The Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) is pleased
to comment on the Scottish Executive Lifelong Learning Department second
consultation paper on the Scottish Higher Education Review. The RSE
is Scotland’s premier Learned Society, comprising Fellows elected
on the basis of their distinction, from the full range of academic disciplines,
and from industry, commerce and the professions. This response has been
compiled by the General Secretary with the assistance of a number of
Fellows with substantial experience in this area.
As we noted in our response to the first consultation paper, it could
be said that what is good for the competitive position of Scottish HEIs
in UK, and international terms, will be good for the Scottish economy.
That, in various forms of application, is therefore a crucial test for
defining policy or action. In addition, given that many institutions
operate in a global market, it is important that the objectives set
are not parochial because higher education is international and Scottish
HEIs have succeeded very much because of their UK and international
competitiveness in research and in teaching quality.
The questions, as set out, suggest a number of "key challenges".
The key challenge that many Scottish Universities currently have to
deal with is the problem of serious under-funding. One piece of evidence
for this is the number of HEI's within Scotland that have had to put
in place, or are in the process of putting in place, major staff-restructuring
programmes aimed at significantly reducing their overall staff costs
to a level that can be afforded. The specific issues identified in the
second consultation paper are now addressed below:
Teaching and Learning
Do you agree that the key challenges in teaching and learning for
higher education institutions over the next decade will be developing
new student markets, and making the higher education they provide available
on more flexible terms? Where will the greatest opportunities, and the
largest obstacles, in meeting these challenges lie?
Communications and information technology has the potential to re-shape
the learning process in the interests of increasing access, flexibility
and learner-centred approaches. Similarly, E-learning could have an
important role in increasing the flexibility in learning delivery, so
long as they are pedagogically based (for example the Heriot-Watt SCHOLAR
programme) rather than technology driven.
Do you agree that increasing the proportion of students from the
lower socio-economic groups is now the key challenge in widening access
in Scotland? What are the most important actions the Executive could
take to meet that goal?
As noted in our response to the first round of consultation, increasing
the proportion of entrants to HE from the poorer socio-economic groups
is also an issue of financing students from that background, for example
in terms of maintenance grants, where the remedy lies principally with
the Executive itself. There is also an issue of academic preparation
during secondary school, where pressures are put on HE either to remedy
educational short comings that should have been addressed in secondary
education or to lower entry requirements to accommodate such short comings.
The Society believes that the first necessary action must be to improve
the quality of the academic offering at secondary school level and that
HE should not be expected to compensate for any deficiencies of the
latter. There is also an insufficient provision of vocational education
in institutions which should be catering specifically for it. Finland,
for example, has recognised the error of the continuing expansion of
HE and is cutting back, while increasing resources in FE and polytechnics
and in school science teaching.
Do you agree that Scotland should seek to develop stronger links
between labour market needs and higher education provision? What are
the key issues to consider in seeking to develop those links?
The importance of dialogue between employers and providers is well recognised
and occurs at all levels from Government bodies to individual university
departments and research groups interacting with industry and business.
While the universities are well aware of their responsibilities to prepare
students for their subsequent careers, it should be remembered that
higher education institutions (HEIs) educate their graduates. They do
not train them to work in one particular industry sector and certainly
not for one specific company.
Many academic institutions run special postgraduate courses to widen
experience of students outside their subject area and there are activities/initiatives
proceeding at research group level through to sector wide level. Many
postgraduates also interact with industry because of the nature of their
award (e.g. in Teaching Company Schemes and CASE awards).
Scottish universities are well aware of the need to develop high level
skills, many of them research based. There are, however, a number of
challenges in developing HEI education and training for industrial researchers
in what are identified as priority areas. As there is no general structure
for interaction between employers and providers, SMEs appear to have
a particularly ineffectual relationship with HEIs or the higher education
sector as a whole. With 4-year degree courses, there can also be long
lead times before HEIs produce the graduates with the required skills.
Planning timescales within industry, however, are usually over a 1-3
year period. These factors make it difficult for HEIs to respond to
perceived skills needs and shortages by, for example, new undergraduate
courses.
Do you agree the importance of increasing the numbers of overseas
students, either as distance learners or coming to study here and the
need for Scottish wide co-operation to do this?
The reputation and reach of Scottish higher education can be dramatically
extended in the international arena by well-designed distance learning.
Such schemes have the potential to help develop new markets, access
new revenue streams and position Scottish education at the forefront
of the rapidly globalising knowledge industries.
Research and Knowledge
Do you agree with the aim that in a decade from now: obvious areas
of strategic weakness should have been addressed; there should be better
networked groups of academics in linked research distributed across
Scottish institutions, and beyond; institutions should be collaborating
more strategically to maximise the effectiveness of investment in research?
What are the opportunities and obstacles to pursuing this aim?
Collaboration can provide additional benefit, but it is not a replacement
for adequate core funding. It is also somewhat unrealistic to expect
collaborative use of a new facility funded in a single institution when
the facility’s capacity is being used fully by the single institution.
Collaboration requires encouragement and facilitation and only works
well when the academic and managerial basis is well founded. The host
institutions, therefore, should be properly funded to run the facilities,
including funding provision for hosting visitors from other institutions.
In terms of improved networks of researchers, the Society agrees that
this is an important area, and it will be important that such networks
are not constrained by geographical boundaries. It will also be important
to recognise that the operation of networks has a cost in terms of both
time and money, both of which need to be provided.
Overall, in the setting of goals and objectives by the Scottish Executive
and SHEFC, there will be the need for a careful application of appropriate
metrics. If the wrong ones are chosen, the wrong behaviour will be encouraged.
Do you agree that the other key research challenge for the decade
is the need to continue to encourage and support innovation and creative
thinking about knowledge transfer? Again, what are the opportunities
and obstacles?
Knowledge transfer and commercialisation potential depends on universities’
fundamental knowledge generation and research capability. It is, therefore,
important to provide adequate support for an internationally competitive
outward looking research base in Scotland. It is also important to recognise
that all stakeholders, including the higher education institutions (HEIs)
themselves, need to see the benefits from knowledge transfer. Comments
are sometimes made about the speed of the knowledge transfer process,
and the inability of universities to deliver suitable deals to business.
Whilst there are instances of universities being unable to deliver in
such circumstances, there are also many examples of Scottish (and UK)
companies who are not geared up to undertake high technology deals.
In addition, whilst there are good reasons for the movement of researchers
from Higher Education into the private sector as part of the knowledge
transfer process, there needs to be safeguards that the core research
base is not denuded of talent as a consequence. Aside from the broader
pay and reward systems, the introduction of (properly funded) schemes
to support research teams when a key researcher(s) leaves to form a
company would be beneficial. Other countries, such as Ireland and the
USA, are actively attracting high quality people to come to work in
relevant sectors, in both universities and companies. In such cases
the Government is supporting the development of key strategic areas
through the recruitment of excellent researchers and this approach could
be considered for Scotland.
Looking specifically at the commercialisation of research, where
is action most urgently needed, if we are to maximise the impact of
higher education?
At the recent "Managing Intellectual Property in Scottish Higher
Education" event at the RSE on 28 June 2002, the following areas
were identified as issues for action:
- potential ways to handle orphan IP;
- improved mechanisms for the sector to market its IP;
- improving brokerage between HEIs and companies;
- increasing co-operation and sharing best practice between commercialisation
offices, including models for smaller universities;
- improved training for commercialisation staff;
- developing mechanisms for funding IP management; and
- the need to identify and collect appropriate metrics to measure
the success of commercialisation
From March to August 2001 the RSE also organised a series of Science
Base Research and Commercialisation workshops across Scotland. The key
recommendations from the summary event of these workshops included:
- It is recommended that SHEFC and Scottish Enterprise (SE) continue
to encourage development of SME-HEI interactions and that TVS should
be involved in this process. Brokering interactions in sectors identified
as key to Scotland’s future will be an important aspect of this.
- It is recommended that SHEFC and Universities Scotland continue
to work together to improve the commercialisation services of the
Scottish science base. SE and Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE)
should also work with Universities Scotland to identify how Local
Enterprise Companies and HEIs might interact to assist companies in
liaising with HEIs.
- It is recommended that TVS and Universities Scotland work together
to identify ways of improving the perception of commercialisation
by academics, and in developing responsive guidelines for encouraging
commercialisation within institutions.
- It is recommended that TVS should, with SIE, SHEFC, Universities
Scotland, SE and HIES, examine the potential for encouraging and assisting
graduate/postgraduate start-ups.
- It is recommended that SHEFC, TVS and Universities Scotland investigate
the potential in this area for university alliances in commercialisation,
and the potential for multilateral partnerships between businesses,
education providers and research institutes.
- It is recommended that TVS and Universities Scotland establish
a forum of Scottish heads of commercialisation to, amongst other things,
identify appropriate metrics to measure commercialisation success
across Scotland; and to discuss best practice in order to achieve
this.
The ‘Proof of Concept’ and RSE/Scottish Enterprise Enterprise
Fellowship schemes have also produced an impressive array of projects
at a relatively low cost and should continue to be supported. Additional
funding for core patenting within HEIs could similarly be considered.
Governance and Management
The RSE believes that University Courts and Governing Bodies in Scottish
HEIs are working reasonably well. Membership of a Court or Governing
Body should, however, be drawn from as representative a range as possible
of organisations and interests and have regard to an appropriate balance
with regard to skills, gender, ethnicity, disability and other groups.
There are particular issues relating to staff development and management
of estates. Do you agree that these should be the key areas of concern
for this review?
Staff represent the highest cost element to HEIs and the sector’s
estates represent the major asset base. Therefore, these two issues
are fundamental areas of concern, but consideration of these areas should
be broader than staff development and estate management. Attention should
also be given to the issue of the relatively poor pay of academic staff
in Britain (and Scotland). Universities must be able to offer attractive,
competitive salaries if they are to deliver the excellent, world class
higher education system the Executive wishes to see. Nevertheless, the
proposals for improving the training staff for changing roles and improving
academic and administrative career management are to be welcomed. Consideration
should also be given to the career management of academic related and
support staff with the further professionalisation of such staff, to
include training and staff development opportunities and proper reward
strategies.
In terms of the sector’s estates, there has been an enormous
under-investment in the sector's physical estate, over the past 20 years.
This needs to be addressed as a priority and as part of any strategy
about managing estates.
Additional Information
In responding to this inquiry the Society would like to draw attention
to the following Royal Society of Edinburgh responses which are of relevance
to this subject: Review of Postgraduate Education (February 1999); Funding
for the Future: A Consultation on the Funding of Teaching (March 1999);
Devolution and Science (April 1999); The Independent Committee of Inquiry
into Student Finance (September 1999); A Framework for Economic Development
(March 2000); Funding for the Future: Stage 2 Consultation Paper on
the Funding of Teaching (April 2000); Research and the Knowledge Age
(April 2000); A Science Strategy for Scotland (July 2000); The Are We
Realising Our Potential Inquiry (July 2000; January 2001); Postgraduate
Support (August 2000); Review of Teaching Funding (March 2001); Review
of Research Policy and Funding (April 2001); Review of the supply of
scientists and engineers (August 2001) and Scottish Higher Education
Review (January 2002).
August 2002
Further information is available from the Research Officer, Dr
Marc Rands |