the world. This is facilitated by a unique and fulfilling student experience so that students graduate from SOAS with a sense of purpose and responsibility, an openness to new ideas, a thirst for lifelong learning, and transferable skills. These are core considerations in our approach where fulfilling academic and personal potential, and providing equality of opportunity in prospects post-graduation are crucial for students from backgrounds underrepresented in higher education. Underpinning these overarching aims is a commitment to select the most academically-able students by increasing the participation of students from a variety of underrepresented backgrounds to ensure that the transformative nature of a SOAS education can be experienced by all. It is therefore crucial to provide support at all points in the student lifecycle – from pre-entry to post-graduation, particularly to students from backgrounds underrepresented in higher education.

36. As a result of the strategic aims and assessment of performance above, our key ambitions in

widening access and participation – closely aligned to the priorities identified by the Office for Students – are:

36.1. To recognise and maintain our improving performance in access, whilst also seeking

to reduce specific gaps where these exist, and to continue to contribute to sector-wide improvements in access to higher education by students from underrepresented backgrounds

36.2. To reduce gaps in student success, with those for students from particular ethnicities as the highest priority, as this is where large and persistent gaps exist

36.3. To continue to deliver our existing commitment to improve the progression outcomes of students from underrepresented backgrounds

36.4. To increase our evidence base for existing gaps in all three phases of the student lifecycle at SOAS through the means of qualitative and quantitative co-created research, and to continue to use an evidence-led approach of evaluation and reflection to reduce these gaps

37. In order to achieve these key ambitions and reflect the School’s strategic priorities, our access

outreach activities will focus on inspiring and encouraging students from the most underrepresented groups to engage with and interpret the world around them, and on providing support and guidance

73


7

in assisting students at all educational levels to achieve their academic and personal potential. Activities will be differentiated in their objectives to produce the most effective impact for learners according to their age and stage of education. We recognise that sustained interventions have the greatest impact, and the earlier a learner can be engaged, the better. In our admissions processes, we will continue to ensure we fairly and transparently assess the academic potential of students regardless of their background. We expect our activity not only to contribute to reducing gaps in access to SOAS itself, but also to contribute to increasing the entry rates of students from underrepresented groups to higher education in general, including to higher tariff providers where gaps are widest.

38. Our highest priority ambition is to significantly reduce gaps in student success, particularly for students from particular ethnicities, as this is where gaps are largest and where closing them will have greatest impact given the ethnically diverse make-up of our student body. This will also contribute directly to the Office for Students’ priorities for student success. At SOAS, these gaps exist both in non-continuation and degree attainment, and we will focus on both issues through whole-institution change and specifically targeted initiatives to deliver significant progress. Whilst recognising that reducing gaps in student success should also contribute to improving performance in progression, our strategic approach to reducing gaps in the progression phase of the student lifecycle will be founded upon increasing our evidence base and using it to shape future interventions. Equality and diversity

39. SOAS will ensure we have appropriately executed our responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010. The Widening Participation team will continue to collaborate with the Diversity and Inclusion Manager, particularly on initiatives to reduce the racialised attainment gap – a clear area of alignment between the School’s approaches to equality and diversity, and widening access and participation. As part of this process the School is committing to make a submission to the Equality Challenge Unit for the Race Equality Charter.

40. We seek to further align related approaches at SOAS in order to increase effectiveness; as such the Head of Equality & Diversity Committee has recently become an ex-officio member of the body responsible for drafting the Access & Participation Plan, and a revised schedule has been developed for the drafting of future Access & Participation Plans to include comprehensive engagement by Equality and Diversity Committee (of which the Head of Widening Participation is also an ex-officio member). Priority underrepresented groups

41. As a result of our assessment of performance, we have identified the following underrepresented groups as priorities for various stages of the student lifecycle. In the access stage we will prioritise reducing the participation gaps for those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, which will involve further developing our use of available datasets to better identify these learners in a SOAS context. We will also prioritise improving access for care-leavers, and will reflect upon our institutional practice and how this could be altered to mitigate the decrease of mature students accessing higher education across the sector (ensuring that mature students themselves are involved in this process).

42. In the student success phase we will prioritise reducing the non-continuation and degree attainment gaps for students of particular ethnicities, and particularly students who identify as Black as this is where the biggest gaps exist. We believe that focussing on this gap in the first instance is appropriate as a successful strategy which marries whole-institution inclusive approaches and targeted interventions will generate evidence of interventions which work (and others which do not) that can be used to reduce student success outcome gaps affecting students from other underrepresented backgrounds, even with the recognition that some of the causes of these gaps will differ.

74


8

43. In the progression phase, we will prioritise in the first instance gaps in outcomes for students of particular ethnicities, recognising that gaps exist for BME students at SOAS and especially across the sector in comparison to White students (HEFCE 2018/05). By focussing our strategic approach on minimising this gap (and understanding how and why it varies across different ethnic groups) we will increase our evidence base enabling us to improve performance more generally in supporting progression outcomes for students from underrepresented backgrounds.

44. In addition to these identified priority groups of students from underrepresented backgrounds, we

are also prioritising the development of our evidence base for certain groups in recognition of gaps that exist at a sector-level – and with the ambition of contributing to the sector-wide evidence base. Across all phases of the student lifecycle, this will include White British students (both male and female) from low socioeconomic status backgrounds, students from refugee backgrounds, and care leavers. We also intend to further research how the intersections of characteristics can affect gaps at all stages of the student lifecycle. We also recognise that that our student body has a large proportion of students who commute to SOAS and/or who live at their parental home and the effect of this on outcomes in student success and progression requires further investigation.

Monitoring the delivery of our Access and Participation Plan

45. The Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) is the senior manager with ultimate responsibility for widening access and participation, supported by the Associate Director of Student Welfare. SOAS’ commitment to access is further supported by departments through the planning, implementation and monitoring of various measures, particularly in relation to retention, progression and collaboration.

46. Performance in widening access and participation are monitored by the Teaching, Learning & Student Outcomes Committee (chaired by the Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching)), and its sub-committee the Student Outcomes Panel (chaired by the Associate Director of Student Welfare), and discussed at the highest level by Academic Board, Executive Board and the Board of Trustees. There is student representation at these committees to ensure students are fully able to contribute to and shape approaches and monitoring of the delivery of the plan. In addition, widening access and participation issues are also considered by the Student Experience & Engagement Committee and the Equality and Diversity Committee, further aligning institutional approaches.

47. Beyond the formal committee structure, all areas of SOAS have a responsibility to support, promote

and embed widening access and participation. In line with best practice identified in OFFA’s “Understanding a whole institution approach to widening participation” research, we are committed to embedding widening access and participation into all considerations across the institution, with a top-down, bottom-up approach to ensure effective expansion of existing pockets of excellence towards a fully inclusive institution model. The development of an institutional Access & Participation Strategy is an integral part of this approach.

48. The core SOAS Widening Participation Team is based in the Student & Academic Experience area.

The team works extensively across the whole institution on issues of access, admissions criteria, student success and progression including with all teams in Student & Academic Experience, all academic departments, and the Students’ Union. The implementation of this Access & Participation Plan will be supported by all these areas of SOAS.

49. The body responsible for the drafting and delivery of the Access & Participation Plan is a steering

group comprised of the Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching), Registrar and Secretary (Chief Operating Officer), Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Student and Academic Experience), Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Resources & Planning), Head of Widening Participation, Widening Participation Manager (Outreach & Progression), Widening Participation Manager (Languages & Community), Head of Equality and Diversity Committee, Head of Marketing, the Fees Deputy Manager, and members of the Students’ Union Executive: the Co-Presidents (Democracy and

75


9

Education), and (Welfare and Campaigns), the People of Colour Officer and the Working Class Students’ Officer. This group reports to the Director of SOAS.

50. As part of our commitment to continuous improvement, we are responding to the establishment of

the Office for Students by reviewing the process undertaken for the drafting and delivery of our Access & Participation Plan. We will undertake this review in 2018-19 to inform our practice for 2019-20. It will be informed by the development of our Access & Participation Strategy and will be based on existing best practice and these underlying principles: that it is imperative to ensure full involvement of students from diverse backgrounds, that it must involve members of staff involved in all phases of the student lifecycle across the institution, that an approach involving sub-groups focussed on particular strands of widening access and participation will enable the considerable expertise spread across the institution to feed into this key process.

51. This new group will oversee the development and monitoring of an action plan for 2019-20, in

collaboration with the Students’ Union, to support the implementation of the Access & Participation Plan. The Head of Widening Participation will be responsible for delivering the action plan, reporting to the Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching). Ensuring continuous improvement through evaluation

52. Monitoring and evaluating impact is core to our approach in widening access and participation. Our strategic approach to evaluation ensures it is designed to be rigorous and to facilitate reflective, responsive and impactful practice. Piloting projects is an integral part of this approach, scaling up those which are evaluated to be successful, and taking forward learning from those which are evaluated as being unsuccessful. Ultimately our evaluation generates evidence in order to influence practice in SOAS and the sector.

53. Monitoring and evaluation is conducted at an institutional and activity level, which assists in refining approaches and processes across the whole student lifecycle. It also involves commissioning external research as appropriate, undertaking research projects internally, and gathering data which is used to continuously improve the outcomes of our interventions. It is also imperative to identify what works elsewhere in the sector, and to incorporate this into our approach where appropriate – we believe in putting evidence and evaluation at the heart of our approach, developing our evidence base further and spreading best practice to where it is needed.

54. SOAS systematically and routinely gathers data from learners and other stakeholders on the impact of our activities. Reports are produced against a number of variables which allows the monitoring of outcomes and attitudinal changes amongst different groups. These include measuring increased awareness of HE study and student life, how to progress to HE, costs and support available, impact on current study, and changes in attitude towards HE.

55. As well as measuring attitudinal change, structures are in place for tracking the progression to

higher education outcomes of learners who engage in our long-term and summer school programmes. SOAS performs well within the context of our current activity evaluation procedure, and are continuing to reap the rewards of having refined our evaluation forms, reducing the range of attitudinal questions asked and focusing on key indicators which can be used to evidence top-line impact more clearly. This enables us to reflect upon current practice and impact, and to change our approach and interventions as a result, facilitating continuous improvement.

56. Our approach to evaluation is under regular review to ensure efficiency and effectiveness. As such,

we are currently exploring ways to further improve aspects of our evaluation in order to be able to better evidence outcomes and to reflect OFFA’s proposed standards for the evaluation of outreach. We are embedding the best practice from our access-focussed evaluation strategy into activity focussed on student success and progression, to further align all strands of our widening access and participation activity. We believe it is important to make known the findings of our evaluation through conferences and publications, particularly the impact on widening access and participation

76


10

of approaches to learning and teaching being pioneered at SOAS such as decolonising the curriculum.

57. The central Widening Participation team work closely with colleagues in the Planning department to understand the access, success and progression of students from underrepresented backgrounds, and to reflect upon this on a regular basis in order to inform our practice. This includes analysis of the make-up of the current study body by certain protected characteristics and widening participation indicators, but also departmental-level analyses which enable us to better understand the attainment and non-continuation patterns of students from underrepresented backgrounds at a more granular level, and which reflect the interest of academic staff in issues to do with widening access and participation at the departmental level. The WP and Planning teams are working increasingly closely together in order to identify and develop further areas where data is sufficiently robust to provide the evidence for developing and delivering additional interventions, including intersectionality.

58. Our approach to evaluation and monitoring is applied to our provision of financial support also. We

will continue to use the toolkit developed by OFFA to monitor and evaluate its impact. This evaluation will be undertaken on an annual basis, and evidence to date – particularly from the qualitative tools – has demonstrated the positive impact of financial support in enabling recipients to concentrate on their studies without worrying about finances, thereby contributing towards our strategic aims of increasing student success outcomes. Other impact reported includes how financial support contributes to reducing anxiety, to increasing feelings of being valued by SOAS, and to helping recipients to manage family responsibilities.

Collaborative working

59. Collaborative working is a key requirement in meeting need and delivering widening access and participation activities for schools, colleges, the local community, and university students, across all phases of the student lifecycle. SOAS will continue to collaborate with partners in working with underrepresented groups, and these partners include schools, colleges, third sector organisations and other universities. A key aspect of our strategic approach to collaborative working is to establish formal partnerships with schools and colleges, based on further developing existing successful models. The nature of all these partnerships and collaboration depends upon the partners involved, but collaborative working collectively enables us to build lasting success, to work with learners at an early stage of their education and to provide them and schools and colleges with sustained engagement in order to accelerate progress in reducing existing gaps. We are currently engaged in the following partnerships:

60. The Brilliant Club: SOAS is a partner university of The Brilliant Club, collaborating to deliver the launch and graduation trips which are a core feature of the programme, and providing SOAS PhD students to deliver tutorials to groups of high-potential pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds in Key Stages 2, 3, 4 and 5. An evaluation by UCAS of their 2015 Year 12 cohort demonstrated that 58% of pupils eligible for free school meals progressed to a highly-selective university compared to 11% nationally. In 2016-17, two-thirds of those tutored by SOAS researchers went on to produce work of a standard associated with the next key stage up in development.

61. Morpeth School: We collaborate with Morpeth School in Tower Hamlets to provide tailored study

support for History A-level students there, currently consisting of a masterclass, study skills support from Student Ambassadors, and assisted use of SOAS library resources. The partnership began five years ago, and is framed by the idea of decolonising the curriculum, with the masterclass drawing on cutting-edge research to provide an alternative to the standard Eurocentric narrative of the world between 1850 and 1950.

62. The Brightside Trust: Brightside exists to help young people from all backgrounds make confident

and informed decisions about their future. We collaborate in order to provide ementoring as part of our outreach offer, and as part of our student success activity. In terms of the latter, the online

77


11

mentoring linked to our Bridging Courses featured in Brightside’s 16-17 Impact Report with over 70% of students feeling their mentor supported them with the social and academic sides of university, and made the transition to university smoother.

63. Capital L: a London consortium of 5 HEIs who collaborate with schools, colleges and a range of

other stakeholders to increase and widen participation in language studies in schools, colleges and universities. Capital L staff sit within the Widening Participation team, and the consortium is jointly directed by the Head of Widening Participation at SOAS and the Professor of French at the University of Westminster.

64. Linking London: a unique partnership of forty-nine educational organisations that work

collaboratively to support recruitment, retention and progression into and through higher education, in all its variety, including full and part time, higher apprenticeships and work based learning and employment. Through Linking London membership partners work both collaboratively, and individually, to maximise their contribution to targeted student engagement and achievement, social mobility and in pursuit of improvements in social justice through education. The long-established network has been in existence since 2006, and is part of the NCOP project.

65. Aimhigher London South: a partnership which works to ensure fair access to higher education

for young people from non-traditional backgrounds. This is achieved by linking schools, colleges, universities and education providers together to work effectively across London and the South East. The network collaborates to provide impartial information, advice and guidance to learners from years 8 – 13, to share good practice at a local and regional level in order to determine what works well and that activities are effective, to develop and apply evaluation and monitoring methods to illustrate long term impact, and to improve the involvement of current students. The network is also part of the NCOP project.

66. University of London Outreach, Access and Success Group: a network established in April

2014 through which a number of University of London providers collaborate on four strategic themes including: white working class boys, key stage 3 and 4 outreach, evaluation and research, and student success and progression.

67. As noted above SOAS has been engaged with a number of regional collaborations as part of our

engagement with the NCOP programme. As part of our membership of Linking London we have supported their NCOP work with colleges in target wards. With Aimhigher London South we have supported a range of activity, including the Look to the Future programme, targeting Looked After Children. Although funded separately, this important contribution to the national landscape complements the work delivered through our Access & Participation Plan by focusing on young people who are most underrepresented. These learners are hard to reach for SOAS as a small, specialist institution, and the collaborations provide a systematic and measurable environment in which to make a difference in these areas.

68. We recognise that the 12 Opportunity Areas identified by the government experience significant

challenges in social mobility. Given our size, location and unique subject mix, we believe that our best approach to engage with Opportunity Areas will be through collaboration with organisations based in the areas, in conjunction with the development of online, remote and devolved outreach resources reflecting our unique specialism, such as the Languages Challenge. Student Consultation and Involvement

69. The SOAS Students’ Union has worked in tandem with the School in drafting the Access & Participation Plan for 2019-20. It is reflected in the continued importance of bursaries, a commitment to review how these are publicised and allocated from the perspective of students’ accessing them, and the importance of maintaining and increasing engagement with students of diverse backgrounds. This is a continuation of the Students’ Union involvement and collaboration in developing access agreements for the past 6 years.

78


12

70. The School’s Widening Participation team meet with members of the Union executive to discuss

issues in access, student success and progression and their alignment with the Students’ Union educational priorities. Collaborative activity includes delivering WP outreach activities such as the Students’ Union Saturday School, and working together to further student success and progression, such as by together progressing the implementation of the recommendations of the Student Union’s Degrees of Racism report.

71. Strategically the Students’ Union has a key role in several areas of SOAS relating to student

experience. This includes membership of key committees and the Board of Trustees. As mentioned previously, two Co-Presidents sit on the Steering Group responsible for drafting the Access and Participation Plan as formal members, and student representation has recently been increased and diversified by the addition of the Students’ Union’s People of Colour Officer and Working Class Students’ Officer joining the Steering Group. The positive work, approach and engagement of all these representatives of the diverse student voice has contributed to an increasingly strengthened approach taken to widening access and participation.

72. It is primarily through membership of this group by Students’ Union representatives that students

have had the opportunity to express their views about the content of the Access & Participation Plan, with the outcomes noted above, as well as to continue being involved in the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Access & Participation Plan.

73. An important additional opportunity for students to be involved in the implementation, monitoring

and evaluation of the Access & Participation Plan is through our Outreach Student Ambassador Scheme. Outreach Student Ambassadors, all from widening participation backgrounds, play a key role in the delivery of our outreach activity to improve access. In addition, Ambassadors complete evaluation forms for the activities they work on, and these evaluations are reflected upon as part of the process of continual improvement, providing another way in which the input of students from diverse backgrounds is involved in evaluating the activities underpinned by the Access & Participation Plan.

Access, student success and progression measures

74. All activity funded through our Access & Participation Plan contributes to improving access at an institutional or sector level, and to improving student success and progression outcomes at SOAS for students from underrepresented backgrounds. We take an evidence-based approach and reflect SOAS’ unique subject mix and diversity in the measures we undertake. The following paragraphs provide examples of activities based on established and evidenced best practice, and which form part of our student lifecycle approach, together with identified areas in which our approach would benefit from further institutional level research.

Access measures

75. Student Ambassador-led taster days: these taster days in which Student Ambassadors deliver subject-specific workshops and age-appropriate information, advice and guidance, provide a positive and engaging HE experience for younger age groups. Key outcomes include increasing participants’ understanding of the link between higher education and career benefits, and increasing awareness of the variety of subjects available in higher education, as well as increased confidence and engagement in education. In 2016-17, over four-fifths of participants reported learning more about what university study and student life would be like, and over half felt they gained study skills or knowledge to help them fulfil their academic potential.

76. Attainment-raising collaboration with The Brilliant Club: in 2016-17 over 300 pupils from 25 schools visited SOAS on either a Launch or Graduation trip as part of The Brilliant Club’s Scholars programme, and over 130 pupils studied with a SOAS PhD tutor. Of these, two-thirds received a 1st or 2:1 in their final assignment, meaning they performed at, or well at, the key stage above their current level.

79


13

77. Languages Challenge: the Languages Challenge is a devolved task based activity delivered at

schools. Aimed at encouraging learners to develop metacognitive skills, the project consists of students working in teams to complete a number of different tasks. Students are encouraged to use their creativity, make choices, plan and complete tasks cooperatively, assess their achievement against success criteria and to reflect on the whole process. In 2017-18, 49 state schools from all over the UK registered.

78. Summer schools: our 4-day summer schools provide a sustained and intensive HE intervention,

with ongoing meaningful contact with current HE students. The summer schools also provide a forum for gaining study skills and specific subject knowledge. Key outcomes include increased understanding of how to progress to university, and an extensive understanding of the higher education experience. In 2016-17, over 80% of participants indicated they had learnt more about both the costs of university and the financial support available, and 90% stated that they now believed more strongly that they would progress to university.

79. Step On Programme: this programme is aimed at supporting Year 12 students to make successful

transitions to A-level study, including through a series of study skills development sessions alongside an ab-initio language course. Participants are encouraged to identify short and long term learning goals; complete a reflective learning diary; evaluate and review how best to manage their time; complete a skills audit and reflect on what mindset they have adopted.

80. SOAS Scholars, Thinking Globally: SOAS Scholars is a long-term sustained two-year project

designed to raise pupils’ attainment in the sixth form by increasing participants’ breadth and depth of knowledge, self-awareness and confidence, and by developing study skills and time management techniques. Participants work with current undergraduate students on a number of higher education and career related activities, as well as experiencing academic masterclasses. In 2016-17, 90% of participants reported they had gained study skills or knowledge to help them fulfil their academic potential, and the project has a sustained history of participants progressing to highly selective institutions.

81. History Partnership with Morpeth School: tailored study support for History A-level students at

Morpeth School consisting of a masterclass, study skills support and assisted use of SOAS library resources. In 2016, all participants met or exceeded their overall target grade in the module SOAS supported.

82. As reflected in the above activities, SOAS collaborates extensively with schools and colleges across

London, and we are continuing to increase our widening access and participation work into other parts of the country to reach more learners in LPNs and Opportunity Areas. This is through initiatives such as funding accommodation and travel for our (otherwise non-residential) summer schools, and developing our online, devolved and remote outreach offer.

83. Overall, we currently engage with over 100 schools, and do so repeatedly and most closely with

those that are in the most disadvantaged third of schools in London according to our school priority formula. This forms the basis of close collaborative and strategic sustained working at both school and learner level. We recognise the close link between academic attainment in schools and colleges and access to higher education, and consequently raising learner- and school-level attainment is a fundamental driver behind our access activity.

84. SOAS has established models of school partnership which are based on subject level support to

raise attainment within target schools. Our experience to date is that schools are engaged in this type of partnership arrangement which is embedded in the curriculum, and also that small group, high intensity programmes have the most significant impact on student outcomes including coursework marks and student confidence. Crucially, the benefits of engaged partnerships can be noted by the increased retention rates of students who progress to SOAS having been supported

80


14

in school or college. This work will be scaled up to increase the number of school-level partnerships. The model mentioned above of collaboration for the delivery of a module within the A-level History course at Morpeth School forms the basis of a template we will develop further in different subjects and different schools.

85. In addition, we are implementing plans to enter into broader partnerships with schools, in order to

enfold our current one-off activity with younger students into a broader framework alongside extended programmes to increase attainment and progression. This model will also involve working in a more consistent way with parents/guardians, maximising impact further.

86. In order to ensure that we target our activities to learners who would benefit the most, we have

developed a school formula which ascribes numerical values to state schools according to various criteria including POLAR, pupil destinations after key stage 4, the attainment 8 score for disadvantaged pupils, and the percentage of pupils eligible for free school meals. The more disadvantaged and low-performing the school is, the higher the score it receives, and the higher priority it is to work with. The formula is subject to annual review to ensure it remains fit-for-purpose.

87. The 10% highest scoring schools form the Priority 1 group, then the next highest scoring 20% are

Priority 2, then the next highest scoring 30% are Priority 3, with the remaining 40% being non-priority. As a result of our school level targeting procedures, in 2016-17 we directly engaged with 13 priority 1 schools, 11 priority 2 schools and 5 priority 3 schools.

88. Supplementary to our school formula, we also use a basket of measures to select individual

applicants to our post-16 outreach activities. The measures include an assessment of their performance at GCSE relative to the overall performance of the school they attended and additional characteristics and socioeconomic context associated with low rates of progression to higher education. The measures are designed to identify those with the academic potential to progress to highly selective institutions, but the least likely to do so.

89. Participants are asked to disclose socio-economic information on anonymous post-activity evaluation forms in order to ensure activities are targeting the most appropriate students. These are analysed on an event-by-event and annual basis. Of over 2000 participant evaluation forms collected in 2016/17, more than half reported no parental background of higher education, over two-fifths reported that they had been in receipt of Free School Meals and just under 5% reported that they had been in care. All of these figures represent an increase since the preceding year, reflecting continued robust targeting procedures, which consistently improve year on year.

Fair and contextualised admissions

90. The School believes that a diverse student population contributes to a challenging and stimulating learning environment. We therefore welcome undergraduate applications from all candidates with the potential to succeed, whatever their background and we believe that a contextualised approach to admissions is vital to identify this potential most accurately. As a result, all home applicants to undergraduate programmes are considered eligible for reduced offers dependent on a basket of socio-economic and educational indicators associated with lower than expected attainment at GCSE and/or A-level, comprised of a mix of individual-level, school-level and area-level data.

91. Our approach is reviewed annually to ensure that it is as effective as possible, and the WP and Admissions teams are currently working together with students in order to better publicise our approach, and to demystify any aspects of the application and admissions process for SOAS applicants from underrepresented backgrounds. Student success measures

92. Bridging Courses for First Generation and Mature Students: these are free, week-long courses for undergraduates designed to enable participants to make a flying start to their studies. The First Generation Bridging Course is for state-school educated students who are the first generation in

81


15

their family to go to university or from Low Participation Neighbourhoods, and the Mature Bridging Course is for students who are 21 or over when starting their undergraduate degree. The Courses include study skills (with written work submitted and feedback given) and the development of early awareness and access to support services available, as well as a mutually supportive network. Key outcomes include a real sense of belonging, improved study skills, greater resilience and improved non-continuation rates compared to students from similar backgrounds who did not attend the courses.

93. First term ementoring: online mentoring extends the reach and impact of the Bridging Courses by providing the opportunity to eligible students to be matched with their own individual mentor throughout the first term, who can offer personal advice around the transition to university. Over 70% of students felt their mentor supported them with the social side of university, supported them with the academic side of university, and made the transition to university smoother.

94. BME mentoring: a new opportunity for BME students (particularly students from African and

African Caribbean backgrounds) to meet with BME staff, with the project aiming to support participants in making the transition to SOAS and to access help and support if required. Key outcomes include a sense of belonging, and increased personal and academic confidence.

95. Peer assisted study support: this programme of support targets academic subjects traditionally

perceived as difficult, with peer leaders encouraging peer support during sessions and students identifying their own solutions to common problems. The sessions focus on topics the students find challenging and reflect on topics previously covered in order to scaffold learning. Targets for future interventions include 70% of PASS attendees reporting improved study skills and social networks, and reporting increased control over study management.

96. Online CBT provision: a new initiative to provide computer-based cognitive behavioural

intervention to support improved mental health for students, particularly aimed at enabling students from underrepresented backgrounds who would benefit to access services. Key outcomes include improved access to services for previously hard to reach students, and faster treatment.

97. Following from the Continuum research and the Degrees of Racism report, an Attainment Gap

Working Group was formed. The Working Group put together an action plan which has been adopted by the School to drive forward progress. In addition, we took part in the HEA London Retention Project (out of which the Retention Working Group was formed), and seek to incorporate established good practice across the sector, such as that identified in the ‘What Works?’ project.

98. The selected student success measures outlined above have been developed from a strong evidence base and aim to combine a whole-institution inclusive approach with additional interventions targeted at learners from underrepresented backgrounds. As with all our activities, we will continually improve the evaluation of the impact of our student success measures funded through the Access & Participation Plan.

99. We will further develop our evidence base by undertaking additional qualitative and quantitative research into the student experience for learners from underrepresented backgrounds. As part of this research process, we will undertake a scoping exercise to determine where the provision of more flexible support may be beneficial for students from underrepresented backgrounds, such as mature learners. In addition, we will examine particularly closely the experience of commuter students as there has been a significant increase in the proportion of our intake who live at home while studying (as noted in The Sutton Trust’s Home and Away report published in 2018).

100. Decolonising the curriculum is an additional key measure we are taking to increase student success for students from underrepresented backgrounds, fully aligned with our widening access and participation strategy. The Decolonising SOAS Working Group (comprised of students, academic and professional services staff) has developed a Learning and Teaching toolkit for

82


16

departments to facilitate making what we teach and how we teach it more responsive to the problems of racialized privilege and discrimination within our teaching practice. Decolonising the curriculum is a key strategic priority for the Students’ Union and the School, and we continue to promote this approach and aim to publicise outcomes across the sector.

Progression measures

101. Outreach Student Ambassador Scheme: Outreach Student Ambassadors work on our access outreach activities and are themselves students from underrepresented backgrounds. SOAS employs approximately 100 Outreach Student Ambassadors annually and this scheme is an opportunity to support the personal development of students from underrepresented backgrounds. They are supported to develop interactive taster workshops, based on their programmes of study, which they deliver to schools and college pupils. Feedback taken from Student Ambassador Scheme exit surveys demonstrate that 100% of Ambassadors thought they benefited, and over 90% said their employability, public speaking, leadership and people skills were improved as a result of their participation.

102. Targeted Careers Service provision: the Widening Participation team works closely with the Careers Service, including being able to use the Careers Registration data to track changes in careers thinking, and funding microplacements for students from underrepresented backgrounds. We are collaboratively exploring and trialling a range of progression measures designed to impact outcomes for students from underrepresented backgrounds, in order to develop increased understanding of what works most effectively.

103. Internationalisation: current measures to promote internalisation have included collaborating with the organisation Common Purpose to provide an international leadership development programme experience for 25 students from underrepresented backgrounds and with little to no experience of international travel. We have also supported students from underrepresented backgrounds to successfully apply for ACU Global Summer School grants, and will continue to explore the most effective ways to support internationalisation for students from underrepresented backgrounds.

Financial support

104. SOAS will provide a bursary worth £4500 for students from low-income backgrounds in 2019/20 as institutional analysis indicates that financial support positively impacts on student success outcomes for students from underrepresented backgrounds. This evidence, and a strong steer from our student body, has informed our decision to offer financial support over the duration of programmes for students from the most disadvantaged groups.

105. We are committed to ensuring that the financial support on offer remains at an appropriate level and will undertake further research into the cost of living for SOAS students, and will review our approach to bursaries if tuition fee levels change.

106. SOAS Bursary: this bursary provides £1500 a year to every undergraduate student with a household income below £25,000, thereby guaranteeing financial support to students from low-income backgrounds. The bursary is paid during three years of study, not including language years abroad.

SOAS Bursary First year Second year Third year Total £1500 £1500 £1500 £4500

107. SOAS will deposit the cash bursary directly into the student’s bank account by the end of February in each relevant academic year. However please note that the current timetable for payments is subject to review as part of a student-centred project reviewing our bursary offer to ensure that impact is maximised for students from underrepresented backgrounds. As part of this review we will aim to make bursary payments as early in the academic year as possible.

83


17

108. To ensure every student with a household income below £25 000 receives a bursary, we have

made provision for a greater number of bursaries than our student numbers forecast. If actual numbers of students in 2019-20 result in there being unallocated funds, we intend that this amount will be used to provide financial support to SOAS students with a household income between £25,001 and £42,875, prioritising allocation in order of those with the lowest household income.

Investment

109. Based on the assessment of current performance outlined previously, SOAS will commit 31.3% of its higher fee income on access, student success, and progression measures. The table below shows the split between financial support, access, student success, and progression expenditure.

2019-20 Financial Support £896,518 Access £436,810 Student Success £465,656 Progression £23,160 Total Expenditure £1,822,144

110. The table below demonstrates, in percentage of higher fee income terms, how our split of spend responds to our assessment of current performance.

2019-20 Financial Support 15.4% Access 7.5% Student Success 8.0% Progression 0.4% Total Expenditure 31.3%

111. As well as the investment above SOAS will make further investment in widening access, student success and progression through funding a number of staff posts across a range of teams in the institution including Admissions, Student Advice and Wellbeing, and Learning and Teaching Development. Further to this SOAS will fund inclusive whole-institution initiatives such as the HEA Inclusive Assessment and Feedback project. This further investment will be underpinned by the developing SOAS Access & Participation Strategy, which will also identify strategic widening access and participation objectives for additional fundraising.

Provision of information to students

112. SOAS provides clear, accessible and timely information to applicants and potential students on our undergraduate fees and financial support. Information on fees and financial support is provided through our institutional website and the UCAS website in sufficient advance and level of detail to enable prospective students to make an informed choice. We will continue to publish this information on these websites.

113. Regarding the financial support available, we will make clear any eligibility criteria and the application process to be considered for the SOAS Bursary. This will also be included in our leaflet on financial support which is distributed to schools and colleges, and which is produced in conjunction with students from underrepresented backgrounds. As mentioned previously we are undertaking a student-centred project regarding our bursaries, which will also focus upon ensuring that information about our financial support is clear and accessible.

114. In addition, we will ensure Access Agreements and Access and Participation Plans pertaining to students studying at SOAS will be available through the SOAS website.

84


18

Access & Participation Enquiries: SOAS Widening Participation Team

[email protected] Follow @soaswpteam

85

mailto:[email protected]


SOAS Student Protection Plan - 2018-19

Background

As part of our registration with Office for Students we have to develop a Student Protection Plan. However we would like this to be more than a tick box exercise and a clear plan that supports students to have the required information if any of the risks were to arise.

We will submit our form in the recommended Office for Students template however we do not believe that this is most effective document for communicating information to Students or Staff. Therefore we will submit a simplified version to Office for Students which outlines the specific risks that we believe are sufficiently likely to affect our students in 2018-19. We will then develop a more detailed plan which provides students with clarity on the processes for supporting them if any of a wider range of risks arose- these risks would be significantly less likely than those presented to Office for Students and therefore would not need to be included in our registration form. However they would aim to give our Students the reassurance that we have thought about the whole School and student experience and have contingency plans if any of these risks were to occur.

The risks we have included on the student protection plan for 2018-19 are those that we have assessed to be sufficiently likely for the next academic year, this does not mean that we believe that they will occur but if they do we have concrete plans in place to support students. The student protection plan review meeting will be built into every academic year, included on the School’s Almanac and agreed with the Students Union. The plan will be developed following the agreement of the departmental plans and budgets for the next academic year, it is likely to be in the Summer term.

The plan has been reviewed and input provided from the Associate Directors; SU representative; Student & Academic Experience representatives; planning representatives; registry representatives; finance representatives and governance representatives.

Communication of the plan

The 2018-19 Student Protection Plan was developed in consultation with front facing academic and professional services staff and student representatives. The risks outlines in this plan are relevant for the academic year 2018-19. The Student Protection Plan applies for one academic year and will be reviewed annually to ensure it is robust and effective.

The plan outlines how risks- if they occur- are likely to be mitigated, however each case will be considered on a case by case basis and take into consideration the individual circumstances. The plan will be utilised in line with the School’s code of conduct to ensure fair and consistent implementation of the plan.

If it is brought to the School’s attention that the plan is insufficient or requires amendments within the current academic year this will be discussed at Executive Board and amendments agreed in consultation with student representatives. The annual Student Protection Plan review will be undertaken in a

86


separate meeting by a working group of front-facing academic and professional services staff and student representatives. The revised plan will be reviewed at the Student Experience Committee to secure engagement from student representatives and scrutinise the detail and implications of any proposed changes for students. Revisions would also be reviewed at Academic Board to ensure all academic implications and risk had been considered and approved at the Executive Board to ensure that resource implications are effectively considered and outlined.

The risks highlighted in blue below are the risks that the Student Protection Plan Working Group deemed to be the most likely risks to occur within 2018-19. These risks were submitted to Office for Students as a summary of the wider Student Protection Plan. The rationale behind circulating a wider Student Protection Plan to students and staff is provide students with the reassurance and information that although many of the risks included are unlikely the School has contingency plans in place to support them if they were to arise.

Communication of the plan is essential to the effective implementation of the plan and therefore the School will evaluate the accessibility of the plan throughout the academic year and additional or alternative actions may be implemented to support the procedure outlined below.

Communicating the plan to students

The School will share the plan to current future students by publicising it on the School’s website and intranet under the academic regulations section. The plan will be integrated into student inductions during welcome week. Copies of the plan will be available from department offices and welfare services. In any circumstances where the plan is implemented this will be outlined to the student(s) and a link to the plan will be included for information.

Access and visibility of the School’s plan will be integrated into the evaluation of the School’s support services and feedback will be collated from Students informally throughout the academic year.

In addition, the plan will be included in the Student Representatives training held at the beginning of each academic session.

If students are unhappy with the process then each department will try to resolve this individually with the student, however their attention will also be drawn to the School’s complaints process and standard processes will be instigated.

The School will develop a student-facing format to share the Student Protection Plan. The format will make it is easier for students to identify the risk relevant to them and support them to understand the process that will be implemented and what they can expect of the School. The student-facing plan will contain more information than the plan submitted to Office for Students because it will included extremely unlikely risks that we do not anticipate arising. We will include these risks because we want to reassure Students that all risks have been reviewed, considered and there are concrete contingency plans for if the risks arose.

87


Communicating the plan to staff

The plan will be tabled as an item for information at all academic committees and executive board. The committees’ roles in implementing and adhering to the plans will be outlined at the start of each academic session. Whenever Learning and Teaching risks increase in likelihood then the relevant academic committee will receive the plan alongside the relevant papers to ensure consistent implementation.

The plan will be tabled as an item for information at the Estates and IT Governance Committee and committee’s roles in implementing and adhering to the plans will be outlined at the start of each academic session. Whenever infrastructure risks increase in likelihood then the committee will receive the plan alongside the relevant papers to ensure consistent implementation. In addition the plan will be tabled whenever the business continuity plan or incident management plan were discussed to ensure alignment.

The plan will be shared as part of new staff’s induction and shared in team meetings at the start of the academic session. Training will be held with programme conveners and student facing welfare teams to ensure fair and consistent implementation of the plan. Additional training would be provided to staff who support students who undertake a year abroad.

The plan will be publicised on the School’s website and included in an all staff email as a matter of priority.

The plan will be shared with departments individually through departmental meetings and the plan will be available from department and welfare offices.

Compensation

All compensation claims would be processed through the same procedure regardless of the circumstances that have resulted in the claim being made. All claims would be considered against the same framework to ensure consistency and fairness of outcomes.

The School have developed their procedures in line with UUK recommendations.

Finance to confirm how things are assessed. Including bursaries and additional support.

Where claims are successful, the fee refunds would be returned to the person, organisation or body that paid them originally. The School would provide additional support to students who are being supported via a sponsor to ensure that their circumstances are not adversely affected by inability to continue study at the School.

The risks are arranged in the order of the impact to students if the risks arose.

88


Risk Likelihood

of risk Impact of risk

Overall risk

Mitigation of risks arising Processes for monitoring increased or decreased likelihood

Specific timeframes for communication with students

Actions to support students if risks crystalize and continuation of study is not possible

Learning and Teaching risks (8 risks) Loss or restriction of university status.

1 5 5 Governance, Quality Assurance and other teams ensure compliance with regulatory framework.

Monitored through quality assurance and risk management procedures in accordance with governance framework.

Within 24 hours Exit awards and certification of credit for studies completed; support for students to transfer to another provider.

Withdrawal of designation

1 5 5 Governance, Quality Assurance and other teams ensure compliance with regulatory framework.

Monitored through quality assurance and risk management procedures in accordance with governance framework.


Inappropriate conduct of staff or students

3 4 12 The School code of conduct, values and disciplinary procedures for both staff and students. The Respect@SOAS policy and well promoted support and welfare services available to staff and students. Widening Participation Plan in place.

Ongoing welfare monitoring through Student Academic and Experience reports, widen participation teams and Students Union. Annual reports

As required depending on the circumstances.

Students would be supported through the student welfare services and would be supported with mitigating circumstances procedures. Inclusive assessment and curriculum work would be amended to support the needs of the student.

89


Inclusive assessment and curriculum work is in place and ongoing. BME mentoring scheme is in place.

produced. Collation and review of number of complaints and disciplinaries.

If students were unable to continue studying at the School, they would be supported to identify an alternative institution that would produce the same outcomes.

Suspension of programme.

3 3 9 Deadlines are in place to ensure programme withdrawals are made well before the period affected. Policies ensure that if these deadlines are not met, programmes are ‘taught out’ for those students already enrolled/holding offers.

Annual and Periodic Programme Review; departmental planning processes.

Current students or their representatives would usually be involved in consideration of withdrawal. Applicants would be informed within ten days of approval.

Students offered the opportunity to transfer to another programme, possibly with adaptation made to accommodate them. If no appropriate programme available, credit certificated for transfer to another institution.

Loss of specialist academic staff and therefore the School no longer has the specialist knowledge to continue teaching specific modules.

4 4 16 The School would seek to identify another member of staff with the appropriate skills and experience to fill the vacancy through alternative staffing arrangements. The department would review the programme and module requirements to identify whether the same outcomes could be delivered through an alternative route.

Policies in place to support consistent workload, career development and secondment opportunities. Engagement with staff to identify potential future staff changes and approve module accordingly.

Students not usually informed specifically of staff changes: communications re programme/module changes as above.

Where an effective staffing replacement cannot be found and a programme cannot continue, the School would implement the same procedures if a programme was suspended. Students offered the opportunity to transfer to another programme, possibly with adaptation made to accommodate them. Where it is a language course and there is a year abroad, we

90


would utilise existing staff to support the delivery of the course or would support students to identify alternative modules that supported the same educational outcomes and maintain the year abroad. If no appropriate programme was available, the School would support students to transfer to another institution and record the amount of credit/academic progress achieved. Where appropriate, the School would compensate students because of disruption to their studies and they suffer demonstrable, material financial loss. All compensation claims will be reviewed and agreed through the compensation procedure outlined within this plan.

Loss of specialist professional service staff and therefore the School are

4 3 12 The School would seek to identify another member of staff with the appropriate skills and experience to fill the vacancy through alternative staffing arrangements.

Engagement with staff to identify potential future staff changes and approve module

Where an effective staffing replacement cannot be found, then the Student Academic and Experience team would identify an alternative provider to deliver

91


unable to provide support services.

accordingly. the required support. The team would look to a partner institution in the Bloomsbury Learning Group to provide the required support.

Major changes in year to programme content for subsequent year of study.

4 2 8 Deadlines are in place to ensure major programme changes are made well before the period affected. Policies ensure that if these deadlines are not met, programmes are ‘taught out’ for those students already enrolled/holding offers.

Annual and Periodic Programme Review; departmental planning processes.

Current students would usually be involved in consideration of major amendments. Applicants would be informed within ten days of approval of change to programme.

Students offered the opportunity to transfer to another programme, possibly with adaptation made to accommodate them. If no appropriate programme available, credit certificated for transfer to another institution.

International institutional risks resulting in students being insufficiently supported or unsafe during their year abroad. This includes the location of the institution and consideration of its context.

3 5 15 Governance, robust and effective due diligence with all international partners, ongoing communications and quality assurance with partnerships

Monitored by programme convener and contextual understanding of locations.

If this risk arose, the School would react within a reasonable timeframe however the communication timeframe would be dependent on the circumstances that resulted in the risk. Students would receive, at least, weekly communications with their department.

A new arrangement would be brokered within a nearby or contextually similar institution that could provide the same intended outcomes. If context meant that the country of choice was not an option, an alternative location would be identified that could provide the same or similar educational outcomes. Alternatively students would be given the options to return to the UK and move to a 3 year degree and additional amendments would be made by the departments to support this

92


transition. Where teaching cannot be completed and there are no alternative options, we would support the student[s] to return to UK and continue their study at SOAS, with their credit/academic progress recorded. Where appropriate, the School would compensate students because of disruption to their studies and they suffer demonstrable, material financial loss. All compensation claims will be reviewed and agreed through the compensation procedure outlined within this plan.

Regulatory risks (3 risks) Suspension of Tier 4 Sponsor Licence

1 5 5 Compliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

Internal monitoring and co-operation with external audit.


Revocation of Tier 4 Sponsor Licence

1 5 5 Compliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

Internal monitoring and co-operation with external audit.


Loss of 1 5 5 Compliance with regulatory standards Internal audits and Within 24 hours Supporting students to identify

93


accreditation. and requirements. quality assurances

processes. an alternative course that met their needs. Provide students with guidance and support to enrol with an alternative provider who holds the relevant accreditation.

Infrastructure risks (4 risks) External events resulting in building or institutional closure

3 5 15 Business continuity plans in place. Engagement with local external agencies (including police, fire brigade etc)

The School’s management engage with local external agencies to monitor and identify any potential increase in likelihood of risk. Monitoring processes are integrated into the School’s Business Continuity Plans are monitored through review processes and quality assured by the committee structure.

The School’s incident management group would convene and the Business Continuity plans would be implemented. The actions to protect and support students would depend on the external circumstances that had resulted in the closure. The process for identifying the appropriate response is outlined in the School’s Incident Management Plan. If the impact of the incident continued then Students would be supported to find different institutions in a safe location. Digital and online resources would be used, where possible, to continue to deliver teaching and advice. The School has robust and

94


comprehensive insurance policies in place. Where appropriate, the School would compensate students because of disruption to their studies and they suffer demonstrable, material financial loss. All compensation claims will be reviewed and agreed through the compensation procedure outlined within this plan.

Institutional closure.

1 5 5 Financial management structures are in place to monitor finances, agree strategies for cost savings, growth and investments Whole school and departmental financial plans in place to support the viability and growth of the school

Monitored through risk management procedures in accordance with governance framework.

Within 24 hours Where possible, the School would close in a gradual way, over a period that would allow current enrolled students to complete their programme The School would support students to transfer to appropriate programmes at other providers and, where appropriate, by compensating students because of disruption to their studies they suffer demonstrable, material financial loss. All compensation claims will be reviewed and agreed through the

95


compensation procedure outlined within this plan.

Permanent building closure.

2 4 8 Financial management structures are in place to monitor finances, agree strategies for cost savings, growth and investments Estates and IT Governance Committee develop, monitor and implement the School’s strategic planning and policy development in relation to the School’s estate. The Committees make recommendations to Resources & Planning Committee, Executive Board and other committees as appropriate. Full terms of reference of the Committee can be found in Annex VII of the School’s Standing Orders.

Monitored through risk management procedures in accordance with governance framework.

The School’s estate would be reconfigured to enable teaching to continue in alternative spaces. Online resources and facilities would be utilised to support students to continue study from home, if on campus study was not possible.

Industrial action. 4 2 8 Policies establish the School’s position and procedures for consultation and negotiation with the recognised trade unions. Policies outline the School’s position on industrial action, procedures and response.

Ongoing HR relationships with the recognised unions.

Support and welfare services would be maintained, as much as possible. If feasible, support would be increased. Alternative services and resources would be extended to support students, for example extending library hours. Where possible, teaching would be rearranged or online platforms or resources would be utilised.

96

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 I

TRACKING STUDENT EXPERIENCE AT SOAS

Board of Trustees is asked to consider the attached documents. Executive Summary For information please find attached:

- Keeping a pulse on the SOAS student experience summary document - An example of a departmental student data pack

Recommendations & Next Steps N/A Financial Impact N/A Risks Effective Student Experience is fundamental to the SOAS vision.

Equality implications N/A Consultations N/A

97

Pre entry Induction & Orientation

Retention, Progression

‘Success’Employment & Further Study/‘Out-duction’

Keeping a pulse on the SOAS student experience

UKES NSS (NB Quants + Quals)

PRESPTES

SEM SEM SEMSEMSEM SEM SEM

INSIGHT FEEDBACK (pre and app stage)

DECLINERS SURVEY

WW SURVEY

CAREERS THINKING CAREERS THINKING CAREERS THINKING GRADUATE DESTINATIONS

STUDENT REPS (COMMITTEES, PPRs, staff-student fora)SERVICE SPECIFIC SURVEYS AND FOCUS GROUPS (e.g Catering)

SERVICE SPECIFIC USAGE DATA AND FEEDBACK

COHORT SPECIFIC SURVEYS AND FEEDBACK (e.g. PGR students)

CONSULTATIONS (e.g. student and academic experience restructure)

Times Higher

SE Survey HEPI/HEA

What Uni Student Choice

SU led surveys

EG: Tracking career thinking and employment outcomes

Department of Anthropology and Sociology information pack for 2018 Planning Roundv0.2 14/03/2018

CONTENTS

2

• Department profile – p3• Undergraduate Enrolments – p5

• Enrolments vs Targets – p7• Tariff – p8• Recruitment projections – p10• Programme enrolments – p11• Modules – p12• Non – Continuation – p17

• Postgraduate Taught Enrolments – 19• Enrolments vs Targets – p21• Recruitment projections – p22• Programme enrolments – p23• Modules – p27

• Postgraduate Research Enrolments – p28• Enrolments vs Targets – p30• Recruitment projections – p31• Programme enrolments – p32

• Finance - p33• League Tables – p42• TEF 3 Subject-Level Metrics – p44• Student Satisfaction – p48• Graduate Destinations – p61

Department profile: Anthropology and Sociology

3

The split by level of study is very similar to the SOAS average

4

Anthropology recruits more FTE than it teaches at UG level, while the department is a net “teacher” at PGT level

• At UG level, Anthropology registers 18 FTE more students than it teaches• At PGT level, Anthropology teaches marginally more FTE than it registers – a difference of 3.6 FTE.

Source: 2017/18 Inter-departmental teaching matrix developed for the RAM

UNDERGRADUATE ENROLMENTS

5

UG Anthropology at SOAS increased by 40% in five years. The sector however, grew five times faster.

6

• UG enrolments for Anthropology in the sector grew considerably each year between 2012/13 and 2016/17. SOAS enrolments still grew across the period.

• Although SOAS enrolments increased overall, its market share fell from 4% to 1.9%.

Source: Heidi Plus 2012/13-2016/17.Numbers rounded to nearest 5.

Undergraduates (first degree), new first year enrolments2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 % change 12/13

to 16/17

SOAS 50 65 55 60 70 40%All UK HEIs 1,250 1,565 2,190 3,135 3,715 197%SOAS share 4.00% 4.15% 2.51% 1.91% 1.88%

Should the significant growth at a national level influence forecast recruitment, or is the market for SOAS programmes a specific subset of the whole?

New UG home enrolments fell sharply in 2017/18

7Sources: Actuals are HESES 1-Dec enrolments for 2014-2017. Targets are from previous Faculty Plans

Home/EU recruitment fell in 2017/18 but estimated tariff stayed constant compared to 2016/17 (next slide). What factors influenced this decline in recruitment of quality students?

The estimated average entry tariff for Anthropology declined between 12/13 and 14/15, but has risen slightly since then

8

From the graph and table, it can be seen that the estimated average tariff for Anthropology in the Times league table declined between 2012/13 and 2014/15, but started to rise slightly in 2015/16 and 2016/17.

In 2017/18, the estimated tariff has remained at the 2016/17 level of 164 points (under the new tariff). This is above the average tariff for SOAS overall of 154 points.

Source: Planning analysis based on Times league table and CCTR tariff model

League Table Year

Year Published Entry Year Old Tariff

New Tariff

2015 2014 12/13 4582016 2015 13/14 4402017 2016 14/15 4322018 2017 15/16 436 162

201916/17

(modelled) 164

202017/18

(modelled) 164

Entry Tariff for Anthropology in Times/Sunday Times League Table

Over half (8 out of 14 FTE) of Anthropology UG new entrants with 3 known A’ Levels did not reach the lower published offer of AAB

9Source: Planning analysis based on top 3 A’ Level results (excluding General Studies) of new entrants in 2017/18, from data in UNIT-e

• An analysis of UG new entrants to Anthropology in 2017/18 shows that, of the 14 FTE with three known A’ Levels:

• Only 3 FTE (21%) met the upper published offer of AAA• A further 3 FTE (21%) met the lower published offer of AAB• The remaining 8 FTE (57%) did not meet the published offers

A significant proportion (57%) did not meet the published offers: what questions does this raise for recruitment strategy?

10

The department’s UG recruitment target for 2018/19 equals the 2017/18 forecast. Recruitment is projected to remain at this level.

Actual New Entrants

Forecast new entrants to 1 Dec

Target excl new progs

18/19 impact of new/ramping up approved progs (automatically populated from New Progs sheet)

Target including approved new/ ramping up progs (automatically calculated)

14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19

UG Home 37.0 47.5 47.0 35.0 35 0 35UG EU 9.5 5.5 16.0 5 5 0 5UG Overseas 8.5 4.5 9.0 7.0 7 0 7Total 55.0 57.5 72.0 47.0 47 0 47

Rationale for targetWe have no new programmes at the UG level planned or in the pipeline and no real reason to believe recruitment will be significantly different from this year. However, our market share has been declining while the UK sector is growing so we would hope to gradually build this up in years to come. Once we start to see that happen - e.g. through better marketing, WP etc. - then we can start to think about revising targets upwards again.

Source: Target setting template, returned by department, October 2017

Projections excl new programmes18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

UG Home 35 35 35 35UG EU 5 5 5 5UG Overseas 7 7 7 7Total 47 47 47 47

Rationale for projections

We have no new programmes at the UG level planned or in the pipeline and no real reason to believe recruitment will be significantly different from this year. However, our market share has been declining while the UK sector is growing so we would hope to gradually build this up in years to come. Once we start to see that happen - e.g. through better marketing, WP etc. - then we can start to think about revising targets upwards again.

The subject grew nationally by nearly 200% in five years: should this influence planned recruitment?

11

Over half of UG Anthropology enrolments (headcount) are spread across 26 two-subject degrees

Name A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 31 32 45.0 22.0 31 32 45 22 103.5 98.375 103.0 97.0 105 99 103 97DEVELOPMENT STUDIES AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 4 5 2.5 5 8 10 5 10 12.5 11.5 8.5 10.5 25 23 17 21International Relations and Social Anthropology 3.5 3 2 1.5 7 6 4 3 4 7 7.25 6.5 8 14 15 13CHINESE AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.5 1 3 1 3 1.5 2 2 4 3 6 6 9SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY AND STUDY OF RELIGIONS 0.5 1.5 2 1.5 1 3 4 3 2.5 3 3 4.5 5 6 6 9LAW AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 2.5 2 1 1.5 5 4 2 3 3.5 5.5 5 3.5 7 11 10 7ARABIC AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 2 2 2 1 4 4 4 2 2.5 2.5 3 4 6 5 6POLITICS AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 1.5 0.5 0 2 3 1 0 4 6 4.5 2.25 2.75 12 9 5 6MUSIC AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 2 0.5 2 1.5 4 1 4 3 2.5 1.5 3 2.5 5 3 6 5AFRICAN STUDIES AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 2 0.5 0.5 1 4 1 1 2 4 3 2.75 2.5 8 6 6 5Social Anthropology and World Philosophies 0 0 1.5 1 0 0 3 2 0 0 1.5 2.5 0 0 3 5HISTORY AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 1.5 1 0.5 0 3 2 1 1.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 5 5 5HISTORY OF ART/ARCHAEOLOGY AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 1 2 0 1 2 4 0 1 1.5 3 2.5 2 3 6 5JAPANESE AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 1.5 3 0.5 1 3 6 1 2 1.5 3.5 1.5 5 3 7 4GEOGRAPHY AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 0 1.5 0.5 1 0 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 4KOREAN AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 1.5 0.5 0.5 1 3 1 1 2 1.5 1 1.5 1 3 3 3 3LINGUISTICS AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 2 0.5 2 0.5 4 1 4 1 2 1.5 3 1.5 4 3 6 3South Asian Studies and Social Anthropology (including year abroad 0 0 1 0.5 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 2HEBREW AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 1 1 2JAPANESE STUDIES AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 1 0 1 0 0.5 0 1 0 1 0 2ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 1 1.5 0.5 0 2 3 1 0 3.5 2.5 2 1 7 5 4 2MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 0.5 1 0 1 1 2 0 0.5 1 2 1 1 2 4 2SWAHILI AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.5 0.5 1 0 1 2 2 1INDONESIAN AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0.5 0 2 0 1Tibetan and Social Anthropology (including year abroad) 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 1 1TURKISH AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0 1 0 0.5 0 2 1 1BURMESE AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 0HINDI AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 0SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOUTH EAST ASIAN STUDIES 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 1 1 0SOUTH ASIAN STUDIES AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0 0.5 1THAI AND SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 0 0 0.5 1Korean Studies and Social Anthropology 0 0 0.5 1Tibetan and Social Anthropology 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 0

55 57.5 72.0 45.0 79 83 99 68 159 153.9 163.8 156.8 217 216 228 221

Sum of FTE Sum of FTEHeadcountNEW STUDENT ENROLMENTS ALL STUDENT ENROLMENTS

Headcount

Source: Enstats aligned to HESES as at 1 December of each year

Anthropology UG enrolments by FTE and Headcount, 2014/15 – 2017/18

Only three programmes have more than 10 enrolments

In 2017/18 the average number of Anthropology UG module enrolments was relatively healthy, at 32.8

12Source: Unit-e

• 74% of the modules had 21 or more students enrolled• No modules had fewer than 11 enrolments• 12 out the 23 modules taught were shared with PGT

Module Type Dept Module Ref Module name current A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18

A17/18 Head count Band

A17/18 Headcount

band group

Module Value

A17/18Shared

Teaching?

UG ANT 151801001 Introduction to Social Anthropology 109 123 132 98 21+ 5 1 NoUG ANT 151802033 Theory in Anthropology 74 57 70 83 21+ 5 1 NoUG ANT 151801003 Social Theory 84 92 105 79 21+ 5 1 NoUG ANT 151802041 Contemporary Trends in the Study of Society 48 52 41 37 21+ 5 1.5 NoUG ANT 151802081 Ethnography of Japan 28 31 21+ 5 0.5 AN09UG ANT 151802085 Ethnography of West Africa 16 31 21+ 5 0.5 AN13UG ANT 151802031 The Anthropology of Gender 26 52 37 30 21+ 5 0.5 AN03UG ANT 151802083 Ethnography of South Asia 32 29 21+ 5 0.5 AN11UG ANT 151802035 The Anthropology of African and Asian Communities in British Society 40 25 29 21+ 5 0.5 AN04UG ANT 151802070 New Media and Society 49 37 29 21+ 5 0.5 NoUG ANT 151802040 Voice and Place 35 47 59 28 21+ 5 1 NoUG ANT 151802052 African and Asian Cultures in the Diaspora 29 17 37 28 21+ 5 0.5 AN05UG ANT 151802082 Ethnography of Near and Middle East 25 28 21+ 5 0.5 AN10UG ANT 151802080 Ethnography of East Africa 20 28 21+ 5 0.5 AN08UG ANT 151802073 New Religious Movements in Africa, Asia and the Middle East 14 12 28 21+ 5 0.5 NoUG ANT 151802017 Mind, Culture and Psychiatry 28 31 35 27 21+ 5 0.5 AN01UG ANT 151802084 Ethnography of South East Asia 18 22 21+ 5 0.5 AN12UG ANT 151802024 Principles of Social Investigation 10 11 8 20 16-20 4 0.5 NoUG ANT 151802026 Anthropology and Film 14 24 24 19 16-20 4 0.5 AN02UG ANT 151802079 Ethnography of China 24 17 16-20 4 0.5 AN07UG ANT 151802039 Independent Study Project in Social Anthropology 14 22 17 12 11-15 3 1 NoUG ANT 151802076 Introduction to Legal Anthropology 19 12 12 11-15 3 0.5 NoUG ANT 151802022 Advanced Ethnographic Study 6 5 15 11 11-15 3 0.5 NoUG Total 580 601 780 756

The UG module failure rate where a grade is awarded is just 1%, the lowest in the School

13

• The 1% failure rate compares with a School average of 8%• With a result of 16% Anthropology performs marginally better than the school average of 17% for overall

fail on first attempt.

Source: Data extracted from UNIT-e on 17 July, 2017. Based on First Attempt only. Low pass rate is Y when >8 students fail, or %Overall Fail >=20%

Module REF Module Name

PASS GRADE AWARDED

FAIL GRADE AWARDED

TOTAL where Grade Awarded

FAIL % where Grade Awarded

NR/NRGC/WD PASS GRADE

NR/NRGC/WD FAIL GRADE

% NR/NRGC/ WD

TOTAL STUDENTS 1st ATTEMPT

OVERALL FAIL % on 1st ATTEMPT

LOW PASS RATE

151802022 Advanced Ethnographic Study 11 11 0% 4 27% 15 27% Y151802026 Anthropology and Film 14 14 0% 5 26% 19 26% Y151802084 Ethnography of South East Asia 12 12 0% 1 4 29% 17 24% Y151802035 The Anthropology of African and Asian Communities in British Society 16 16 0% 1 5 27% 22 23% Y151802033 Theory in Anthropology 48 48 0% 3 14 26% 65 22% Y151802079 Ethnography of China 14 14 0% 1 4 26% 19 21% Y151802076 Introduction to Legal Anthropology 7 7 0% 1 2 30% 10 20% Y151801003 Social Theory 71 1 72 1% 2 17 21% 91 20% Y151801001 Introduction to Social Anthropology 93 4 2 19 18% 118 19% Y151802081 Ethnography of Japan 22 22 0% 5 19% 27 19%151802024 Principles of Social Investigation 5 5 0% 1 17% 6 17%151802031 The Anthropology of Gender 21 21 0% 5 5 32% 31 16%151802077 Anthropology of Globalisation 14 3 3 30% 20 15%151802040 Voice and Place 38 1 39 3% 2 5 15% 46 13%151802083 Ethnography of South Asia 20 20 0% 3 13% 23 13%151802082 Ethnography of Near and Middle East 17 17 0% 2 11% 19 11%151802041 Contemporary Trends in the Study of Society 35 35 0% 4 10% 39 10%151802052 African and Asian Cultures in the Diaspora 24 24 0% 3 2 17% 29 7%151802085 Ethnography of West Africa 14 14 0% 1 7% 15 7%151802017 Mind, Culture and Psychiatry 29 29 0% 2 6% 31 6%151802080 Ethnography of East Africa 15 15 0% 1 6% 16 6%151802039 Independent Study Project in Social Anthropology 17 17 0% 0% 17 0%

22 557 6 452 1% 24 108 19% 695 16% 9

NR/NRGC RESULTS

There are currently 30 module enrolments outside the department for 1st year single-subject Anthropology students

14

• LCL (8) and HRP (7) have the largest number of enrolments, although this is dispersed across several modules, suggesting a bespoke pattern of student choice

• The modules with the largest enrolments are Introduction to Global History (4), Introduction to Development Studies (3), and Culture in Africa (3).

1st Year Single Hons Anthropology students taking modules outside of the Department

Summary by teaching department: all year levels

Note: excludes students on Ant and… programmes

Prog Year

Teaching Dept

Teaching Section Module Name

No. of ANT

Enrols Notes1 ART HAA Themes in the Art and Archaeology of Africa 21 ART HAA Themes in the Art and Archaeology of the Near and Middle East 21 DEV DEV Introduction To Development Studies 31 DEV DEV Introduction to Political Economy of Development 11 EAL JPN Basic Japanese 1 11 ECO ECO Introduction to economic analysis 11 HRP HIS H130 Introduction to the History of the Near and Middle East 21 HRP HIS Islamic Intellectual Tradition 1 Auditing1 HRP RLG Buddhism: Foundation 21 HRP RLG Hinduism: Foundation 21 LCL AFR Culture in Africa 31 LCL AFR Swahili 1 11 LCL LIN Introduction to Phonology 11 LCL OME Elementary Written Turkish 11 LCL SAS Bengali Language 1 11 LCL SEA Indonesian Language 1 11 POL POL Introduction to Global History 41 POL POL Introduction to International Relations 1

Total Single Honours ANTHROPOLOGY enrolments in non-ANT modules 30 (1)

Source: Unit-e Module Enrolments on 20-Feb-18, reconciled to HESES Programme Enrolments at 01-DEC-2017

TCHG Total DEPT 1 2 3 EnrolsART 4 14 6 24DEV 4 3 7 14EAL 1 3 4ECO 1 1EXT 1 1FIM 1 2 3HRP 7 6 6 19LAW 4 4LCL 8 17 6 31POL 5 4 5 14TOTAL 30 53 32 115

PROGRAMME YEAR

Anthropology students access modules outside their department from a wide range of subject areas

There are currently 53 module enrolments outside the department for 2nd year single-subject Anthropology students

15

• Almost half of the UG enrolments occur in the second year.

• LCL (17) and ART (14) have the largest number of enrolments, with HRP continuing a steady enrolment through all three years (6 in year 2).

• The most popular module is ART’s African Filmmaking (6), followed by Arabic 100 (4)

2nd Year Single Hons Anthropology students taking modules outside of the Department

Summary by teaching department: all year levels




PROGRAMME YEAR

Prog Year

Teaching Dept


No. of ANT

Enrols2 ART HAA Art and Culture in Modern China 12 ART HAA Themes in the Art and Archaeology of East Asia 12 ART HAA Themes in the Art and Archaeology of South and Southeast Asia 12 ART ART African Filmmaking: From the 1960s to the Present 62 ART ART Curating Global Arts 12 ART MUS Gender and Music 12 ART MUS Music in Africa 12 ART MUS Performance 1a 12 ART MUS Pop and Politics in East Asia 12 DEV DEV Comparative Studies on Development 12 DEV DEV Introduction to global forced migration studies 22 EAL JPN Japanese Cinema in the 1960s: Politics, Porn and Protest 22 EAL KOR Basic Korean I 12 EXT LSE Economic Anthropology (1): Production and Exchange 12 FIM FIM Principles of Management 12 HRP HIS H213 Gender in History 12 HRP HIS Imagining Pakistan: Culture, Politics, Gender 12 HRP RLG Death and the Meaning of Life 22 HRP RLG Islam in Britain 12 HRP RLG Themes in Japanese Religions 12 LAW LAW Foundations of Human Rights Law 22 LAW LAW Islamic Law 12 LAW LAW Law and Nature 12 LCL AFR Culture in Africa 12 LCL AFR Sci-fi and Afrofuturism in the Afrophone Novel 12 LCL LIN Language, Society and Communication 32 LCL LIN Psychology of Language 22 LCL OME Literatures of the Near and Middle East 12 LCL SAS Bengali Language 1 12 LCL SAS Society, Culture and Politics in Nepal 32 LCL SAS Hindi Language 3 12 LCL ARB Arabic 100 42 POL POL Introduction to Political Theory 12 POL POL Political theory 12 POL POL Politics of the World Economy 12 POL POL War and the International 1

Total Single Honours ANTHROPOLOGY enrolments in non-ANT modules 53

Taking modules outside the department is most common in the 2nd year

There are currently 32 module enrolments outside the department for 3rd year single-subject Anthropology students

16

• Enrolments are spread more evenly between departments in third year: DEV has the highest enrolment (7), with ART, HRP, LCL each with 6, and POL with 5. These are also the more popular departments across the total UG enrolments.

• While the module Neoliberalism, Democracy and Development has the highest enrolment (3) there are 5 modules with 2 enrolments. This suggests students have pursued specific and varied interests across their UG enrolment.

3rd Year Single Hons Anthropology students taking modules outside of the DepartmentSummary by teaching

department: all year levels




PROGRAMME YEARProg Year

Teaching Dept


No. of ANT

Enrols Notes3 ART HAA Comparative Avant-Gardes: Global Perspectives in Modern Art 1

3 ART HAAGender, Art and Visual Culture: Explorations in the Representation of Southeast Asia 1

3 ART HAA Visual Arts of Africa and The Atlantic World: History, Creativity and Agency 13 ART ART Curating Global Arts 13 ART ENG Fictions of History 13 ART ENG South Asian Literature in English 13 DEV DEV Introduction to global forced migration studies 23 DEV DEV Issues in Borders and Development 13 DEV DEV Neoliberalism, Democracy and Development 33 DEV DEV Issues of the working poor and development 1 Auditing3 FIM FIM International marketing 1: the environment 13 FIM FIM International marketing 2: global markets 13 HRP RLG Anglo-European Philosophies and Critical Dialogue: Hermeneutics and Beyond 23 HRP RLG Comparative Ethics 13 HRP RLG Death and the Meaning of Life 23 HRP RLG Themes in Japanese Religions 13 LCL AFR Swahili 1 13 LCL LIN Language, Society and Communication 13 LCL OME Cinemas of the Middle East and North Africa 2 13 LCL SAS Cinema and Society in South Asia: Key Issues 13 LCL SEA Queer Cinema in Asia 13 LCL ARB Arabic 100 13 POL POL Government and politics of China 23 POL POL Political theory 23 POL POL Religion and World Politics 1

Total Single Honours ANTHROPOLOGY enrolments in non-ANT modules 32 (1)

Anthropology had the 3rd highest rate of UK UGs not continuing with their studies in SOAS during 2012/13 to 2014/15

17

• The chart shows the percentage of students leaving SOAS between 1st December of their first year, and 1st

December the following year• It is different from the TEF measure of continuation: students transferring to another HE Provider are counted as

students leaving SOAS above (this would be a successful outcome in the TEF measure)• The comparison looks at whether the student is enrolled at SOAS on December 1st of each year. This means:

• A student who leaves SOAS before 1st December of their first year is excluded• A student who re-enrols and retakes their first year is a successful outcome• A student who interrupts for their second year before returning to resit exams is an unsuccessful outcome

(because they are not enrolled on 1st December of their second year)

What steps are being taken to reduce non-continuation?

Anthropology non-continuation at SOAS deteriorated in 2014/15 to 24%

18

Year Discontinue Total % discontinue

2012/13 3.5 26.5 13%2013/14 6 47 13%2014/15 8 34 24%

Total 17.5 107.5 16%

Anthropology

Anthropology non-continuation at SOAS: UK-domiciled first degree entrants, 2012/13 to 2014/15 (student FTE)

This data uses the same method as the previous slide: it shows the proportion of students leaving SOAS between 1st December of their first year and 1st

December of their second year.

Does the department expect to see an improvement in non-continuation in more recent years?

POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT ENROLMENTS

19

20

SOAS Anthropology PGT enrolments grew by 10% in 2016/17, but the sector saw very strong growth of 29%


• PGT enrolments in the sector appeared to follow an increasing trend between 2012/13 to 2016/17 (55% increase in that period).

• SOAS enrolments show a drop in 2015/16 when two programmes were recoded to other HESA subject groups (see details here)

Postgraduate Taught new enrolments2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 % change 12/13

to 16/17

SOAS 140 145 140 100 110 -21%All UK HEIs 715 830 890 860 1,110 55%SOAS share 19.58% 17.47% 15.73% 11.63% 9.91%

Note that there are some differences between the HESA data reported here and the internal programme enrolment data from Enstats reported in later slides.

This is due to two programmes which used to be coded to L6 Anthropology in HESA up to 2014/15 but are not in the Department of Anthropology and Sociology in Enstats:• Media in Development - coded to L6

in 2014/15 HESA (5 students). Programme is now located in the School of Interdisciplinary Studies and split 50:50 in HESA between Development and Media Studies

• Migration, Mobility and Development -coded to L6 in 2014/15 (17 students). Programme is now located in Department of Development Studies and is split in HESA between Development and Economics.

• UCL, Oxford, LSE and Leeds Beckett grew the most in2016/17 (25 or more new enrolments)

PGT Home/EU recruitment fell by 22% in 2017/18, while overseas recruitment was stable

21

Sources: Actuals are HESES 1-Dec enrolments for 2014-2017. Targets are from previous Faculty Plans

What factors influenced the reduction in home/EU recruitment in 2017/18?

22

The target is to increase PGT recruitment in 2018/19, with a steady increase projected in the following years

Projections excl new programmes18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

PGT Home 50 55 57 58PGT EU 10 5 5 5PGT Overseas 38 40 41 42Total 98 100 103 105

Rationale for projectionsThis year the MA Anthropology of Travel and Tourism, which has historically recruited around 5-6 students did not run due to Dr.Leite's research leave. This will return in 2018/19 going forward. There is a worrying drop in MA Social Anthropology of Development students this year, which planning figures suggest is part of a longer decline. We sincerely hope there will be a bounce back as we have seen with other programmes in the past after such dips. However, we have to be prepared to see this decline continue or only be arrested. This might be also partly counterbalanced by growth in the Museums and Heritage programme (see projections for new programmes). We are redoubling efforts at marketing MA Anthropology of Media this year and would hope to see some returns on that, otherwise we will drop the programme next year. We are investing in a revamp of the MA Medical Anthropology with a new teaching team and new directions. Over the next few years this should hopefully pay off. However, that said, recruitment to this programme this year has been unexpectedly high at nearly double the historic figure for recent years. There is much volatility and unpredictability in this whole market.

Projections incl approved new programmes

18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22PGT Home 51 57 59 60PGT EU 10 5 5 5PGT Overseas 39 42 43 44Total 100 104 107 109

Includes MA Museums, Heritage and Material Cultural Studies (started 2017-18) - shared with SoA - these figures represent the anthropology portion

ActualForecast to 1 Dec


18/19 impact of new/ramping up approved progs (automatically populated from New Progs sheet)

Target including approved new/ ramping up progs(automatically calculated)

14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19PGT Home 46.2 49.5 49.0 44.5 50 1 51PGT EU 10.5 7.0 14.5 8.5 10 0 10PGT Overseas 44.0 32.5 38.5 38.5 38 1 39Total 100.7 89.0 102.0 91.5 98 2 100


Commentary highlights volatility in the PGT market

Anthropology enrolled students on 11 PGT programmes in 2017/18: 6 programmes had more than 10 students (headcount)

23

Name A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18MIGRATION AND DIASPORA STUDIES 11.5 12.8 19.0 21.5 13 16 20 24 13.7 14.6 22.0 24.0 18 20 26 28ANTHROPOLOGY OF FOOD 15.0 13.8 23.0 16.3 20 17 26 21 19.3 20.6 25.2 18.0 30 31 31 25SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY 24.3 17.5 19.5 16.0 29 18 20 19 27.0 21.5 20.8 17.5 35 26 23 22MEDICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 6.5 6.0 6.5 11.0 7 6 7 12 8.0 6.5 6.5 12.5 10 7 7 15SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY OF DEVELOPMENT 22.8 19.5 15.5 9.0 25 22 17 9 24.8 21.9 18.7 10.3 29 27 24 12ANTHROPOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODS 7.5 6.0 4.0 9.0 8 6 4 9 7.5 6.8 4.5 10.0 8 8 5 10Migration and Diaspora Studies and Intensive Language (Arabic) 0.5 2.0 2.5 0.5 1 4 5 1 0.5 2.5 4.0 3.0 1 5 8 6Museums, Heritage and Material Culture Studies 2.5 5 2.5 5ANTHROPOLOGY OF MEDIA 9.0 6.0 5.0 1.0 10 6 6 2 9.5 6.8 6.5 1.0 11 8 8 2Anthropology of Travel and Tourism 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 0 0 6 0 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.5 0 0 6 1Medical Anthropology and Intensive Language (Arabic) 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0 1 1 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 0 1 2 1Anthropology of Travel, Tourism and Pilgrimage 3.5 5.0 0.0 4 6 0 4.7 6.4 1.5 7 9 3Medical Anthropology and Intensive Language (Japanese) 0.0 0.0 1.0 0 0 2 0.0 0.0 1.0 0 0 2

100.7 89.0 102.0 86.8 117 102 114 102.0 115.0 108.0 117.2 99.8 149 142 145 127.0

Sum of FTE Headcount Sum of FTE HeadcountNEW STUDENT ENROLMENTS ALL STUDENT ENROLMENTS


Anthropology PGT enrolments by FTE and Headcount, 2014/15 – 2017/18

Although most programmes had 10 or more enrolments, there were 5 programmes with fewer than 10 students

Although the average PGT module enrolment was healthy at 22.2, there were 5 modules with 10 students or fewer

24

Source: Unit-e

• Over 70% of the modules taught were shared with UG


A17/18 Head count Band

A17/18 Headcount

band group

Module Value

A17/18Shared

Teaching?

PG ANT 15PANC008 Theoretical Approaches to Social Anthropology 80 62 78 70 21+ 5 1 NoPG ANT 15PANC090 Anthropology of Development 46 50 49 36 21+ 5 1 AN25PG ANT 15PANH009 African and Asian Cultures in Britain 42 43 36 21+ 5 0.5 AN04PG ANT 15PANH002 Ethnographic Research Methods 101 116 118 35 21+ 5 0.5 AN17PG ANT 15PANH010 African and Asian Diasporas in the Modern World 25 24 27 28 21+ 5 0.5 AN05PG ANT 15PANH067 Culture and Society of Near and Middle East 21 28 21+ 5 0.5 AN10PG ANT 15PANH068 Culture and Society of West Africa 27 27 21+ 5 0.5 AN13PG ANT 15PANC012 African and Asian Diasporas in the Contemporary World 16 19 27 26 21+ 5 1 AN05PG ANT 15PANH063 Culture and Society of East Africa 21 26 21+ 5 0.5 AN08PG ANT 15PANC013 The Anthropology of Food 23 19 28 23 21+ 5 1 NoPG ANT 15PANH062 Culture and Society of China 22 23 21+ 5 0.5 AN07PG ANT 15PANH024 Issues in the Anthropology of Gender 9 13 20 23 21+ 5 0.5 AN03PG ANT 15PANH055 Religions on the move: New Currents and Emerging Trends in Global Religion 6 7 23 21+ 5 0.5 NoPG ANT 15PANH050 Media Production Skills 11 14 22 22 21+ 5 0.5 NoPG ANT 15PANH065 Culture and Society of Japan 21 22 21+ 5 0.5 AN09PG ANT 15PANC073 Comparative Studies of Society and Culture 32 18 20 22 21+ 5 1 NoPG ANT 15PANH032 Issues in Mind, Culture and Psychiatry 5 6 20 22 21+ 5 0.5 AN01PG ANT 15PANH033 Perspectives On Development 10 10 16 19 16-20 4 0.5 AN25PG ANT 15PANH064 Culture and Society of South Asia 12 19 16-20 4 0.5 AN11PG ANT 15PANH066 Culture and Society of South East Asia 21 18 16-20 4 0.5 AN12PG ANT 15PANC011 Research Methods in Anthropology 9 13 14 18 16-20 4 1 AN17PG ANT 15PANH022 Issues in Anthropology and Film 12 13 20 15 11-15 3 0.5 AN02PG ANT 15PANC093 Cultural Understandings of Health 8 9 9 15 11-15 3 1 AN31PG ANT 15PANH027 Therapy and Culture 5 8 11 11 11-15 3 0.5 AN31PG ANT 15PANC099 Museums, Heritage and Material Culture Studies 10 6 - 10 2 0.5 NoPG ANT 15PANH056 Anthropology of Law 4 5 7 9 6 - 10 2 0.5 NoPG ANT 15PANH028 Comparative Media Theory 6 2 8 6 - 10 2 0.5 AN14PG ANT 15PANH045 Directed Practical Study in the Anthropology of Food 7 10 8 6 - 10 2 0.5 NoPG ANT 15PANC009 Comparative Media Studies 10 9 9 2 1 - 5 1 1 AN14PG Total 461 431 685 644

In addition there were 2 PGT dissertation modules

25

Source: Unit-e


A17/18 Head count

Band

A17/18 Headcount band group

Module Value

A17/18Shared

Teaching?

PG-Diss ANT 15PANC999 Dissertation in Anthropology and Sociology 103 106 119 87 21+ 5 2 NoPG-Diss ANT 15PANC998 Dissertation in Anthropological Research Methods 7 5 6 10 6 - 10 2 2 No

PGT first attempt module fails are in line with the SOAS average of 2%

26

• Anthropology equals the School’s low average PGT fail rate of 2%• At 8% Anthropology overall fail % on 1st attempt is marginally lower than the School average of 9%.

Source: Data extracted from UNIT-e on 17 July, 2017. Based on First Attempt only. Low pass rate is Y when >8 students fail, or %Overall Fail >=20%

Module REF Module Name

PASS GRADE AWARDED

FAIL GRADE AWARDED

TOTAL where Grade Awarded

FAIL % where Grade Awarded

NR/NRGC/WD PASS GRADE

NR/NRGC/WD FAIL GRADE

% NR/NRGC/ WD

TOTAL STUDENTS 1st ATTEMPT

OVERALL FAIL % on 1st ATTEMPT

LOW PASS RATE

15PANC009 Comparative Media Studies 3 3 0% 3 50% 6 50% Y15PANH067 Culture and Society of Near and Middle East 14 14 0% 4 22% 18 22% Y15PANC012 African and Asian Diasporas in the Contemporary World 18 18 0% 3 4 16% 25 16%15PANH062 Culture and Society of China 18 1 19 5% 2 10% 21 14%15PANH068 Culture and Society of West Africa 20 20 0% 3 13% 23 13%15PANH063 Culture and Society of East Africa 15 15 0% 2 12% 17 12%15PANH050 Media Production Skills 16 16 0% 2 11% 18 11%15PANH009 African and Asian Cultures in Britain 32 1 33 3% 3 8% 36 11%15PANH059 Tourism and Travel: A Global Perspective 9 1 10 10% 0% 10 10%15PANH024 Issues in the Anthropology of Gender 12 1 13 8% 0% 13 8%15PANH032 Issues in Mind, Culture and Psychiatry 13 13 0% 1 7% 14 7%15PANC008 Theoretical Approaches to Social Anthropology 54 1 55 2% 3 5% 58 7%15PANH061 Anthropology of Globalisation (PG) 15 15 0% 1 6% 16 6%15PANC090 Anthropology of Development 40 1 41 2% 2 1 2% 44 5%15PANH010 African and Asian Diasporas in the Modern World 21 21 0% 1 1 4% 23 4%15PANH053 Anthropological approaches to agriculture, food and nutrition 23 1 24 4% 0% 24 4%15PANC013 The Anthropology of Food 21 21 0% 0% 21 0%15PANC098 Anthropology of Travel and Tourism 6 6 0% 0% 6 0%15PANH002 Ethnographic Research Methods 19 19 0% 0% 19 0%15PANH022 Issues in the Anthropology of Film 12 12 0% 0% 12 0%15PANH028 Comparative Media Theory 2 2 0% 0% 2 0%15PANH033 Perspectives On Development 12 12 0% 0% 12 0%15PANH056 Anthropology of Law 7 7 0% 0% 7 0%15PANH060 Directed Practical Study in the Anthropology of Tourism 2 2 0% 0% 2 0%15PANH064 Culture and Society of South Asia 9 9 0% 0% 9 0%15PANH065 Culture and Society of Japan 21 21 0% 0% 21 0%15PANH066 Culture and Society of South East Asia 14 14 0% 0% 14 0%

27 448 7 455 2% 6 30 7% 491 8% 2

NR/NRGC RESULTS

There are 140 Module Enrolments outside the Department for PGT Anthropology students (including 17 students auditing)

27

• Students frequently choose modules taught by DEV (45), LCL (23) and INT (23), although most Departments have enrolments, except FIM and ECO. There is one external (UCL) enrolment.

• Gender Migration & Diasporas has the highest enrolment (10), along with Civil Society… (9 enrolments). Issues in Forced Migration (8) and the joint DEV & ECO module Agrarian Development… (7) are also popular.

Summary by teaching department


TotalART 10DEV 45DEV/ECO 7EAL 10EXT 1HRP 12INT 23LCL 23POL 9TOTAL 140

TCHG DEPT

Teaching Dept


No. of ANT

Enrols NotesART ART The Story of African Film: Narrative Screen Media in Africa 2 1 AuditingART HAA Contemporary Art and the Global 2 1 AuditingART HAA Curating Cultures Cohort B 1ART HAA Modern and Contemporary Arts in Africa 1 Auditing

ART HAARepresenting Conflict: A Cross-Cultural and Inter Disciplinary Approach 1

ART HAA Visual Arts of Dynastic China (to 1800) (Cohort B) 1

ART MUSAnalytical Approaches to the Global Creative and Cultural Industries 1

ART MUS Pop and Politics in East Asia (Masters) 1DEV DEV Aid and Development 2DEV DEV Borders and Development 3DEV DEV Civil society, social movements and the development process 9 1 AuditingDEV DEV Development Practice 4

DEV DEVExtractive Industries, Energy, Biofuels and Development in a Time of Climate Change 3

DEV DEV Gender and Development 4DEV DEV Issues in Forced Migration 8DEV DEV Migration and Development 4 2 AuditingDEV DEV Natural resources, development and change: putting critical 4DEV DEV Political economy of violence, conflict and development 1 AuditingDEV DEV The Working Poor and Development 3 1 AuditingDEV/ECO DEV/ECO Agrarian Development, Food Policy and Rural Poverty 7EAL CHI Modern Film from Taiwan and the Chinese Diaspora 1EAL CHI Special Course in Chinese 1 1 AuditingEAL CHI Special Course in Chinese 1 (PG) 2EAL CHI Styles of Modern Chinese Literary Language 1EAL JPN Basic Japanese 1 (PG) 1EAL JPN Intermediate Japanese 2 (PG) 1EAL JPN Japanese Post-War Film Genres and the Avant-Garde 1

EAL JPNJapanese Transnational Cinema: From Kurosawa to Asia Extreme and Studio Ghibli 1

EAL OEA Culture and Society of Taiwan 1EXT UCL Multisensory experience: understanding sickness and health 1HRP HIS Gender, law and the family in the history of modern South Asia 1 AuditingHRP HIS Historical Perspectives on Gender in Africa 1HRP RLG Chinese Buddhism in Pre-Modern Period 2HRP RLG Chinese Religious Texts: A Reading Seminar 2

HRP RLGColonialism and Christian Missions in Africa: Readings from the Archives 1

Teaching Dept


No. of ANT

Enrols NotesHRP RLG Death and Religion 2HRP RLG East Asian Buddhist Thought 2HRP RLG Religion in Global Politics: Theories and Themes 1 AuditingINT GEN Gender in the Middle East 1INT GEN Gender, Armed Conflict and International Law 1INT GEN Gendering Migration & Diasporas 10INT GEN Queer and Feminist Diaspora Studies 3INT GEN Queer Politics in Asia, Africa and the Middle East 3 1 Auditing

INT MEDMediated Culture in the Middle East: Politics and Communications 1

INT MED Studies in Global Digital Cultures 1

INT MEDTransnational Communities and Diasporic Media:Networking, Connectivity, Identity 3

LCL AFR African Philosophy 1 AuditingLCL AFR African Philosophy (PG) 2 1 Auditing

LCL AFRCultural studies theories and the study of Asia, Africa and the Middle East 1

LCL AFR Somali 2 (PG) 1LCL AFR Zulu 1 1 AuditingLCL ARB Introduction to Standard Modern Arabic 2LCL ARB Israel and the Palestinians 1LCL CLP Postcolonial Theory and Practice 5LCL LIN Intermediate Syntax 1LCL LIN Psychology of Language 1 AuditingLCL OME Intensive Turkish Language (PG) 1LCL OME Intermediate Modern Turkish Language (PG) 1LCL SAS Culture and Conflict in the Himalaya 1LCL SAS Hindi Language 2 (PG) 1LCL SAS Indian Cinema: Its History and Social Context 1LCL SAS Nepali Language I 1 AuditingLCL SEA Genders and Sexualities in South East Asian Film 1POL POL International migration and diaspora politics 6POL POL Political Thought on the Just Rebellion 2POL POL Political violence 1Total Single Programme PGT Anthropology enrolments in non-ANT modules 140 (17)

Taking modules outside the department is popular with PGT Anthropology students, in particular Development Studies

POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH ENROLMENTS

28

29

New PGR enrolments at SOAS and across the sector have seen little variation between 2012/13 and 2016/17

• PGR enrolments in the sector have followed a fluctuating trend between 2012/13 and 2016/17. Overall, there was a growth of 9% with a slight drop in 2016/17.

• SOAS enrolments fluctuated but remained broadly constant in that period.


Postgraduate Research new enrolments2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 % change 12/13

to 16/17

SOAS 10 15 5 10 10 0%All UK HEIs 270 320 300 305 295 9%SOAS share 3.70% 4.69% 1.67% 3.28% 3.39%

In 2017/18 home PGR recruitment declined while overseas recruitment increased

30

Sources: Actuals are HESES 1-Dec enrolments for 2014-2017. Targets are from previous Faculty Plans

The 2018/19 PGR recruitment target is for a modest increase, which is then sustained

31

ActualForecast to 1 Dec


14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19

PGR Home 5 7 4 3 5PGR EU 1 2 2.5 0 0PGR Overseas 1 2 1 5 6Total 7 11 7.5 8 11

Projections 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22

PGR Home 5 5 5 5PGR EU 0 0 0 0PGR Overseas 6 6 5 5Total 11 11 10 10


Rationale for projections

We have a fairly large cohort of students in the MA Anthropological Research Methods this year which is a feeder programme for the Mphil/PhD. Although not all these students will continue to further research, we should be able to hope that a fair number (say 50%?) will. Given that Home student recruitment was only just over half of our average over the last three years, we would also hope to see some modest rise here perhaps to bring levels back to those in 2014/15, but not as high as 2015/16. Given uncertainties about Brexit it would probably be optimistic to expect any EU students to register next year. Given that this year's cohort of MA Res students is unusually high, it would be foolish perhaps to project continuing growth in this area in a highly competitive market with few funding opportunities for students.

Anthropology enrolled students on 3 PGR programmes in 2017/18: one programme had more than 10 students (headcount)

32

Name A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18 A14/15 A15/16 A16/17 A17/18MPHIL/PHD ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY (FT) 6 10 5 6 6 10 5 6 25 26 24 17 25 26 24 17MPHIL/PHD ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY (PT) 0 1 0.5 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 3.5 3.5 2 4 7 7MPHIL/PHD Anthropology +4 (FT) 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 3 0 0 2 3PhD Direct ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY (FT) 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0ANTHROPOLOGY RESEARCH 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0

7 11 7.5 7 7 12 8 7 31 29 29.5 23.5 32 31 33 27

Sum of FTE Headcount Sum of FTE HeadcountNEW STUDENT ENROLMENTS NEW STUDENT ENROLMENTS


Anthropology PGR enrolments by FTE and Headcount, 2014/15 – 2017/18

FINANCE

33

By 2021/22, the Anthropology department is forecast to make a deficit, ranked 7th in SOAS as a percentage to income

34

The Department of Anthropology & Sociology is forecast to make a ‘deficit as a percentage of income’ of -5% in 2021/22, up from a deficit of -16% in 2017/18 due an increase in PGT student numbers while maintaining the current cost base.

The SOAS wide chart of departments shows the department in relation to other academic departments.

Should the significant growth at a national level in UG influence forecast recruitmentQ: Expectation would be much higher than average?

Contribution as a percentage of income is projected to increase to 55% in 2021/22

35

The department’s contribution as a percentage of income is forecast to increase by 2% over the five years. 53% in 2017/18 to 55% in 2021/22, largely due to increased PGT student numbers.

Improved position due to uplift in PGT numbers, however UG forecast is flat even though UK sector is growingQ: Expectation would be much higher than average?

Income per student is lower than the school average

36

The income per student is 2017/18 is one of the lowest and below the SOAS average. This is forecast to narrow in 2021/21 with the impact of increased student number closing the gap between the department and SOAS average.

Increase in income per student driven by uplift in PGT numbersQ: Expectation would be higher than average?

Student per academic is forecast by 2021/22 to increase to a ratio of 15.8, higher than the school average

37

The department’s student per academic ratio is just above the SOAS average. However the ratio is projected to increase from 2017/18 to 2021/22 due the forecasted increase in PGT student numbers while sustaining a constant staff complement.

The SOAS wide chart shows the department’s forecast in comparison with others where Interdisciplinary Studies is projected to be the highest, and Languages and Culture the lowest, over the next five years from 2017/18 to 2021/22.

Q: Expectation would be higher SSR given the increase in student numbers?

Total Income per academic is forecast to rise by 2021/22, slightly above the school average

38

For 2017/18, Income per academic is below above the SOAS average, and forecast to increase in 2021/22 largely due a projected increase in PGT student numbers and therefore student fees.

The second chart SOAS wide charts show the department’s in comparison to other departments. In 2021/22, the department is forecast to rank 7th highest in this performance indicator where the highest is where Interdisciplinary Studies.

Q: Expectation would be higher income per academic given the increase in student numbers ?

Research income per academic is in line with the school average

39

The department’s research income per academic is just above SOAS average. It is projected to slightly decrease over next five years 2017/18 to 2021/22, however it will still be above the SOAS average.

Staff costs as percentage of income are forecast to fall in 2021/22

40

Staff costs as a percentage of income 45% in 2017/18 forecast to fall to 42% in 2021/22. With a projected constant staff complement and increase in student numbers, this ratio will forecast a fall as expected in the chart.

Students per academics is to increase by 2021/22 and Staff costs as a percentage of income is forecast to reduce

41

The student per academic ratio is projected to increase from 2017/18 to 2021/22, due to increased student numbers, however, in comparison, the staff costs as a percentage of income is projected to fall over the next year. Since student fees income make up the large proportion of the income, these two ratios are inversely proportional to each other.

LEAGUE TABLES

42

Anthropology has been gaining lost ground in the league tables since 2015, with ranking improving in all three tables in 2017

43

• The highest rank is 8 (out of 19) in the Guardian, which has consistently ranked in the top 10 for the last 3 years.

• The lowest rank is 17 (out of 31) in the CUG, which has shown a steep decline from its best position of 6 in 2014.

• The Times/Sunday Times rank also dropped (16) in 2015, but has since recovered to a rank of 9 (out of 26).

• Development Studies is included in the rankings for Anthropology in the Guardian and the Times/Sunday Times.

Subject Table 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Anthropology CUG -- 7 8 6 14 18 17Anthropology Guardian 3 12 9 11 9 9 8Anthropology Times/Sunday Times -- -- 7 6 16 12 9

NOTE: CUG is released in April. Guardian in May, and Times in September

Anthropology is in quartile 2 in the Guardian and Times

TEF 3 SUBJECT-LEVEL METRICS

44

The TEF subject metrics are Silver

45

• Five of the six metrics have no flag, but are below benchmark. Assessment and Feedback is 4.6% below benchmark.

• The split metrics have no flag, except for the following:• Teaching on my course: positive flags for first degree students, and not disabled students• Continuation: negative flag for white students

• Notes on the TEF definitions are on the next slide

Core metrics for Subject: Sociology, social policy and anthropologyDenominator Indicator

(a) % Benchmark

(b) % Difference

(a)-(b)Z-score Flag Year†

1 2 3Full-time headcount: 280 (99%)

The teaching on my course 138 92.8 * 87.8 5.1 2.0 + + R

Assessment and feedback 138 69.0 73.6 -4.6 -1.2 R

Academic support 138 75.6 80.0 -4.3 -1.3 - R

Continuation 159 90.5 93.5 -3.0 -1.4 -

Employment or further study 86 91.2 93.1 -1.9 -0.7Highly skilled employment or further study 86 60.8 61.7 -0.9 -0.2

Key: ++ Double positive flag - Single negative flag * Top 10% score+ Single positive flag -- Double negative flag ! Bottom 10% score

• There is a positive flag and top 10% score for ‘Teaching on my course’.• Anthropology and Development Studies are combined in one category in TEF

R Response rate too low

Continuation is below benchmark and is a key challenge

Notes on TEF definitions

• TEF metrics include undergraduates only.

• Subject-level TEF metrics have been produced for the first time this year (2017/18). They are being used in the TEF subject pilot but are not going to be published.

• The metrics use the last three years of data:• NSS 2015, 2016 and 2017 (all domiciles)• Continuation: new entrants in 2012/13 to 2014/15 (UK domiciled only)• DLHE (Destination of Leavers from Higher Education): leavers in 2013/14 to 2015/16 (UK

domiciled only)

• The thresholds for top 10% and bottom 10% scores are based on results at institution level, not subject level

• The Continuation metric identifies students enrolled on 1 December of their first year, and calculates the percentage who are still enrolled in HE on 1 December of their second year. The table below shows how various scenarios are treated in the continuation metric:

46

Student leaves before 1 December of their first year Excluded from the population

Student transfers to another HE Provider Continuation

Student enrols in their second year and retakes their first year

Continuation

Student takes leave of absence in their second year, and resits exams at the end of their second year

Non-continuation (as they are not enrolled on 1 December of their second year)

LEO (Longitudinal Education Outcomes) supplementary TEF metrics show mixed results, but are based on historic data

47

• The proportion in work or study is 9.3% below benchmark. However, LEO data cannot tell if graduates are working or studying abroad. As more UK SOAS graduates work abroad than average, this particularly affects SOAS’ data.

• The proportion earning over £21,000 is 3.0% above benchmark.• The TEF LEO data shows the activity of graduates three years after graduation. It is

historic data, showing the activity of 2010/11 leavers.• LEO data is created by linking student records to UK tax and benefit records

Supplementary metrics for Sociology, Social Policy and AnthropologyDenominator Indicator

(a) % Benchmark

(b) % Difference

(a)-(b)Z-score Flag

Full-timeSustained employment or further study 53 72.4 ! 81.7 -9.3 -1.7Above median earnings threshold or further study 35 65.2 62.2 3.0 0.4

STUDENT SATISFACTION

48

In NSS 2017, no Anthropology respondents were dissatisfied with ‘Teaching on my Course’

49Chart shows total responses across each section of the survey, weighted by the number of questions in each section.The results in this chart are not weighted by student FPE, so will differ from the overall % agree shown on the next slides.

Based on unpublished data: response rate 36%

* Metrics used in TEF

Anthropology was above the subject median in all areas except Academic Support

50

SOAS Anthropology NSS 2017 compared with all UK Anthropology results

The NSS results are broadly positive, with Academic Support the area most scope for improvement

SOAS Anthropology was generally above the subject average nationally, but 7% below for Q12: ‘I have been able to contact staff when I needed to.’

51

MetricSOAS % Agree

Subject-wide % Agree VARIATION

The teaching on my course* 91.67 86.56 5.111. Staff are good at expla ining things . 95.83 92.11 3.722. Staff have made the subject interesting. 95.83 86.74 9.093. The course i s intel lectua l ly s timulating. 95.83 87.27 8.564. My course has cha l lenged me to achieve my best work. 79.17 80.23 -1.06Learning opportunities 86.11 83.35 2.76

5. My course has provided me with opportuni ties to explore ideas or concepts in depth. 87.5 87.41 0.096. My course has provided me with opportuni ties to bring information and ideas together from di fferent topics . 95.83 87.6 8.23

7. My course has provided me with opportuni ties to apply what I have learnt. 75 75.15 -0.15Assessment and feedback* 81.25 72.95 8.38. The cri teria used in marking have been clear in advance. 87.5 71.85 15.659. Marking and assessment has been fa i r. 87.5 73 14.510. Feedback on my work has been timely. 75 71.86 3.1411. I have received helpful comments on my work. 75 75.08 -0.08Academic support* 79.17 77.76 1.4112. I have been able to contact s taff when I needed to. 79.17 86.39 -7.2213. I have received sufficient advice and guidance in relation to my course. 79.17 76.46 2.7114. Good advice was ava i lable when I needed to make s tudy choices on my course. 77.27 70.23 7.04

SOAS Anthropology NSS 2017 compared with subject sector average Anthropology NSS results are generally strong in a year that was challenging for SOAS as a whole

Overall satisfaction was high, as was satisfaction with opportunities to provide feedback on the course (96% for Q23)

52

MetricSOAS % Agree

Subject-wide % Agree VARIATION

Organisation and management 81.94 76.39 5.5515. The course i s wel l organised and running smoothly. 83.33 71.8 11.5316. The timetable works efficiently for me. 79.17 79.24 -0.0717. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated effectively. 83.33 78.1 5.23Learning resources 88.89 85.2 3.6918. The IT resources and faci l i ties provided have supported my learning wel l . 90.91 83.56 7.3519. The l ibrary resources (e.g. books , onl ine services and learning spaces) have supported my learning wel l . 91.67 88.05 3.6220. I have been able to access course-speci fic resources (e.g. equipment, faci l i ties , software, col lections) when I needed to. 86.96 83.96 3

Learning community 77.08 72.98 4.121. I feel part of a community of s taff and s tudents . 75 64.58 10.4222. I have had the right opportuni ties to work with other s tudents as part of my course. 79.17 81.4 -2.23Student Voice 80.9 68.13 12.7723. I have had the right opportuni ties to provide feedback on my course. 95.83 84.89 10.9424. Staff va lue s tudents ’ views and opinions about the course. 87.5 76.9 10.625. It i s clear how students ’ feedback on the course has been acted on. 69.57 54.68 14.8926. The s tudents ’ union (association or gui ld) effectively represents s tudents ’ academic interests . 69.57 55.53 14.04

Overall satisfaction 95.83 87.3 8.53

SOAS Anthropology NSS 2017 compared with subject sector average

SOAS Anthropology overall satisfaction ranks third out of five in London

53

LONDON Rankings RANK n= 5

Institution The

teac

hing

on

my

cour

se

Lear

ning

op

portu

nitie

s

Asse

ssm

ent

and

feed

back

Acad

emic

supp

ort

Orga

nisa

tion

and

man

agem

ent

Lear

ning

re

sour

ces

Lear

ning

co

mm

unity

Stud

ent

Voice

Over

all

satis

fact

ion

Brunel University London (10000961) 1 3 3 3 5 4 5 4 1Roehampton University (10007776) 5 4 1 2 3 3 2 3 2The School of Oriental and African Studies (10007780) 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 3Middlesex University (10004351) 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 4The University of West London (10006566) 3 2 4 1 2 1 1 2 5

PTES* 2016 results for Sociology, Social Policy and Anthropology were above average for overall satisfaction

• Both Overall Satisfaction and Information scored 90% (1st quartile)• Satisfaction with Teaching was in line with the sector average in this subject• The lowest satisfaction score was for Assessment (66%) compared with a subject average of 74%

54

Source: PTES 2016Please note that only the results for SOAS and the Sector % Agrees can be made public under the PTES agreement. All other results, including sector quartiles, are for internal use only.

SummarySOAS (60 responses)

Sector mean

Sector Quartiles (21 HEIs) London

Teaching 85% 84% 2 84%Engagement 80% 79% 3 81%Assessment 66% 74% 4 71%Dissertation 77% 78% 3 78%Organisation 71% 75% 3 73%Resources 85% 84% 2 82%Skills development 74% 74% 2 74%Information 90% 82% 1 85%Overall 90% 85% 1 84%

% Agree and Quartiles

While these PGT results compare favourably with the sector average, they are perhaps not quite as strong as the NSS results for Anthropology

* Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey

The highest scores were in the teaching section, with the lowest score (54%) for promptness of feedback

55

PTES 2016 Individual Questions for Sociology, Social Policy and Anthropology

Source: PTES 2016For internal use only.

PTES 2016 Individual Questions% Agree and Quartile Analysis SOAS

Sector mean

Sector Quartiles London

TeachingQ2_1_a Staff are good at explaining things 93% 90% 2 88%Q2_2_a Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching 95% 91% 1 94%Q2_3_a The course is intellectually stimulating 95% 89% 1 93%Q2_4_a The course has enhanced my academic ability 92% 88% 1 89%Q2_5_a The learning materials provided on my course are useful 85% 85% 3 85%Q2_6_a There is sufficient contact time to support effective learning 62% 69% 3 65%Q2_7_a I am happy with the support for my learning I receive from staff on my course 74% 75% 3 74%EngagementQ4_1_a I am encouraged to ask questions or make contributions in taught sessions 90% 89% 2 90%Q4_2_a The course has created sufficient opportunities to discuss my work with other students 75% 76% 2 76%Q4_3_a My course has challenged me to produce my best work 84% 82% 2 81%Q4_4_a The workload on my course has been manageable 75% 76% 3 81%

Q4_5_a I have appropriate opportunities to give feedback on my experience 75% 75% 3 78%AssessmentQ6_1_a The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance 64% 76% 4 71%Q6_2_a Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair 72% 74% 3 73%Q6_3_a Feedback on my work has been prompt 54% 69% 4 63%Q6_4_a Feedback on my work has been useful 72% 78% 3 75%

Students were highly satisfied with supervisor knowledge (93%) and IT resources (93%), but satisfaction was low for student involvement with how the course is run (52%)

56




Sector mean


DissertationQ8 Planning, undertaking, or completed, a dissertation or major project 92% 85% 2 91%Q9 Stage of dissertation 64% 57% 1 56%Q10_1_a I understand the required standards for the dissertation / major project 73% 79% 4 79%Q10_2_a I am happy with the support I received for planning my dissertation / major project 65% 72% 4 68%Q10_3_a My supervisor has the skills and subject knowledge to adequately support my dissertation / major project 93% 84% 1 86%Q10_4_a My supervisor provides helpful feedback on my progress 76% 79% 3 77%OrganisationQ12_1_a The timetable fits well with my other commitments 75% 81% 4 81%Q12_2_a Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated effectively 78% 81% 3 77%Q12_3_a The course is well organised and is running smoothly 74% 77% 3 75%Q12_4_a I was given appropriate guidance and support when I started my course 75% 74% 3 72%Q12_5_a I am encouraged to be involved in decisions about how my course is run 52% 60% 4 59%ResourcesQ14_1_a The library resources and services are good enough for my needs 84% 85% 3 82%Q14_2_a I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to 93% 89% 1 89%Q14_3_a I have been able to access subject specific resources necessary for my studies 86% 84% 2 84%Q14_4_a I am aware of how to access the support services at my institution 78% 77% 2 74%

Students were more confident about independent learning (85%), but reported less satisfaction with development of skills for their career development (52%)

57




Sector mean


Skills DevelopmentQ16_1_a As a result of the course I am more confident about independent learning 85% 82% 1 83%Q16_2_a My confidence to be innovative or creative has developed during my course 79% 72% 1 74%Q16_3_a My research skills have developed during my course 89% 85% 2 86%Q16_4_a My ability to communicate information effectively to diverse audiences has developed during my course 67% 72% 3 71%Q16_5_a I have been encouraged to think about what skills I need to develop for my career 52% 63% 4 63%Q16_6_a As a result of the course I feel better prepared for my future career 69% 68% 2 66%OverallQ18_1_a Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course 90% 82% 1 85%Motivation to StudyQ21_1 To enable me to progress to a higher level qualification (e.g. PhD) 39% 45% 3 37%Q21_2 To progress in my current career path (i.e. a professional qualification) 43% 45% 3 46%Q21_3 To change my current career 30% 22% 1 27%Q21_4 To improve my employment prospects 52% 55% 3 54%Q21_5 As a requirement to enter a particular profession 15% 12% 1 8%Q21_6 To meet the requirements of my current job 0% 5% 4 4%Q21_7 For personal interest 70% 60% 1 69%

The main reasons students chose SOAS were reputation in the subject area/dept, and content of the course

58




Sector mean


Chose this Course becauseQ22_1 Overall reputation of institution 54% 54% 3 62%Q22_2 Reputation in chosen subject area / department 67% 43% 1 56%Q22_3 Reputation of the course tutors 20% 19% 3 24%Q22_4 It was recommended to me 31% 18% 1 21%Q22_5 Graduates from this institution have good career and employment prospects 5% 11% 4 10%Q22_6 I have studied at this institution before 3% 16% 4 7%Q22_7 Location of institution 44% 38% 2 45%Q22_8 The content of the course 59% 53% 2 63%Q22_9 The way the course is structured or assessed 13% 18% 3 16%Q22_10 My employer advised or encouraged me to do it 2% 3% 3 2%Q22_11 Delivery of the course is flexible enough to fit around my life 13% 21% 3 17%Q22_12 Funding was available to study this particular course 8% 19% 4 12%Q22_13 The cost of the course compared to other institutions 8% 12% 3 12%Q22_14 It is the only institution offering this course 23% 11% 1 16%InformationQ23_1_a Information for prospective students was easy to find 95% 89% 1 89%Q23_2_a Information for prospective students was useful 92% 87% 2 87%Q23_3_a Information for prospective students was accurate 82% 80% 2 77%

NSS COMMENTS

59

There is only one NSS 2017 comment that relates to Anthropology

60

Dept 1 Dept2

Negative comment Positive comment Other comments

LIN* ANT* Minimal ISP engagement or guidance between staff and linguistics students, especially in comparison to other departments likes Social Anthropology that provides prerequisite steps and help. Lack of linguistics modules, resulting in an unbalanced timetable and workload in final year. Very disappointing.

Overall a good experience, particularly accessibility to resources, and particular staff members (who always having an open door and go the extra mile for students), and the SOAS community. Benefited greatly from the language open option available throughout the three years. The development of course content for compulsory modules was both gradual and challenging.

More efforts to improve student advice and wellbeing. A good start would be to employ more councillors or even implement student mentor scheme. More mental health awareness and more action.

Note: Ipsos Mori did not allocate comments to depts with fewer than 10 comments, therefore many comments in NSS 2017 could not be assigned to depts.

GRADUATE DESTINATIONS

61

UK UG leavers working or studying remained below the SOAS average in 2015/16, after strong results in earlier years (2012/13 and 2013/14)

62Notes: follows HESA PI method – joint students counted as 0.5; students doing ‘other’ activity, e.g. travelling are excluded from the measure.

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16Anthropology 83.3% 93.9% 95.5% 80.0% 83.8%SOAS result 88.4% 89.8% 91.8% 91.5% 88.7%SOAS benchmark 89.7% 90.2% 92.0% 92.4% 91.9%Number of dept respondents 15 24.5 22 12.5 18.5

The proportion of UK UG leavers in graduate jobs improved in 2015/16 from a low base in previous years


Are there further steps that should be taken to help Anthropology students prepare for their next steps in work or study?

The proportion of UK-domiciled PGT leavers in highly-skilled employment or further study has been consistently low


2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16Average annual

studentsUK 60.6% 52.4% 76.9% 61.5% 56.5% 25.8Other EU 91.7% 66.7% 66.7% 68.4% 85.7% 12.3Non-EU 38.5% 64.3% 91.7% 52.4% 75.0% 14.4

Are there further steps that should be taken to help Anthropology students prepare for their next steps in work or study?

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 J

1

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND THE CONDUCT OF EVENTS POLICY

Board of Trustees are asked to note the revised Policy on Freedom of Speech and the Conduct of Events

Executive Summary In recent years, the School has encountered a number of problems in relation to the hosting of events, with competing claims made around freedom of speech and the right to protest. A working group was convened to develop a new Policy on Freedom of Speech and the Conduct of Events. This is attached for EB to approve, along with a revised version of the more detailed procedure for booking events.

Recommendations & Next Steps To approve the attached Policy and consider how this will be communicated to the School.

Financial Impact There is no direct financial impact. However, EB is asked to consider how additional security costs for events should be attributed going forward. The proposal is that security charges should be allocated to the departmental bookings and that the security costs for school centres or institutional events be funded out of a central fund where these cannot be incorporated in to specific events budgets e.g. for graduations. The Students’ Union is already recharged for any additional costs.

Risks As highlighted in the paper, this has been a significant reputational risk to the School and also links with the School’s obligations under the Prevent Duty. The revised Policy and detailed procedure should further strengthen the School’s approach.

Equality implications There are no direct implications from the policy or procedure.

Consultations The covering paper details the members of the working group. This included academic and professional services staff with relevant expertise along with representation from the Students’ Union. It was approved at Executive Board on 16th April 2018.

98


1

Policy on Freedom of Speech and the Conduct of Events Draft

Preamble

1. Freedom of speech and academic freedom are central tenets of SOAS life.

2. SOAS University of London is committed to upholding academic freedom of enquiry in its teaching and research, to ensuring that free and open discussion can take place in an atmosphere of tolerance, openness and inclusivity, in which all members of our community can engage with each other, and the public, in debate and discussion, and remain open to both intellectual challenge and change.

3. The legal duty of UK universities to protect freedom of speech is enshrined in legislation,

including the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 and the Human Rights Act 1998 and academic freedom is protected by the Education Reform Act 1988. Section 43 of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 specifically requires universities to: (a) ‘take such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech

within the law is secured for members, students and employees of the establishment and for visiting speakers’

(b) ‘ensure so far as is reasonably practicable, that the use of any premises of the establishment is not denied to any individual or body of persons on any ground connected with

a. the beliefs or views of that individual or of any member of that body; or b. the policy or objectives of that body; and

(c) issue and keep up to date a code of practice for meetings and events.’

4. The central importance of freedom of speech and academic freedom in a university underlies this policy. This policy should be read in conjunction with the detailed guidance on the booking of events found at: [INSERT URL]

Scope

5. This Policy must be followed by all members, students, and employees of the School and all external visitors to SOAS in respect of: (a) all meetings and events to be held on SOAS premises including those organized by

third parties; and (b) all meetings and other events that are organized or funded under the name of SOAS

University of London wherever they may take place.

6. It is not anticipated that prior approval of meetings will be required for normal teaching sessions, events that form part of the scheduled academic timetable, or for academic or administrative operational meetings.

Key Principles

7. Freedom of speech within the law and academic freedom must be protected.

100


2

8. The School believes that a culture of free, open and robust discussion can be achieved

only if all concerned engage critically but courteously with each other. The School does not tolerate any form of harassment or victimization and expects all members of the community, and its visitors, to treat each other with respect, courtesy and consideration (and in accordance with the Respect@SOAS policy). The School is committed to fostering an inclusive culture which promotes equality, values diversity and maintains a working, learning and social environment in which the rights and dignity of all members of the community are respected.

Procedure

9. Subject to paragraph 6 above, this policy should be followed whenever an event is planned involving speakers, participants or audiences from outside SOAS, and should be commenced at the earliest opportunity and not later than four weeks before the date of the meeting or event.

10. The Principal Organiser (the person responsible for the event) must undertake a self-assessment using the questions in Annex 1 to determine whether further scrutiny or support from the School is required. If the Principal Organiser reasonably decides that there are no issues as to unlawful content or public order, the event can go ahead. It is anticipated that the vast majority of events organized will fall into this category.

A Principal Organiser can be: a named staff member of the Student Union or one of its clubs or societies; a SOAS staff member on a contract of 0.2 FTE or greater; a representative of an external organisation booking events through the Conference Office.

11. If a Principal Organiser identifies that further scrutiny is required, the venue can be

provisionally booked and the Principal Organiser must refer the matter to the Responsible Officer to determine how best concerns or risks in respect of unlawful content or public order may be mitigated. The Principal Organiser may propose measures of mitigation, but the final decision will rest with the Responsible Officer who will decide what conditions, if any, are required. Annex 2 provides examples of measures of risk mitigation that may be resorted to in order to enable events to proceed.

12. In exceptional circumstances, where it is anticipated that the risks posed by an event cannot be mitigated by reasonable and proportionate measures, the Responsible Officer has the right to refuse permission for the event to proceed, or cancel the event even after initial authorization.

13. As required by section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, the School will not give permission

to hold a meeting or event where it is known that: (a) the proposed speaker belongs to, or professes to belong to, a proscribed organization;

or (b) the proposed speaker will use the event to support, or to further the activities of, a

proscribed organization. Role of the Responsible Officer

101


3

14. In the context of this code, the Responsible Officer will be entrusted with the duty to assess the implications of events formally referred to them and to act in accordance with the School’s legal responsibilities, including: (a) the importance of academic freedom (as required by the Education Reform Act

1988); (b) the need to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured (as required by

the Education (No.2) Act 1986); (c) the rights and freedoms enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights

and incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998; (d) to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, promote equality

of opportunity, and foster good relations between different groups in accordance with the Equality Act 2010 and the Public Sector Equality Duty 2011;

(e) the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 which requires universities to ‘have due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism’ (s.26(1)) and which also provides that in carrying out that duty, Universities ‘must have particular regard to the duty to ensure freedom of speech; and to the importance of academic freedom’; and

(f) the need to ensure the safety of all staff, students and other visitors to the institution especially where they might be exposed to public disorder, incitement to violence or hatred.

15. The Responsible Officer will act in a risk-based and proportionate manner consonant

with the desire, wherever possible, to enable events or meetings to proceed.

16. Unless otherwise determined the “Responsible Officer” will be the Director of Governance & Legal Services.

17. Some functions of the role, as detailed in the annexes to this policy and related Booking Procedure may be undertaken by staff in the Conference Office.

Appeal

18. If an organizer, or any member of the School’s staff or student body has any concerns about a meeting or event and is unhappy about the decision of the Responsible Officer they may write to the Registrar and Secretary (Chief Operating Officer) setting out clear reasons for their unhappiness and requesting a reconsideration of the decision. The decision of the Registrar and Secretary (Chief Operating Officer) will be final.

The Conduct of Meetings

19. It is expected that all participants in events organized within, or under the name of SOAS University of London, will observe good order and behave in a manner consonant with the values outlined in this policy, and in particular, by respecting the right to freedom of speech within the law, and by treating others with respect, courtesy and consideration.

20. A failure on the part of SOAS Staff or Students to adhere to the terms of this policy will represent a disciplinary offence and action may be taken, accordingly, under the respective disciplinary procedures.

102


4

21. The School reserves the right to exclude from its premises, or meetings hosted in its name, members of the general public who are deemed to have breached the terms or ethos of this policy.

Review of the Operation of the Code

22. The Registrar and Secretary shall undertake a review of the operation of this Code after its

first twelve (12) months and report to Executive Board on any recommended changes.

103


5

Annex 1 Self-Assessment Questions

The Principal Organiser must make themselves sufficiently aware of the speaker’s background and reputation to be able to take a considered view as to whether it is appropriate to host the proposed event within SOAS. The primary consideration is whether the event can be safely managed and whether any additional measures should be put in place to enable the event to go ahead. The following questions will enable the Principal Organiser to consider how to mitigate any risks the speaker’s attendance might bring, and ensure that the event can be managed appropriately. a) Are there any concerns about unlawful content or content that might encourage terrorism or violent extremism? For example: • _Are they representing an organisation proscribed by the UK Government? https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/538297/20160715-Proscription-website-update.pdf • _Are they likely to breach UK laws on Hate Speech? https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/freedom-express/top-ten-things-you-need-know-about-freedom-expression-laws • _Are they likely to raise concerns under the Prevent duty guidance in terms of encouraging violent extremism or terrorism, or drawing people into terrorism? https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevent-duty-guidance If you are unsure, please contact the Responsible Officer for advice. b) Could there be a public order issue? Concern about public order issues does not automatically block such an event taking place, but it is important to seek advice. For example: • _Is the subject of their talk or the organisation they represent likely to mobilise significant opposition such that there might be a risk to safety of the public or members of the SOAS community? • _Is there any evidence that this has been the case on other occasions? • _Does the speaker, or the organisation they represent have a controversial profile in the media? • _Is the event likely to attract a heightened media interest? • _Is the event likely to attract unusual interest or unusually large numbers? At the end of the self-assessment process the Principal Organiser should be able to answer Yes or No to these questions. In cases in which the answer to either question is ‘Yes’, the matter should be referred to the Conference Office or the Responsible Officer. The Principal Organiser can propose measures of mitigation for consideration by the Conference Office or Responsible Officer.

104


6

Annex 2 Mitigation Measures

As the overarching aim of the Events Code of Practice is to enable, where possible, for events to go ahead, the Principal Organisers of meetings and Responsible Officer should, in case of risk, consider the following measures of mitigation:

- Ticketing and/or restricting numbers - Changing the time, date, length or venue of the event - Limiting admission to SOAS staff and students and/or by named guest list only - Checking identification of those attending - Provision of stewards/ additional security - Attendance by a senior member of staff - Copy of any speech to be approved in advance - A suitable Chair, in particular for public/open meetings, to ensure the event is conducted

in line with this Code; - Providing opportunity to debate or challenge a view that is being promoted - Imposing restrictions on the recording of an event and/or controlling the use of social

media - Imposing restrictions on items that might be brought into the venue.

105


7

SOAS, University of London

PROCEDURE FOR THE BOOKING AND CONDUCT OF EVENTS

1. Introduction This Procedure supports the School’s Policy on Freedom of Speech and the Conduct of Events. It sets out the detailed arrangements for the booking of rooms for internal and external events. It also covers the conduct of such events and the associated arrangements. Aspects of the Code also apply to where SOAS events are organised offsite. A flowchart summarising the process is available at Annex 1 to this document. 2. Arrangements for the Booking of Meetings These provisions apply to any meetings or activities falling within the meaning of “event” as defined in sections 5 and 6 of the Code of Practice. a) Booking and other preliminary arrangements

− It shall be the duty of every student and employee, who wishes to book an event on School premises or a SOAS branded event offsite, whether an officer of an organisation within the School or not, to be familiar with this Code of Practice and to comply with its provisions. This shall extend to all outside organisations wishing to use School premises.

− Any organisation, group or member of staff proposing to organise an event shall ensure

that a single person is appointed as the "Principal Organiser" of the event.

− A Principal Organiser can be: a named staff member of the Student Union or one of its clubs or societies; a SOAS staff member on a contract of 0.2 FTE or greater; a representative of an external organisation booking events through the Conference Office.

− The Principal Organiser is deemed by the School to be responsible for the event, for

ensuring that the School’s property, furnishings and equipment are treated with respect and for any liabilities or consequences arising out of the event.

− Events should be booked at least four weeks in advance and the Principal Organiser shall give as much notice of the proposed event and the request to book SOAS premises as possible. All information concerning the event, including risk registers, must be submitted no later than ten working days in advance of the event for consideration by the Conference Office.

− The School's Conference Office may accept bookings at shorter notice but the School

reserves the right not to accept a booking on the grounds of insufficient time to ensure that all necessary arrangements can be made.

106


8

− In all cases, written notice of the proposed meeting on SOAS premises must be made at the time of booking using the School’s Web Room Booking portal http://www.soas.ac.uk/timetable/teachingrooms/ . The form must be completed in full and provide the following information:

− the nature of the meeting − numbers of attendees, whether it is internal and limited to SOAS students and

employees or is for external attendees only or both. − the name(s) of the speaker(s) − the subject /theme of the meeting − the topics of the speakers − Budget code for internal charging or purchase order − Risk assessment (see Annexes 2-4)

− It is the responsibility of the Principal Organiser to ensure full information about the event,

as described above, is provided to the Conference Office at least ten working days in advance of the event. If this deadline is not met, the School reserves the right to cancel the event.

− Where the Principal Organiser or those responsible for taking the bookings believe that

the event may not meet the requirements of the duty of care to speakers and the attendees so that all can enter, deliver speeches, listen to speeches and/or participate in events safely without the probability of a threat to public order then this must be referred to the Responsible Officer for consideration. The Principal Organiser can recommend to the Responsible Officer what measures might be considered by way of risk mitigation.

− On receipt of the referral, the Responsible Officer shall give a written statement

(normally via email) within ten working days, to the Conference Office which will forward it immediately to the Principal Organiser. The statement shall either grant or withhold permission for the use of School premises for the proposed event;

− Permission to hold the event may be subject to conditions the Responsible Officer

considers reasonably necessary to ensure the discharge of the School statutory responsibilities in regards to mutual tolerance, intellectual freedom and freedom of expression.

b) The arrangements for booking School premises for events is as follows: SOAS staff or the Students’ Union wishing to hold events on School premises are required to use the procedures which follow. Detailed operational guidelines, forms, tariffs and other charges are available on the Conference Office pages on the website. http://www.soas.ac.uk/business/conferenceoffice/.

SOAS staff can only make bookings on the appropriate (online) form. This is so that any budgetary requirements can be authorised by the relevant budget holder and that responsibility for the event is clearly identified. See http://www.soas.ac.uk/timetable/

107

http://www.soas.ac.uk/timetable/teachingrooms/

http://www.soas.ac.uk/business/conferenceoffice/

http://www.soas.ac.uk/timetable/


9

Students can only make bookings on the appropriate form through the Students’ Union, authorised by one of the Co-Presidents or SU staff members. The Students’ Union is responsible for all events booked in their name.

SOAS Staff and students cannot request and officers cannot book rooms for another part of the organisation or for another budget holder or for any other (external) organisations. For example, a Departmental Office is not permitted to book a room for an event being publicised as a Students’ Union event, unless it is a jointly sponsored event which should be declared when the booking is first made and a single Principal Organiser identified.

SOAS Staff or the Students’ Union may apply, through the appropriate person, having indicated a Principal Organiser, to hold an event on School premises by applying online to the Conference Office to book a room(s) on the one-off room booking form http://www.soas.ac.uk/business/conferenceoffice/ which enquires about the nature of the event and the arrangements planned for its safe organisation and management.

The Principal Organiser’s answers on the form will allow the Conference Office to proceed with the booking if the event seems to be in order or if further advice is needed to inform the Conference Office’s discussions with the Responsible Officer.

No booking will be accepted without a named Principal Organiser, who is required to be present at the event, or without all of the relevant information being provided.

Where meetings are determined by the Conference Office or the Responsible Officer as not meeting the requirements of Duty of Care as defined above the booking may be subject to further conditions.

Where such meetings are held by the Students’ Union or one of its clubs or societies, the booking may be subject to the condition that one of the Co-Presidents of the Students’ Union shall be required to attend and/or act as Principal Organiser. c) SOAS branded events taking place offsite SOAS-branded events taking place offsite should comply with the requirements of the hosting organisation, SOAS branding guidelines (see clause 8 below) and the spirit of this code of practice. The event, organisers, speakers and attendees represent the School. No event should risk damaging the reputation of the School and failure to comply could result in disciplinary proceedings (see clause 11 below). 3. Risk Analysis and Escalation a) The Principal organiser is responsible for an initial assessment of the risk of each event, in

particular with regards to controversial speakers, crowd control and the risk of protests. The risk assessment will indicate whether the Conference Office needs to escalate the event to the School to consider any necessary further measures. This may include escalation to the Responsible Officer. This will also consider any requirements of the School to comply with the Prevent legislation and duties.

108

http://www.soas.ac.uk/business/conferenceoffice/


10

b) The School will if necessary grade an event for security purposes using a ‘traffic light’ indicator along the following lines:

(i) Green: non-controversial with no protests expected. No further action is required.

(ii) Amber: regarded as medium with controversial speakers and/or the risk of protests.

Monitor and escalate to red if appropriate.

(iii) Red: highly controversial; student or outside protest likely. − For these events, the Conference Office will alert the Head of Security and the

Responsible Officer to consider such factors as cost, location, publicity, security, stewarding and entrance arrangements needed, as well as implications on freedom of speech. This assessment may also involve consultations with the organisers, speakers or their representatives, the police, neighbouring institutions that may be impacted by the event and any other institutions that have staged a similar event.

− A security plan will be drawn up that clearly indicates the duties and responsibilities of everyone involved, including contingency plans and escape routes in case of an emergency. The plan will be treated as confidential.

− Consideration may include the appropriateness of the venue and whether the event should be ticketed, as well as other security requirements.

− Additional speakers may be required to sit on the panel to balance the views of a

controversial speaker.

− The conference office and Responsible Officer will carry out due diligence checks on external speakers, including online research, discussions with other institutions or external organisations as required. Any information will be shared in accordance with the School’s Information Sharing Protocol.

− The Communications Manager or a nominee, in consultation with the Responsible

Officer and the School’s senior management, will normally have sole responsibility for dealing with any press or media companies.

c) For events that involve external speakers, participants or audiences from outside SOAS, a risk assessment must to be carried out. See annex 3 and 4.

4. Approval of an event a) An event will not be approved to proceed if

− there are reasonable grounds for believing that the speaker or other persons at the event will incite others to commit criminal acts, such as acts of violence and/or the incitement of racial or religious hatred;

− there are reasonable grounds for believing that opinions may be expressed in a way that

is contrary to English law, or which infringe the human rights of others;

109


11

− the event appears to be in direct support of an organisation that is unlawful or proscribed;

(For Proscribed Terrorist Groups see http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/counter-terrorism/proscribed-terror-groups/proscribed-groups?view=Binary)

− the event may cause a breach of the Terrorism Act or the Counter-Terrorism & Security Act including the encouragement or inducement to, or glorification of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism or disseminating terrorist publications;

− the event is likely to contravene health and safety legislation, or cause a breach of the

peace, or cause a public order offence;

− the scale or nature of the event is demonstrably unsuitable for the School’s facilities or is likely to disrupt its other activities;

− staff, students or other internal or external groups or individuals have misled the School

about the nature of the event by falsifying or concealing information;

− proper procedures have not been followed;

− or if it is thought that the event may attract numbers in excess of the room/lecture theatre capacity

b) If there are concerns, the Responsible Officer may either decide that the event cannot proceed or may permit it to proceed but with special conditions which must be followed, such conditions will be conveyed through the Conference Office.

c) Should the event proceed then the cost of any special conditions imposed, which might

include ticketing, additional security etc, will be borne by the organisers. In case of events organised through an academic Department or one of its Centres, additional costs will be borne by that Department. In case of events organised under auspices of School Centres or Institutes, the costs will be borne centrally from a designated events fund.

d) The Responsible Officer will arrange for the decision on whether the event may or may not

proceed, and any conditions attaching to it, to be notified by the Conference Office to the applicant within ten working days of the receipt of a satisfactorily completed booking form.

e) The School reserves the right to withdraw an event booking, if it receives further information

at any time that leads it to believe that the law will be infringed or if it believes conditions for the event will not be met.

5. Organisation and the Conduct of Meetings The Principal Organiser and all persons concerned with the organisation of approved events shall comply with the conditions set out in this Code. They have a duty to ensure that nothing in the preparations for or conduct of the event infringes the law, whether by conducts likely to cause a breach of the peace, incitement to illegal acts or in any other way.

110

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/counter-terrorism/proscribed-terror-groups/proscribed-groups?view=Binary

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/counter-terrorism/proscribed-terror-groups/proscribed-groups?view=Binary


12

The Principal Organiser may wish to refer to the full Health & Safety Guidance for event safety: HSE The event safety guide (Second edition) A guide to health, safety and welfare at music and similar events: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg195.pdf a) Organisational requirements: Further information in the form of an event management plan may be requested prior to final confirmation of a booking, an event management plan would include:

− Ticketing and/or restricting numbers; − Checking identification of those attending − Limiting admission to SOAS staff and students and/or by named guest list only − The provision number, suitability, instruction and management of event stewards; − The presence and responsibilities of security staff; − Changing the time, date, length or venue of the event − Compliance with advice received from the Police or local Prevent partners; − Advertisement and publicity arrangements, including the content of posters and

information on the web; − The presence of, and under what conditions, representatives of the media are proposed

to be admitted; − Arrangements to ensure speaker(s) and guests have free access and egress to and

from the location of the event; − A suitable Chair, in particular for public/open meetings, to ensure the event is conducted

in line with this Code; − Provisions for ensuring that the event venue is left in a clean and tidy condition; − A detailed/safety risk assessment may also be required to be completed, see Annex 3

and 4.

Information about photography and filming of the event, where it will be publicised, for what purpose would it be used shall be required. The event attendees will also need to be made aware of the fact that filming/photography will be taking place and consent should be taken from the audience b) Recovery of costs for additional staffing, resources

− The levying of charges for facilities and equipment will be determined by the School and

are available from the Conference Office on request; − Where additional staffing and other special arrangements are considered necessary by

the Responsible Officer the costs shall be met the organisers as per paragraph 4 (c) above;

− This will include the cost for any additional cleaning and repairs (if required); − All internal bookings must supply a budget code for the recharge of any costs

6. Logo & branding SOAS branding and logo should only be used on approval by the Marketing Department or, for external events, the Conference Office at which time guidelines for its use will be provided.

111

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsg195.pdf


13

7. Reserved Rights

a) Where it is deemed necessary the Responsible Officer shall have the right to arrange for School staff to be responsible for all security arrangements in respect of a meeting and to appoint a member of staff as Controlling Officer for the occasion. The costs arising would be attributed on a basis to be determined under Section 3(ii) (c) above. If the Responsible Officer is not satisfied that adequate arrangements can be made to maintain order, and that it is not reasonably practicable to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured, he/she shall refuse or withdraw permission for a meeting.

b) The School reserves the rights to film, photograph and /or audio record any event that

takes place on the Schools premises.

c) The School reserves the right to refuse any request from the media and/or production companies to film at SOAS or on SOAS premises or property. Such permission may be given in accordance with Annex 5 The School reserves the right to ask for filming, photography or audio recording to be stopped during the event if it is likely to have a detrimental effect on SOAS, its reputation or image of its staff or students or cause disruption among the audience.

d) Banners, loudhailers or other articles likely to lead to disruption, injury or damage may

not be taken inside the premises where the meeting is being held. Where necessary any such articles may be temporarily confiscated and held by the School or those controlling the meeting.

e) The School reserves the right to charge a deposit.

8. Appeal Appeals against the decisions of the Responsible Officer may be made to the Registrar whose decision shall be final (see Code of Practice, para. 18) 9. Disciplinary offence Failure by SOAS staff or students (including officers of the Students’ Union) to comply with the provisions of this Code of Practice and/or the School’s statement on ‘Freedom of Expression’ shall constitute a disciplinary offence for which the staff or student (as applicable) may face disciplinary procedure which may be implemented by the School. Such action would follow the School’s Disciplinary Processes.

Disciplinary Non-academic procedure; Student Disciplinary Procedure http://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/policies/ and;

Academic Staff: Dismissal, Discipline and Grievance Procedures and Related Matters http://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersacademicprocedures/

112

http://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/policies/

http://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/standingorders/standingordersacademicprocedures/


14

113

Annex 1 - Flowchart

15

Is the Principle Organiser:

Staff StudentExternal

Does the event involve an external

organisation or require conference

space?

Does the event involve an external

organisation or require conference

space?

Contact the Conference OfficeYES YES

Use the online room booking form

NO

Use the online room booking form

NO

Initial risk assessment of event to be carried out by Principle Organiser,

or Conference Office for external

events

Event assessed as ‘green’

Event assessed as ‘amber’ or ‘red’

Escalated to Responsible Officer to assess event and

any additional requirements

deemed necessary Room booking registered in

system, details checked by

Timetabling and/or Conference Office

Queries discussed with Principle

Organiser

Room booking confirmedEvent takes place

Responsible Officer agrees to the event,

with additional measures if

requried

Responsible Officer does not agree to

the event

Conference Office communicate

decision to Principle Organiser that the

event can take place

Conference Office communicate

decision to Principle Organiser that the event cannot take

place

114

Annex 2

16

Risk assessment for events involving speakers, participants or audiences from outside SOAS

This risk assessment must be completed for all events taking place onsite involving speakers, participants or audiences from outside SOAS. It must be completed and returned to the Conference Office at least ten working days in advance of the event. The Principal Organiser may be contacted by the Conference Office for further information. Consideration will also be given to the School’s requirements under the Prevent Duty. In some cases, the Conference Office may need to refer the event to the Head of Security or Responsible Officer. This does not necessarily mean that the event will not be permitted to go ahead, but further arrangements may need to be made, such as ticketing, crowd control or other security requirements. Please complete the assessment below. If the answer to any question is yes then the booking request must be escalated to the Conference Office for further consideration. Yes 1. Is the event likely to attract media attention, or have similar events in the past

attracted media attention? If so, please contact the SOAS Press Office.

2. Could demand for the event exceed the size of the room booked? 3. Is the topic likely to attract protest or serious disagreement? 4. Has there been disruption to events that have addressed the same topic in the

past, at SOAS or elsewhere?

5. Is the speaker likely to attract protest or serious disagreement? 6. Has there been disruption to events that have involved the same speaker in the

past?

7. Is there any identified security threat to the speaker?

115

Annex 3

17

Guidance on Risk Assessment

There is a requirement under Health and Safety Law that a suitable and sufficient assessment of risk to employees and others affected by our activities (such as students, contractors and visitors) is undertaken by the School. Risk Assessments are also required for particular people who may be at risk, such as young people or pregnant women, or for a particular event. An 'Assessment of Risk' is a careful examination of what could cause harm to people in the work place. It is a way of establishing whether the precautions in place to avoid harm are sufficient, or whether more should be done. Risk Assessments should aim to keep the risk as low as “reasonably practicable”- i.e. the quantum risk versus the sacrifice (in terms of money, time and trouble) in averting the risk. Hazard is anything that can cause harm (i.e. slippery floors, electricity, equipment not secured correctly etc.) Risk is the chance, great or small, that someone will be harmed by the hazard. ALL PEOPLE WHO NEED TO BE AWARE OF THE RISKS SHOULD SIGN AND DATE A COPY OF THE RISK ASSESMENT TO SAY THEY HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD IT.

When to do and review a Risk Assessment • Before the work starts • Review after any alterations • Review after time (at least annually) • Review after any new hazards are identified • Review if no longer valid

How to Assess Risks • Concentrate only on significant hazards that could result in serious harm or affect several

people. • Don't over complicate! • You are probably aware of most hazards, but you need to check that all reasonable

precautions have been taken to avoid causing harm • You should ask all people who are exposed to the hazard what precautions they consider

are necessary • If you have any problems in the completion of a Risk Assessment, you should ask your

Manager or the Health and Safety Officer. 1. Look for the hazards • Look afresh at what may cause harm in your workplace. • Ask other employees for their input. • Manufacturer’s instructions will help spot hazards • Accident or hazard report forms may also help.

116

Annex 3

18

2. Decide which people are at risk and how • Think about who might be harmed by the hazard, including members of the public,

visitors, cleaners, contractors, maintenance personnel etc. • There is no need to list individuals by name - just think about groups who may be

affected. • Are there any obligations to the School under the Prevent Duty 3. Are existing precautions adequate or should more be done? • Even after precautions have been taken usually some risks remain, you should consider

each hazard, and how to reduce the risk to a minimum. • Have you done all the things required by law to prevent risks? (Consult the HSE

website: www.hse.gov.uk or ask the Health and Safety Officer if you are unsure) • You need to assess whether you can get rid of the hazard altogether, or if not, can the

risks be controlled so that harm is unlikely? • Have you considered all possible options for reducing risks? • Has everybody at risk been provided with sufficient information, instruction or training? • Have you considered all those who may be affected, such as other employees or visitors?

GET ALL THE PEOPLE WHO NEED TO BE AWARE OF THE RISK ASSESMENTS TO SIGN AND DATE TO SAY THEY HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD IT.

4. Review and Revise

• Changes over time, new equipment or work practices may result in new hazards which will need to be assessed.

• It is also good practice to review your assessments from time to time for ongoing activities.

117

http://www.hse.gov.uk/

Annex 4

19

Area: Date:

Author: Proposed Review Date:

Location/Event/Activity:

Hazards

Look for hazards which you could reasonably expect to result in significant harm, e.g. Slipping hazards e.g. spilt drinks Food hygiene Electricity / Fire Tripping hazards e.g. wires/leads Poor weather Physical activity Positioning/space/confined work areas Equipment usage Noise/Lighting/Heat/Temperature Access Duties under the Prevent legislation List hazards / draw plan as necessary

People at Risk

Think of groups of people who may be affected, e.g. General public Staff Cleaners Pregnant people People with disabilities

List groups of people at risk from hazard

Existing Controls of the Risk

Have you already taken precautions against the hazards you have listed? e.g. have you given adequate information, training or instruction and are there adequate systems/procedures in place? Do the precautions meet legal requirements, represent good practice and reduce risk as far as reasonably practicable? If you aren't sure about legal requirements, check with the School or SU.

List existing controls or state where information may be found.

Further Steps Required to Control the Risk What more can be reasonably done for those risks that are not already adequately controlled? Apply the following principles, in order: Remove the risk completely Try a less risky option Prevent access to the hazard Organise work to limit exposure to the hazard Issue protective clothing/equipment Provide welfare facilities e.g. door locks, first aid List further steps taken to control risks that are not adequately controlled. Consider what is reasonably practicable in the situation.

118

Annex 5

20

FILMING POLICY TERMS AND CONDITIONS (updated for 2017/18)

1. All requests from the media, production companies or individuals to film at SOAS must have completed the SOAS Filming Request Form before contacting the Communications Office. 2. Authorisation for filming can only be given on the condition that the terms and conditions are agreed – either by signing this document or agreeing to the terms and conditions via the online form. TECHNICAL 3. SOAS reserves the right to determine the suitability of all equipment used in filming and photography, including its electrical safety. No equipment without a current valid safety certificate, or which does not conform to the Safety Regulations of the Electrical Institute of Great Britain and suitable British Standards, may be used on the premises. No lights or equipment may be clamped to any fixed furnishings. EVENTS 4. Film crews and photographers are expected to abide by the SOAS code of conduct and the terms and conditions set out in the code. Please see our Code of Practice for the Booking and Conduct of Events policy. 5. Event organisers are obliged to inform the audience about the presence of the film crew or photographer through signage and by announcing their presence at the start of the event. 6. The audience and speakers reserve the right not to be filmed or photographed. 7. SOAS reserves the right to make a recording of public events. LOCATION 8. SOAS reserves the right to limit photographic, video, or audio recording activities. 9. SOAS reserves the right to request a copy of events being filmed by independent parties. TERMINATION 10. SOAS reserves the right to terminate filming or photography if terms and conditions are not being met or if the filming is deviating from the agreed schedule or context. I ……………………………………………………………. On behalf of ………………………………… Agree to SOAS’ terms and conditions and will adhere to the points above Date: ………………..

119

https://www.soas.ac.uk/comms/filming/

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/policies/file37337.pdf

https://www.soas.ac.uk/admin/governance/policies/file37337.pdf

Annex 6

21

Submission of a speaker request This procedure applies to all staff, students and Students’ Union members. If an event you are planning involves an external speaker, the following form must be completed by the Principal Organiser and returned to the Conference Office at least ten working days in advance of the event. The Conference Office will aim to contact you in writing to let you know whether the event has been approved to take place within 10 working days. The Conference Office may contact you for further information. In some cases, the Conference Office may need to refer the event to the Head of Security or Responsible Officer. This does not necessarily mean the event will not be permitted to go ahead, but further arrangements may need to be made, such as ticketing, crowd control or other security requirements. In the event that this form is not submitted to the Conference Office by the Principal Organiser ten working days before the date of the event, permission for the event to take place may be withdrawn. Consideration will also be given to the School’s requirements under the Prevent Duty. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. 1. Name and contact details of the Principal Organiser.

2. Name and details of the visiting speaker, including the organisation they represent, have

they spoken at SOAS or another university before? 3. Date, time and place of the event.

4. Expected arrival and departure times of the speaker. 5. Overview of the event: what is the subject matter, who is the appointed Chairperson, what

language will the event take place in? 6. What topic will the external speaker be taking about? 7. How will the event be advertised and in what language? 8. What publication materials will be made available to attendees from the speaker? 9. How many people are expected to attend the event, including staff, students, members of

the university, the public etc? 10. Will the event be ticketed? 11. Does the Principal Organiser believe there may be a threat of disruption caused by the

subject matter of the event or topics of discussion? What is the nature of that disruption? 12. Does the Principal Organiser know of any issues that may arise in relation to the external

speaker?

13. Is the event being sponsored? If so, by who?

120

Annex 7

22

Safety Guidance on events

First Aid The number of people requiring medical treatment at any event will vary considerably as will the type of ailment. These can range from traumatic injuries or conditions such as dehydration, sunstroke, food poisoning or the serious effects of drugs or alcohol. The first-aid provision needs to be suitable for the number of people expected to attend and for the type of event. Details on the amount of first aid cover required can be found in the Events Safety Guide published by the Health and Safety Executive. The recommended minimum number of first aiders at small events where no special risks are considered likely is 2:1000 for the first 3000 attending. It is advisable that no event should have less than two first aiders. Fire Safety It is advisable to provide equipment for putting out small fires, e.g. fire extinguishers, fire blankets, throughout the site. Make sure the relevant personnel know where the equipment is, everyone with responsibilities at the event should be told not to attempt to fight major fires. Organisers should ensure that they are familiar with evacuation procedures including escape routes and how to raise the alarm. Evacuation routes must be kept free from obstructions and should easily identified by all attendees. Ensure that adequate provision is made for the safe evacuation of any disabled persons. Waste One event can generate a lot of rubbish – it is the responsibility of an event organiser to clear the site following their event. Therefore you will need to provide an adequate number of rubbish bins around the site where they will be most required. Make arrangements to regularly empty the bins and to satisfactorily dispose of the rubbish at the end of the event. Waste must not be allowed to gather in escape route as it may impede evacuation or lead to fire spread. Electrical safety Event organisers, contractors and others using electrical equipment must do all that is reasonably practicable to ensure that electrical installations and equipment at an event are properly selected, installed and maintained so as not to cause death or injury. Organisers should read the HSE “electrical safety at places of entertainment” GS50 guidance notes http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/gs50.pdf Outside installations, including wiring, switchgear and any generator, must be installed in a safe manner by a suitably competent electrician who should provide a written certificate to prove this and must be in contact with University Estates Office. The safety standard of the installation should be at least that of the current IEE (Institute of Electrical Engineers) Wiring Regulations. For fixed installations please consult the GS50 guidance as stated above Food safety Organisers must ensure that any food preparation is undertaken in hygienic conditions and complies with relevant legislation. Allergy information must be made available on request. PEEPS (Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans) for visitors Event promotional material should contain information for visitors regarding arranging a PEEP for those that require one.

121

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/gs50.pdf

Annex 7

23

Stewards Organisers will need to provide enough identifiable stewards, should the event require them, to cater for the size and nature of your event. Stewards must be adequately trained in their roles and responsibilities. It is essential that stewards and the event organisers are able to communicate effectively, this is particularly important in the event of an evacuation. Stewards must be made aware of emergency evacuation procedures. Emergency Services It is advisable for any medium to large scale event to notify the police, fire and ambulance services. The emergency services will need to ensure that your event does not pose operational problems either at the scene or in the surrounding areas.

122

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 K

SOAS LANGUAGES STARTEGY

The paper presents a strategy for the School’s work on languages, taking into account the external and internal contexts and proposing four activity strands. The Board is asked to

approve the strategy paper.

Executive Summary Languages are central to SOAS, and have been subject to considerable discussion and work over the last few years. For some, languages are the bedrock of SOAS’s academic mission, and central to our activities, while for others, they have not kept pace with changes internal to SOAS and in the external environment, and now threaten to hold the institution back. The current strategy acknowledges the complex situation and perceptions of languages within SOAS, and emphasises both our strength in languages, as well as the need to change and address key problems – in particular financial sustainability, pedagogic innovation and student success – with some urgency. Professor Deborah Johnston, PDLT

Recommendations & Next Step

In order to maintain and progress our language activities we need to address challenges we face and improve in key strategic areas – financial sustainability, student success and progression, and pedagogical innovation. Four strands of activity are proposed to address the major key challenges:

1) Strategically important and vulnerable languages 2) High-recruiting languages 3) Pedagogic innovation 4) The Language Centre

While work on the strands will be conducted in relevant departments (incl. the Language Centre), with support from the School overall if appropriate, the Strategy serves to provide an overarching foundation and direction for this work.

Financial Impact Implementation of the strategy will improve student success and financial sustainability and so make a positive contribution to the School’s financial position overall.

Risks

123

Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 K

Failure to implement the strategy may lead to poor coordination between different activities related to languages and potentially negative effects for pedagogical innovation, student success and financial sustainability.

Equality implications There are no direct equality implications.

Consultations The Strategy has been noted by Executive Board and has been approved by Academic Board on 14 March 2018.

124

1

SOAS Languages Strategy 2018 15 February 2018 Lutz Marten, Interim Dean, FAH & FLC 1. Introduction Languages are central to SOAS, and have been subject to considerable discussion and work over the last few years. For some, languages are the bedrock of SOAS’s academic mission, and central to our activities, while for others, they have not kept pace with changes internal to SOAS and in the external environment, and now threaten to hold the institution back. The current strategy acknowledges the complex situation and perceptions of languages within SOAS, and emphasises both our strength in languages, as well as the need to change and address key problems – such as financial sustainability, pedagogic innovation and student success – with some urgency. 1.1 Strategic priorities The SOAS Vision and Strategy 2016-2020 makes extensive reference to languages. It notes that SOAS is a ‘small research-led university with excellent teaching and language and area studies specialisms in Asia, Africa and the Middle East’, and a global university focussing on ‘teaching and researching across a range of social science and humanities subjects, rooted in the culture and languages of the regions in which we specialise’. Our language scholarship enables SOAS staff and students to listen, speak, read and write in the languages in which key local, regional, and global debates take place, and to meet speakers of African, Asian and Middle Eastern languages on their own linguistic terms. Through our languages, we enable our staff and students to understand and interpret both local and global contexts, to mediate between them, and to critically challenge one in terms of the other. We draw on this strength in our research and our teaching, and use it to change and make an impact locally and globally. Our overall strategic aim is to embed language in the student experience and academic mission of the School and to provide an excellent learning experience for diverse learner groups. Through this, our language scholarship supports the School’s distinctiveness, underpins engagement with our regions, and provides students with key interpersonal and life skills. Our core values underpinning language scholarship and learning are 1) a diverse portfolio of African, Asian and Middle Eastern languages, 2) language study as part of degree study, 3) supporting diverse learners and audiences, and 4) excellence. In order to achieve our strategic aims we will have to take urgent action in a number of areas, where we are currently facing challenges and are not working on the level of excellence we aim for. Our main challenges are financial sustainability, student success and pedagogical innovation, and they will be addressed by four strands of activity: Two strands focussing on different language groups (strategically important and vulnerable languages, and high

125

2

recruiting languages), one strand focussing on the Language Centre, and one overarching strand for pedagogical innovation. 1.2 Previous work The School has undertaken considerable work around languages over the last few years. A review of languages was submitted to Academic Board in March 2016, which provided the background and context for subsequent strategic development. In 2016/17 a Working Group co-chaired by the Associate Dean (L&T MA) (FLTC) and the Dean (FLTC) developed a draft Languages Strategy, of which the current draft is a development. In 2017/18 there was also a Working Group specifically looking at student success and progression in languages, reporting to the Academic Development Committee. In addition, a review of the Language Centre took place in 2015/16, with the findings of the review still being implemented. Several recent developments in programme and curriculum design have had an effect on languages. From 2015/16 beginners-level language modules have been designated as FHEQ Level 5, allowing final year students to take these modules. The PGT credit reform has made it much easier for PGT students to take a language as part of their degree. We have also developed and expanded our 2-year MA programmes combining a discipline with intensive language study, and the MA Translation. There are also projects for the development of Distance and Online Learning in co-ordination with the Academic Head of Online Learning. In 2016, we launched the SOAS World Languages Institute which has since then supported a range of research, outreach and public engagement activities, highlighting and showcasing our languages work. In 2017, the School was awarded £5m funding from the HEFCE Catalyst Fund for safeguarding teaching and scholarship of strategically important and vulnerable languages. The project is linked to an ambitious fundraising campaign to raise £5m for languages as part of our Questions Worth Asking campaign. 2. The wider picture There has been vigorous public debate and considerable amount of work devoted to languages. The British Academy has published several reports on the importance of modern languages, as has the British Council (which is notable as the British Council’s primary mission is to support English). The BBC maintains, and has recently expanded, foreign languages services, and there is a cross-party parliamentary group on languages. Specific thematic support for languages in HE has been provided by HEFCE, the AHRC and the British Academy. Languages in education has been a central topic in these discussions, but also the role of languages in the wider social domain, and in particular the importance of foreign languages for business. While the main modern languages featuring in these discussions tend to be European languages, there is also considerable attention devoted to non-European languages, especially Chinese.

126

3

There are some voices which question the need for learning foreign languages, often with reference to the perceived dominance of English as an international language, or to technological innovation, such as automatic translation, which would render knowledge of foreign languages obsolete. However, there appears to be a consensus among published studies on the topic that there are considerable individual and societal benefits associated with foreign languages learning, and that there is a deficit in the UK of learners and speakers of foreign languages. 2.1. Languages in UK education1 Support for languages in schools has varied over the last decades. In 2002, languages became no longer compulsory at Key Stage 4, and language uptake at GSCE level dropped from around 76% in 2002 to 44% in 2008, although uptake has increased slightly again since then. At the same time the National Languages Strategy (2002-2011) refocused language learning at primary school level, and the numbers of primary schools offering a language rose from 22% in 2002 to an estimated 99% in 2014. In 2012 the government introduced the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) which is awarded to students having at least a C GSCE grade in five core academic subjects, including a language. The inclusion of a language in the EBacc resulted in an initial increase in language take-up, but did not reverse the overall trend. For example, in England GSCE uptake from 2013 to 2017 declined in French, German, and Spanish, although there was a small increase in other modern languages. In 2016, students taking a language GSCE varied from 41% in the North East to 64% in Inner London. It is also noteworthy that opportunities to study languages remain much greater in high performing schools with low indices of socio-economic deprivation. At university level enrolment in language degrees has been declining. From 2010/11 to 2013/14 new enrolments in language degrees fell by 46% from 16,965 to 9,130, although numbers were up to 9,945 in 2014/15. However, in contrast to language degrees, numbers in institution-wide language learning courses have increased considerably during the last decade. The number of universities offering language degrees has declined from 93 in 1998 to 56 in 2014, largely due to reduction at post-1992 universities, so that language degrees are increasingly concentrated at Russell Group universities. With the end of the National Language Strategy in 2011, there is currently no overall languages strategy or policy in England. At university level, the phasing out of special subject funding and funding of the Routes into Languages programme, and the abolishment of HEFCE, indicates the end of government involvement in strategic support for languages. Activists and proponents of languages have called for a change in approach and to establish a wider strategic and support infrastructure for languages.

1 This section draws heavily on two key reports: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. 2016. Options for a sustainable programme of demand-raising activity in modern languages. Report to HEFCE, and The British Council. 2017. Languages for the Future: The foreign languages the United Kingdom needs to become a truly global nation.

127

4

2.2. Benefits of language learning Proponents of languages have pointed out the benefits of language learning in numerous publications.2 Societal benefits of language learning include enhanced economic opportunities through harnessing the linguistic and intercultural skills of the workforce, increased global standing and better foreign relations through the use of languages in policy and diplomacy, and strengthened community relations and social cohesion through valorisation of community languages. Learner benefits of language learning include personal cognitive benefits, intercultural communicative skills and cultural agility, and accumulation of cultural and social capital. Several large-scale studies have presented growing evidence for the cognitive benefits of bilingualism. These are related, for example, to healthy ageing and cognitive functions like attention across the life-span. Language learning provides everyone with access to some of these benefits. Multilingual and intercultural skills allow language learners to approach problems from different perspectives, taking into account different cultural expectations and assumptions, to construct knowledge and skills through another language, and to develop contextualised and effective solutions. Particular attention has been paid to employment-related benefits. A recent LFHE report notes:3 ‘Employers benefit from the specialist skills of interpreters and translators, but also more broadly from the linguistic and intercultural skills of language graduates. There are also wider societal benefits from the promotion of language and intercultural studies in terms of the broader community cohesion and cultural benefits which they bring in an increasingly multilingual society and the needs of an increasingly globalised economy.’ 2.3. Public demand There is evidence for high public demand for graduates with languages skills. A number of studies have argued that language skills are essential in international business. Even in contexts where English is used, knowledge of foreign languages can help to add another dimension to business negotiations, and familiarity with relevant languages and cultures helps to behave culturally appropriately and to avoid pitfalls. According to an

2 E.g. The British Academy. 2012. Language Matters More and More: A position statement, The British Academy. 2016. Born Global: Implications for Higher Education, Cambridge Public Policy Strategic Research Initiative. 2015. The Value of Languages: Ideas for a UK Strategy of Languages. 3 Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. 2016. Options for a sustainable programme of demand-raising activity in modern languages. Report to HEFCE, p. 15.

128

5

estimate by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Languages, the UK is losing about £50bn per year because of lack of language skills.4 Graduates with language skills are in demand not only because of their specific language skills in a particular foreign language, but also because of the cultural and communicative competencies they have acquired as part of their language study. The British Academy’s ‘Born Global’ project,5 which involved interviews with a range of language practitioners and employers, found that employers value ‘cultural agility’ as a key asset for working in multilingual, transnational, and diverse teams and environments. Cultural agility is developed through engaging with a different language and culture, and through international experience and study abroad. The project found that employers often reported that graduates had only limited experience of living abroad. In public services language skills are in demand especially in the areas of international relations and foreign policy. In 2014, a House of Lords Select Committee6 reported that the UK capacity to ‘build connections is constrained by the small number of its citizens who are able to speak foreign languages’, which is relevant to the influence and engagement required in modern international relations. In a study published by the British Academy, Berdal (2015)7 describes the language and cultural skills required in post-conflict state-building and notes that the decline in languages and area studies had led to a limit on the available expertise and knowledge of countries in conflict. Technological innovation in languages, such as automated translation, is likely to have a positive effect on practical day-to-day translation, and on enriching learning and teaching of languages, but is unlikely to reduce the need for skilled, high-quality translation, or for the need for graduates with excellent linguistic and inter-cultural training and the skills associated with this.8 2.4. English is necessary, but not sufficient Over the last century, English has developed into the world’s most widely used language of wider communication. English as a lingua franca (ELF) is the global language of business and international relations, and in many parts of the world a language of education and social aspiration. However, the UK and UK graduates cannot rely only on English alone. There are

4 See e.g. ‘The cost of Britons’ failure to learn foreign languages’, The Guardian 6 Nov 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/nov/06/the-cost-of-britons-failure-to-learn-foreign-languages, and ‘Modern languages “recovery programme” urged by MPs’, BBC News 14 July 2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28269496 . 5 The British Academy. 2016. Born Global: Implications for Higher Education. 6 The House of Lords Select Committee on Soft Power and the UK’s Influence, Persuasion and Power in the Modern World (2014) 7 Berdal, Mats. 2015. Afghanistan and After – Reflections on Western Interventionism and State Fragility in the post-Cold War Era. In Rethinking State Fragility. London: British Academy, 6-18. 8 See e.g. ‘Will language learning become obsolete?’, Artefact 16 Nov 2017, http://www.artefactmagazine.com/2017/11/16/will-language-learning-become-obsolete/

129

6

significant parts of the world – both in geographical and social terms – where English is not used, and when English is used as a lingua franca, it is typically used within complex patterns of multilingualism, knowledge of which is essential for successful understanding and communication. A British Council report on the foreign language needs of the UK notes that: ‘Both within and beyond Europe, we will need to reach out beyond English, not only to maintain and improve our economic position but to build trust, deepen international influence and cultural relationships, and to keep our country safe.’9 For research within and understanding of diverse communities, relying on English only carries the risk of partial and biased understanding, because often only small sections of the society have access to and use English, such as government and administration, or educated elites.10 This risk can be mitigated through competence in the relevant language(s). Even in situations in which English is used as the lingua franca, it is embedded in a context of multilingual practices, and without understanding of and exposure to these practices, monolingual speakers of English are often at a disadvantage.11 Bernardette Holmes, Principal Investigator on the British Academy Born Global research project, points out that ‘cooperation in multiple countries means interaction with multiple languages and cultures. While English is the nexus, communication in multinational operations is functionally multilingual and culturally diverse’, and that for employment prospects ‘those graduates who offer only English are at a competitive disadvantage to their multilingual peers’.12 2.5. Languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East The discussion about foreign languages in the UK is mainly concerned with European languages, but languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East play an important role as well. On a global level, more than half of the world’s languages – about 4,000 languages out of an estimated 7,000 languages – are spoken in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. Six of the ten biggest languages in terms of number of first-language speakers are from these regions: Chinese (ranked first), Arabic, Hindi, Bengali, Japanese, and Punjabi. Arabic and Chinese are among the six working and official languages of the United Nations. In the UK, many languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East are important community languages, such as Arabic, Bengali, Turkish, Persian, or Somali. A number of African, Asian, and Middle Eastern languages also play a role in education, and notably Chinese has become

9 The British Council. 2017. Languages for the Future: The foreign languages the United Kingdom needs to become a truly global nation. 10 Cf. Bamgboṣe, Ayọ. 2000. Language and Exclusion. The Consequences of Language Policies in Africa. Münster: Lit Verlag. 11 Hulmbauer, C., H. Böhringer and B. Seidlhofer. 2008. Introducing English as a lingua franca (ELF): Precursor and partner in intercultural communication. Synergies Europe 3: 25-36. 12 Cambridge Public Policy Strategic Research Initiative. 2015. The Value of Languages: Ideas for a UK Strategy of Languages, 8-9.

130

7

an increasingly popular school subject – in part as the result of strong support by Hanban, the Chinese Language Council. And in 2016, the BBC World Service announced the biggest expansion of its languages since the 1940s, launching 11 new language services, all of which are in African or Asian languages: Afaan Oromo, Amharic, Gujarati, Igbo, Korean, Marathi, Pidgin, Punjabi, Telugu, Tigrinya, and Yoruba.13 The 2017 British Council Report ‘Languages for the Future’ discusses the language need of the UK, largely based on economic criteria, but also taking into account aspects such as diplomatic, educational, and communication importance. Among the ten most important languages identified in the report overall are Chinese, Arabic, and Japanese, and eight of the ten most important emerging markets languages are languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East – Hindi, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Mandarin, Malay, Thai, Arabic, and Turkish. Languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East also have an important role to play for development, societal progression, and decolonisation. The historic marginalisation of many African, Asian, and Middle Eastern languages has critically been analysed as a colonial legacy and related to wider asymmetric processes of power and knowledge creation. Engagement with this wider legacy also entails revalorisation of and investment in these languages.14 3. SOAS values Languages have always played an important role at SOAS. They were central to the founding of the School and in its early years, and have grown into an integral part of the modern SOAS, with a high number of students learning languages as part of a single-subject degree, a joint degree, or as an open option. In addition, the SOAS Language Centre offers courses in African, Asian, and Middle Eastern languages to the wider public. The strength of language study at SOAS is due to strong institutional support and key strategic decisions. 3.1. Diversity of the portfolio SOAS teaches the highest number of languages at degree level in the UK, and is among the world’s top universities in terms of our range of languages. We currently teach 26 modern languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, and another 16 ancient and classical languages.15

13 BBC World Service announces biggest expansion 'since the 1940s', 16 Nov 2016, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37990220 14 See e.g. Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon, and Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o. 1981. Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature. London: James Currey. 15 Excluding languages only taught in the Language Centre.

131

8

Africa (6) Amharic, Hausa, Somali, Swahili, Yoruba, Zulu Near and Middle East (4) Arabic, Hebrew, Persian, Turkish South Asia (5) Bengali, Hindi, Nepali, Punjabi, Urdu South East Asia (5) Burmese, Indonesian, Khmer, Thai, Vietnamese East Asia (6) Chinese (Mandarin), Cantonese, Hokkien, Japanese,

Korean, Tibetan Ancient and classical languages (9 + 7)

Akkadian, Hittite, Sumerian, Avetsan, Pahlavi, Pali, Syriac, Prakrit, Sanskrit, plus classical Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Malay (Jawi), Persian, Tibetan and Ottoman Turkish

Among the modern languages, four are high-recruiting languages (Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean), and 22 are strategically important and vulnerable languages (SIL). For 13 of our SIL languages, SOAS is the only UK university to offer these languages at degree level, and for the remaining ones, provision exists only at one or two other institutions. The languages we teach are typically widely used languages, or languages of wider communication, are spoken in regions of specific diplomatic, business or cultural interests for the UK, and hold significant cultural and literary value. Many of today’s key debates about the world’s social, political, and economic future are held in the language we teach at SOAS. Through maintaining research, scholarship, and teaching in a wide portfolio of languages, we equip our students with the linguistic and cultural tools to take part in these debates, and help the UK as a whole to play a productive role in the world. While over the history of the School there has been fluctuation in terms of the specific languages taught, the overall scope of the portfolio has remained comparatively stable. The selection of languages aims at broad geographical coverage of our regions of expertise – there are six African languages, four languages of the Near and Middle East, five languages of South Asia, five Southeast Asian, and six East Asian languages. This achieves broad coverage of the different regions, even though of course, there remain inconsistencies and gaps. To some extent the specific languages we maintain are subject to revision and adjustment to changing circumstances – although it is important to keep in mind that once provision and scholarship in a language has ceased, it is hard to re-establish it as crucial expertise and infrastructure such as library holdings have not been maintained. However, we believe it is important to maintain a range of languages per sub-region, in order to credibly and meaningfully maintain our approach to language-based area studies. Reducing, for example, our African languages to Swahili, or our South Asian languages to Hindi, would mean to give up on language-based African or South Asian Studies, in favour of Swahili and Hindi Studies. In order to avoid this, we wish to maintain a balances portfolio of about 25-30 African, Asian, and Middle Eastern languages.

132

9

3.2. Language study as part of degree study Advocates of languages in the UK have noted the decline in language study in particular within degree programmes. A 2015 Cambridge SRI report emphasises the importance of degree-level language study, because ‘it is here that the higher skill in language proficiency and cross-cultural agility are achieved, as well as deeper cultural and societal aspects of language learning.’16 At SOAS we have made the decision to encourage and support degree language learning and to support all our students to engage in language learning. Our undergraduate degree programmes are designed to allow language learning not only in language degrees, but also in discipline degrees through the use of language open options, and as part of a wide range of joint degree combining a language with a discipline. The vast majority of our UG programmes permit a language option in the first year of study, and a recent decision by the Executive Board requires all new UG programmes to include such provision. At MA level, our flexible degree structure with four 30-credit taught modules allows the study of a language in most of our MA programmes. In addition, we offer a wide range of two-year MA programmes with intensive language study. Both our UG and PGT language degrees include a period of study abroad. Our strategic approach to languages places language study at the heart of our educational and academic mission, and provides students with a range of ways to engage with and benefit from language study. Through this we emphasise the association of language, culture and society, and help students to become competent, culturally agile actors and interpreters within today’s complex realities. 3.3. Diversity of leaners, widening participation, and wider communities Against a national trend in which languages are seen as a subject only for the brightest or most well-funded students,17 we believe that language study is for everyone. SOAS is among the most diverse universities in the UK. For example, in 2012/13 to 2014/15, 13% of our UG students were from the rest of the EU, and 26% from outside the EU. In the same period, 34% of our UG students were black or minority ethnic. The diversity of our students and staff is reflected in the heterodoxy of our scientific approaches, in our culture of debate and developing alternative ways of thinking, and in our multilingual practices. We believe that learning a language helps to develop the ability to adopt different perspectives, to understand different points of view, and to question carefully and with empathy. These are key critical skills and valuable employment assets, and we wish that all our students have the option to develop these skills, independent of educational, personal, or financial background.

16 Cambridge Public Policy Strategic Research Initiative. 2015. The Value of Languages: Ideas for a UK Strategy of Languages, 16. 17 Cambridge Public Policy Strategic Research Initiative. 2015. The Value of Languages: Ideas for a UK Strategy of Languages.

133

10

We have a strong programme of Widening Participation for languages, and we are co-leader of the London Routes into Languages consortium. As part of this engagement, we work with schools, universities, and other stakeholders, to encourage the uptake of languages, and to empower more students from a wide variety of backgrounds to develop their aptitude for language learning. The SOAS Language Centre provides high-quality language courses in African, Asian, and Middle Eastern languages to external audiences, such as individual learners, businesses and companies, government, and public and private organisations. In 2015/16 the Language Centre had more than 2,000 enrolments and it plays a key role in SOAS’s mission to make the study of the languages of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East available to a wide range of learners. We believe that our inclusive approach to languages, which provides all students with options to learn a language – plus offering language learning opportunities to the wider public – is an important element in our academic and wider impact agenda to provide high quality education which underpins personal and professional development and social change. 3.4. Excellence SOAS is committed to excellence in all we do. Our language activities have to be based on excellence in learning and teaching, research, and the student experience. We wish to provide students with an excellent learning and student experience. Studying languages supports students to become global citizens who can understand and engage with the world. We strive to provide holistic language and culture learning where foreign language skills and linguistic and cultural competence are intertwined with the development of subject knowledge and regional expertise. The learner is at the centre of our activities, and we support learner autonomy, critical and problem-solving attitudes, and the development of learner responsibility over the learning process. We value learner diversity and reward student achievement. Our students regularly achieve the highest attainment in language competitions such as the Chinese Bridge Competition, and we are proud to showcase their work.18 We believe that our language teaching should be based on excellence in pedagogy and innovation. We understand the importance of paying attention to learners’ needs and develop syllabi and learning materials which reflect different learner backgrounds and expectations. We have started to engage with and develop on-line and blended learning models for languages. We support students’ international experience through including periods of study abroad and we explore other aspects of transnational education. Our language learning experience needs to be based on excellent support for our teaching staff. We provide administrative, professional and developmental support for all staff and encourage the formation of strong teams and communities of practice. We recognise that

18 E.g. the award of prizes for Arabic year-abroad ISPs, https://www.soas.ac.uk/nme/arabicislam/isps/

134

11

many of our language teachers are fractional staff and we aim to build opportunities for training and development which are easily accessible for all staff engaged in language teaching. 4. SOAS strategic priorities In order to maintain and progress our language activities we need to address challenges we are facing and improve in key strategic areas – financial sustainability, student success and progression, and pedagogical innovation. 4.1. Sustainability The School overall faces significant financial challenges, in part related to internal dynamics, in part through a volatile environment.19 Languages play an important part in this, because of the comparatively high costs of language teaching, and because of the internal cross-subsidy to support strategically important and vulnerable languages. There are a number of costs associated with language teaching which are different from, and often higher than, costs in other arts or social sciences subjects:

• Costs related to direct teaching, including more contact hours than non-language classes, a cap on student numbers at least for some classes (e.g. conversation classes), a higher amount of assessment due to e.g. regular homework and oral exams

• Costs related to the year/period abroad, including direct costs such as fees of the partner institute, and indirect costs such as administration, selection, and support of students abroad

• Costs arising from low and fluctuating enrolment in some languages, which means that some classes have to run with very low student numbers

In recognition of these higher costs, and of the strategic value for the School of the on-going provision of strategically important and vulnerable languages, SOAS has agreed an internal cross-subsidy, whereby other parts of the School transfer funds towards the costs of teaching these languages. The current amount of this cross-subsidy is £1.6m which will be reviewed annually, with the aim to reduce the cross-subsidy over time. In 2017, the School was awarded a HEFCE Catalyst grant of £5m, subject to raising £5m of philanthropic income, for the support of strategically important and vulnerable languages. The Language Centre has its own financial challenges, as it operates in a different, more commercial environment. Part of the Language Centre’s mission statement is to make an overall contribution to the School’s finances, and it needs to develop a financial strategy to address this requirement.

19 Including the loss of HEFCE minority subject funding which at some time supported our language teaching and scholarship with up to £2m direct funding.

135

12

The overall financial challenge for languages is to control the costs of provision, to increase income principally through attracting more students, and to gradually reduce the cross-subsidy, while maintaining – or achieving – high standards of excellence across a wide range of learners. 4.2. Student success and progression There is some concern about progression in languages, and some evidence for a high number of transfers, drop-outs and failures. Problems with progression require critical reflection on pedagogical approaches, student support, and course and programme design. There are also financial implications, as loss of student enrolments entails a loss of student fee income. Conversely, addressing problems with progression has positive effects on financial sustainability. While it is widely accepted that attrition in language classes – especially of non-European languages and those languages which require the learning of a new script – tends to be higher than in non-language classes, we need to develop strategies to increase progression and student success. A complicating factor for the understanding of progression is that different languages often follow different models and approaches, and that there is no shared or common approach to teaching languages. This means that at least initially, provision of data and analysis have to be conducted separately for individual languages. Recent papers at Executive Board and Academic Development Committee have addressed this problem, and highlighted the need to put more robust measures in place to support student success. 4.3. Pedagogical innovation In 2017, the Academic Development Committee convened a working group to investigate options to increase the attractiveness and availability of languages and ensure that they supported student success. In their report, the working group found that there was scope for a School-wide review of language pedagogy, which would address questions such as pedagogical approaches and learning material, student training and needs analyses, curriculum design, and teacher training and development. The review should also explore methods of flexible learning, e.g. through summer offerings, internationalisation and transnational education, and online and blended learning. The working group also noted the absence of a common approach to questions of learning and teaching of languages, and suggested the establishment of a co-ordinating and oversight position for languages, which would lead and support pedagogical innovation within the School.

136

13

It is expected that the provision of more structured strategic oversight over language learning and teaching will also have a positive effect on progression, and through this on financial sustainability. 5. Activity strands Based on the key strategic priorities, a number of activities are proposed to address the major key challenges identified: financial sustainability and pedagogic innovation and student success. The four activity strands proposed are SIL, high-recruiting languages, pedagogic innovation, and the Language Centre.20 5.1. Strategically important and vulnerable languages (SIL) 5.1.1. Fundraising Long-term success of SILs depends on a more secure financial basis. Fundraising plays a key role for this, both in terms of direct funding of posts through endowment and through funding activities and scholarships which support SILs. The key strategic fundraising activity for SIL is linked to the £5m linked to the HEFCE Catalyst project and the associated fundraising campaign. This aims to raise up to £5m in philanthropic income by 2021. In addition, we wish to increase philanthropic income for UG Language/Language and … studentships to encourage students to continue language learning to a high level of competence. We also wish to raise philanthropic income for our collaboration with Chatterbox, a social enterprise which provides refugees with work as language professionals. This would combine the School’s work on languages and on supporting refugees and could be part of a crowd-funding campaign aiming at £27,000 p.a. 5.1.2. Curriculum reform and harmonisation Curriculum reform is a key vehicle to strengthen the position of our SIL. Attractive, well-designed curricula can increase student numbers and reduce costs and inefficiency. For SIL we propose two key elements of harmonising curricula and programme structures. 1) We wish to adopt a 13 contact hour model: 4+4+3+2 hpw, i.e. the Language 1 and Language 2 modules are 4 hpw, Language 3 modules for 3 hpw, and Language 4 modules for 2 hpw. For most SIL (e.g. those with fewer than 12 students per year), the curriculum can be taught with 1.5 FTE staffing (see below) – 1 FTE academic post teaching 4 hpw (approximately half of their teaching, the other half on thematic/discipline modules related to the language/area), and a 0.5 lector teaching 9 hpw. 2) We wish to harmonise syllabus structure, in particular for first year/initial modules. This includes aligned milestones for all SIL, with pre-teaching needs analysis and training, early assessment points, clear exit points (such as ‘life boat’ options), as well as harmonisation of assessment structure: All SIL are assessed based on the same number, timing, and weighting of assessment elements. Through this, we will be in a better position to support student success, read early warning signs, and provide clear and helpful academic advice.

20 The current document does not address ancient languages, which operate in a slightly different context.

137

14

5.1.3. Pedagogic innovation We wish to continue developing our pedagogic approaches and practices. At present the ley strategic element in this is the development of flexible period abroad study, which provide alternatives to the one-year abroad currently part of 4-year language degrees. More flexible periods abroad will provide students with more study options, and may reduce the overall costs of their degrees. We can draw of the successful development of accredited periods abroad which are part of our new two-year MA programmes. 5.1.4. Staffing strategy In accordance with our strategic aims in curriculum reform, and in view of the need to reduce the institutional cross-subsidy, we propose to adopt an overall staffing policy based on a 1 + 0.5 model, where one academic staff and 0.5 lector support one SIL language based on a 13 hpw SIL curriculum. In some cases, one academic staff may be aligned with more than one language, and some larger languages may have a slightly higher staffing level. There is a risk that due to visa restrictions, recruitment to a 0.5 lector position will be difficult. This might be mitigated by appointing 1.0 FTE with 50% teaching and 50% scholarship and support functions (or inclusion of additional teaching hours, e.g. over the summer). The 1 + 0.5 model will be the guiding principle of our SIL staffing strategy. 5.2. High recruiting languages (Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Korean) 5.2.1. Fundraising Fundraising for high-recruiting languages plays a less central role than for SIL. However, there might be possibilities to encourage philanthropic gifts, for example, for classical languages such as Classical Chinese, for which a gift proposal is currently being developed. 5.2.2. Curriculum reform High recruiting languages provide an attractive degree choice and are among the larger degree programmes within the School, in particular Japanese. Ongoing curriculum reform has resulted in several innovations over the last years, and this work will continue. There is also need to increase retention and progression rates. Specific strategic activities are 1) review of open option language courses to ensure their relevance and currency, 2) development of two model syllabus structures – one for named language degrees, one for open option classes, and 3) harmonisation of syllabus structure with aligned milestones for all (initial) modules, with pre-teaching needs analysis and training, early assessment points, and clear exit points. 5.2.3. Pedagogical innovation There is scope for development in particular for the intensive language MA programmes, and study abroad arrangements. 5.3. Pedagogical innovation Development of pedagogical approaches and practices is an overarching strategic activity, relevant for both SIL and high-recruiting languages. It includes 1) the development of strategic oversight mechanisms and co-ordination of activities across different languages at School or inter-departmental level, 2) review of language pedagogy across different languages, 3)

138

15

increase of student satisfaction and success, and increase of progression, 4) development of mechanisms for easier entry and exit around the core teaching and learning activities, 5) increase of flexibility of the curriculum through, for example, shorter periods abroad or the development of 15 credit units, 6) collaboration with wider School-wide activities related to pedagogy and curriculum, such as Decolonising SOAS, 7) appropriate programmes of support and development for language-teaching staff, and 8) technological innovation and development of language technology for African, Asian, and Middle Eastern languages. 5.4. The Language Centre The main strategic activity of the Language Centre is the development of a strategy consistent with the overall SOAS strategy and the Language Centre mission statement with a focus on outwards facing activities which make an appropriate financial contribution to the School. Elements of this strategy are: 1) discontinuation of accredited courses, 2) discontinuation of provision of LEP modules, 3) discontinuation of the teaching of European languages/ languages of European origin, 4) critical assessment of language testing activities, 5) development of robust structures of QA oversight for non-degree students, 6) further development of a wide range enterprise activities, and 7) development of a strategy which spells out how core activities are maintained, and which underpinning elements need to be in place to achieve this.

139

16

Sources The British Academy. 2009. Language Matters: A position paper. The British Academy. 2012. Language Matters More and More: A position statement. The British Academy. 2013. Languages: The State of the Nation: Demand and supply of language skills in the UK. The British Academy. 2013. Lost for Words: The need for languages in UK diplomacy and security. The British Academy. 2016. Born Global: Implications for Higher Education. The British Council. 2017. Languages for the Future: The foreign languages the United Kingdom needs to become a truly global nation. Burns, Judith. 2014. Foreign languages ‘shortfall’ for business, CBI says. BBC News, 22 June 2014. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27948049 Cambridge Public Policy Strategic Research Initiative. 2015. The Value of Languages: Ideas for a UK Strategy of Languages. Carlisle, Ann. 2017. ‘UK language industry – CIOL concerned for the future of EU nationals in the UK following Brexit’ (press release). Available at: www.ciol.org.uk/uk-language-industry-%E2%80%93-ciol-concerned-future-eu-nationals-uk-following-brexit CBI. 2014. More firms demanding language skills to break into new markets - CBI/Pearson survey. 23 June 2014. http://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2014/06/more-firms-demanding-language-skills-to-break-into-new-markets-cbi-pearson-survey/ CBI/Pearson. 2017. Helping the UK thrive, Education and Skills Survey 2017. Available at: www.cbi.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/helping-the-uk-thrive/ HEFCE Time series of undergraduates in higher education subjects, accessed 2 Jan 2017, http://www.hefce.ac.uk/analysis/supplydemand/ug/ Hulmbauer, C, Böhringer, H and Seidlhofer, B. 2008. Introducing English as a lingua franca (ELF): Precursor and partner in intercultural communication. Synergies Europe 3: 25-36. Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. 2016. Options for a sustainable programme of demand-raising activity in modern languages. Report to HEFCE.

140

Almanac 2018 – 2019 Session Board of Trustees 17.05.2018 BoT 17/18 5 L

School Closed Open Days and Events

Reading Week Student events

Departmental meeting periods Clearing

September 2018 Mon 3 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Thu 6 10.00- 12.00 Portfolio Board Mon 10 Jewish New Year

11.30-13.30 Editorial Board of SOAS Bulletin 13:00-15:00- Executive Board

Tue 11 Jewish New Year & Islamic New Year

Wed 12 Islamic New Year Thu Mon 17 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 13.00-15.00 China Quarterly Executive

Committee Tue 18 Yon Kippur 12.00-14.00 Regional Centre Chairs Meeting

14.00-15.00 Skip Meeting Wed 19 Yon Kippur

15.00 – 18.30 Board of Trustees

Mon 24 Term 1 begins Departmental meeting period begins

13:00-15:00- Executive Board

Welcome Week Tue 25 Welcome Week Wed 26 Welcome Week

Thurs 27 Welcome Week Fri 28 Welcome Week

141





October 2018 Mon 1 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 2 09.30-11.30 SAAAP Board 14.00-16.00 REF Steering Group Wed 3 10.00-12.00 Research Ethics Panel 14.00-16.00 Health, Safety and Security

Committee Thu 4 10.00-12.00 Student Outcomes Panel Mon 8 Departmental meeting period ends 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 9 10.00-12.00 Student Engagement and

Experience Committee 14.30 – 17.00 Resources & Planning Committee

Wed 10 10.00-12.00 Research and Enterprise Committee

14.00-16.00 Curriculum Quality Assurance Panel

Thu 11 10.00 – 12.00 Audit Committee 15.00-17.00 Senate Mon 15 09:00 – 11:00 Estates & IT Governance

Development Board 13:00-15:00- Executive Board

Tue 16 Wed 17 10.00-12.00 Teaching, Learning and Student

Outcomes Committee

Thu 18 JNCC 13.00-15.00 Equality & Diversity Committee Sat 20 Undergraduate Open Day Mon 22 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 24 12.00-13.00 LMEI Board of Trustees Thu 25 10.00-12.00 Human Resources Committee Fri 26 Clocks go back on Sunday 28 October

Mon 29 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 31 14.00 – 16.00 Academic Board (Committee

Rm, PWW)

142





November 2018 Thu 1 09.00 – 10.00 Governance & Nominations

Committee 10.00 – 11.00 Honorary Degrees & Fellowships

Mon 5 Reading Week 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 6 10.00 – 12.00 Audit Committee Wed 7 Diwali/Deepavali Fri 9

Mon 12 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 13 Wed 14 Post Graduate Open Day Thu 15 14.30 – 17.00 Resources & Planning Committee Mon 19 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 20 11.30-13.30 Editorial Board of SOAS Bulletin 14.00 – 16.00 Estates & IT Governance

Development Board Wed 21 10.00- 12.00 Brunei Gallery Advisory Panel 13.00-15.00- REF Steering Group

Thurs 22 10.00-12.00 Student Engagement and Experience Committee

Mon 26 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 27 15.00 – 18.30 Board of Trustees Wed 28 14.00-16.00 Curriculum Quality Assurance Panel

143





December 2018 Mon 3 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 5 10.00-12.00 Teaching, Learning and Student

Outcomes Committee

Mon 10 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 12 14.00 – 16.00 Academic Board Thu 13 14.00-15.00 Skip Meeting Fri 14 End of Term 1

Mon 17 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Fri 21 School Closes

144





January 2019 Wed 2 School Reopens Mon 7 Term 2 begins 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 9 Thu 10 13.00-15.00 REF Steering Group Mon 14 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 15 14.00 – 16.00 Estates & IT Governance

Development Board

Wed 16 12.00-14.00 Regional Centre Chairs Meeting Thu 17 10.00-12.00 Student Outcomes Panel Mon 21 11.30-13.30 Editorial Board of SOAS Bulletin 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 22 10.00-12.00 Student Engagement and

Experience Committee

Wed 23 10.00-12.00 Brunei Gallery Advisory Panel 14.00-16.00 Curriculum Quality Assurance Panel Thu 24 10.00-12.00 Teaching, Learning and Student

Outcomes Committee

Sat 26 Post Graduate Open Day Mon 28 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 29 09.00 – 10.00 Governance & Nominations

Committee 10.00 – 11.00 Honorary Degrees & Fellowships Committee

Wed 30 14.00 – 16.00 Academic Board

145





February 2019 Mon 4 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 5 10.00-12.00 Research Ethics Panel Thu 6 10.00-12.00 Human Resources Committee Thu 7 09.30 – 16.00 Board of Trustees Meeting NB

ALL DAY

Fri 8 10.00-16.00 Academic Promotions Application review

Mon 11 Reading Week Thu 14 14.00-16.00 Equality and Diversity Committee Fri 15 10.00-13.00 Academic Promotions

References sub-panel

Mon 18 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 19 10.00-12.00 Research and Enterprise

Committee

Wed 20 10.00-12.00 Student Engagement and Experience Committee

12.00-13.30 LMEI Board of Trustees

Undergraduate Insight Day 14.00-18.00 SAAAP Board Thu 21 10.00 – 12.00 Audit Committee Mon 25 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 26 13.15-15.15 China Quarterly Executive

Committee 14.00-16.00 Curriculum Quality Assurance Panel

Thu 28 JNCC 15.00-17.00 Senate

146





March 2019 Mon 4 Wed 6 10.00-12.00 Teaching, Learning and Student

Outcomes Committee 14.00-16.00 Health, Safety and Security Committee

Thu 7 Sat 9 Post Graduate Open Day Mon 11 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 12 14.30 – 17.00 Resources & Planning

Committee

Wed 13 14.00 – 16.00 Academic Board Mon 18 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 19 14.00 – 16.00 Estates & IT Governance

Development Board 13.00-15.00 REF Steering Group

Thu 21 Mon 25 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 26 14.00-15.00 Skip Meeting

147





April 2019 Mon 1 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 2 15.00 – 18.30 Board of Trustees Meeting Mon 8 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Mon 15 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 17 10.00-12.00 Brunei Gallery Advisory Panel Thu 18 10.00-12.00 SAAAP Board Thu 18 School Closed- Maundy Thursday Fri 19 School Closed- Good Friday

Mon 22 School Closed- Easter Monday Tue 23 School Reopens and Term 3 begins

11.30-13.30 Editorial Board of SOAS Bulletin

Wed 24 10.00-12.00 Research Ethics Panel Undergraduate Insight Day

Mon 29 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 30 10.00-12.00 Teaching, Learning and Student

Outcomes Committee

148





May 2019 Wed 1 10.00-16.00 Academic Promotions Panel Mon 6 School Closed (May Bank Holiday) Tues 7 09:30-11:00 SAAAP Board

10:00-12:00 Audit Committee

Wed 8 13:15-15:15 China Quarterly Executive Committee

Thu 9 14.00-16.00 Equality & Diversity Committee Mon 13 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 14 10.00-12.00 Research and Enterprise

Committee 14.00 – 16.00 Estates & IT Governance Development Board

Wed 15 Thu 16 09:00 – 10.00 Governance & Nominations

Committee

15.00 – 18.30 Board of Trustees Meeting (Informal) NB – Joint with Academic Board

10:00 – 11.00 Honorary Degrees & Fellowships Committee

Mon 20 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 21 10.00-12.00 Student Engagement and

Experience Committee 13.00-15.00 REF Steering Group

Wed 22 12.00-14.00 Regional Centre Chairs Meeting

14.00-16.00 Health, Safety and Security Committee

Thu 23 10.00-12.00 Human Resources Committee Mon 27 School Closed (Second May Bank

Holiday)

Wed 29 10.00-16.00 Academic Promotions Panel 14.00-16.00 Curriculum Quality Assurance Panel Post Graduate Open Day

149





Thu 30 10.00-12.00 Student Outcomes Panel

150





June 2019 Mon 3 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 4 10.00-12.00 Teaching, Learning and Student

Outcomes Committee

Fri 7 JNCC Sat 8 Undergraduate Open Day Mon 10 11.30-13.30 Editorial Board of SOAS Bulletin 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 12 12.00-13.30 LMEI Board of Trustees 14.00 – 16.00 Academic Board Thu 13 10:00-16:00 Internal Advisory Panel Fri 14 End of term 3

Mon 17 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Tue 18 14.30 – 17.00 Resources & Planning Committee Thu 20 10:00-16:00 Internal Advisory Panel sub-

committee

Mon 24 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 26 Sub-boards of Examiners: Undergraduate /

Diploma / Certificate student

Thu 27 10.00-12.00 SAAAP Board

151





July 2019 Mon 1 School Boards of Examiners: Undergraduate

/ Diploma / Certificate students 13:00-15:00- Executive Board

Wed 3 Sub-boards of Examiners: Postgraduate students

Fri 6 School Boards of Examiners: Postgraduate students

Mon 8 13:00-15:00- Executive Board

14.00 – 15.00 Senior Staff Remuneration Committee

15.00 – 18.30 Board of Trustees Meeting 18.30 Board of Trustees Annual Dinner

Wed 10 14.00-15.00 Skip Meeting

Mon 15 13:00-15:00- Executive Board

Tue 16 14.00 – 16.00 Estates & IT Governance Development Board

Wed 17 Mon 22 13:00-15:00- Executive Board Wed 24 Graduation Thu 25 Graduation Fri 26 Graduation

Mon 29 13:00-15:00- Executive Board August 2019

Thu 15 Clearing

152

Documents

SOAS BOARD OF TRUSTEES AGENDA - SOAS University of London