Concerns are growing among academ- ics about the way the Academic Board is governed by Provost Professor Michael Arthur. Reforms are rumoured to be afoot, and some academics are less than happy about the current state of things.
Gowning the issue
Academic Board is, in theory, the gov- erning body of College. Every Professor at College is allowed to have a seat with voting rights on the Board. A small smat- tering of teaching fellows and doctors are also elected from each faculty. The Board originally had direct decision-making powers, but these were cannily and slowly stripped by previous Provost Malcolm Grant.
According to School of Public Policy Professor Saladin Meckled-Garcia, there is a growing sense that staff must cam- paign for changes. Currently it is down to the will of the Provost as to whether items appear on the agenda and there is no procedure to move to a vote. Academic Board is also asked to ‘note’ things rather than approve them, leaving little political power in the hands of those who teach in the university.
Just a minute
There is also the question of minute- taking. One Board member asserted that the Provost was wilfully falsifying the minutes. A group of academics chal- lenged the record on a matter relating to Statue 18, regarding staff redundancy rights, in the last meeting. It’s recorded that the changes to Statute 18 were wel- comed, whilst in fact it was said that although changes to the statute were accepted, further discussion should be based on the vehemently anti-Statute 18 ‘Statute 18 Working Group.’ Their chal- lenge was rejected as the Provost remem- bered the meeting differently.
Powerful Provost
Plans are afoot to give the Provost more power, as he now wishes to also chair Academic Committee. Engineer- ing Dean, Professor Anthony Finkelstein, said that although the Academic Com- mittee is to be grown and given more legislative power, the representation of academics on this committee will not change. Suspicions remain amongst sev- eral Board members that this will wrest power from them in favour of the non- academics who currently populate Col- lege Council and Academic Committee. Given the descent into UCL PLC that the 2034 plan reveals, they may be right.