Author: Project 2
Last saved by: Becky Jennings
Company: SML

SUBJECT CENTRE FOR LANGUAGES, LINGUISTICS 
AND AREA STUDIES

MINUTES OF THE MANAGEMENT GROUP
07 MAY 2003, CILT LONDON

Present
Prof. Michael Kelly (Chair and Director of the Subject Centre), Liz Ashurst (Centre Manager, Alison Dickens (Academic Coordinator, Linguistics), Dawn Ebbrell (CILT Higher Education Information Officer), Lid King (CILT Director), Vicky Wright (Academic Coordinator, Languages), Diana Jones (Minutes Secretary).

1. 	Minutes of the last meeting and matters arising

The minutes were accepted as a true record of proceedings.

Institutional visits

LK provided CILT’s self-audit template and a description of the self-audit process as follows:

•	An initial meeting is held between representatives of the institution to be audited and CILT.
•	The self-audit is conducted according to the template provided.
•	A follow up meeting is held.
•	Records of the audit are kept by the institutions and by CILT.

VW suggested that the self-audit process could be combined with the proposed review processes currently being discussed by AULC and that the self-audit process could work as a form of staff development.

It was further suggested that the Subject Centre might focus specifically on auditing in the fields of Literature and Culture with AULC focussing on Languages. SC would tie this in with the proposed series of institutional visits. Emphasis would be on ‘norms’ or ‘guidelines’ in preference to ‘standards’. It would be important to have disucssion with Nick Byrne.
Action VW/EJA

Portfolio group

LK advised that the group is known as the European Validation Committee and that Clare Goudy is the HE contact person.

It was observed that City University have created their own version of the portfolio (and that portfolios are often produced independently by schools in Italy). This raises questions of validation and dissemination. The notion of specificity was also discussed and it was agreed that the use of a single passport and overriding portfolio structure would ensure continuity.

ICT4LT

LK is still waiting for feedback from Graham Davies on this project.

Conference

EJA and DE reported on their meeting earlier in the day. Alison Cutler is costing venues in London and Southampton for a two-day event next July. This information will be circulated to the Management Group by the end of May.
Action: EJA

DE advised that significant flexibility would be obtained if the Exhibition and ICT room were removed from the provisional programme. It was agreed that neither was central to the proposed event. VW noted that web access and power point would still be vital.

EJA stated that appropriate branding would be achieved through the production of folders and notepaper for the event. The cost of these would need to be worked into the budget and calculated within the delegate fee. It was agreed that an email template would not be necessary but that the conference URL might usefully be added to DE’s normal email signature.
Action: DE

EJA would email David Head (SCHML), Hilary Footitt (UCML), Nick Byrne (AULC) and Linda Parker (ALL) following the Advisory Board meeting. EJA and DE would prepare and circulate a discussion paper outlining possible themes for the conference. This is to include mention of its remit being limited to languages and related studies. It was agreed that an explicit focus would be placed on issues of “Policy and Curriculum” and that this theme might be retained for future events in order that the SC conference become known as the Policy Conference.
Action: EJA/DE

2. 	Role of the Subject Centre in the implementation of the National Languages Strategy

To date SC has supported the strategy through publication of items in the newsletter and on the website, and by inviting the acting National Director for Languages, David Mallen, to Southampton for an informal discussion of the role. LK is to be provided with a copy of the notes from that meeting.
Action: DSJ
MK asked:

•	Should the SC be more proactive in supporting the Strategy?
•	What timing would make sense?

LK advised that the DfES has a ‘Programme Board’ working with key partners from schools, CILT, the British Council and the TTA to implement the strategy. The HE sector, life long learning, and links with the business community do not seem to be being addressed yet and might benefit from Subject Centre involvement.

It was noted that the HE part of DfES should be responsible (at least in part) for this work.  MHK will write to Mela Watts (cc to Geoff Brown) to propose the involvement of key partners from HE in implementing the strategy.
Action: MHK

LK identified three elements of the strategy which might involve the Subject Centre:

•	HE recruitment
•	Research into other areas of the curriculum
•	Working with other sectors to implement strategy

There may be a role for the SC in working out the role of HEIs in curriculum development across the sectors.

A question was raised about the role of other subject centres in cross-sectoral issues, including teacher training and non-subject-based education. 

The strategy document is unclear on the role of universities in implementing the strategy. This needs to be clarified if anything is to be done. 

LK indicated that the National Director is to be appointed ‘soon’ but that no date had yet been specified.

3. 	Role of the Subject Centre in Europe

LK and MHK attended the European Policy conference in April.

European Commission

MHK advised that the commission is thinking about promoting networking initiatives (under the Socrates programme) and may soon be launching a call for bids. It was suggested that it might be possible to build up a collaborative network system for HE languages.

ECML

The ECML has recently launched a new medium term action for new projects with a deadline in June. Details are on the website. www.ecml.org

The question was raised whether SC should/will become more involved following the restructuring. As part of the ECML we could lead projects. For example, ECML is currently calling for small collaborative projects focussing on  ‘inclusiveness’ and it may be appropriate for us to work towards producing a European model for auditing good practice.

It was noted that 15 or 20 small projects are to be funded across Europe and that it would not be appropriate to promote bids too forcefully within the UK.

Ideas and priorities for potential projects included:

•	Exploiting DIALANG
•	Primary languages and teacher training
•	Community languages (e.g. in HE in Europe)

Publication opportunities were seen as having the potential to attract bids. It was noted that EU project administration can be time consuming and that meetings lasting several days are not usually feasible for UK academics. The role of the SC here might be limited to the dissemination of information or a form of ‘brokering’.

LK advised that the ECML is now advertising an event on ‘learning more than one language’ in June, and one on Curriculum Innovation in July. Projects on ‘Languages for social cohesion’ will be funded in the period 2004-7. The detailed call for bids indicates that issues relating to the curriculum will be considered. SC might structure a bid around the question ‘What would an HE languages curriculum look like in the 21^st Century?’ Projects tend to be run by a small core group with a single coordinator.

Bologna Process

MK reported that the LTSN is pushing for greater awareness of the European context through its international strategy. It was noted that this year’s funding has been allocated to projects and that additional resources are not available at this stage. After restructuring and the launch of the Academy it is anticipated that more funds will become available.

4. 	Recommendations of the ‘New Landscape’ report

The SC will take action to promote these recommendations. Priority will be given to:

No. 1.	Collection and clarification of rationales for studying languages
No. 3	Curriculum innovation in supplementary languages
No. 5	Review of specialist language degree curricula

It was agreed that a first step will be to open up a dialogue with key players in each sector (e.g. AULC, ALL). SC and CILT will work together, possibly in partnership with Nuffield or another funding body, to design a follow-up project prioritising these recommendations.

It was also noted that:

•	The National Qualifications Framework is currently being remapped making the proposed project particularly timely. (VW)
•	Some review initiatives are already underway and we need to be aware of these before moving forward. (LK)
•	Funding for the project might be obtainable from Europe. (AD)
•	Face to face meetings are an essential starting point. (MHK)
•	Consideration of rationales and curricula is core business for the SC. (MHK)
•	The Advisory Board could be involved in implementing recommendation 5. (EJA)
•	The proposed follow-up project might be tied in with the self-audit process (VW).

As a point of departure it was agreed that EJA, MHK and DSJ would meet next week to ascertain how the recommendations might be taken forward and by whom. A document will be prepared and circulated to the Advisory Board.
Action: MHK/EJA/DSJ

5. 	Looking to next year

C&IT

EJA proposed and LK agreed that SC and CILT work together on one or more C&IT workshops. These might address the similarities and differences observed in the application of technology to teaching and learning contexts in HE and Schools.

The issue of funding was briefly discussed. While our funding will only allow a single workshop at this stage, it was observed that schools (and particularly specialist colleges) are much better funded and equipped than universities where technology is concerned.

Recruitment and Marketing

It was agreed that these issues are still of great interest to our constituents and that they need to become more proactive by adopting a more professional and businesslike approach to marketing. An event on this topic is desirable.

LK suggested that a speaker be recruited from the Chartered Institute of Marketing with whom CILT has established contacts. He will pass on details to SC.
Action: LK

Residence abroad

The potential role of the SC in brokering placements was discussed. MK expressed the opinion that this falls beyond our remit. However, we might usefully recruit a specialist speaker to advise on residence abroad in the context of one of our events. 

The role of the Ethnography materials was discussed. There was considerable demand for this and Ethnography would also form part of an RA workshop.

Priorities

The status of ‘Widening Participation’ was addressed. MK indicated that the ‘low’ priority accorded to it last year was deliberately provocative and might now be revised in the light of current thinking on anti-elitism and a possible link to our proposed work on clarifying rationales for language learning.

VW asked if it was appropriate to name low priority items at all.

An event or ‘swap shop’ (merry-go-round) focusing on new courses and resources was suggested. This could consider the content of resources collections (with links to the materials bank) and a possible survey of what published materials are being used/developed by the community. AD will work up a draft outline of the event.
Action: AD

6. 	Update on Learning Technologies Bid

The proposal that a panel be appointed to consider the bids and that Graham Davies act as a consultant was approved.

 7. 	Update on recent activity

Subject centre

The document provided by EJA is taken as a record of recent SC activity.

MHK reported on two elements of a meeting of SC Arts and Humanities directors:

•	A recent book has challenged the social sciences bias in many books on teaching and learning in these disciplines. 
•	A possible e-learning conference is being discussed.

The correct spelling of Liaison Light is noted.

CILT

DE reported that the “Languages: Work” project has begun although no meeting dates have been set yet. It was hoped that there would be a meeting in the next month.
Action: LK

The DICTATED Attitude survey was briefly discussed. This may be adapted as a tool for measuring attitudes within our subject areas and in specific sectors. DE will find out if it is possible to add questions.
Action: DE

Before promoting the survey (through our website and e-bulletin), VW suggested we need to have a notion of what the results would be used for.

The CALL Database is to be sent to DE for her to review the data and the fields. She will carry out a job of ‘pruning’ or relabeling, as some items will now be out of print. A mechanism for adding new software to the database needs to be put in place. 
Action: EJA/DE

8. 	Any other business

It was noted that Fred Riley’s personal home page contains links to the CALL database and comments regarding the termination of his involvement with the SC. EJA has informed Roel of this. No other action is considered necessary.

9. 	Date of the next meeting

EJA will find a suitable meeting time in September or October.
Action: EJA

<script src='//archive-bar.soton.ac.uk/archive-bar.js'></script>