University of Oxford


Survey Results

RPW Survey Introduction

Steering Committee


Meeting 1 part 1

Meeting 1 part 2

(Ch)3 Affinity Group Steering Committee

Inaugural Meeting

In order to make progress with the wishes of the respondents to the survey, we have set up a Steering Committee (SC) to discuss several of the issues arising. This SC is an unofficial body with a preliminary membership that probably should be confirmed in due course. A first meeting was convened on Wednesday 9th October 2013, at Richard Wayne’s home. Various people were invited to attend, including current and recent Tutors and Academic Staff, Development Office representatives and other interested individuals. The timing of the meeting meant that the only people who were able to attend were: Richard Wayne (Chair), Leia Clancy; Fiona Holdsworth; and Ann Holloway (Minutes).

Those present at this inaugural meeting renamed themselves the (Ch)3 Affinity Group Steering Committee (SC), to differentiate themselves from the Affinity Group committee, which has yet to be formed. In the light of the survey results, the Steering Committee recommended that a (Ch)3 Affinity Group should be formed and the current group will now work towards making this happen. Fiona Holdsworth said that we had a number of names of people from the survey who had volunteered to help and they should be the first people we approach. The SC suggested that it would be wise if the committee members were representative of chemists drawn from as many decades as possible. 10 was suggested as a useful number of committee members.

The survey shows that people want a dinner. As Hall gets booked up well in advance and as most people prefer Fridays and Saturdays, it was decided that Leia Clancy would contact Hall to see if it is possible to hold a potential date for us.

The survey revealed people want a mechanism for knowing about old members and their activities but it was decided that this should be something discussed at the first Affinity Group meeting.

It was also noted that using the (Ch)3with the ASCII code to generate the superscript causes some problems in various e-mail systems – an  symbol appears before the superscript in some cases, particularly in message headers. It was decided that the (Ch)3 should continue to be used, but that a disclaimer should be included in an early message to warn e-mail recipients about the possible extra character.