Scrutiny Committee THURSDAY 13TH

DECEMBER 2012 MINUTES Present: John Pinkney, Hannah Graham, Hannah Parratt, Natalie Davison, Matthew Anderson, Andrew Findlay, Daniel Olaman, Ali Gamblin, Christina King In attendance: Adam Cotterill, Michele Jukes 1 Apologies

Apologies were received from Nicky Teasdale and Sheri Burrows 2 Minutes of the Previous Meeting

This is the first meeting of this Committee. 3 Summary Report of the Officers’ individual and team objectives and their main

campaigns planned for the year 4 A brief written report from the Officers on the work they have done Items 3 and 4 were covered together as it was the first meeting. The Officers presented their objectives and the written report on work done to date which were accepted by the Committee. Questions from the Committee Will the feedback from the Hidden Course Fees campaign be ready for inclusion in the next prospectus? JP noted that it won’t be ready as the deadline for the prospectus is in February. He hase spoken to the University about the SU content in the prospectus so they are aware of it What is the purpose of the feedback campaign? HG explained that she wants to gather everyone’s feedback to see what type of feedback is given. Students should receive a grade and details of how they were given that particular grade. Does University have a feedback policy? HG noted that it does. The turnaround from handing in an assignment to receiving feedback should be within four weeks, however, this doesn’t always happen Are there plans for a blueprint? HG noted that SSE use a standardised template. They produce a list of assignments with their due dates and have added an extra column with date of feedback. There should be a break down of feedback into good and bad points. HG has had meeting with Assistant Deans who are positive about the campaign but it is not their decision. HG is aiming to raise awareness and persuade students to care about the feedback the receive.

5 Short report from the President confirming the working hours of each Officer Trustee since the last meeting

JP presented the paper which includes the numbers of hours worked by the Officers, the weekly average, toil taken (in hours) and holidays taken. He explained the Officers work 40 hours per week as standard. There was some discrepancy with the hours noted in paper, therefore at the next meeting the Officers will include hours worked during evenings and weekends JP noted the Officers can accrue up to 30 hours of toil as a maximum, however, it is not always possible to take the time back as they are so busy. JP noted that if the Committee wishes, the number of hours/days an Officer has been off sick can be included in the paper for the next meeting. The number of hours worked by each Officer over the summer break can also be included. 6 A short report of the Officer Trustees attendance at Students’ Union, University and

external meetings that have taken place since the last meeting The paper listing the meetings the Officers have attended was noted. There was some discrepancy as ....which will be revised for the next meeting. The Officers aim to go to meetings that are focused on students. Action: JP/HG to bring the University Meeting Structure to the next meeting 7 Any other papers requested by the Committee or referred by other bodies of the SU There were no additional papers 8 Any Other Business CK explained that members of her society had requested a report on the transparency of grant allocation - who received funds and why. They would like more information than ‘as requested’ and ‘money requested’. HP explained that some clubs/societies apply for funds for a lot of different things but may receive set amount to use on items on the application. HP suggested bring the minutes from Society Committee and Sports Committee to the relevant forum Action: HP to take forward 9 Date of next meeting To be confirmed.