JOINT FUTURE THINKING TASKFORCE ON UNIVERSITIES: MEETING 3

11.00 to 13.00 Perth Suite, Carlton Hotel, Edinburgh

AGENDA: MEETING 3 ON OUTCOMES AND ACTIVITIES

11.00 - 11.05 1. Welcome

11.05 - 11.15 2. Note of last meeting and actions arising

Including shared documents and supplementary papers for noting:

• Finland / Scotland innovation systems (provided by Stephen Noon on February 18)
• Future of Science & Technology in Europe (provided by Tariq Durrani on February 8)
• Work-related learning in Scottish universities (US paper)
• Graduate demand (SG paper)
• Skills utilisation (SG paper)
• Research and innovation (SG paper)

11.15 - 12.35 3. Outcomes and activities

Future models paper and presentation by SG

Policy options paper and presentation by US Discussion

12.35 - 12.45 4. Matters arising since last meeting

12.45 - 12.50 5. Communications

12.50 - 13.00 6. Summing up and next steps

Next meeting on Wednesday, April 16 10.30 - 12.30 @ Carlton Hotel, Edinburgh

NOTE OF MEETING

Present

Fiona Hyslop MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning
Sir Muir Russell, Convener of Universities Scotland and Principal of University of Glasgow
Bernard King, Deputy Convener of Universities Scotland and Principal of University of Abertay Dundee
Sir Tim O'Shea, Principal of University of Edinburgh
Pamela Gillies, Principal of Glasgow Caledonian University
David Caldwell, Director of Universities Scotland
Seona Reid, Director of Glasgow School of Art
John McClelland, Chair of Scottish Funding Council
Stephen Noon, Special Adviser
Mark Batho, Director of Lifelong Learning
Stephen Kerr, Head of HE and Learner Support
Claire Woodward-Nutt, HE Futures and Research (Secretariat)

1. Welcome

1. Sir Muir Russell welcomed members of the taskforce to their third meeting. He passed on his thanks to the Cabinet Secretary for confirming an additional £10m from in-year flexibility for universities last week.

2. Note of last meeting and actions arising

2. The following documents and papers were noted as follow-up actions as a result of the last meeting on 4 and 5 February:

· Finland / Scotland innovation systems (provided by Stephen Noon on 18 February)

· Future of Science & Technology in Europe (provided by Tariq Durrani on 8 February)

· Work-related learning in Scottish universities (US paper)

· Graduate demand (SG paper)

· Skills utilisation (SG paper)

· Research and innovation (SG paper)

3. There was work underway in a number of these areas by both the Scottish Government (SG) and by Universities Scotland (US). In particular, it was agreed that SG economists would support work being undertaken by US looking at economic impact.

Action: US to liaise with SG economists on economic assessment work

4. The taskforce agreed that these papers were constructive and helpful. The taskforce would come back to these at a later stage as appropriate and consider whether there were any gaps.

3. Outcomes and activities

4. The taskforce discussed the issues presented in the papers prepared by SG and US. There was consensus that the current system performed well, but that that did not mean that it should not change to reflect future challenges.

5. US argued that more graduates and post-graduates would be required in future. SG indicated that there was not necessarily a need to change the proportion of graduates, but we would need more post-graduates. Who determined the structure of the sector was an issue. Co-operation was recognised as a key strength of the sector in Scotland. It was felt that the funding system should support the ability of differing programme structures to influence articulation to a greater extent. It was stressed that this included encouraging both entry and articulation at different points within the current 4 year Honours degree course. How best to incentivise alternative forms of delivery was therefore a key issue. Efficiency and leveraging in external audiences (e.g. employers) were fundamental in ensuring a sustainable sector.

6. The taskforce agreed that there was value of exploring the nature of the relationship between Government, the Scottish Funding Council and the Scottish universities and to consider how this might change in future. The capability or otherwise of existing arrangements to support and develop adaptive capacity in the sector was agreed to be a fundamental principle that should guide change.

7. The seven models presented by the Scottish Government provided a useful perspective for the taskforce's work. Future demands and challenges were the context for the models. Members of the taskforce considered each of the seven models in turn to explore areas of agreement as well as differences. There were different elements in a number of models that were supported, but there was no clear consensus on a single model as currently presented. Members were reminded that the purpose of the models was not to prescribe a solution at today's meeting but to aid the discussion on outcomes and activities.

8. The taskforce agreed that officials from US and SG would work together to identify common areas of agreement and any areas of disagreement as the basis for a hybrid model for consideration at the next taskforce meeting on April 16.

Action: US and SG to develop hybrid model for consideration at next meeting

9. There was discussion about funding for the sector and the next spending review. The example of the concordat with COSLA was raised by the SG. This tied agreement on increased funding to the delivery of a series of policy outcomes and a redefined relationship between central and local government. Without pre-empting the next spending review, there would be value in the taskforce considering what a similar agreement for universities might look like. Among the elements that might comprise such a package could be a closer alignment with the Government's overarching strategic purpose.

4. Matters arising since last meeting

9. Progress on the taskforce's work would be presented to both the FHE Roundtable in March and the Council of Economic Advisers in June. These provided useful forums against which to test the taskforce's thinking. Views from the NUS and STUC would also be fed into the taskforce's work. There would also be scope for wider engagement once the taskforce developed its conclusions in the Summer.

5. Communications

10. The taskforce agreed that it was important that it was as open as possible in sharing progress and was proactive in releasing papers on the SG website.

Papers