|
|
subtext |
|
Home |
subtext issue
77 9
June 2011 ***************************************************** '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/. If
you're viewing this using Outlook, the formatting might look better if you
click on the message at the top saying 'Extra line breaks in this message
were removed', and select 'Restore line breaks'. CONTENTS:
editorial, news in brief, more on the Charles Carter building. Apollo,
Phoenix and A C Grayling, the woodland trail, council report, want to be VC?,
student evaluations, letters ***************************************************** EDITORIAL As
we near the end of another undergraduate year, academics confront two opposed
temptations. One is to join in with the widespread sentiment among immediate
colleagues that in general the quality of students' work has deteriorated
since - well, since some hard to specify time when it was better. The other
is to echo the management line that students' work is in a state of
continuous improvement, and that the proof of this is in the increasing
proportion of them who get Firsts and Upper Seconds - a change that,
incidentally, has gratifying results in terms of Lancaster's position in
various league tables. The first
argument is of course what politicians tend to say about school and
university students when they are in opposition; the second is what they tend
to say when they are in government.
This flexibility should make us suspicious of both kinds of
claim. These
polarised positions are reflected in responses to the new marking scheme to
be introduced at Lancaster from the start of the next academic year. The
official line is that, among other things, this will encourage the
recognition of excellent work in those qualitative subjects in which
traditionally no-one ever gets more than 75%. A more critical position is
that it may indeed lead to the award of more first class marks, but that the
point of it is less to ensure that high achievement is duly rewarded (and
non-achievement duly penalised) than to inflate grades and thus raise
Lancaster's standing in the league tables still further. No-one
knows, of course, what the effects of the new scheme will be. A sudden
spectacular increase in the proportion of Firsts might lift Lancaster in the
league tables, but would justifiably lead to suspicion that this was merely an
artefact of the new system of marking. subtext - like, we think, the academic
community at large - will keep a sceptical eye on its operation, opposing
artificial grade inflation while accepting that there is some work that
deserves more than the traditional top limit of 75%. ***************************************************** NEWS
IN BRIEF Departure
of Commercial Director David
Peeks, the Commercial Director in the Facilities Division, is to leave the
University later this year, after 12 years at Lancaster, where he was
responsible for what most people think of as Catering, the Conference Centre,
and, latterly, the college bars. subtext has on
occasions been critical of Mr Peeks, but is happy now to wish him well as he
pursues his career elsewhere, and will await with interest the appointment of
his successor. ***** Climbing
Wall The
climbing wall in the new sports centre has been installed. Climbers wanting a
sneak preview can find some photos here: http://www.hangfastclimbing.com/?p=777 ***** Further
expansion at Goenka Lancaster
already offers degrees in management subjects through the GD Goenka World Institute of Higher Education (GDGWI),
India. Students are taught by local staff, but follow a curriculum designed
by Lancaster University. On graduation they receive Lancaster University
degrees. The first cohort of students taking degrees in management subjects
through the Lancaster-Goenka partnership graduate
this year. This autumn, the provision of Lancaster degrees through Goenka expands to include three engineering degrees
(Mechanical Engineering, Electronic and Electrical Engineering, Computer
Systems Engineering). subtext 67 includes discussion of the pros and cons of
Lancaster's overseas links. ***** Open
Garden event On
Sunday 12 June the garden at Clearbeck House,
Higher Tatham LA2 8PJ will be open to visitors from
2.00 to 4.30, by permission of the owners Peter and Bronwen
Osborne. This is one of the most
remarkable gardens in the Lune Valley, created entirely by the owners, and is
well worth a visit. Sunday's event
(admission £3) is put on in aid of the funds of the Haffner
Orchestra, and there will be live music played in the grounds throughout the
afternoon, as well as a home produce stall, second-hand books and teas. If you can't make it on Sunday, there are
other open days: see http://www.clearbeckgarden.org.uk.
***************************************************** MORE
ON THE CHARLES CARTER BUILDING: PIGEONHOLES The
recent opening of this fine addition to the Management School has brought to
light a further example of extravagance which astonished even subtext. A
simple question: how much might a set of departmental pigeonholes cost? You
know the ones, usually built of wood and hung on a wall either inside or
outside an office. They offer easy access to post and allow staff to collect
letters, books etc. What do readers think? £100? £500? Maybe £1000 for a
large one with staff names picked out in gilt? It seems that the individual
departments housed in the building requested staff pigeonholes from an early
stage. A simple matter, one might have thought, but it seems the request was
forgotten or ignored as the project progressed. Rumour has it that such
trappings are frowned upon by those making the decisions on interior design
and, after all, they obviously know what staff and departments need because
they consult with and listen to the users.
However, the request resurfaced as the building neared completion,
only this time it was more insistent. The
outcome? Somewhat surprisingly, it was
agreed that pigeonholes were to be provided. All well and good but for some
reason the matter was referred to the project architects. As one might expect
they did what architects do and designed a set of pigeonholes - well, three sets
actually, one for each department. Freestanding in open plan space they can
now be seen and admired. On one side they provide a mix of locking individual
pigeonholes complete with letterbox, complemented by a number of small
drawers which must have some purpose though no one subtext consulted could
identify it. On the other side one finds a mixture of lockers, presumably for
cycle helmets, shopping bags and the like. This multi-purpose storage
solution is clearly the 'future', as comedian Peter Kay used to say of garlic
bread. However, users have identified at least one important drawback, namely
the size of the letterbox hole. With a little bending letters of varying
sizes can be posted into the locked compartments but bulkier items, such as
books, are a different matter. Ah yes, the cost of these state of the art
pigeonholes? £6655 plus VAT each, a total of £23,958. subtext
would be interested to know who authorised expenditure of this kind, all the
more so given questions about fitness for purpose. Any information welcome. ***************************************************** APOLLO,
PHOENIX AND A C GRAYLING subtext's collective eye has been caught by
two recent news items about private, for-profit institutions of higher
education. The institutions in question are of very different kinds. One
is BPP, which claims to be the only private, for-profit institution in the UK
to hold degree-awarding powers (since 2007), and was granted university
status by David Willetts in July 2010. Since 2009
BPP has been owned by Apollo Global, a subsidiary of the Apollo Group, the
biggest for-profit provider of higher education in the USA. BPP has over
36,000 students, taking courses in accountancy, business and law. Most of the
teaching is online, though some non-virtual contact is also offered. The BPP
website lists 28 'UK locations', eight of them in London. The nearest to
Lancaster is said to be Preston, but the interested web surfer will find that
all the courses there are run by BPP's Manchester office, and the only Preston
facilities mentioned are those of the University of Central Lancashire. The
scale of BPP is dwarfed by Apollo's main institution, the University of
Phoenix, which in terms of numbers is the largest university in the USA, with
a student body of 500,000. An article by Howard Hotson
in the latest London Review of Books suggests, however, that this spectacular
figure may now be in decline: the University of Phoenix is under official
investigation in several states for possible malpractice, and numbers of new
students fell in the last quarter of 2010.
On 2 June the Times Higher reported a 'write-down' of the value of
BPP, following a similar downgrade of the University of Phoenix, as a result
of the recruitment of lower than expected numbers for finance and
accountancy. This news may mean that Hotson's
conclusion, that what we are seeing now is 'just the beginning' of the growth
of this kind of higher education in the UK, is unduly pessimistic - or
perhaps not, since numbers at BPP could grow again when more of its students
are studying for degrees and are eligible for student loans. Dodgy
in a different way (or arguably so) is the New College of the Humanities
whose foundation was reported in the Guardian on 6 June. For a fee of £18,000
a year, its students will have the opportunity to be lectured to by, among
others, A C Grayling, Linda Colley and Steven Pinker. They will also be
expected to be 'science literate', thanks to lectures by such as Richard
Dawkins and the physicist Lawrence Krauss of Arizona State University (on no
account to be confused with the University of Phoenix). These luminaries and
their students will be very much co-present with their students - nothing virtual about this institution - and students will also
have weekly Oxbridge-style one-to-one tutorials, though not with anyone very
famous. They will have 12-13 contact hours each week. This is not so
different from what Lancaster's FASS students get, if a quick calculation in
the subtext warehouse is correct. But according to Grayling, speaking to the
Guardian in defence of his choice of the private route, that level of contact
will be unsustainable in public universities with the present level of
funding, and more will begin to think about going 'independent'. Grayling's
initiative has met with a ferocious response from Lancaster's own Terry
Eagleton, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/06/ac-graylings-new-private-univerity-is-odious.
Plenty more on recent developments on the Guardian website. ***************************************************** THE
WOODLAND TRAIL The
woodland trail has been open for some time, but a combination of bad weather
and laziness has prevented a review until now. The trail is 2.6 miles long
and goes round the perimeter of the campus. The most obvious access points
are close to the start of the northern cycle track into town, and on either
side of Bigforth Drive immediately as one turns off
the A6. The path is also easy enough to find throughout the eastern,
motorway-hugging, part of its length. Simply head up the banking and it's a few metres into the trees. Although one would think
that following a trail around the perimeter of the campus would be
straightforward, it's easy to lose it on the south west sections. Still,
given that one knows roughly where one's heading, it's simple enough to pick
up again. Given
that much of the route goes through what might be more accurately called
'road verge with a few trees' rather than 'woodland', it's surprisingly
pleasant. The section close by the motorway is, of course, affected by
traffic noise, but it's still possible to hear a few of the louder
birds. A sign promises that a wide
range of wildlife, including 120 bird species, bats, and deer, live in the
area. Taking this too literally and actually looking for them will likely
lead to disappointment, but you will see some sheep in the distance. South
east sections of the trail offer good views out towards the moors. Close to Bailrigg House the route passes by the organic garden and
chicken coop maintained by Green Lancaster.
Until a few days ago there was also a section of trees hung with
magnifying glasses on the northern side of the trail. These were very pretty,
but most of them have now gone. Whether an art project has finished or
they've been stolen is unclear, but now only two
magnifying glasses remain. The
trail surface is mainly woodchip, with wooden boardwalks over the boggiest
areas. It's currently good for running or walking on, but will clearly
require regular maintenance. The trail is already being used by some horse
riders, and without regular top-ups the wood chips will eventually sink
beneath the mud. All in all, though, the woodland trail is a very good thing.
Sections are very pretty, and for runners it's much better than jogging round
the perimeter road. ***************************************************** COUNCIL
REPORT At
the latest meeting of the University Council, due to the indisposition of
several of his D-Floor colleagues, the Vice-Chancellor was called upon to
make a number of extra presentations and introduce agenda items on their
behalf. Perhaps Council is simply getting its money's worth in the short time
the VC has left! The
meeting started with a presentation on the 'Lancaster Student Experience'.
This was a summary of the results of a survey carried out by the
Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Colleges and the Student Experience. It was no
surprise to see amongst the 'wish list' for students: no hidden course costs,
increased academic contact, free access to sports and improved social spaces.
Comparisons with other institutions already show Lancaster in a favourable
light and further advances are being made in quiet study areas, the college
advisor system and more work placements. The
Vice-Chancellor reported on the official opening of LICA and the Charles
Carter building. He also confirmed planning approval for a single wind
turbine on the Hazelrigg site. Nationally we are
still waiting for the promised white paper - now expected at the end of June.
The Vice-Chancellor also confirmed that his final date in office will be the
7th of December. The
President of LUSU reported that after a closely fought battle Lancaster
narrowly lost out in this year's Roses event. He reported that the LUSU
Strategic Plan has been completed and is now ready to be passed by the
Trustee Board and LUSU Council. The President also thanked the members of
Council who visited the LUSU offices and given him their support in looking
for expansion room. The NUS Conference took place over Easter with Liam Burns
being elected as the new President of NUS. A LUSU team have been on a
fact-finding trip to Sunway University in Malaysia, where they had extremely
positive meetings with staff and students. The
Pro-Chancellor then gave a long and detailed description of the processes put
in place to find a new Vice-Chancellor. Uncharacteristically, he then opened
the floor to debate and discussion. He stated that in order to progress
things as swiftly as possible he had set up a 'Proto-Committee' and that this
has now formed the basis of the actual Search Committee. He said he is happy
with Senate's decision to elect its own representatives and delighted with
the selection of Gavin Brown and Clare Powne. The
head-hunting company has already had a series of talks with a range of university
staff. The
Chief Operating officer reported that the new Sports Centre is now expected
to be opened in July. Work on Alexandra Square is now complete, and both the
LICA and Charles Carter buildings have been shortlisted for an award by the
Royal Institute of British Architects. Council
approved a proposal to name a laboratory after a company who is giving
financial support to the university. The AEROFLEX Wireless Broadband
Laboratory will be located in the School of Computing and Communications. ***************************************************** WANT
TO BE VC? Amongst
the vacancies currently advertised on the university website one in
particular stands out. The ad for VC
says that 'Candidates will have a record of distinguished leadership
experience gained in a complex, knowledge intensive organisation, underpinned
by significant management and budgetary responsibilities. Academic
credibility and the ability to provide effective external representation will
be essential.' One wonders whether 'knowledge intensive organisation' means 'university'?
Possibly not. Pay is negotiable and will include a Performance Related
Element. Presumably applicants can expect something similar to the pay of the
current VC, which in 2010 was £215,000 (http://www.lancs.ac.uk/press/pdf/ar10.pdf).
Staff who fancy their chances should be working on
their CVs. The deadline is close, but how close is unclear. The advert says
12th June, the further details say 16th. ***************************************************** CONTRIBUTED
ARTICLE STUDENT
EVALUATIONS Sam
Clark, PPR Many
of us will by now have been emailed the results of student evaluations of
courses we've taught this year: at the end of a module, our students are
invited to fill in an online form mixing Likert-type
questions (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) with free comment
boxes. Any good teacher wants to know how well her teaching is going, but
here are three reasons to doubt that forms like this are going to tell her. 1.
Irrelevant correlations: many studies suggest that evaluation scores don't
reliably track teaching quality. For example, high scores are instead
correlated with teachers who: (a) match gender stereotypes in dress, mien,
and social behaviour [1]; (b) mark generously, or more generously than
students expect [2]; and (c) present in an enthusiastic style, regardless of
content [3]. 2.
Anonymity breeds contempt: as anyone who's read youtube
comments knows, anonymity encourages some people to speak expressively and
without normal filters: to say things they'd never say to your face, haven't
really thought about, and couldn't defend. There's good reason to make
anonymous channels of communication available to our students, but not owning
their words in evaluations may not promote honesty or usefulness, let alone
civility. 3.
Competent judges? Evaluations may tell us whether our students like us and
our teaching or not. But if we want to know whether we're good teachers of
our subjects, why think our students are competent to judge? They typically
have no teaching experience. They don't know what they don't know, or what
they need to know, or how to gain that knowledge. The best learning is often
unsettling, inconclusive, and not what we expected. Perhaps someone in the
middle of that difficult process of development isn't in the best position to
judge how well it's going. None
of these are reasons to stop listening and responding to our students, but
they are reasons to wonder whether the evaluation tools we use actually tell
us what we want to know. What would be better? I don't know. But perhaps the
first question to ask is whether a human relationship as complex as that
between teacher and learner can be made legible by any such bureaucratic
device. References: 1. Kierstead, D., D'Agostino, P., & Dill, H., 'Sex Role Stereotyping of
College Professors: Bias in Students' Ratings of Instructors, Journal of
Educational Psychology 80(1988): 342-4. 2. Greenwald, A. & Gillmore,
G., 'Grading Leniency is a Removable Contaminant of Student Ratings',
American Psychologist 11(1997): 1209-17. 3. Naftulin, D.,
Ware, J., & Donnelly, F., 'The Doctor Fox Lecture: A Paradigm of
Educational Seduction', Journal of Medical Education 48(1973): 630-5. Further
discussion: Adams,
J., 'Student Evaluations: The Ratings Game', http://www.vccaedu.org/inquiry/inquiry-fall97/i12-adam.html
(accessed 3.vi.11) Glymour, C., 'Why the University
Should Abolish Faculty Course Evaluations', http://www.hss.cmu.edu/philosophy/glymour/glymour-universityFCE2003.pdf
(accessed 3.vi.11) Heumer, M., 'Student
Evaluations: A Critical Review', http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/sef.htm
(accessed 3.vi.11) ***************************************************** LETTERS Dear
subtext Just
to be picky I'll think you'll find the deposed councillors (in the university
ward) were both Greens, not Lib Dems. Paul
Smith, Research Associate in Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre [Quite
right and our mistake. According to the Council website, in 2007 in the
University Ward the successful candidates were Ian David McCulloch (Green
Party) and Morgwn Trolinger
(Green Party). The Lib Dem candidates each got only 12% of the vote. In the
2011 election the Greens went from 12 down to 8 councillors - due, they
reckon, to a combination of longstanding councillors standing down, and some
very energetic campaigning by Labour - Eds.] ***** Dear
subtext Interesting
to read your comments about the new Charles Carter Building. I've
walked past it many times but never ventured inside. The
sign above the door says 'Charles Carter'. Was there not enough space to add
'Building'? At least the building has a name sign from its opening; it took a
couple of years for Infolab to have a sign. I
imagine an open day tour one day will pause outside the new building. Guide:
'This is the Charles Carter Building. Charles Carter was the first ever VC of
Lancaster University.' Prospective student: 'I see that building over there
is called The George Fox Building. Was he the second VC?' Steve
Elliott, School of Computing and Communications ***************************************************** The
editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order)
of: Rachel Cooper (PPR), George Green, Gavin Hyman, David Smith, Bronislaw
Szerszynski and Martin Widden. |