SENIOR PROCTOR: Insignissime Vice-Cancellarie, licetne anglice loqui?
SENIOR PROCTOR: Later today, the oral literature of the University will be expanded by a new corpus of narratives beginning `When I was Senior Proctor', `When I was Junior Proctor' and `When I was Assessor'.
But this morning I address you still in the present tense, and by tradition briefly. [Procurator Senior gesta illius Anni quaecunque occurrerint memoratu digna, brevi oratione percensebit (from the Senior Proctor's Book of 1477.]
Life is brief, too, for Proctors, a single year in which to visit as many as possible of the rooms leading off the corridors of power. Proctors are immediately visible: their uniform distinguishes them from almost everyone else, identifying them as holders of their office, not individuals, and emphasising their detached independence. And they are anonymous: certainly one loses one's own name for a whole year and is addressed only as `Senior Proctor', or whatever. Complicated problems are sorted out over the telephone with people who know only that they are speaking to a Proctor. They are, of course, quite impartial in their judgment of complaints; yet as they follow long-overdue reforms through the committees, they have convenient opportunities for strongly felt contributions; and they are listened to with politeness and respect always. Proctors constitute an element of the University's democracy, which is achieved not by everyone delivering themselves of an opinion on every topic, but by the preservation of opportunities for intervention, as and when necessary, by representatives of all relevant interests. And while they hold statutory membership of many committees, with a right to attend all others, and take a full participation in their discussion and business as ordinary members, at the same time Proctors also represent a form of internal audit (by simply `listening in'): less time-consuming and administratively less complex than a visit from the Higher Education Quality Council. After a year, one can, unexpectedly, create a meaning for this complex bundle of activities, and it shows that there is wisdom in the organic growth of institutions. Certainly the office would never be invented if the University were being designed (or redesigned) today. The Oxford form of Proctorship is unique: it is `our thing'.
This year we have seen the University still recovering from the effects of the DR shift and trying to deal with the departmental budgeting problems associated with it by the implementation of formula funding. At the same time all universities have suffered further cuts in public funding, including what are these days known as `efficiency gains', a cruel euphemism just like that by which the Greeks called the Black Sea the Hospitable Sea, because of the number of shipwrecks. We continue to be subjected to a multitude of external assessmentswhich can so often be not true evaluations of the personal experience of education, but merely agreed criteria for sharing out scarce public money.
Despite this, we seek to maintain the high world-wide reputation of the University by encouraging research, and attracting and retaining the best academics, and that includes somehow finding the means to pay our professors, as well as all our established lecturers, and readers, at appropriate levels. Meanwhile the outcome of the first round of promotions to the titular ranks of reader and professor is awaited with curiosity; and in the wake of all this it has been discovered that contract researchers are now more numerous at Oxford than established staff.
A major decision opening up welcome and far- reaching opportunities has been that to establish a new post of Director of University Library Services and Bodley's Librarian from the beginning of 1997, with a new committee structure. The present financial situation reinforces the need for distribution of resources through an integrated library service. We hope that the fresh wind of a new Director and new committees will blow away the suspicion by faculty and other libraries of a Bodleian take-over, and allay any anxiety in Bodleian circles that attention to present Oxford users' needs will ruin provision for future international scholarship.
It is easy to believe, for any generation of Proctors, that they have in their short term witnessed unique events of earth-shaking change. If this were truly so, the frequency of earthquakes in the Oxford region must be greatly above average. In fact the University is in a state of Heraclitean constant change, but the difference for Proctors is that they have exchanged the worm's eye view for that of the bird. Now the University has an enduring ability to absorb change. That venerable giant the Hebdomadal Council is edging towards only its 150th birthday, while the General Board was a novel phenomenon a mere eighty-three years ago. The subjects we study change too, and the official demarcations between faculties may be a century or more behind the real disciplinary interfaces of today. Reorganisations are undoubtedly necessary from time to time, and need not inescapably be perceived as shaking the University to its roots.
Yet a cynic might suggest that evolutionary biology, and perhaps ancient history, demonstrate that random behaviour is more conducive to an institution's survival than too much strategic planning, and more recent history leads us to be sceptical about the value of five-year plans. But, as the Junior Proctor reminded us in his oration (which took the form of a paper to the Planning and Development Committee), it is certain that in this University we do not have enough strategic planning. Probably there is too much information at the centre and too little elsewhere, and if the centre could be relieved of much of the burden of routine decision-making it would have the scope to tackle more of the strategic issues. A former Proctor described the University of the early eighties as totally lacking in strategic direction; fifteen years on, we can report that the lack is no longer total. Running like an undercurrent through this year, Mr Vice-Chancellor, has been the continuing work of your Commission, which has indicated that it is addressing these and many other issues, and to which we wish good speed.
There has been change this year in the Proctors' Office too. Both Proctors now have basic computing facilities at their desks, and can be reached by e-mail. Following the report in July last year of a Committee to Review the Proctors' Office, a new post has been created to provide support for the Proctors and to manage the office, functions which have hitherto been performed by the Marshal. His duties as head of the Security Service have grown considerably in recent years and, given his continuing responsibility for the University Police and for ceremonial events, it has become increasingly difficult for one person to cover the whole range of work. At the same time, the nature of the Proctors' work has been changing and they now need more support in an increasing range of administrative duties. It will be our successors who will have full benefit of the new Clerk to the Proctors (as his provisional, but probably permanent title, is), although it is good to see that he is getting his hand in already. For many Junior Members especially, he will be the first point of contact in the Proctors' Office. He has already seen the stacks of files tied with red tape, and he may well wish to embark on computerised indexing of the records.
The Proctors have continued their traditional and statutory work of seeing that examinations are properly conducted, work which is central to the University's existence. This ranges from visits to the examination hallswhere on one occasion even Proctorial eyebrows were raised when it transpired that the person who had turned up in a T-shirt and shorts, under an MA gown and hood, was one of the examinersto a more general overview of the examination system. Overall we are satisfied by what appears to us an exceptionally high standard of examining throughout the University, with remarkably few lapses. At the planning level, we have tried to give advice in drafting new examination regulations; this can speed their passage through the committees. A working party on the revision of the Examination Decrees and Regulations, on which both Proctors sat, will propose the development of faculty or course handbooks, and a read- only version of the Decrees available via the network, while retainin g the circulation of a single book to all members of Congregation for the foreseeable future.
Oversight of all examinations facilitates the identification of problem areas across the faculties, and it has become clear that there is a need to ensure that the best examining practices are widely disseminated. The Junior Proctor has proposed, and the General Board has disposed: an Examinations Policy Committee will come into being, to advise the Proctors in strategic review of such matters as the proper role of external examiners (they should be listened to), policy on vivas (there should be more of them), disparities between honour schools (there should be fewer of them), examination conventions and marking scales (there should be some). It might also revisit the question of anonymity in the examination process.
For graduate taught courses, I have encouraged the development of a set of agreed guidelines on which to assess alternative forms of examination. Many faculties now favour pre-submitted essays, week- long projects, three-week written assignments on lecture courses and a whole range of innovative tests. With convincing rationale and justification, there is every reason to encourage these developments, which offer candidates a wider range of opportunities to demonstrate their abilities, so long as concerns about maintenance of standards, adequacy of assessment, practicality of examining, and precautions against cheating, collusion, and plagiarism can be satisfiedagain, this underlines the importance of vivas.
Another aspect of Proctorial responsibility in respect of examinations is that of dealing, I hope humanely, with the complaints of candidates. We live today, we are told, in a `complaint culture', where complaints are to be welcomed as an opportunity to improve the `services' offered by the `organisation'.
That may be so. But it has to be said that by persisting in the use of the metaphors of production and consumption for the activities of the mind, of buying and selling to describe the process of education, we can be fallaciously persuaded that `customers' have a unique charter to judge the quality (that over-used word) of what is `provided'. There are even signs of a tendency to think that a degree is a right once a sufficiently large sum of money is paid.
Traditionally the Senior Proctor has been concerned with graduate examinations, predominantly the D.Phil. Complaints have, very approximately, tripled over the last decade (or doubled, proportionately to student numbers). According to the most accurate figures available, of those candidates submitting for the D.Phil. who are recommended instead for the M.Litt. or M.Sc. without referral, over a half lodge complaints. Under the current procedures, this category of students receives no official feedback from their examiners concerning the respects in which their work has been judged unsatisfactory, and that disappointment is certainly an element in what leads them to complain. Failure or recommendation for the lower degree requires detailed justification from the examiners, and the candidate deserves to receive an explanation.
Echoing the words of my predecessor of last year, I have to report that nearly 70 per cent of all graduate examination complaints have come from overseas students. I have no single explanation for this, since not everything can be explained by cultural differences; but it seems that we are still failing our overseas students. Ever more rigorous monitoring of progress for all students is certainly a desideratum, especially at the crucial first stage of transfer (the point at which a candidate can reasonably expect to feel `on course' towards a doctorate); perhaps it is an advantage that we are not being pressurised now to accept ever greater numbers. But pre-eminently, there is the need to make absolutely clear the University's expectations from the very beginning, so that students can learn to match those to their own.
The Assessor shares the committee round with the Proctors. Otherwise her principal concern is with student financial hardship. A survey is gathering information on current student income, expenditure and indebtedness, on applications to Access and hardship funds, on the amount of paid work students need to undertake in term-time and vacation, and the effects of financial pressure on their health, academic performance and career plans. It will help the University to target assistance to students in financial difficulty, and provide reliable evidence for use in responses and representations to outside agencies. The present Gazette supplement Notices of University Scholarships, etc., will be expanded to include all hardship-related funds, with an index to guide applicants to appropriate sources of funding, and extra copies will be printed, to be available all year round.
The Assessor also takes a special responsibility for about 240 student clubs and societies. In the light of the Clubs Committee's concern about the possibility of clubs incurring debts, the Rules Committee has now made it a requirement for the treasurers of clubs, societies, and organisations for publications to forward to the Proctors each term a copy of the accounts for the previous term, signed by the Senior Member. The new regulations also include a formal statement that the Proctors may withhold or withdraw registration from clubs, societies, and publications if there is reason to do so.
Computers are increasingly a part of all our lives. The Marshal, for example, is only too well aware of widespread computer theft, which the Security Service tries to keep track of. Tens of thousands of pounds worth of equipment can be removed in a few minutes by expert thieves. Almost all research students, as well as many undergraduates, now use a computer. At the research level, consequently, I have strongly encouraged a move to consult faculties about allowing students to submit an electronic copy of their thesis along with the paper version, surely to the convenience of many examiners now; and about making it possible for candidates to include, as part of their theses, extra material which could only be fully and appropriately considered if submitted in electronic form, so as to widen the scope of doctoral assessment.
But just as the Proctors of earlier this century held all-too-frequent `motor courts' to deal with offences involving motor vehicles, so we have found ourselves dealing with a veritable epidemic of `computer investigations', as foretold by my predecessor. The considerable increase even from last year is ominous. In a typical scenario, late on a Friday night or in the small hours of Saturday morning, first-year undergraduates in a college computer room log in and talk to or mail other students, it may be indulging in harmless `play' activities, but sometimes sending messages which are deeply offensive to the recipients; in extreme cases the harm done has been even more serious. Our students gain access to sophisticated computing equipment and learn the techniques to operate it, yet some are slow to acquire the necessary ethical overlay to regulate their behaviour (etiquette seems too feeble a term). They have never had access before to Unix servers, and mail and talk facilities are no velties; they may have received minimal training in the use of them. There is a need here, not just for another unread booklet, but for explanations, social education. This is something which the University, and the colleges, will need to take increasingly seriously.
The Proctors have a responsibility to set bounds to the exuberance of post-examination celebrations, and the continued use of the Merton Street exit appears the best way to control the crowds, at least in the vicinity of the Examination Schools. From microscopic traces of `trashing' on the streets of Oxford, archaeologists of the future may be able to reconstruct the diet of late-twentieth-century students: baked beans, eggs, flour, spaghetti, and of course `fizzy liquid'.
But for late-twentieth-century residents, it is no joke, it can be offensive and dangerous, and it does the University's name no good. This is a perennial problem, exacerbated nowadays by the example set by Formula One racing drivers and by television slapstick. As usual the University Constables and Special Constables exercised their function as efficiently as their numbers permit, ably assisted by our Pro-Proctors, with the co-operation of the Thames Valley Police and, we are happy to report, of the vast majority of examination candidates.
The University's disciplinary procedures were comprehensively reviewed by a committee of which my predecessor, and then I, were successively members, and which reported in January. Its central concern was with unsatisfactory aspects of the procedures of the Disciplinary and Appeal Courts (the upper reaches of the University's disciplinary system); but the opportunity was taken for a wide range of recommendations on such questions as Proctorial jurisdiction in examinations open to non-members of the University, a category not foreseen by the Statutes. There is no comprehensive listing of disciplinary offences at Oxford; instead they occur scattered across many sections of the Statutes, Examination Decrees, Proctors' Memorandum and elsewhere; and the report draws attention to the desirability of a full codification of offences and a full listing of potential penalties, in a spirit of transparency and accessibility. Council has endorsed the majority of its recommendations, and this should lead in due course to a radical rewriting of Title XIII (the main disciplinary statute) and a fundamental repackaging of the material which has accumulated over the years in the Proctors' Memorandum. (I must confess to wondering if it is really necessary to include the information that car parking is not permitted in the University Offices.) The report also identified an approach to `serious' offences, making it clear that (with a certain few exceptions) the University should not attempt to deal using its own procedures with offences which would attract a custodial sentence on conviction. This may commend itself to college jurisdictions. The committee also gave a reminder that, under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the University as a landlord is not in a position to be ahead of the law. Finally the development is envisaged of a concordat between college and university disciplinary authorities to ensure that appropriate congruent action is taken by all parties involved. This might eventually extend to the unevenness between colleges perceived by Junior Members in the categorisation of offences and the levels of penalties.
Both Proctors, and the Assessor, serve during their year of office as Delegates of the University Press, and this affords the opportunity to observe at close quarters a great international publishing enterprise, recently enlarged with a potentially extremely successful extension into Latin America. During this year, the Delegates met outside Oxford for the first time ever in the history of the Press. That visit to OUP New York was primarily to inaugurate the new offices there, but it has also heralded a divisional reorganisation and a realignment of the publishing business between Oxford and New York. The procession of the Oxford and US Delegates along Madison Avenue in full academical dress and the July heat, headed by an officer of the New York Police Department, was an extraordinary event. Frankly, we felt as if we had been beamed down from another planet. Mistaking us for the practitioners of yet another cult, the majority of New Yorkers were unmoved, even if (as the New York Times reported) one fell off his roller-blades in surprise. But the Proctors were nearly called upon to intervene when a Pro-Vice-Chancellor was interrogated by the police outside the Cuban Embassy, `seeking shelter' as he said, `from the rain'.
Among other agreeable aspects to the year, it has been a great pleasure to put faces to names (some previously known only as sets of initials) of many of the staff of the University Offices, and to get to know them as they go about their work. We have been impressed by well-run committees and their efficiency as they produce papers which, contrary to a widespread belief, are not generated spontaneously in Wellington Square but respond to concerns raised by Senior (and sometimes Junior) Members of the University. I feel sure, Sir, that a reforming Vice-Chancellor will spare a thought for the resource needs of the University's civil service.
Notable visitors to Oxford during the year included President Árpád Göncz of Hungary, fluent not only in English but also in the Common Speech of Middle-earth, as the translator into Hungarian of the works of J.R.R. Tolkien; and the Secretary-General of the UN, Dr Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who delivered the Cyril Foster Lecture. As a rare avocation the Proctors were able to inspect the summer camp of the University Air Squadron at St Mawgan. The `Dinosaur Roadshow' attracted over 18,000 visitors to the University Museum. And after months encased in scaffolding, the Ashmolean Forecourt Development was completed and opened in February, and its restaurant has already been reviewed in the Oxford Magazine. University life is enlivened by many ceremonies. Some are performed early on dark winter mornings by small groups in panelled rooms in the University Offices. The grandest and most public of all is Encaenia. Among this year's honorands, David Hockney and Betty Boothroyd also received from my colleague a unique Proctorial dispensation to smoke in academic dress. An honorary degree was conferred also on Arthur Miller. Memorial services have been held for Lord Warnock, former Vice-Chancellor; for Freddie Beeston, former Laudian Professor of Arabic; and also for a former Junior Proctor, Paul Hayes, who died after a long illness.
The Proctorial cycle was invented in 1628 by a Professor of Geometry. It has been adjusted regularly, from 1960 incorporating the Assessorship also; and this year three more colleges, Templeton, Mansfield, and Harris Manchester, will join the club. My own college has previously held the Assessorship twice, and I thank the Fellows of Wolfson for electing me to be their first Proctor, and for their support and encouragement during the year.
We owe a great debt to the Marshal, who has patiently encouraged another stable of Proctors, discreetly keeping us on course; and we hope that the coming year will bring him satisfying developments of his new responsibilities. We are grateful to all the staff of the Proctors' Office, who have ministered faithfully and cheerfully to our needs for twelve months. Our thanks go also to the Bedels, always ready with a cheerful word of encouragement on great occasions, and to the University Verger. We are particularly grateful too to our four Pro-Proctors, Peter Baker, Dan Isaacson, Ellen Rice, and Chris Schofield, who have represented us at Degree Ceremonies and in attending University Sermons (where once upon a time one of their duties was to range the streets and taverns during sermon hours).
It is possible, I suppose, that two Proctors might not work well together. Indeed, a decree of 1304 provides for Congregation to be summoned by one Proctor only, in the (apparently all too common) event of his colleague being unreasonably obstructive. [ Altero Procuratorum, et forte minus juste aliquoties, contradicente (recorded in the Junior Proctor's Book of 1407: 32, 58).] However, I consider myself to have been quite exceptionally fortunate in my Proctorial colleague; we have often transgressed the bounds conventionally separating our duties, functioning much more as a double act than either of us expected. Likewise we both feel that we could not have had a better colleague than this year's Assessor, who has devoted far more than half of her time to assessing; we have worked closely with her, relishing in particular those endless discussions over tea, especially about the future of the University's library services.
A manuscript note in the Senior Proctor's Book of 1477 records that each Proctor `enters cheerfully' on his term of office, and `departs even more cheerfully'. [Laetus intrat jucundior extrat.]
I, and I believe I can speak for my colleague and for the Assessor too, have valued highly, and enjoyed much, the privilege of our offices and the responsibilities we have exercised, serious and sometimes solemn, but with many cheerful moments. Now it is time to hand over to our successors, whom we wish well as they enter on the Outward Bound course of Proctorship. We meanwhile shall take back to our colleges and faculties a store of specific knowledge that will be useful, for some years at least, and changed perspectives that will endure, like the already germinated seed of the dying Agave ferox which burst into spectacular centennial flower in the Botanical Gardens this year.
Many of those present will recall the defeat of the proposal to put a road through Christ Church Meadows; but I cannot think that anyone remembers the earlier plan to put a railway on a viaduct over the Isis perilously close to the winding glades and island walks of the Cherwell. It was in 1895. [ Gazette, 27 October 1895; 29 January 1896.]
My predecessor of exactly a century ago, speaking at this occasion in this place, expressed his relief that the scheme had been abandoned in 1896, ending his oration (and I paraphrase), `so it will be possible to continue enjoying the delights of Mesopotamia'. [ Oxford Magazine, 29 April 1896.]
Mr Vice- Chancellor, I now echo those sentiments.
Number of cases: 86.
Result: 15 fines £60, 2 fines £40, 44 fines
£30, 4 fines £25, 3 fines £20, 8 fines £15, 1
fine £10, 3 not guilty, 2 case dismissed. Total of £24.58
Offence: Breach of University Regulations (obstruction).
Number of cases: 3.
Result: 1 fine £60, 1 fine £20, 1 letter of apology to constable.
Offence: Breach of University Regulations (`fly- posting').
Number of cases: 2.
Result: 1 joint fine £20.
Offence: Breach of Examination Regulations (using unfair means).
Number of cases: 7.
Result: 1 fine £100; reprimanded; failed on
assignment; not permitted to enter for that assignment again.
1 fail on the essay; resit paper and submit new work.
1 fail on one paper; no mitigation on any other part of exam; Proctors to be consulted before name included on Class/Pass List; if fails to obtain Honours and wishes to sit for Honours on later occasion will need prior permission of Proctors.
1 failed paper; Proctors to be consulted before name placed on any exam list; highest mark permitted will be `pass' degree.
1 not permitted to enter any exam of this University or matriculate, for three years from 1 October 1995.
1 thesis withdrawn and cannot be resubmitted; may not read for higher degree of this University without permission of the Proctors.
1 not guilty.
Offence: Breach of University Regulations (failing to answer summons to appear before Proctors).
Number of cases: 2.
Result: 2 no action.
Offence: Breach of University Regulations (non bona-fide use of University Computer System).
Number of cases: 2.
Result: 1 fine £100, 1 fine £60.
Offence: Breach of University Regulations (removal/defacement of library books).
Number of cases: 2.
Result: 2 fines £50.
Total number of cases: 104.
Members of Congregation wishing to suggest candidates are asked in particular to note the following points:
(a) under Council's standing orders, no member of Council or of the advisory committee shall forward to that committee or propose directly to Council the name of any person for any honorary degree unless he or she is prepared personally to recommend that the conferment of such a degree be seriously considered;
(b) while informal soundings within the University on any proposal will often be desirable, every effort should be made to ensure that publicity is not at any stage given to any proposal for the conferment of an honorary degree.
The advisory committee will report to Council early in Michaelmas Term, submitting a short-list of candidates for further consideration. Council will then decide which proposals should be referred to its Committee on Honorary Degrees. The final list of proposed honorands, drawn up by Council in the light of the latter committee's report, will be submitted to Congregation for approval in accordance with the requirement of Tit. II, Sectt. VI and VIII (Statutes, 1995, pp. 1314).
The ten members of Congregation are:
Dr D.S. Fairweather, Corpus Christi
Dr M.J.O. Francis, Wolfson
The Revd S. Innes, Greyfriars
Dr R.J. Jacoby, Linacre
Mr A. Jones, Pembroke
Dr J. Logue, Somerville
Dr L.J. Smith, Harris Manchester
Dr B.J. Stapleton, Balliol
Dr J.H.M. Taylor, St Hilda's
Mr B.E. Woolnough, St Cross
The ten Junior Members are:
Ms S. Akhtar, St John's
Ms S.A. Bayes, St Catherine's
Mr A.C. Clifford, Nuffield
Ms T.R. Curristine, Trinity
Mr M.W. Greenwood, Kellogg
Mr J.K. Kirk, Magdalen
Mr M. Knowles, Worcester
Mr D.T.D. O'Riordan, Hertford
Mr M.E. Saunders, Christ Church
Ms Y. Tun, Oriel
The panels will remain in force until the first day of Trinity Term 1997.
The Registrar has drawn by lot the name of Dr D.S. Fairweather, Corpus Christi, to fill the vacancy occurring on the Disciplinary Court at the beginning of Trinity Term 1996 in respect of a Member of Congregation. The names of the two Junior Members who have similarly been selected by lot to fill the vacancies occurring at the same date are:
Ms S. Akhtar, St John's Mr A.C. Clifford, Nuffield
The members of the Disciplinary Court (and their periods of office) are therefore:
Professor R.M. Goode, St John's (Chairman), until the first
day of Trinity Term 1997
Dr D.S. Fairweather, Corpus Christi, until the first day of Trinity Term 1998
Dr E.J. Garnett, Wadham, until the first day of Trinity Term 1997
Ms S. Akhtar, St John's, until the first day of Trinity Term 1997
Mr A.C. Clifford, Nuffield, until the first day of Trinity Term 1997
The committee has agreed to make various amendments to its first regulation, which concerns clubs, societies and publications, in the light of proposals put forward by the Clubs Committee. The amendments are intended (a) to ensure that clubs, societies and publications keep their accounts up to date, to bring the accounts to the attention of senior members, and to enable the Marshal, the Proctors and the Assessor to have an earlier warning of impending financial trouble; (b) to give the Proctors the right not to register, or to de-register, an organisation, which hitherto they have not had; and (c) to correct some anomalies. The amendments will come into effect from the beginning of Michaelmas Term 1996.
The committee has agreed that its other regulations should remain in force for 1996-7.
1 In Ch. XI, Sect. VIII, § 1, cl. 1 (b) (Statutes, 1995, p. 716), delete `it'.
2 Ibid., cl. 3, delete `clauses 4 and 5 below' and substitute `clauses 5 and 6 below'.
3 Ibid., insert new cl. 4 as follows and renumber existing cll. 45 as cll. 56:
`4. The Proctors may not unreasonably withhold or withdraw registration.'
4 Ibid., cl. 5 (i) (e)(g) (as renumbered) (pp. 71617), in each case delete `cl. 4' and substitute `cl. 5'.
5 Ibid., cl. 5 (i) (g) (as renumbered) (p. 717), after `who shall keep a proper record of its financial transactions' insert `which shall be available for inspection at the request of the Senior Member or the Proctors; and shall forward to the Proctors by the end of the first week of each term a copy of the accounts for the preceding term1 signed by the Senior Member for retention on the Proctors' files'.
6 Ibid., insert footnote:
`1 Any transactions in the vacation should be included in the accounts for the following term.'
7 Ibid., cl. 5 (i) (m) (as renumbered), delete `All clubs, societies, and publications' and substitute `All clubs, societies, and organisations'; and in each of the three places in which the word appears, delete `publication' and substitute `organisation'.
8 Ibid., cl. 5 (ii) (as renumbered), after `the Proctors shall have discretion to dispense from the qualifications required under subclauses (i) (e), (f), (g), ( h), (k), and (l)' insert `,and from the requirement to submit termly accounts under subclause (i) (g),'.
9 Ibid., cl. 6 (i) (c) (as renumbered), delete `; and' and substitute `which shall be available for inspection at the request of the Senior Member or the Proctors; and forward to the Proctors by the end of the first week of each term a copy of the accounts for the preceding term1 signed by the Senior Member for retention on the Proctors' files;'.
10 Ibid., cl. 6 (1) (d) (as renumbered), delete `.' and substitute `; and' and insert (e):
`(e) All organisations for publications with a turnover in excess of £15,000 in the preceding year, or which, owing to a change in the nature or scale of their activities, confidently expect to have such a turnover in the current year, shall submit their accounts for audit by the University's auditors (or other auditors approved in advance by the Proctors). Accounts shall be ready for audit within four months of the end of the financial year of the organisation for the publication, and the costs of the audit shall be borne by the organisation for the publication. If requested by the auditors, the organisation for the publication shall submit accounts and related materials as a basis for a review of accounting procedures, the cost likewise to be borne by the organisation for the publication.'
11 Ibid., cl. 6 (ii) after `dispense from the requirement of subclause (i) (b)' insert `and from the requirement to submit termly accounts under subclause (i) (c)'.
12 Ibid., insert cll. 7 and 8:
`7. Any breach of this regulation shall be a university offence.
8. Failure to comply with this regulation may result in the club, society, or organisation (including one for the publication of a journal, newspaper, or magazine) being deregistered by the Proctors.'
The proposed programme for the work is as follows:
Monday, 1 April. No access to the Lower Reading Room from the North staircase. The C. Acad. and C. Latin rooms will be completely closed; the C. Greek room will be open but without electricity. The South range will be unaffected.
Tuesday, 2 April. The C. Greek room will be closed. The C. Acad. and C. Latin rooms will be open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. with power, but without lighting. There will be no through passage between these rooms and the Lower Reserve. The South range will be unaffected.
Wednesday, 3 April. Room B2, where OLIS terminals and other workstations are concentrated, will be completely closed at the beginning of the day. There will be no access to this room from either direction until later in the morning. Other rooms will be unaffected.
Thursday, 4 April. The Theology (T) section will be closed. There will be no through passage between the Classics reading rooms and the Catalogue and General Reference Section.
It may become necessary to alter this schedule. The Library apologises for this major disruption at such short notice.
Candidates should be able to teach widely within a broad four-year Materials Science syllabus and to carry out a programme of research into the electrical and magnetic properties of materials.
Further particulars, containing details of the duties and the full range of emoluments and allowances attaching to both the university and college posts, may be obtained from the Head of Department, Department of Materials, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PH (telephone: Oxford (2)73737, fax: (2)73738, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org). Applicants should give a full postal address for reply. The closing date for applications is Tuesday, 30 April.
On lecturership will be held in conjunction with an official fellowship at Templeton College. The person appointed will be expected also to contribute to the college's executive programmes.
The other lecturership will be held in association with an official fellowship at St Edmund Hall. The person appointed will be required also to provide tuition for undergraduates at the college.
Further details, including salaries and allowances attaching to both the university and the college posts, may be obtained from Mrs Ingunn Seidler, University Offices, Wellington Square, Oxford OX1 2JD (telephone: Oxford (2)70016), to whom completed applications (ten copies) should be sent by 26 April.
The stipend will be on the scale £14,317£15,154 per annum. There is the possibility of some college teaching for which separate payment would be made.
Applications (ten typed copies, or one only from overseas candidates), together with a full curriculum vitae, list of publications, statement of research interests, and the names of three referees, should be sent by Monday, 22 April to the Departmental Administrator, Department of Statistics, 1 South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3TG (telephone: Oxford (2)72869, fax: (2)72595), from whom further particulars, containing details of the duties and the full range of emoluments, may be obtained.