|
|
subtext |
|
Home |
subtext issue
69 16
December 2010 ***************************************************** 'Truth:
lies open to all' ***************************************************** Every
fortnight during term-time. All
editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors [at] lancaster.ac.uk. Please
delete as soon as possible after receipt. Back issues and subscription
details can be found at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext. The
editors welcome letters, comments, suggestions and opinions from readers.
subtext reserves the right to edit submissions. subtext
does not publish material that is submitted anonymously, but is willing to
consider without obligation requests for publication with the name withheld. For
tips to prevent subtext from getting swept up into your 'junk email folder',
see http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/dejunk/. ***************************************************** CONTENTS:
editorial, news in brief, the Hutton Review and the universities, university
in crisis, the woodland fitness trail - and the pods, student rent rises,
farewell to the Fahrenheit marking scheme, letters. ***************************************************** EDITORIAL And
so we reach the end of term, and time for a triple celebration. Not only is
it the last week of teaching, and nearly Christmas, but subtext is
celebrating its fifth birthday (the 1st issue came out on the 12th December
2005). Student
protests have been the big story this term. Enraged by proposed higher fees
and the marketisation of education, students have taken to the streets in
numbers. Here at Lancaster, protesters have been passionate and the level of
debate has been high. Not only have students made the trip to London and also
protested closer to home, they have also organised The University in Crisis
Lecture series to reflect on the purposes and futures of higher education
(more on the latest lecture later). However,
for the moment at least, it looks like protests have failed. Increases in
tuition fees have been voted through in both houses. Eric Ollerenshaw, the
Conservative MP whose constituency includes the university, was amongst those
voting for the increases. In the House of Commons debate on the 30th November
he argued that increases were necessary to fund world-class institutions and
considered that Lancaster would be amongst the winners in the new system. He
said: 'I represent two universities ... Lancaster university is a
multi-million pound business that reached the top 10 of English universities
... It makes a massive contribution to Lancaster and the wider Lancashire
economy and it hopes to develop and proceed in what it perceives as a global
market ... It wants to provide the best tuition and facilities ... Before the
election, the pressure for an increase in fees came from universities' (http://bit.ly/ollerenshaw). Despite
Ollerenshaw's predictions, exactly what the consequences of funding changes
will be for Lancaster remain unclear. It's noticeable that Ollerenshaw and
his colleagues think of universities principally as businesses, that are
worth supporting in so far as they bring economic benefits. Financially,
Lancaster may survive, and possibly even flourish, under the new regime: as
reported below, UCU predicts that Lancaster is in a good position compared to
other institutions. But how the changes will impact on the broader culture of
the university remains to be seen. ***************************************************** NEWS
IN BRIEF Lancaster
marches against the cuts Marches
against the cuts by students and staff at Lancaster have continued. Most
recently, on Wed 8th December protesters braved the cold and marched from
Dalton Square to Market Square. There are reports that a significant police presence
was in force, with a number of mounted police, though the march passed
peacefully. ****** Ben
Wallace against/for fees increases Ahead
of the vote on tuition fees, an email exchange between Tory MP Ban Wallace
and Robbie Pickles, LUSU President, sought to clarify the matter of whether
Wallace had or had not signed the NUS pledge to oppose fees increases (http://bbc.in/benwallace). It turns out
that Wallace had indeed signed a pledge, but had amended it to read 'I pledge
to vote against any increase in fees UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM in the next
parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative'.
And these weasel words, it turned out, could be interpreted to mean whatever
Wallace wanted. ****** UCU
and the cuts The
University and College Union (UCU) has published a report (http://bit.ly/gAnosS) on universities at risk
as a result of the cut in government funding for teaching. The headline
figures have been that 49 of 130 institutions are seriously at risk and that
for four the risk is 'very high'. All 49 are post-1992 universities or
specialist institutions. The indicators used to assess the degree of risk
were extent of reliance on public funding, proportion of funding for teaching
going to non-priority subjects, proportion of students from the poorest
backgrounds, and reliance on non-EU student fees. The
report is serious and well-documented, and analyses not only the risk to
individual institutions but the impact of the cut in funding for teaching on
local economies (this part of the report is based on research by Ursula Kelly
and Ian McNicoll of the University of Strathclyde). Lancaster, by the way,
comes out as low risk, in the lowest possible category on all the indicators
except for its proportion of non-priority subject teaching (as hinted at by
the Vice-Chancellor at the last Senate meeting - see subtext 68). However, some other HE institutions who
used to award degrees validated by Lancaster before going it alone as
universities in recent years, and therefore with which we might have a
particular sense of solidarity, are not predicted to fare so well. The University of Cumbria is classed as
being at 'high medium' risk (8/12), and Edge Hill University is in the 'very
high' risk group with 11/12. ****** Financial
or ideological? It
was Rahm Emanuel that said 'never let a crisis go to waste', but as a strategy
this has generally been put into practice more effectively by the right than
the left. Suspicions that the
restructuring of university funding has far more to do with ideology than
with any financial necessity are slowly but surely being confirmed, as the
figures start to emerge (http://bit.ly/standardpoor): *
annual reduction in government spending by 2014-15 due to reduced university
teaching grant: £2.9bn *
annual increase in government borrowing by 2015-16 due to larger student
loans: £5.5bn Can
it really be true that the national debt is being increased to fund a costly
and dangerous political experiment with no obvious benefits to the
country? Has anyone told the Daily
Mail? ****** Cable
under tension After
his wobbling last week over whether to vote against his own bill or not,
Vince Cable is reported to be trying to ensure that most universities peg
their fees at the lower £6000 threshold, rather than going up to the £9000
maximum. Readers will recall that
universities charging more than £6000 will have to show how they are using
some of their extra income on initiatives to widen access and
participation. It was always assumed
that it would be the Russell Group universities which would want to charge higher
fees, and these mechanisms were clearly aimed at them. But reports suggest that most non-Russell
universities are also having to consider charging higher fees, and that many
of them will find it pretty easy to meet the access criteria already. So Cable hinted recently that he might have
to introduce new mechanisms to discourage universities from setting fees over
£6000. This could get even more interesting. ****** EU
support for social sciences and humanities under threat Academics
at the Free University of Berlin are warning of an impending reduction of
European Union funding for social science and humanities research. They
report a number of worrying developments: *
the downgrading of socio-economic and humanities research in the
Directorate-General for Research from a department to one single office *
reduced funding for socio-economic and humanities research projects in the
8th Framework Programme *
the abolition of broader, long-term integrated projects in the 8th Framework
Programme in favour of a focus on 'grand challenges' and the fostering of
European economic competitiveness *
social science being reduced to an 'auxiliary' discipline to be mainstreamed
into the other sciences The
academics, at the Berlin Centre for European Studies in the Otto Suhr
Institute for Political Science, are calling for a concerted campaign to
oppose the plans (see http://bit.ly/eusocsci). ****** Marsella's
successor In
the first issue of the academic year, subtext reported on the premature
departure of the Director of Marketing and External Linkages, Anthony
Marsella. Given the controversies
around his tenure of that post, we expressed the hope that those responsible
for his appointment had learned lessons and that a different approach might
be adopted next time around, including the involvement of staff within that
area of operation. It is disturbing, therefore, to hear that the same path as
before is being followed and that in particular external employment agencies
are again involved in steering the process.
As we said, such an approach is not necessarily the best route to
ensure the appointment of someone with an understanding of academic and
scholarly values and ways of working.
We also understand that a potential appointee had been offered the
post, but had turned it down; hardly an auspicious start. subtext will be keeping its ears open and
will report further. ****** Nominations
for Staff Prizes Nominations
for staff prizes are open until 17 January. The winners are decided by
committee rather than by popular vote - so unfortunately it won't be possible
rig a popular winner. Still all staff can nominate candidates, and so there
may be some fun to be had... Those who have recently been made redundant
might value the £1000 prize. ****** Notes
from the empire It's
easy to forget Lancaster's overseas ventures, but as these will doubtless
become more and more important, subtext plans to keep an eye on them. In
India, GD Goenka World Institute and Lancaster offer business degrees.
Student chatrooms on the web suggest that the current intake of students are
happy with the courses they are studying, and also that they have a somewhat
different attitude towards university life than UK students. While in the UK
meeting sexual partners is part of the point of going to university, a
potential applicant at Goenka who asks whether the girls are beautiful is
reprimanded by his fellows: 'man r u lookin 4 a college or a hook up
center......i wonder at ur audacity of putting up such a post' (http://bit.ly/goenka). A
further oddity from Goenka is that 'boys' and 'girls' pay different fees -
though subtext had no idea why. Certainly there is no suggestion that their
courses are any different. ****** Charles
Clarke visiting professor Charles
Clarke has been appointed a visiting professor in Faith and Public Life to
the newly merged department of Politics, Philosophy and Religion. As Prof
Segal noted in the last edition's letters, given that Clarke is infamous for
his lack of interest in certain humanities subjects, and given that PPR
incorporates philosophy, this appointment is superficially surprising. Could
the whole link perhaps become mutually embarrassing? As it happens such fears
look to be misplaced, and an internet search reveals that Clarke, somewhat
surprisingly, approves of philosophy, indeed he 'advocated pupils studying
philosophy, his own subject at university' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2712833.stm)
So that's one less thing to worry about. ****** New
private dining room in County South A
new 'private dining room' for staff at last seems to provide what the
university has long been lacking: a designated dining room and common room
where staff and their guests can socialise. An intriguing feature is an area
of comfortable seating and low tables, divided into separate alcoves by soft
screens. It would be sensible for users to check who's in the adjacent
alcoves in order to decide what level of gossip to engage in. On the other
hand, the seating arrangements may have the unintended benefit of improving
the exchange of information among staff. ***************************************************** THE
HUTTON REVIEW AND THE UNIVERSITIES The interim
report of the review on fair pay in the public sector by Will Hutton of
the Work Foundation, recently acquired by the University (see subtext 68),
was published by the Treasury at the beginning of December. Impressively
referenced and thus inclined to inspire confidence in academic readers, it
notes that in universities as in other parts of the public sector with
relative autonomy 'there are significant upward pressures on senior pay', and
includes some interesting material on the pay of Vice-Chancellors. Hutton's
figures show that in the past ten years Vice-Chancellors have done well
compared with four star generals and permanent secretaries in the civil
service. The pay multiple - the gap between the highest and lowest paid
workers - was higher in universities than in any other public sector
institutions, at 15.35, according to the employers' organisation UCEA. In
Russell Group universities the ratio was 19:1, which can be compared with,
for example, a ratio of 9:1 in local authority shire districts. Hutton
found no cases of pay multiples above 20, the government's suggested maximum,
but believes that the figure of 20 is likely to be exceeded soon in the Russell
Group, and that this trend is likely to be followed in the rest of the
university sector. The report argues that some (how much?) of the rise in
Vice-Chancellors' pay can be justified. Hutton notes the emergence of a
global market in university leaders and the increased complexity of
Vice-Chancellors' jobs, as revenue streams have become more complex and
universities have become more active in commercialising research and engaging
more generally with the private sector. This means that as well as 'academic
credibility' Vice-Chancellors are now expected to have financial and business
skills. All of which resonates with the argument of Laurence Hemming in the
latest 'University in Crisis' talk, reported in this issue of subtext, that
universities have become businesses, and that mergers and acquisitions, of
the Work Foundation for example, are bound to follow. The questions of what
counts as fair pay, and who is to decide, remain unanswered: top public
sector salaries, contrary to what the government implied in commissioning
Will Hutton to undertake the review, is still well below private sector
levels, and in a global market where the public-private boundary is
increasingly blurred there is presumably scope for them to rise further. In
this context, considerations of fairness are likely to play only a minor part
- if any part at all. ***************************************************** UNIVERSITY
IN CRISIS On 7
December the third in the series of talks and discussions on The University
in Crisis featured Dr Laurence Paul Hemming, Research Fellow at the
Department of Organization, Work and Technology. In a
philosophically challenging but historically rich talk, Hemming pitted the
ideas of Martin Heidegger against those of fellow 20th-century German philosopher
Jurgen Habermas, in order to advance a view of thinking as a vocation, and a
vocation that has only in exceptional cases been supported by the university
as an institution. While criticising
the Browne Review's marketisation of the university for the way that it made
the student-consumer the ultimate arbiter of value in the university, he
cautioned against a nostalgic idea of the university as a pinnacle of
enlightened modernity which had to be defended. Hemming
said that he himself had had to unlearn much of what he was taught, and that
those who taught best were on the periphery of the institution. Universities, he suggested, have always
been a place of 'the commerce of thinking', not of the avant garde. He cited
some historical exceptions, but suggested that universities have rarely been
at forefront of real thinking, which he located in the humanities. He
discussed a 1980 speech by Habermas which itself cited Peter Weiss' novel
Aesthetics of Resistance, about young workers who defied the Nazis in 1937 by
educating themselves and reappropriating the art and history of their nation,
especially in front of the Pergamon Altar.
But Hemming pointed out that the altar had been excavated in what is
now Turkey and brought back to the new country of Germany as a triumphalist,
colonial act, and that its actual role in Hellenic culture was a
mystery. Its perception as a symbol of
the classical roots of liberal German culture, he argued, was nothing more
than a beguiling fiction. Hemming
suggested that Lancaster University was founded at similar moment of optimism
and national self-redefinition - that of high modernity in Britain, with its
faith in building a strong state and strong economy - hence, in the postwar
period, the weakness of the humanities compared with the social sciences, and
both increasingly having to give way to the sciences. Students at that time received a grant set
at 2/3 of the average wage of a skilled worker. The logic was that we owed it to young
people with their hopes and aspirations, and because of a duty to the future
that needed to be built. At that point
5-7% of the population went to HE. But
with the target for HE participation increasing to 50%, and grants becoming
loans, the logic started to change, and students became consumers. He
suggested that the Browne Review had simply revealed more starkly what has
been the dominant logic of the modern university for the last two or three
decades, that of efficient management.
And, despite the amount of protest, which can be seen as a lightning
rod, he complained that there is no clear statement in the public sphere of
what HE is for; even the protestors themselves seem not to be motivated by
any clear goals. Hemming
quoted Habermas's critique of Heidegger's perpetuation of the 'hidden
curriculum' of the German Gymnasium, with its elitism, idolatry for the
mother tongue, contempt for anything social and polarization between natural
science and the Geisteswissenschaften.
But Hemming rejected Habermas' argument, suggesting that 'a thinking
that thinks the average is not thinking at all', and that 'the highest
thinking lets other thinking be thought'.
Arguing that the social democratic idea of education is about
levelling of opportunity, he asked whether everyone ought to be able to read
classics such as Homer and Pindar. And
if they cannot, he asked, should we simply throw these things away? Or should everyone live in a polis where
these things are thought, and where there are people they can go to who can
think? The
animated discussion that followed centred on whether Hemming was being too
dismissive of student protests, and whether his model of higher education and
thinking in general was too exclusivist and conservative. The lecture series will continue in the New
Year. ***************************************************** THE
WOODLAND FITNESS TRAIL - AND THE PODS The
announcement of the opening of a new Woodland Fitness Trail on campus aroused
as much excitement in the subtext warehouse as anywhere else in the
university. According to LU News, the 2.6 mile route features a series of
'timber exercise stations' - tastefully illustrated in the news item - and
clearly marked entry and exit points that allow for those short of time or
energy to undertake something short of the full circuit. Amanda Chetwynd is
quoted as saying that the 'trail is designed for all levels of fitness,
whether you want to do a five mile run...or just go for a leisurely stroll'.
(The five mile run would presumably involve going round the circuit twice.) The
only problem for the subtext collective has been that despite its length and
clear signposting the Trail has proved difficult to find. Research which we
are happy to share with readers suggests that a good starting point is on the
A6 on the latitude of The Croft, where a new entrance to the campus has been
created. This may not be a practical option for those wanting to use the path
for a spot of exercise between lectures. Another
woodland puzzle encountered by subtext researchers is the arrival of two
near-spherical wooden structures in the woods to the west of the LICA
building. Vaguely Scandinavian in appearance when viewed from a distance,
they turn out on closer inspection to contain not a stove for a sauna but
cushioned benches along most of their circumference. At the moment they are
accessible only by people prepared to cross several yards of mud churned up
by contractors' vehicles (subtext investigators managed it because the mud
was frozen), but this state is presumably temporary and not part of a plan to
provide users with a bracing survivalist-style experience. Subsequent
research disclosed that the near-spheres are technically 'pods'; they were
part of the original specification for the LICA building and will be used for
'break-outs' from LICA, in more clement climatic conditions. ***************************************************** STUDENT
RENT RISES The
Finance Committee has passed a proposal to increase student rents from next
year by 6.9%. This will bring the cheapest room on campus to £69. Most rooms
on campus are now en suite and cost substantially more - £90 upwards. Are
these rents fair? Or are students being exploited? When
subtexters were young, and the Young Ones were on telly, students paid low
rent and lived in rubbish houses. All
has changed. While in the olden days universities provided halls to
undergraduates as part of university services, now students' accommodation is
seen as a canny investment opportunity for pension funds, and overseas
investors. Since 2003 student residences at Lancaster University have been
managed and redeveloped by UPP (University Partnerships Programme) who
financed refurbishments and new buildings when the university couldn't afford
them and now has a partnership agreement with the university until 2051. The
minutes of the Finance Committee say that the contract with UPP requires
rents to increase yearly at a level at least 1.5% above the Retail Price
Index, but do not explain why rent increases of 6.9% have been agreed for
next year. Rents on campus have increased rapidly over the last few years not
only because of over-inflation rent increases but also as a result of
improvements to the halls. The level of provision at Lancaster seems to
compare well with other institutions. Lancaster won the 2010 award for halls
of residence in the National Student Housing Survey, which measures 'levels
of resident satisfaction', so something is working, though the rents seem
pricey. How
do the rents for on-campus accommodation compare with those in town? In
private accommodation, a room in a shared house without utilities can be
expected to cost between £50 and £65. Rooms with utilities included cost £75
upwards. Private halls of residence are also available in Lancaster through
CityBlocks and CableStreet. Such accommodation is marketed as luxury
accommodation whereby students pay to avoid 'traditional student living'. In
pictures on the net the halls look nice. Very nice. Nicer than the houses of
subtexters. Dishwashers and Sky TV are standard. In a Youtube video, the
manager of CableStreet explains that he manages to rent 100% of his rooms
because he seeks to treat residents like 'hotel guests'. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkm1qawZROQ)
But of course they also pay like hotel guests, in the region of £100 a week. What
can we conclude? Student rents are much higher in real terms than they used
to be. At least part of the reason is that students are willing to pay more
for accommodation that is nice, clean and comfortable (and in some cases has
dishwashers, large screen LCD TV, fast broadband etc etc). Still, a rent
increase of 6.9% for university accommodation at a time when inflation is low
appears steep. Rents on campus will remain comparable to those in private
halls in town though whether this should be taken to suggest that the rents
are fair, or that the private market fixes its prices along those on campus
is unclear). ***************************************************** FAREWELL
TO THE FAHRENHEIT MARKING SCHEME [Eds:
This is a contributed article from Angus Winchester, Senior Lecturer in the
Department of History and erstwhile member of the Working Party on Degree
Classification.] Details
of the new undergraduate assessment regulations should by now have been
disseminated around campus in preparation for their implementation next
academic year. So now might be a good
time to explain an aspect of the reasoning behind them which has until now
been kept under wraps. subtext readers
might be interested to know that sound graduological principles were applied
by the Working Party in order to harmonise the disparate marking practices of
the sciences and the humanities - and, as so often in One
of the drivers behind the deliberations of the Working Party was the desire
to devise a system which would ensure that all disciplines use the full range
of available marks. While quantitative
subjects are happy to mark up to the full 100%, qualitative subjects, such as
those in the arts, humanities and social sciences, are reluctant to mark
above 75 and only rarely award marks above 80. It
appears that the reason for the lower boundary of first-class work being
placed at 70 lies in the lingering influence of the Fahrenheit temperature
scale: as a temperature of 70° ushers in a pleasant summer day (summer
frocks, cricket on the village green, cream teas on the veranda ...), so
student work worth a mark of 70 induces in the marker a warm glow of satisfaction,
a feeling of contentment that their protégé has reached a high standard of
academic attainment. The reluctance to
award marks of over 80 again mirrors the weather: temperatures of over 80°F
are HOT, and, if much higher than that, unpleasantly so. The rare piece of undergraduate work that
might deserve a mark of over 80 would be uncomfortably good - in danger of
outshining the high standard of scholarship of the marker. Indeed,
the choice of mark parallels the weather across the current marking scale.
Temperatures (and marks) in the low 60s are pleasant enough not to induce a
shudder, whereas a 68 is getting on for balmy summer warmth. Marks (and temperatures) in the 50s are
dull and grey and nothing to write home about; in the 40s disappointing and
something of a write-off; below 40 pretty grim and raw. The
new system devised by the Working Party cunningly preserves this
principle. Now that Fahrenheit has
yielded to Celsius, so Lancaster is (belatedly?) giving up the 0-100 scale
(in reality, in the humanities, the more temperate 30-80 scale) and replacing
it with a system more in keeping with the modern weatherman. The new 'aggregation scores' run from 0 to
24. In order to maintain the veil of
secrecy obscuring the link between the marking scale and the weather, the new
numerical scheme is hidden behind a set of grades (A-, C+ etc) but the
thinking is still there. The new pass
mark will be an aggregation score of 9, approximately mirroring the temperature
(9oC = 48oF) at which grass starts to grow fresh shoots. In setting a top mark of 24, the humanities
principle is retained: 24°C equals 75°F, the temperature which many would
consider makes for a perfect summer's day.
The Oxbridgean 'whiff of alpha' (for which read 'touch of summer') lives
on! ***************************************************** LETTERS Dear
subtext, I
have just come upon this grammatical delight in the 'official' weekly
Lancaster newsletter: 'Contributions
to the media this week include Professor Cary Cooper (LUMS) on the Times
Higher Education website following his receipt of the Lord Dearing Lifetime
Achievement Award, and also Professor Ruth Wodak (Linguistics and English
Language) who's recent lecture on 1940's Hollywood actress Hedy Lamarr was
published in Der Standard, Vienna.' Undergrads
I teach at Aberdeen from places like Poland and the Czech Republic would
never write WHO'S instead of WHOSE. A
professor I know who teaches English at a swanky American liberal arts
college continually tells me that while he would not object to having to
teach English as a second language, he would object to having to teach it to
those who don't have a first one. Robert
Segal, Univ. of Aberdeen (after twelve years at Lancaster) ***************************************************** The
editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order)
of: Noel Cass, Rachel Cooper (Philosophy), Catherine Fritz, George Green,
Gavin Hyman, Peter Morris, David Smith, Bronislaw Szerszynski and Martin
Widden. |