APPENDIX 1
Memorandum from Dr J R Fry, University
of Liverpool
The Committee has invited evidence on the following
points, addressed in turn:
— The impact of HEFCE's research funding
formulae, as applied to RAE ratings, on the financial viability
of university science departments;
The teaching of undergraduate science subjects
in universities is not adequately funded, and historically it
has been subsidised by income from research. Given the recent
trend for research income to be sharply focussed on subjects with
RAE grades of 5 and above, university managements are increasingly
taking a commercial approach to the viability of individual subjects.
In the short term this has put at risk science departments with
RAE ratings of 4 and below. In the longer term even top-rated
science departments may be at risk if they have few students,
because of the need for the cross subsidy from research. The most
useful form of assessment of the quality of a department, or subject
area, would be on the basis of the contribution made by the whole
department, both teaching and research—but this assumes
adequate funding for both!
— The desirability of increasing the
concentration of research in a small number of university departments,
and the consequences of such a trend;
There is merit in better resourcing a number
of highly-rated departments so that they may compete in research
on equal terms with the best in the world—usually in the
USA—but this must not be done at the expense of less highly-rated
ones; additional money is required. Whilst the RAE rating gives
a measure of the international dimension of research, it does
not pretend to measure its utility or its importance in a regional
setting. If money is switched from low RAE-score departments to
high ones, then the danger is that all regionally-useful research
will be lost. Moreover, because of the cross-subsidy of teaching
from research funds, a reduction in research funding may lead
to the loss of a good teaching unit and the very useful graduates
produced.
— The implications for university science
teaching of changes in the weightings given to science subjects
in the teaching funding formula;
The weighting given to science subjects is woefully
inadequate given the high cost of providing and maintaining up-to-date
teaching laboratories, and needs to be substantially increased,
but an additional concern is the small numbers of students in
some science departments. This limits the overall "formula
funding" to the department unless the university is prepared
to cross subsidise from its other activities. This point is further
addressed under "regional capacity".
— The optimal balance between teaching
and research provision in universities, giving particular consideration
to the desirability and financial viability of teaching-only science
departments;
Research (at university level) and experimentation
(at secondary-school level) are of inestimable benefit to the
teaching of science. Science is a living, developing subject where
progress is made by observing, measuring and trying things out—and
making mistakes. It is not just that research know-how and equipment
is used in project work at all levels of undergraduate teaching—although
this is of great benefit—nor that research at the frontiers
of knowledge often gives insight into the understanding of elementary
science, but that the pursuit of knowledge through research communicates
the inspiration, excitement and motivation to students—and
also humility and doggedness—that is an essential part of
their ongoing education. A teaching-only university science department
would be a sad, moribund affair. If there is a need to teach science
to undergraduates as part of a more general education than the
traditional single-honours degree, then money should be put into
the development of more generalised degrees—but the teaching
should be done by research-led faculty.
— The importance of maintaining a regional
capacity in university science teaching and research;
Here in Liverpool, local secondary schools rely
on staff from the university science departments to keep them
up to date, to give special-interest lectures to, and run laboratory
projects and science fairs for, their (mainly 6th form) pupils,
and to advise and guide them on the more modern and more difficult
aspects of A-level work, as well as contributing strongly to (eg
Institute of Physics) programmes of talks and lectures. [Others
will describe the context in which advice is given to local industry
and joint work is done.] An item which you have not mentioned
is inter-disciplinary science within a university. If a particular
subject is cut—because the international appreciation of
research in that area is not high enough—then the contribution
of staff to work in other departments may suffer very badly. Here
in Liverpool there is growing inter-disciplinary work within the
science faculty and between the faculties of science and medicine,
with strong regional components. Finally, as the problem of student
debt increases there will be financial pressure, particularly
on those from poorer backgrounds, to study at a university close
to home. It would be unfortunate in very many ways if such students
were deterred from studying science because the department of
choice at their local university had been closed.
— The extent to which the Government
should intervene to ensure continuing provision of subjects of
strategic, national, or regional importance; and the mechanisms
it should use for this purpose.
Where the subject provision is of "strategic,
national, or regional importance" then it is obviously necessary
to safeguard it. The problem is to determine the level of importance,
the cost, and who will make up the shortfall in funding. What
is probably needed is a broad measure of "importance",
with some local assessment from schools and industry together
with an assessment of the contribution of both research and teaching
towards meeting regional and national goals, and some assessment
of the damage that might occur (eg deterring students from poorer
backgrounds from studying science) if the subject were lost locally
through closure of the department. There is also the problem of
university autonomy to address if funds are targeted.
January 2005
|
