A senior college official urged to consider his position by the Education Secretary over the secret recording of a conversation has quit.
The board of Glasgow's Stow College said in a statement that it had received the resignation of its chairman Kirk Ramsay.
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said at the weekend that Education Secretary Mike Russell "no longer had confidence" in Mr Ramsay after discussions about controversial college sector reforms were made public.
The college statement said: "It is with great sadness that today the Board of Stow College has received the resignation of its chair, Kirk Ramsay. We accept that, in the circumstances, it is the honourable thing to do.
"It is typical of Kirk to put the college, its students and staff first and, by resigning, at this time he has, once again, shown his commitment to Stow College."
Mr Russell suggested at a meeting with Mr Ramsay on Wednesday that he should consider his position.
"Making and distributing a secret and surreptitious recording of a confidential meeting is inconsistent with the behaviour expected of the chair of a publicly-funded college," the government minister said. The Education Secretary wrote to others at the recorded meeting to express his concerns and inform them their comments were taped.
At Holyrood on Tuesday, Mr Russell was accused of trying to "bully and intimidate" college staff. Labour education spokesman Hugh Henry said education staff had contacted him to say they were "frightened to speak out" against Mr Russell, who is overseeing controversial reforms.
Mr Russell replied that most of his meetings with the college sector were positive and said Mr Ramsay was wrong to record their discussion. He said he had no power to demand any individual's resignation as ministers' power of direction over the college sector was removed by the previous Labour Scottish Executive.
Mr Henry suggested it may be appropriate to record meetings for accuracy and argued it may be "in the public interest to publicise what the Cabinet Secretary said or how he behaves at meetings". Mr Russell rejected the claim, arguing that "the issue is that in a meeting of chairs and principals a recording was made with a surreptitious device".
