A2VU MAW Case Study 2 Current Practices V4

All2Visible University

Management of Academic Work-loading

Case Study 2: Current MAW Practices

1.Introduction

The focus of this case study is on the range of MAW systems and processes, and some related systems and processes, that existed in A2VU prior to the development of a university wide Management of Academic Work-loading (MAW) framework and process (hereafter MAW Policy for brevity). It is in effect the first part of the development stage. Many projects have a phase that focuses on problem specification before proceeding to the development of solutions.

The aspects of initiation of this university project were dealt with in Case Study 1: MAW Initiation. Case study 3 will deal with the development stage, case study 4 implementation, case study 5 maintenance, and case study 6 with systems aspects of MAW plans storage and access. Further information on the aims of this series of 6case studies is contained in sections 1 and 2 of MAW Case Study 1: Initiation.

2.University MAW Project Team Approach

An evidential approach to MAW development was adopted by the MAWPT. This was to enable the MAWPT to identify the current range of MAW practices and their distribution in the university, examples of MAW 'good practices' and breaches of the Academic Staff Contract National Text and Locally Agreed Terms (hereafter Local Agreement). Data on MAW policies and practices in other institutions would also be collected.

The aim of data collection was to a sufficiently detailed description of the range and complexity of existing MAW practices to justify and maintain the case for a university MAW against dissenting voices.

The timing of the survey of current practices was mainly during winter and spring of the academic year 2003-04.

2.1MAW and MAW Related Systems and Processes

One of the first tasks undertaken by the MAW Project Team (MAWPT) was to develop an understanding of the systems / process context of MAW. The diagram produced (Appendix A) illustrated the complexity of the dependencies between MAW and several other major university systems, processes and data sources. It was only later realised, during the implementation stage, that many of these processes and systems, as well as others, involved significant contributions or leadership from work planners (heads of department and divisional heads but especially subject group leaders). This in effect created a then unperceived barrier to implementation (see Case Study 4 on Implementation and Case Study 6 on MAW Information Systems).

2.2Academic Structures

During 2003-04 the university was undergoing a major academic reorganisation from a school structure to a faculty structure and faculties decided their internal structures at somewhat different times during that period although all of them officially came into being on the same day. Some aspects of the restructuring continued into 2005.

Data was collected on the structures (which varied somewhat from one faculty to another as did some of the roles and role descriptions) because the MAWPT would need to know who to contact and consult with during the development phase, develop MAW hours of recognition for academic managerial / administrative roles different roles and also reflect the structures in the design of the proposed University MAW Database.

The summary of the move from schools to faculties is as follows:

Faculty 1 / Faculty 2 / Faculty 3 / Faculty 4
Number of divisions used to form each faculty. / 4 / 3 / 3 / 2
Number of subject groups used to form each faculty. / 20 / 20 / 12 / 15
Number of schools from which the subject groups were transferred. / 3 / 4 / 3 / 3

The mapping of movement of schools and parts of schools to faculties is indicated by the following diagram:

A2VU MAW Case Study 2 Current Practices V4

Shading of a school indicates that it was transferred whole into a faculty.

A2VU MAW Case Study 2 Current Practices V4

The change in structures had an impact on the number of MAW approaches that became co-located. An apparently transparent, fair and equitable whole school MAW approach could look significantly less transparent, fair and equitable when several when viewed in a faculty with several other MAW approaches and several means of storing staff MAW plans. Using fairly high level descriptors the number of MAW approaches inherited by each faculty was as follows:

Faculty 1 / Faculty 2 / Faculty 3 / Faculty 4
MAW Approaches / 16 / 3 / 2 / 3

The key characteristics of faculty structures were as follows:

In programme areas that were not 'multi-disciplinary' (e.g. health related) the mapping between programmes and subject groups was fairly direct. In programme areas that were primarily 'multi-disciplinary' the mapping between programme areas and subject groups was more indirect and complex because the mapping of subject groups extended across several programme areas (e.g. business and management).

The newness of the structures also meant that some new managers (internal or external appointees) had less management experience and there were also gaps due to delays in appointment processes. The experiential aspect was recognised and all senior faculty and departmental managers were required to undertake a university wide management development programme.

The change in academic structures also required the realignment of university processes (e.g. business planning, timetabling, student information systems, human resources data base, and financial systems) and to some extent departmental structures.

2.3Internal Surveys

2.3.1MAW Parameters and Process

The first survey was carried during November 2003 and January 2004. The MAW PT developed a questionnaire (Appendix B - an anonymised return from a particular subject group leader) in October 2003 and issued it by email in November 2003to all staff who managed local MAW processes in all schools/faculties (69 senior academic staff of principle lecturer grade or above including 13 divisional heads and 56 subject group leaders).The return could be by email or hard copy. Although reminders were sent, sufficient usable returns had been received by the end of January 2004 to proceed to analysis of the results. The response rate was nearly 50% (34/69) and included all four faculties, all 13 divisions and a wide range of subject groups.

As well requesting information about the parameters used in MAW and individual and peer group MAW processes information was requested on:

The means used to make MAW plans accessible to staff,
Whether MAW was linked to processes such as staff appraisal,
Whether the MAW they used was a school / faculty wide MAW or a 'local' division or subject group MAW.

The analysis of the survey returns was carried out by the MAWPT. A summary of the findings is contained in Appendix C.

2.3.2Academic Roles and MAW Recognitions

A second survey was also carried out in January 2004. The MAWPT developed a questionnaire (Appendix D {which includes the anonymised return from a divisional head}) which was issued by email to the same population of staff as in the survey of MAW parameters and processes. Again the return could be by email or hard copy.

The second questionnaire focussed on academic managerial and administrative roles and requested information on:

Whether a faculty / school / division / subject group used any of the roles from a list of academic roles (title only) known to be used in parts of the university.
The academic staff grade normally associated with particular roles (senior academic, principal lecturer, senior lecturer, lecturer / other).
The annual MAW plan hours of recognition allocated to each role.
The annual MAW hours planning base used.
Whether MAW recognition for academic managerial and administrative roles was adjusted to reflect differences in volume (number of staff / students) managedand if adjustments were made, details of the basis used.

The response rate was again high at over 50% and included all four faculties, all 13 divisions and a wide range of subject groups. In the case of this survey some follow-up activity was required to achieve a good return and elicited faculty level responses from two faculties from which no response had been received from a division or subject group. This revealed that some parameters used in local MAW could be faculty wide parameters. The analysis of the survey returns was carried out by the MAWPT.

2.3.3Analysis of Results

The survey revealed that at one extreme a faculty had 'inherited', from the schools and parts of schools from which it had been created, sixteen different MAW approaches (using fairly high level descriptors) whilst at the other extreme another faculty had inherited three (of which two had been school wide MAW policies and covered over 90% of the work of the faculty and were rather similar in adopting a moderate stance on level of detail).

2.3.3.1 MAW Parameters and Process

The survey revealed that there was a core of good practices that accorded with the requirements of the Local Agreement that can be summarised as follows:

Managers of MAW: Subject Group Leaders were the work planners and staff raised MAW issues with their subject group leader. Subject Group Leaders raised MAW issues with their line manager (divisional / departmental head).
MAW Context: Work planners were familiar with the business plan of the Faculty / School / Department, they contributed to the development of the business plan, used the business plan during MAW processes, and an element in the Faculty / School / Departmental Business Plan related to their subject group.
Timing of MAW: MAW was initiated during March-May, the main MAW process in the summer term, and MAW plans were revised once or twice per year (September or before Semesters 1 & 2).
MAW Basis & Parameters: Most of work planners used an annual teaching contact hours basis (462) whilst other used total hours. There was a set of faculty / school / department wide standardised academic administrative / managerial roles with standard MAW Plan recognitions for the roles. Local flexibility was used to assist staff to deal with difficult circumstances.
MAW Process: Personal scholarly activity was included in MAW plans and all MAW plans were published to all members of a subject group by hard copy of email/drive. Final student recruitment and option choices were reflected in MAW plans in September / October.
MAW Related Processes: Work planners had knowledge of overall faculty / school / department targets and those of their subject group. There was a formal planned process for students to choose option modules and the process was managed by administrative staff or a combination of academic and administrative staff.

No one subject group exhibited the full set of these features. There were numerous variations and combinations. There were, for example, 14 different MAW plan hours bases (because a small number of subject groups used a dual-metric i.e. a combination of contact hours and total hours per year from the ten bases single hours bases observed).

Faculty
1 / 2 / 3 / 4
Plan Hours Base per year / 420 / f=1 / 448 / f=4 / 440 / f=1 / 462 # / f=9
462 / f=3 / 462 / f=1 / 448 / f=1 / 900 § / f=4
550 / f=2 / 1406 / f=1 / 462 / f=1
1406 / f=1 / 1480 * / f=1 / 900 / f=1
1348 / f=1
1406 / f=1
None / f=1
Total Responses / 7 / 7 / 7 / 13
Subject groups in faculty / 15 / 17 / 13 / 13
* / This research oriented group declared the use of 200 days per year as the MAW planning base. The average contractual hours per week of 37 imply a 7.4 hour days and the 200 days translates into 1480 days per year.
# / Eight of these subject groups were from one school that had a well established school wide MAW policy with a single annual hours base.
§ / These four subject groups were from one school that had a well established school wide MAW with a single annual hours base.
MAW Annual Planning Bases / Frequency
0 / 1
420 / 1
440 / 1
448 / 5
462 / 14
550 / 2
900 / 5
1348 / 1
1406 / 3
1480 / 1
34

No subject group used 1576 total hours per year (1406 plus 170 hours for Personal Scholarly Activity / Self Managed Time). Each work planner had an explanation / rationale for the base(s) they used. However, as only the 462, 1406 and 1576 hours per year bases comply with the Local Agreement this confirmed that to varying degrees only 50% of the 34 subject groups covered by the survey had a MAW annual planning hours basis that complied with the Local Agreement.

Also there were 'gaps' in good practice. For example, additional in year research, consultancy and business development contracts were dealt with ad hoc.

Some of the differences in MAW processes were due to the nature of the operations of some subject groups. This was especially true of the timing of MAW processes due to funding contracts and curriculum design and delivery patterns.

2.3.3.2 Academic Roles and MAW Recognitions

A university level summary of academic administrative / managerial roles, staff grades, MAW plan hours of recognition and MAW bases used is contained in Appendix E. The summary for a particular faculty is contained in Appendix F.

2.3.4Discussion of Results with Work Planners

Subsequently, the MAW Project Manager (MAWPM) organised meetings with work planners at which the MAWPM and a UCU representatives presented the results. The meetings were very well attended and stimulated a lot of discussion. Brief notes of the 4 meetings are contained in Appendix G.

The divisional heads and subject group leaders said it was the first time that they had been brought together at university level. They also said that although some of them had been involved in debates about MAW at school level it was the first time that they had been involved in a discussion about MAW with staff from other parts of the university.

The result was a broad consensus that a university MAW framework was desirable in order to prevent breaches of the 'Local Agreement', achieve greater transparency, equity and fairness in work load allocations and build on good practices that were identified in the survey (provided they would not breach the local agreement).

3.Academic Contract: National Text and Locally Agreed Terms

The terms of the National Text and Locally Agreed Terms (Local Agreement) were agreed in 1992. Whilst there have been some changes to update the academic staff contract the Local Agreement has not changed since 1992. The degree of the flexibility of interpretation increased from 1992 as the university responded to changes in HE funding and government policies, recruitment patterns, modes of delivery, semesterisation, new businessdevelopment, and changes in sector wide quality assurance and enhancement regimes. However, very few managers or staff had a copy of the Local Agreement and significantly fewer were familiar with its terms or accepted interpretations of some of the terms.

An extract of some of the key terms is contained in Appendix H.

4.University Guidance

The Human Resources Department staff intranet pages of the university contained some MAW related guidance. Some of thisis contained in the following Appendices:

IUniversity Roles and Responsibilities of Academic Staff - Notes for Guidance

JThe Process of Managing Academic Work Loading and Appraisal for Academic Staff

Again, many managers and staff appeared to be unfamiliar with these documents.

5.UCU View

UCU (NATFHE as was) published its own guidance to its members on the academic staff contract and Local Agreement (see Appendix K). This was published in 1993 but again it appeared that many managers and staff were unfamiliar with the document. The document differed in some details (UCU preferred interpretations or paraphrases) from the academic staff contract and Local Agreement.

6.External Sources

MAW is not new. The MAW process has always taken place in universities and colleges. Relatively new in the period from 2000 have been efforts made by a gradually increasing number of universities to develop a university wide approach to MAW.

6.1Intranet

An internet search was made to try to identify UK universities that had developed university wide MAW but, not unexpectedly, the results were very limited. One institution wide MAW policy was discovered for a UK university. (Note that by 2008 it was possible to quickly find and access over a dozen UK university wide MAW policies and several in Australia and in the EU could also be accessed).

6.2University Staff Knowledge of Other HEIs

6.2.1The MAWPT also sought to obtain information on MAW in other HEIs from university staff. Several divisional heads and subject group leaders who had worked for other HEIs volunteered information about MAW practices in those institutions. The UCU (NATFHE) representatives also tried to obtain information use their colleagues in other universities. Some information was obtain by these means but very little in terms of number of universities, probably due to the lack of development of MAW approaches at institutional level in 2003-04.

6.2.2The MAW Project Manager had connections with two national academic subject bodies. Information on MAW practices was sought at meetings of the bodies, again with little success.

7.0 Summary

In summary, the state of MAW at the university could be characterised as follows:

MAW guidance and MAW related guidance was in a variety of different locations in the university.
Although there as a set of key MAW parameters in the academic contract many managers and staff were not familiar with it
There was inconsistency in advice from different sources (managers, union representatives, and other staff).
The majority of MAW approaches were local to a division or subject group and a minority of school wide MAW approaches.
The local MAW practices had become 'embedded' in the operations of schools and subject groups.
There had not been a university wide debate about MAW for over 10 years.

Overall, it appeared that the human and social aspects of developing a university MAW approach would be at least as significant as the technical aspects. In reality each local MAW approachrepresented a set of vested intereststhat needed to be persuadedto change to a different approach.

======

Questions

1.How would you typify MAW practice at the university where you currently work?