2012 Annual Report - Jesus College - University of Cambridge

82 COLLEGE NEWS I Jesus College Annual Report 2012
their sectors, (ii) Institutional Diversity, allowing the widest possible range of
opportunities for students and staff alike, and (iii) above all, a focus on Institutional
Excellence, in teaching, learning, research and reflective enquiry, with this last
endeavour best involving both independent study and collective engagement or
collegiality.
The meeting recognised, however, that such success faces major challenges,
particularly given the continuing global economic environment which is restricting the
financial support and investments that stakeholders can provide to the university
system. The challenge of responding to this was a topic of much debate from which
several points were identified during the meeting as being of importance:
1. Institutional Focus: To deliver excellence and diversity across the UK university
sector, and not least for the sake of students, institutions must focus on areas of
established excellence which have sufficient critical mass to be efficient. It was
therefore proposed certain forms of education be focussed in specific centres, for
example for the PhD degree. Also the Government should develop more specific
metrics for recognising excellence, for example in vocational courses, so that all
students in particular, could determine how well an institution would provide
targeted training and education (and indeed to what extent they meet specific
needs, standards and career opportunities). Entry standards should also be defined
so it is clear what standards are required at school for the student to be sufficiently
qualified to take the course.
2. Global Focus: Research-Intensive universities can only be globally leading if they
outperform international competitors. Despite its success, the UK cannot afford to
be complacent in terms of the standing of its Research-intensive universities, not
least because of the benefits this brings in terms of national reputation and
recognition. Given the large levels of known future investment in research by
Europe, success by UK Universities in obtaining a large proportion of such funding
is crucial. To date, the UK Government has not needed to provide the support that
other countries have implemented to help their universities achieve success in
Europe, but this must be kept under review. UK universities must increasingly
benchmark their standards at international levels, recognising that that the scale of
the university sector, for example the BRICs will dwarf Europe and the USA within
twenty years, and the quality of leading universities elsewhere will be extremely
high. Decisions on Government support for UK Research-Intensive universities
need to take greater account of international competition and collaboration.
3. Recognition of the Benefits of Research-Intensive Universities: It is only right that
universities should accept scrutiny from stakeholders, not least in terms of value for
money, and that this scrutiny typically involves a level of competition. Such scrutiny
must also not only avoid detracting from the core functions of the sector, but rather
reflect them. There was a strong view at the meeting, however, that current
benchmarks for defining the social-economic benefits of universities need to be
improved, and that the university sector needs to communicate more effectively its
benefits, rather than primarily using comparative assessments at local levels such as
in the REF. It was argued that although universities have been most successful in
commercialising their research, the primary economic benefits from universities
were from training students - the financial benefit of trained students is normally at
least 100 times that of commercialisation activities. Also, this benefit arises from a
very wide range of subjects, not least because many disciplines have common
principles and levels of rigour. Impact is undoubtedly important, but should be on
the basis of genuine academic achievement rather than coincidental circumstance