Volume Twenty-Five • Number Nine • 9 July 2001 

The QAA and the School

By Professor Judith Rees, Pro-Director

Readers may have seen an item in the THES of 29 June saying that the School has 'softened its stance' towards the Quality Assurance Agency and that, in particular, we have agreed to go ahead with the Continuation Audit of our quality assurance systems which had been planned for November this year. Unfortunately this item was based on a misunderstanding.

At time of writing (2 July) the position remains as reported to the Academic Board on 20 June. The School has proposed to the QAA that this year's audit should be cancelled and that an audit under the Agency's new style Institutional Review should be carried out in 2003/2004. The Agency has intimated informally that it may well suggest to the School that it would not undertake the audit: instead, it would offer an early review under new and different arrangements. However, we are still waiting for a formal proposal from the Agency.

On this understanding the Board agreed formally not to refuse to take part in the Audit if it were to take place in November: but this was in the expectation that the QAA would agree to our proposal that it should not take place.

More generally, far from 'softening its stance', the School continues to lobby, including through the Russell Group, for a further reduction in the burden the QAA is placing on institutions.

The announcement made by David Blunkett before Easter about a 40 per cent reduction in the volume of subject level inspection does not, in our view, go far enough.

Negotiations are currently taking place between the various national bodies about the shape of future arrangements: but we are continuing to press that these should be kept to an appropriate minimum, with in particular a minimal amount of QAA review of individual departments.

Information of the new arrangements will be sent out as soon as it is available. But in the meantime, anyone who wants more information should get in touch with Simeon Underwood in the Teaching Quality Assurance and Review Office.

^

Third Deputy Director appointed

LSE is pleased to announce that Dr Ray Richardson has been appointed as a Deputy Director of the School for three years from 1 September 2001. Dr Richardson will join Professors Judith Rees and Stephen Hill as a member of the new team of three Deputy Directors agreed by the Academic Board and Council earlier this year.

Dr Richardson will initially take up a new portfolio which includes responsibilities for teaching and learning quality and student services.

An expert in human resource issues, Dr Richardson has strong ties with the School having graduated from LSE in 1962. He then gained an MA at the University of Pittsburgh, and a PhD from Columbia University, New York.

He came to work at LSE in 1968 as a lecturer in the Economics department, before moving in 1979 to his present position as a Reader in Industrial Relations in the Department of Industrial Relations. For the last two years he has also worked jointly for IR and the Interdisciplinary Institute of Management.

An author, former editor of Economica, and a previous academic governor and Dean of the Graduate School, Dr Richardson is also currently academic director for LSE in the new TRIUM Executive MBA programme.

^

Funding for a better health service

By Julian Le Grand, chairman LSE Health and Social Care

Everyone agrees that the Labour government will stand or fall on its record on delivering quality public services - especially education and health. Most people also believe that this will not be achieved simply by extra public funding, welcome though that might be. The NHS in particular is notorious for its leaky bucket quality. Radical reform is needed to create a whole new organisation: an NHS that retains its traditional values of equity and fairness, but that is also responsive, efficient and innovative.

But what kind of radical reform? Instead of trying to develop another internal reorganisation, the IPPR Commission on Public/Private Partnerships, of which I was a member, has suggested extending the notion of public-private partnerships within the NHS. The NHS would continue to be funded out of taxation and remain free at the point of use, but the present public monopoly providers would be complemented by a plurality of providers; public, private and not-for-profit offering all kinds of services.

In fact, the idea is not that radical. We already entrust the care of the most vulnerable people in society to private and voluntary providers. In 1998-99, two thirds of public expenditure on services for the elderly and mental health services was on provision from the private and voluntary sectors.

Predictably, the idea of private or voluntary provision of - especially - clinical services has provoked outrage from the public sector unions. But the British public may well be more pragmatic. Results of a recent MORI poll reveal that 69 per cent of those questioned would find it 'acceptable' or 'very acceptable' for an experienced private health care company to run all hospital services on behalf of the NHS, so long as the provider was able to meet agreed safety standards.

But would it work? The experience of the Private Finance Initiative in the NHS has not been encouraging. A review of health care PFI schemes found little evidence of innovation or even of significantly greater value-for-money. But it is likely that at least in part this arises from the fact that they were confined to ancillary services, whereas the creation of real change requires control over the central activities of the organisation concerned.

Moreover, there is relevant experience from abroad. Publicly funded but privately run hospitals play a significant role in other European countries - many, such as Germany and France, with more highly rated systems than ours. It would be foolish to ascribe this to cause and effect; but it does show that a substantial role for the private sector in hospital provision does not necessarily bring about the disaster that the unions and others predict would happen in Britain.

Still, the absence of any systematic evidence concerning the relative performance of public and private sectors in Britain means that the sensible course is to move forward slowly. Let us remove the restrictions on health care PFI schemes that prevent the inclusion of clinical services. Let us try some experiments involving a greater use of private sector: private provision of pathology services or specialist surgery units, for instance. Let us monitor and evaluate these experiments. Above all, let us take off all ideological blinkers, and allow us properly to find out what works best for NHS patients and staff.

Taken from an article which appeared in The Independent, 25 June 2001.

^

Academics abroad

• Peter Sozou, Operational Research, gave a seminar at the Department of Economics, Cyprus University, Nicosia on 21 June on Discounting the Future: an evolutionary perspective.

^

Election night at LSE

Once again, election night at LSE was a great success with more than 130 of the world's media jostling for interviews with the School's academics who took part in forums and panel discussions throughout the night.

Journalists from countries including Kenya, Brazil, Japan and Europe watched results come in, listened to special briefings and interviewed many academics including Patrick Dunleavy and Tony Travers.

^

Congratulations

LSE Philosophy and Economics student Julia Junger is one of only 50 top honour winners from 16 countries on the Goldman Sach Global Leaders Programme.

Julia, a second year student from Germany, was congratulated by Professor Giddens, after winning the Goldman Sachs Foundation and the Institute of Education award for her superior academic record, leadership potential and excellent communications skills. She receives $5,000 a laptop computer with internet access, and a trip to New York to attend a major Goldman Sachs Global Leaders Institute event this month with other winners.

Congratulations also to second year Economics student finalist Markus Granlund who won $2,000.

^

British Academy awards

The following members of staff have been made Fellows of the British Academy:

• T J Besley, Economics
• T P Dyson, Social Policy
• N M Lacey, Law
• D Lieven, Government
• E C Page, Government
• J P Parry, Anthropology

Election to Fellowship is the culmination of a rigorous selection process involving each of the Academy's 18 sections with the number of Ordinary Fellows elected each year limited by statute to 35. The British Academy is the national academy for the humanities and the social sciences and the counterpart of the Royal Society which covers the natural sciences. An independent learned society, it has responsibility for promoting research and scholarship in all branches of humane and social studies.

^

Two prestigious awards for LSE academic

Dr Andrés Rodríguez-Pose of the Geography and Environment Department has been awarded the Gill Memorial Award from the Royal Geographic Society. This award is given to encourage geographical research in young researchers who have shown great potential. In Dr Rodriguez-Pose's case, the award was conferred in recognition of research contributions to understanding regional disparities and regional policies.

Past holders of the award include some of the most eminent geographers of our time such as Professor David Harvey (winner in 1972 and currently Milliband Fellow at the School), Professor Judith Rees (1980 and current Pro-Director), Professor Michael Chisholm (1970), Dr David Keeble (1985), Professor Richard Munton (1987), and Professor Peter Taylor (1989). The presentation of the award took place at the Society's Annual General Meeting on Monday 4 June.

Dr Rodríguez-Pose has also been awarded the Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Award for which the School had nominated him.

These awards, jointly funded by the Royal Society, the Wolfson Foundation and the Office of Science and Technology (OST), are intended to give institutions additional support to attract to this country or keep here researchers of outstanding achievement and potential. Initial funding available for the awards totals some £20 million over five years.

The award will bring a total of £325,000 to the School over a period of five years, most of which will be devoted to a research project entitled Development Strategies in a Changing World.

^

Retirements

These retiring members of staff have amassed almost 150 years between them as students and in service to the School.

• Dr Teddy Brett came to the School as a student in 1961 and returned in 1994 when he took up the position of programme director for development management in DESTIN
   
• Professor Howard Glennerster came to the School in 1968. He spent eight years as director of STICERD and four years as vice-chair of the Appointments Committee. He is not severing all his ties with the School, however, as he is to remain co-director of CASE.
   
• Chris Langford started his 41-year long association with LSE as a student in 1962. After two years conducting research abroad, he returned to the School as a research officer and was made Reader in Demography in 1997. He is now hoping to be able to devote his time to his research.
   
• David Dalby came to LSE as a student in 1968 and never left. He became head of IT Services in 1989.
   
• Angela White joined the Law Department in 1968, becoming its administrator in 1974. She has worked for no less than ten convenors.

^

Books & publications

Warrior Lovers: erotic fiction, evolution and female sexuality
Catherine Salmon and Donald Symons

(Series: Darwinism Today, eds Helena Cronin and Oliver Curry)
Weidenfeld & Nicholson

Romance novels and pornography are multi-billion-dollar global industries. Here, the authors show how the stark contrasts between these erotic genres reflect the very different selection pressures that forged women's and men's sexual psychologies during human evolutionary history.

In particular, they analyse 'slash fiction', written by and for women. 'Slash' depicts romantic and sexual relationships between heterosexual males, fictional characters from TV and film, such as Star Trek's Captain Kirk and Mr Spock. The heroes of both romance novels and slash fiction are 'warrior lovers' who embody the qualities our female ancestors valued in a mate. But, whereas romance-novel readers fantasise about being 'Mrs Warrior', slash fans prefer to fantasise about being a 'co-warrior'. By separating the essential features of female erotic fantasy from the variable, the authors get to the heart of what women really want.

^

Noticeboard

^

LSE News & Views is published every Monday during term by the Press & Information Office. Printed by Reprographics Department. The aim is to provide a means of communication for all members of the School as well as news and information about people and activities. Articles, news and photographs are welcome. Contributions should be sent to Toni Sym, Press & Information Office, 6th Floor, Tower 1, to arrive no later than one week before publication date. All personal ads carry a standard charge of £2 for up to 50 words.

^ Back to top