Then came the quest for a chairman to succeed Professor Martin Harris the Vice-chancellor of Manchester University

Then came the quest for a chairman to succeed Professor Martin Harris, the Vice-chancellor of Manchester University. Two other vice-chairmen were already in situ: Professor Sir John Arbuthnott, Principal of the University of Strathclyde; and Professor Howard Newby, Vice-chancellor of Southampton University. Both were nominated for the unenviable post, and one or t'other should have been elected chairman for 1999-2000 without much fuss this spring Yet, suddenly, both decided to withdraw from the race Why? Good question. A new and equally good vice-chairman was easily found in the shape of Roderick Floud, Provost of London Guildhall University, and former Professor of Modern History at Birkbeck College, London University. Ever since the resignation of Mike Fitzgerald, the colourful Vice-chancellor of Thames Valley University, following a damning report on its progress from the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), the CVCP has suffered a spate of hiccups.

Dr Fitzgerald was also vice-chairman of the CVCP at the time of his departure, and might well have been in line for the chair. The assurance of standards, rather than simply checking on educational provision, may well be achievable.Anthony Fletcher is a professor of history at the Essex University and chair of the History Benchmarking Group. In need of a chair The Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals (CVCP) got off to a slightly shaky start this millennium year. This means relating the benchmarking framework to its own learning outcomes and the local assessment methods that test these There is a long way to go.

But working with the QAA has been stimulating and worthwhile. The funding committee's proposal that external examiners report directly to it and its self-denying ordinance on discussion with them preclude judgements about individual performance. Academic review should concentrate on a department's ability to deliver on standards. We shall hope to contribute purposefully and constructively to this, knowing that it is of crucial importance that a scheme emerges which is intellectually convincing, coherent and acceptable to the sector as a whole. The group took a policy decision not to use the phase programme specification in its statement, since it sees this as tainted by the overtones of standardisation and bureaucratisation in the QAA's current approach to the matter.Between now and July some of the group will be involved with others in the trialing in certain institutions of the new model for academic review.