|
|
subtext |
|
Home |
subtext issue
81 17th
November 2011 ***************************************************** 'Truth:
lies open to all' ***************************************************** Every
fortnight during term-time. All
editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors@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 (course consultants' contracts, new Chemistry
department, more ex-staff turn to the creative arts), Business Process
Review, LUSU fails to support London protests, infill between campus and
Lancaster outskirts, more links with China, T H Mawson
and Bailrigg House, news on the new V-C, letters. ***************************************************** EDITORIAL A
happy workforce is a productive workforce.
This has been the finding of innumerable studies, admittedly often in
factory environments where productivity is easier to measure than in
universities, but all the same it seems self-evidently true. And these studies further find that what
makes for a happy workforce is: control over one's own work, providing space
for experimentation and failure (because fear of failure prevents
improvement), a positive and optimistic work environment, and keeping
everyone informed of what is going on.
Fortunately,
Lancaster University mostly meets these requirements fairly well. The benefits are to be seen in colleagues'
readiness to collaborate, in contrast to some universities where people in
different departments barely speak to one another. There is also a healthily egalitarian
feeling about the place, which has existed since its foundation. One
might hope that University House, the administrative centre of the
University, would set a leading example in creating and maintaining a
positive and optimistic work environment, but it seems that unfortunately
this is not everywhere the case. The
word at the grass roots is that some sections of the administration would
score poor marks on the criteria for a happy workforce: at some levels there
is a feeling of insecurity and a fear of failure, and people who are not at
the top of the tree are often not informed of what is happening. At a
time when the University is embarking on a review of its administrative
processes (see below: Business Process Review), the centre may need to put
its house in order just as much as, or possibly more than, other parts of the
organisation. ***************************************************** NEWS
IN BRIEF Course
Consultants' Contracts Those
of us who, as well as our work at Lancaster, act as University course
consultants to local colleges have recently been asked to sign variable-hours
contracts which are intended to relate only to this aspect of our work at the
University. But the contract contains
the wording 'this agreement and engagement [constitute] the entire terms and
conditions of your employment. They
cancel and are in substitution for any previous letters of appointment or
contracts of employment and all other agreements and arrangements relating to
your employment by the University.' University
House is assuring us it is OK to go ahead and sign this, because it doesn't
really mean what it says. Not
surprisingly, many are refusing to do so, and are asking why, if this clause
of the contract is so obviously wrong, it is not
removed immediately. It looks as if an
old form of contract has been used without checking that all of the clauses
are appropriate. Surely it would be a
simple job to correct the wording of the contract, and reissue it to all the
consultants? HR should be able to do
this in their sleep.... shouldn't they? ******* New
Chemistry Department The
chemistry department at Lancaster closed in the late 1990s, with some staff
leaving for Sheffield, and others being transferred into LEC. As we've noted before, plans are now afoot
to found a new department. Since the closure of the previous department, the
numbers of students taking chemistry at A-level have increased markedly, and
numbers applying for university courses are expected to rise. Senate agreed
to support the proposal at its 12 October meeting, and subject to approval
from Council, a new department will be created. ****** More
ex-staff turn to the creative arts Anthony
Marsella (once Director of Marketing and External
Affairs, now novelist) may have started a trend. Alasdair McKee, who used to
work in ISS, is now an Insensitive Singer-songwriter. He will be performing
at the Gregson Centre on Sunday 4th December 8 pm
(tickets £5), and he has good reviews: 'He has a very good line in jokes'
(Sunday Times); 'Had me laughing like a studio audience' (Glasgow Herald);
'Excellent' (Edinburgh Festival Times). ***************************************************** BUSINESS
PROCESS REVIEW Many
subtext readers will have received an email from the Vice-Chancellor on
Monday giving an update on the Business Process Review. This review of the administrative processes
of the University started last February, with workshop sessions involving
staff across Faculties and Central Services.
To no one's surprise, these workshops are reported to have identified
a number of areas where performance could be improved. The Review is now on the point of getting
going in earnest: the email newsletter from HR Dept dated 6 November 2011
says 'it is expected that the Process Review will commence this month'. According to the Process Review web site,
'teams drawn from Faculties and Central Services are now focusing on more
detailed process re-design' (see http://centralinfo.lancs.ac.uk/sites/processreview2011/SitePages/Home.aspx). Support and advice for the Review are being
provided by a firm of consultants. No
doubt efficiency can be raised and performance improved in the administration
of Lancaster University, which is a large organisation with a variety of aims
which often compete for resources and time; but subtext suggests the Review
should look at the strengths of the present organisation and take care to
preserve them, as well as improving any areas of underperformance. This University has performed remarkably
well in many ways in recent years. As
just one example, the high grades achieved recently in student feedback and
in areas such as graduate careers are in part a reflection of the personal,
face-to-face support that students get at Lancaster, which students at other
universities may not receive, and in part due to exhaustive data-gathering. This is just one area where the University
might leave well alone, rather than risk losing its excellent reputation in a
narrow pursuit of efficiency. Apparently,
one factor driving this Review is the finding that admin costs and staffing
levels at Lancaster are higher than the norm for 94 Group universities. This is certainly a change from the early
years of the University, when one of its unusual features was that it did not
have Faculties: some of the admin work that in most universities was carried
out centrally or by Faculty offices was done here by departments. This highly devolved arrangement was
economical when it placed the administrator in immediate close contact with
the department whose affairs were being administered. About
1990, the V-C of that time, Harry Hanham,
introduced a Faculty structure. Since
then, the Faculty offices have gradually expanded, their functions often
overlapping those of University House or of departments. The division of responsibilities among
these three layers appears to have grown in an unplanned way, and the present
arrangement looks unwieldy. One
would feel confident that the Review process will be objective and impartial
if it did not have on its Steering Committee three of the four Faculty deans
plus a representative of the fourth, and the heads of the University's
central administrative divisions, but no representatives at all of
departments. This is fine if the
intention is to devolve some of the admin functions currently in Uni House out to the Faculties. If on the other hand the Steering Committee
considers removing admin functions from departments to Faculty admin offices,
it will need some representation of departments. ***************************************************** LUSU
FAILS TO SUPPORT LONDON PROTESTS Last
week's student protests in London against cuts passed peacefully,
although numbers were lower that at the 2010 demonstrations. As noted in
subtext 80, this time there was no official Lancaster representation, and now
we can add more details as to why. In a notice posted on LUSU's website a
week before the protest, LUSU announced that it would not be supporting the
demonstration. The note explains: 'With just over a week to go until the
event, we are concerned that the correct procedures have not been carried out
to ensure the safety and security of all those that attend. Since student
safety is of paramount importance to us, LUSU will not be endorsing or
supporting the anti-cuts demonstration.' In
responding to complaints from the group Lancaster University Against the
Cuts, the LUSU President sought to justify LUSU's stance by pointing to
advice given to local unions by the NUS - see
http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/asset/News/6001/NCAFC_211011.pdf.
This was produced in response to queries from local unions who had concerns
about legal aspects of the demonstration and health and safety issues. Local
student unions are charities and as such have to comply with the various
guidelines of the Charity Commission. With regard to Campaigning and
Political Activities, these impose certain duties on Charity Trustees. For
example, Trustees have a duty to minimise the possibility of reputational
damage to the charity, and must do all they can to ensure that all proposed
activities fall within the law. A slight complication in the case of the 9
November demonstrations was that the organiser was the National Campaign
Against Fees and Cuts (NCAFC), rather than the NUS. This meant that local
unions would have to take the word of an independent organisation that proper
measures had been put in place regarding coordination with the police,
appropriate provisions being made for disabled students, and so on. While
statements from LUSU imply that they were merely following NUS advice in
failing to support the demonstration, the actual advice given on the NUS
website left it open for local unions to choose whether or not to support the
demonstration as they thought best.
The NUS advised those unions who chose to support the protests of the
duties of Trustees, and suggested that, for example, they should give
participants advice on 'how to keep safe, avoid trouble, be peaceful and law
abiding etc'. Local unions were also told that they should have 'carried out
a risk assessment and carefully considered the steps necessary to take to minimise
or mitigate the risk of public order or criminal offences being committed at
the demonstration by either trustees or officers of the charity, or other
students taking part.' A
brief look on the internet suggests that local unions responded very
differently to this guidance. Like LUSU, the union at The University of
Nottingham (http://www.su.nottingham.ac.uk/news/article/6001/3221/)
failed to support the demonstration. The union at King's College London
supported the protests and sought to fulfil its obligations by advising
participants that 'The November 9th demonstration is a peaceful action, and
both NUS and the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts have always called
explicitly for non-violent direct action. We recommend that you stick
together as a group and look after each other's safety and remind you that
all students attend at their own risk' (http://kclsu.org/page.asp?section=939§ionTitle=9+November+Demo). Hull student union (http://www.hullstudent.com/union/news/index.php?page=article&news_id=282023)
also supported the protests, this time with no warnings or disclaimers. Looking
at the Charity Commission and NUS guidelines, both the LUSU interpretation of
the NUS guidance, and the NUS interpretation of the Charity Commission
requirements, appear hyper-cautious. It's a sad day
when Student Unions decide not to support protests against cuts to education
on the grounds of Health and Safety. ***************************************************** INFILL
BETWEEN CAMPUS AND LANCASTER OUTSKIRTS? The
City Council web site carries, in its Planning section, details of a possible
'high-quality urban extension' of Lancaster, which would develop the whole of
the green space between the north end of the campus and the Burrowbeck and Hala housing at
the southern edge of Lancaster. This
area, amounting to 46.5 hectares, or 115 acres, is bounded on the east by the
M6; on the west, it incorporates the proposed Science Park, which gives it a
short frontage to the A6. At
this stage the whole thing appears to be a purely speculative proposal by the
owners of the land. They envisage a
mixed-use development of 970 houses, which they optimistically describe as an
academic quarter, presumably because it would include the Science Park. There
are some obvious problems with this site.
It is crossed by national grid high-voltage power lines, beneath which
development is restricted. Access to
the site is very limited: the only access to a major route appears to be
through the Science Park on to the A6
- but the A6 is already close
to its capacity: some would say beyond it, at certain times of day. It could be argued that brown-field sites
within the existing developed city area would be better candidates for
development. But some version of this
scheme might just happen all the same, because Lancaster needs to build more
housing, the district is very short of development sites, and brown-field
sites in the city are more difficult and costly to develop. ***************************************************** MORE
LINKS WITH CHINA The
university website has announced an agreement between Lancaster University
and Guangdong University of Foreign Studies (GDUFS) to establish a new
university campus in China. Students will follow Lancaster-designed syllabi,
and, if they wish, will be able to transfer to Lancaster to complete the
later parts of their studies. Initial subjects will be English and
linguistics, along with business, management and computing courses. In the university's second year, courses in
environmental science, bioscience and mechanical engineering will be added,
and later subjects in the humanities and social sciences will be introduced
(but probably not in religious studies, for reasons that will be explained
below). A
confusing aspect of the announcement is that 'GDUFS will identify and appoint
an investor to build the new campus in the Guangdong Province of China,
subject to approval by Lancaster. The investor will cover the set-up and
initial operating costs of the campus, including facilities and staffing' -
which makes it sound as if, as yet, there's no money behind the project. An
announcement by The People's Government of Foshan
Municipality provides more details (http://www.foshan.gov.cn/english/government/News/FoshanNews/201110/t20111031_3103040.html). Here we are assured that 'In line with the
Regulations on China-Foreign Cooperation on Running Schools, the mainstay of
the school is run by the Chinese side, with the principal appointed by the
Chinese side.' The Regulations of the People's Republic of China on
Chinese-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools are available online (http://www.china.org.cn/english/education/184658.htm).
Article 5 is of special interest. This states that 'Chinese-foreign
cooperation in running schools shall abide by the laws of China, implement
China's educational policies, comply with Chinese public ethics and shall not
jeopardize China's sovereignty, security and public interests.' Furthermore, 'Chinese-foreign cooperation
in running schools shall meet the needs of the development of China's
educational cause, ensure teaching quality and make efforts to train all
kinds of talents for China's socialist construction.' Article 7 states that 'Chinese-foreign
cooperatively-run schools shall not offer religious education.' The
increasing drive to develop campuses overseas opens up a range of concerns
(as discussed in subtext 67). How will the quality of courses be ensured? In
the long run, do such initiatives help or hinder the development of higher
education in partner countries? How will Lancaster deal with different
expectations regarding issues such as academic freedom? While
Lancaster expands into China, China also makes inroads into Lancaster. A 'Confucius
Institute' is set to open in Lancaster, and will be located in the
Roundhouse, which is currently being refurbished. Such Institutes are funded
by the Chinese government and seek to promote instruction in Chinese
languages and culture. In the UK,
there are already a number of Confucius Institutes, including centres at the
universities of Liverpool, Edinburgh, Manchester, Nottingham, Sheffield,
Cardiff, and Central Lancashire. In the U.S., in particular, some institutes
have become sources of controversy, with, for example, rumours of pressure
being brought to bear to prevent discussion of topics on sensitive issues,
such as Tibet (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-01/china-says-no-talking-tibet-as-confucius-funds-u-s-universities.html). For the most part, however, it appears that
Institutes provide courses in Chinese languages and culture, with few
explicit restraints being placed on their activities - any censorship that
occurs is more likely to be self-imposed rather than explicitly demanded.
Still, even if academic freedom at the new Institute can be ensured it should
be borne in mind that the Chinese government is unlikely to be funding
Chinese studies at Lancaster for purely disinterested reasons. In an analysis
of the role played by Institutes, James Paradise concludes: 'Maybe the best
way to think of the Confucius Institute project is as a type of impression
management, an effort by China to craft a positive image of itself in a world
fraught with danger. Faced with tremendous anxiety about China in the U.S.
and other major trading partners, Confucius Institutes help create the
impression of a kinder and gentler China.' (Paradise, James, 2009, 'China and
International Harmony: The Role of Confucius Institutes in Bolstering
Beijing's Soft Power', Asian Survey, 49: 647-669). ***************************************************** T H
MAWSON AND BAILRIGG HOUSE Born
in Scorton just south of Lancaster in 1861, Thomas
H Mawson became one of the most successful
landscape architects of the early 20th century. With his two brothers, he started a garden
nursery and contracting business in Windermere in 1885: the other brothers
were to look after the contracting, while Thomas developed the garden design
side of the business. Within just a
few years he had secured major contracts to design the gardens of large
houses in the Lake District, and over the following 25 years he designed over
100 gardens in the UK for private clients.
Overseas, he designed gardens in the USA, Canada, and several European
countries, including the Peace Gardens at The Hague. His
later work, done from the T H Mawson firm's
practice in High Street, Lancaster, included the gardens of Bailrigg House for Herbert Storey, at the northern end of
what is now the University campus.
This Arts and Crafts-style house, built in 1902 to designs by the
Liverpool architects Woolfall and Eccles, was grade
2 listed by English Heritage as of special architectural interest in
2005. The listing includes the
structural features of the garden. We
are fortunate indeed to have this striking house on the campus, together with
gardens by such a highly-regarded landscape architect. Over the years, the University made
inappropriate changes to the interior of the house, including removing and
scrapping the fine oak internal doors and replacing them with standard fire
doors whose fire performance is probably no better than the ones they
replaced. Along with the house, the
gardens have become rather dilapidated, but there is now a programme of
restoration in progress to restore both the house and the garden. The University really needs to cherish the
good features of its campus: there are not that many of them, and it would be
a sad day if any were lost. ***************************************************** NEWS
ON THE NEW V-C Those
surfing the net for info on the new V-C will find a useful interview with one
Mark E Smith in this Sunday's Independent, at http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/life-lessons-mark-e-smith-on-bullying-the-occult-and-why-stalin-had-the-right-idea-6260036.html. Anyone feeling insecure in the current
economic climate will not be reassured. Smith is reported to hate
psychologists and has an 'occasional propensity for violence'. He believes
'that the pen is mightier than the sword', but unfortunately 'has not always
had a pen to hand'. Smith has a reputation for sacking staff, but claims he
has been misrepresented. 'I've only fired half as many people as you'd think.
The others left, to go back to their humdrum bleeding lives. And that's the
point where they start to appreciate how nice I was to them.' We
look forward with some trepidation to meeting Professor Smith when he starts
in December, and hope he will treat us more gently than he has the members of
The Fall. ***************************************************** LETTERS subtext 80 reported on the election of the Chancellor
at Cambridge University, prompting this response. Dear
subtext editors Another
cultural cringe before the hyper-elitist Cambridge University. There are other, and better universities of which to be jealous, if
we must be. Perhaps fewer people than you would like read subtext because it
can at times be so reactionary and conservative, as the continuing
idealization of Oxbridge demonstrates. Bill
Cooke Organization,
Work and Technology ****** subtext 80 noted that undergraduate applications are
down around 10% across the sector for the next academic year. Dear
Editors Let
us not forget that the number of 'straight out of A level' students is down
on last year as the number of births were in a
steady decline from 1991 until early 2000s.
People always forget that in year-on-year analyses, you must compare
the size of the cohorts for a percentage increase/decrease. So although we are 10% down on raw numbers
of applicants the fact that the pool of just eligible' students is also down
is missed. Thanks, Rebecca
Killick ******* And
we also said that Lancaster was up from tenth last year to seventh this year
in the Guardian rankings, which is apparently wrong. Dear
Editors As
always I very much enjoyed this week's subtext but thought I should write to
correct you on your comments regarding Lancaster's standing in the league tables. Lancaster
actually went from 6th to 7th in The Guardian, went from 8th to 9th in The
Complete University Guide and from 10th to 9th in The Times. Thank
you Leanne
Bates, UK
Student Recruitment & Outreach Manager - Widening Participation ****** And,
finally, subtext 80 wondered whether there were any quiet locations on
campus. Dear
Editors Chaplaincy!
Even when someone's practising piano, it's usually soothingly quiet there.
There may be laughs and chatter in the upstairs lounge (I hope, still), but the
downstairs lounge is typically rather dead. Regrettably! Peter
Burkimsher ***************************************************** 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. |