Placatory STFC to consult on advisory panels

The Science and Technology Facilities Council is hoping that a formal consultation on the constitution of its subject-specific advisory panels will help to defuse tensions with academics.

July 28, 2011

Subject advisory panels were set up ahead of the STFC's 2009 exercise to set its funding priorities for the coming years. But some subject communities, particularly in nuclear physics, still felt that they lost out.

There has also been widespread dismay among astronomers about the STFC's decision to withdraw from several northern hemisphere telescope facilities.

A recent report by the Commons Science and Technology Committee criticised the "adversarial" relationship between the STFC and researchers.

John Womersley, director of science programmes at the STFC, said the existing subject panels had given "extremely useful" input in 2009 and the need for them had been reaffirmed during internal STFC discussions.

But he said changes in the funding landscape since then, such as the creation of the UK Space Agency, meant that it was right to look again at their composition.

Professor Womersley also admitted that the council was "still learning how to interact best with communities" and wanted to "give an opportunity for communities to tell us what they think is working and what could work better if we made some changes".

He said the STFC also hoped to introduce more uniformity into the way the panels operated "so that we have clearer expectations and they have clearer ideas about how their advice is going to be used".

"This is an evolution, not a revolution," he said. "But given the sensitivity of the STFC's relationships with its communities, we think it is important to do it through consultation."

The STFC has also announced that it is to amalgamate its three existing science committees, which provide scientific advice to its governing council, into a single "science board".

According to Professor Womersley, this streamlined structure would provide clearer advice and connection with researchers, as well as saving more than £100,000 a year.

paul.jump@tsleducation.com

http://tinyurl.com/3vj8g48

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns