Linking performance-related pay to a Business School's mission and objectives

This paper first analyses the Performance Related Pay (PRP) schemes developed from 1992/3 to 2002/3 in a large Business School in England and then the School’s mission and strategic objectives in that period. The PRP schemes changed to include more specific performance indicators and these were increasingly linked to the objectives. The School’s resources allocated to PRP increased from £44,000 in 1992/93 to £355,000 in 2002/3 and from 1.08% in 1995/96 to 2.37% of the School’s income in 2002/3. As well as examining the changing strategic objectives and PRP schemes, the paper charts the development of the School’s reputation and resources and the role which staff motivation via PRP played at different stages. The paper concludes that the PRP scheme was at its most effective when it was clearly linked with the School’s strategic objectives, but that the relationship between objectives and motivation may be more complex than apparent from this study. Although the PRP scheme under consideration also applies to academic related staff, this paper concentrates on the effect on academic staff.

Preparing Aston Business School students for placement

Aston Business School (ABS) has offered four-year sandwich degrees (including a year long placement) for over 30 years, and ABS has often been ranked top for graduate employability. This report outlines the activities ABS uses to meet its ever increasing placement targets. ABS builds relationships in students’ thinking between theory and practice, and this has implications for their study, the placement period and beyond. Developing the links has certainly been a factor in the enhanced employabilility of ABS graduates, resulting in ABS having been ranked top for graduate employability for many years. The eight employability skills used as the basis for the placement preparation objectives originate from Smith at al’s (2002) work on employability. We were encouraged to find that these employability skills overlap with the benchmark of the ‘Profile summary for Business and Management’ outlined by Hawkridge (2005). In this case study we provide a rationale and then the objectives of the placement preparation period, followed by specific details of the preparation process. The evaluation highlights key achievements and areas for development, and the discussion is future-focused. Readers should note that the ABS Undergraduate curriculum is aimed at preparing students for employment but this case study focuses on the role of the Placements Team.

The contribution model:a school-level funding model

Over a number of years, as the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)'s funding models became more transparent, Aston University was able to discover how its funding for teaching and research was calculated. This enabled calculations to be made on the funds earned by each school in the University, and Aston Business School (ABS) in turn to develop models to calculate the funds earned by its programmes and academic groups. These models were a 'load' and a 'contribution' model. The 'load' model records the weighting of activities undertaken by individual members of staff; the 'contribution' model is the means by which funds are allocated to academic units. The 'contribution' model is informed by the 'load' model in determining the volume of activity for which each academic unit is to be funded.

Good practice guide in learning and teaching

Once again this publication is produced to celebrate and promote good teaching and learning support and to offer encouragement to those imaginative and innovative staff who continue to wish to challenge students to learn to maximum effect. It is hoped that others will pick up some good ideas from the articles contained in this volume. We have again changed our approach for this 2007/08 edition (our fifth) of the Aston Business School Good Practice Guide. As before, some contributions were selected from those identifying interesting best practice on their Annual Module Reflection Forms in 2006/2007. Brookes? contribution this year is directly from her annual reflection. Other contributors received HELM (Research Centre in Higher Education Learning and Management) small research grants in 2006/2007. Part of the conditions were for them to write an article for this publication. We have also been less tight on the length of the articles this year. Some contributions are, therefore, on the way to being journal articles. HELM will be working with these authors to help develop these for publication. Looking back over the last five years it is brilliant to see how many different people have contributed over the years and, therefore, how much innovative learning and teaching work has been taking place in ABS over this time. In the first edition we were just pleased for people to write a few pages on their teaching. Now things have changed dramatically. The majority of the articles are grounded in empirical research (some funded by HELM small research grants) and Palmer?s article was produced as part of the University?s Postgraduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching. Most encouraging of all, four of this year?s articles have since been developed further and submitted to refereed journals. We await news of publication as we go to press. It is not surprising that how to manage large groups still remains a central theme of the articles, ABS has a large and still growing student body. Essex and Simpson have looked at trying to encourage students to attend taught sessions, on the basis that there is a strong correlation between attendance and higher performance. Their findings are forming the platform of a further study currently being carried out in the Undergraduate Programme. A number of the other articles concentrate on trying to encourage students to engage with study in an innovative way. This is particularly obvious in Shaw?s work. Everyone who has been around campus lately has had evidence that the students on Duncan?s modules have clearly been inspired. I found myself, for example, playing golf in the student dining room as part of this initiative! The articles by Jarzabkowski & Guilietti and Ho involved much larger surveys. This is another first for the Good Practice Guide and marks the first step on what will clearly be larger research efforts for these authors in this area. We look forward to the journal publications which will result from this work. The last articles are the result of HELM?s hosting of the national conference of the Higher Education Academy?s Business, Management, Accounting and Finance (BMAF) Subject Centre Conference in May 2007. Belal and Foster have written about their impressions of the Conference and Andrews has included the paper she gave. The papers on employability and widening participation are the centre of HELM?s current work. In the second volume we mentioned the launch of the School?s Research Centre in Higher Education Learning and Management (HELM). Since then HELM has stimulated a lot of activity across the School (and University) particularly linking research and teaching. A list of the HELM seminars for 2007/2008 is listed as Appendix 1 of this publication. Further details can be obtained from Catherine Foster (c.s.foster@aston.ac.uk), who coordinates the HELM seminars. We have also been working on a list of target journals to guide ABS staff who wish to publish in this area. These are included as Appendix 2 of this publication. May I thank the contributors for taking time out of their busy schedules to write the articles and to Julie Green, the Quality Manager, for putting the varying diverse approaches into a coherent and publishable form and for agreeing to fund the printing of this volume.

Good practice guide in learning and teaching

Once again this publication is produced to celebrate and promote good teaching and learning support and to offer encouragement to those imaginative and innovative staff who continue to wish to challenge students to learn to maximum effect. It is hoped that others will pick up some good ideas from the articles contained in this volume. We have again changed our approach for this 2006/07 edition (our fourth) of the Aston Business School Good Practice Guide. As before, some contributions were selected from those identifying interesting best practice on their Annual Module reflection forms in 2005/2006. Other contributors received HELM (Research Centre in Higher Education Learning and Management) small research grants in 2005/2006. Part of the conditions were for them to write an article for this publication. We have also been less tight on the length of the articles this year. Some contributions are, therefore, on the way to being journal articles. HELM will be working with these authors to help develop these for publication. The themes covered in this year?s articles are all central to the issues faced by those providing HE teaching and learning opportunities in the 21st Century. Specifically this is providing support and feedback to students in large classes, embracing new uses of technology to encourage active learning and addressing cultural issues in a diverse student population. Michael Grojean and Yves Guillaume used Blackboard™ to give a more interactive learning experience and improve feedback to students. It would be easy for other staff to adopt this approach. Patrick Tissington and Qin Zhou (HELM small research grant holders) were keen to improve the efficiency of student support, as does Roger McDermott. Celine Chew shares her action learning project, completed as part of the Aston University PG Certificate in Teaching and Learning. Her use of Blackboard™ puts emphasis on the learner having to do something to help them meet the learning outcomes. This is what learning should be like, but many of our students seem used to a more passive learning experience, so much needs to be done on changing expectations and cultures about learning. Regina Herzfeldt also looks at cultures. She was awarded a HELM small research grant and carried out some significant new research on cultural diversity in ABS and what it means for developing teaching methods. Her results fit in with what many of us are experiencing in practice. Gina leaves us with some challenges for the future. Her paper certainly needs to be published. This volume finishes with Stuart Cooper and Matt Davies reflecting on how to keep students busy in lectures and Pavel Albores working with students on podcasting. Pavel?s work, which was the result of another HELM small research grant, will also be prepared for publication as a journal article. The students learnt more from this work that any formal lecture and Pavel will be using the approach again this year. Some staff have been awarded HELM small research grants in 2006/07 and these will be published in the next Good Practice Guide. In the second volume we mentioned the launch of the School?s Research Centre in Higher Education Learning and Management (HELM). Since then HELM has stimulated a lot of activity across the School (and University) particularly linking research and teaching. A list of the HELM seminars for 2006/2007 is listed as Appendix 1 of this publication. Further details can be obtained from Catherine Foster (c.s.foster@aston.ac.uk), who coordinates the HELM seminars. For 2006 and 2005 HELM listed, 20 refereed journal articles, 7 book chapters, 1 published conference papers, 20 conference presentations, two official reports, nine working papers and £71,535 of grant money produced in this research area across the School. I hope that this shows that reflection on learning is alive and well in ABS. We have also been working on a list of target journals to guide ABS staff who wish to publish in this area. These are included as Appendix 2 of this publication. May I thank the contributors for taking time out of their busy schedules to write the articles and to Julie Green, the Quality Manager, for putting the varying diverse approaches into a coherent and publishable form and for agreeing to fund the printing of this volume.

Good practice guide in learning and teaching

Once again this publication is produced to celebrate and promote good teaching and learning support and to offer encouragement to those imaginative and innovative staff who continue to wish to challenge students to learn to maximum effect. It is hoped that others will pick up some good ideas from the articles contained in this volume. We had changed our editorial approach in drawing together the articles for this 2005/6 edition (our third) of the ABS Good Practice Guide. Firstly we have expanded our contributors beyond ABS academics. This year?s articles have also been written by staff from other areas of the University, a PhD student, a post-doctoral researcher and staff working in learning support. We see this as an acknowledgement that the learning environment involves a range of people in the process of student support. We have also expanded the maximum length of the articles from two to five pages, in order to allow greater reflection on the issues. The themes of the papers cluster around issues relating to diversity (widening participation and internationalisation of the student body), imaginative use of new technology (electronic reading on BlackboardTM ) and reflective practitioners, (reflection on rigour and relevance; on how best to train students in research ethics, relevance in the curriculum and the creativity of the teaching process) Discussion of efforts to train the HE teachers of the future looks forward to the next academic year when the Higher Education Academy?s professional standards will be introduced across the sector. In the last volume we mentioned the launch of the School?s Research Centre in Higher Education Learning and Management (HELM). Since then HELM has stimulated a lot of activity across the School (and University) particularly linking research and teaching. A list of the HELM seminars is listed as an appendix to this publication. Further details can be obtained from Catherine Foster (c.s.foster@aston.ac.uk) who coordinates the HELM seminars. HELM has also won its first independent grant from the EU Leonardo programme to look at the effect of business education on employment. In its annual report to the ABS Research Committee HELM listed for 2004 and 2005, 11 refereed journal articles, 4 book chapters, 3 published conference papers, 18 conference papers, one official reports and £72,500 of grant money produced in this research area across the School. I hope that this shows that reflection on learning is live and well in ABS. May I thank the contributors for taking time out of their busy schedules to write the articles and to Julie Green, the Quality Manager, for putting our diverse approaches into a coherent and publishable form.

The role of personal advisors at Aston Business School

Aston Business School has moved away from a traditional Personal Tutoring model to the Personal Advisor model. During 2006, a review was undertaken of the existing system and proposed the new scheme. This session will present the current model of supporting students within Aston Business School’s Undergraduate Programme. It will discuss the research undertaken at the beginning of the change process which informed the decisions and structure of the Personal Advisor Scheme. It will also present evaluation research undertaken with students into their perceptions of the new scheme. The session will conclude with the plans for the future.

Decomposing school and school-type efficiency

This paper puts forward a Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) approach to decomposing a pupil's under-attainment at school. Under-attainment is attributed to the pupil, the school and the type of funding regime under which the school operates. A pupil-level analysis is used firstly on a within school and secondly on a between school basis, grouping schools by type such as state-funded, independent and so on. Overall measures of each pupil's efficiency are thus disentangled into pupil, school and school-type efficiencies. This approach provides schools with a set of efficiency measures, each one conveying different information. © 2001 Elsevier Science B.V.

School outcomes:sharing the responsibility between pupil and school

This paper uses a Data Envelopment Analysis based approach to decompose pupil under-attainment into that attributable to the school the pupil attends and that attributable to the pupil. The approach measures pupil attainment in terms of value added. Data on over 6700 A-level pupils from 122 English schools have been analysed. The results suggest that at current levels of school effectiveness a pupil's own application accounts for the major part of any under-attainment, though schools also have scope to improve their effectiveness.The approach also makes it possible to identify target attainment levels a pupil could be set and the extent to which the attainment of those targets necessitates an improvement in the effectiveness of the school the pupil attends and in the pupil's own efforts.

Role of protein kinase C and NF-kappa B in proteolysis-inducing factor-induced proteasome expression in C2C12 myotubes

Proteolysis-inducing factor (PIF) is a sulphated glycoprotein produced by cachexia-inducing tumours, which initiates muscle protein degradation through an increased expression of the ubiquitin–proteasome proteolytic pathway. The role of kinase C (PKC) in PIF-induced proteasome expression has been studied in murine myotubes as a surrogate model of skeletal muscle. Proteasome expression induced by PIF was attenuated by 4alpha-phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (100 nM) and by the PKC inhibitors Ro31-8220 (10 muM), staurosporine (300 nM), calphostin C (300 nM) and Gö 6976 (200 muM). Proteolysis-inducing factor-induced activation of PKCalpha, with translocation from the cytosol to the membrane at the same concentration as that inducing proteasome expression, and this effect was attenuated by calphostin C. Myotubes transfected with a constitutively active PKCalpha (pCO2) showed increased expression of proteasome activity, and a longer time course, compared with their wild-type counterparts. In contrast, myotubes transfected with a dominant-negative PKCalpha (pKS1), which showed no activation of PKCalpha in response to PIF, exhibited no increase in proteasome activity at any time point. Proteolysis-inducing factor-induced proteasome expression has been suggested to involve the transcription factor nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kappaB), which may be activated through PKC. Proteolysis-inducing factor induced a decrease in cytosolic I-kappaBalpha and an increase in nuclear binding of NF-kappaB in pCO2, but not in pKS1, and the effect in wild-type cells was attenuated by calphostin C, confirming that it was mediated through PKC. This suggests that PKC may be involved in the phosphorylation and degradation of I-kappaBalpha, induced by PIF, necessary for the release of NF-kappaB from its inactive cytosolic complex.