Big changes are in store for one of Britain’s most prestigious universities if, as expected, University College London signs off on a modernising green paper from Provost Malcolm Grant.
Big changes are in store for one of Britain’s most prestigious universities if, as expected, the Council of University College London signs off today (13 June) on a modernising green paper put forward by Provost Malcolm Grant.
You might think that UCL was doing fine already. Three (unofficial) global league tables put it at 25th or 26th in the world and 4th or 5th in Europe, and its life science research is more highly cited than Oxford or Cambridge. But competition nationally and globally – for funding, for academics and for students – is tough, and getting tougher.
The matter of the heart
Cardiovascular research is cited by Malcolm Grant as exemplifying the need for reorganisation. Across the university, he says, there are 20 professors carrying out research in this field.
In May the university brought together everyone involved in cardiovascular research at UCL. “There were 150 scientists there – it was like an international conference, with lead papers…
“To me it’s the eye-opener. You don’t need to group all these scientists together to get the best science out of them, but you need an institutional mechanism for ensuring that you pass first base, which is communication within the institution of what people are actually doing.”
Grant, who has a background in law and land economy, was brought in as Provost in 2004 in the wake of the turmoil caused by his predecessor’sunsuccessful support for a merger with Imperial College. Since then there has already been one green paper and one white paper. So why another green one?
“That’s the reason for doing it again, which is that it actually worked,” Grant told Science|Business’s Richard Hudson and Peter Wrobel in an interview.
Among the changes will be a rationalisation of the university’s sprawling faculties to create three groupings based around arts and social sciences; engineering, maths and physical sciences; and biomedical and life sciences. That’s a big shift for a university whose faculties have traditionally been so independent that there’s not even a common timetable (though that will change, too).
But Grant’s plan shies away from the controversial proposal to merge biomedical and life sciences. “The antibodies were out against it,” says Grant, who cites worries by life scientists that they would end up being “clinician driven”.
A case for compromise
Grant thinks those fears are unfounded. But he accepts that with 60 per cent of UCL’s overall activities, and a income greater than eight out of ten UK universities the massive new faculty would have been unwieldy and difficult to manage.
His solution is a pragmatic compromise, which he refers to as “second order thinking”. Biomedical and life sciences will remain separate, but there will be a number of cross-faculty committees, and they will share functions such as teaching programmes, admissions, grant administration and finance.
Thumbs down for the EIT
Cardiovascular research is cited by Malcolm Grant as exemplifying the need for reorganisation. Across the university, he says, there are 20 professors carrying out research in this field.
In May the university brought together everyone involved in cardiovascular research at UCL. “There were 150 scientists there – it was like an international conference, with lead papers…
“To me it’s the eye-opener. You don’t need to group all these scientists together to get the best science out of them, but you need an institutional mechanism for ensuring that you pass first base, which is communication within the institution of what people are actually doing.”
Justifying this proposal, Grant says “You create structures that will allow the interactivity you want, but at the same time you create homes that are a base for young scientists.” He adds that new models of organisation, “can be a stimulus for new methods of thinking”. The next step, he says, is to apply the same logic to mathematics and the physical sciences.
Financial discipline
There’s a lot about finance in the Green Paper. Financial discipline may not be a phrase that naturally springs to mind when thinking of academia. But times are changing, and for universities like UCL getting the finances right is a fine balancing act. Key to this is the proportion of higher-paying undergraduates from outside the UK and the EU.
Grant emphasised the deliberate effort that has gone into “reprofiling” the student population. Government regulations set a quota for overseas students, but allow flexibility of 5 per cent above or below that limit. “We have brought down our undergraduate UK population to the optimal point in the funding band.” This, Grant adds, had the benefit of bringing in more high-quality overseas students, who now account for 80 per cent of the postgraduates studying at the university. Overall, 40 per cent of the students are postgraduates.
Other universities – like the ETH in Zürich – have seen vice-chancellors who have pushed structural reform being pushed out themselves.
So is Grant worried about his future? Not at all. “I think this is quiet radicalism, but I think the institution’s ready for it,” he says.
Receive the Funding Newswire each Tuesday, our Policy Bulletin each Thursday, and news about bridging Europe’s east-west innovation gap twice a month in The Widening. 
A unique international forum for public research organisations and companies to connect their external engagement with strategic interests around their R&D system.
