Category Archives: news

FROM SIX TO FIVE

Speaking of unions, the students’ union is planning a restructure:

https://lancastersu.co.uk/officer-review

The October meeting of its trustee board agreed a reduction in the number of full-time officers from six to five, keeping the President but replacing the proliferation of five Vice-Presidents (activities, campaigns & communications, education, welfare & community, and union development) with four new posts: activities officer, education officer (undergraduate), postgraduate officer, and welfare officer. There will be a referendum in Week 8, and campaign teams for and against are being formed this week.

So, aside from the cosmetic name changes, we’re losing campaigns & communications, and union development, in favour of a full-time postgraduate officer. Not many are likely to oppose the loss of the union development post (formerly the General Secretary, aka ‘the President’s sidekick’), but the loss of a full-time political role in charge of LUSU media is more significant, and as for the proposal that undergraduates should be allowed to both stand and vote for the full-time postgraduate officer – well, good luck justifying that to the PG Board!

Student media at Lancaster is now de-politicised, barring a few exceptions on SCAN’s team, so the loss of a full-time media sabbatical might just reflect reality. The days when SCAN could openly oppose the union’s political strategy are long gone. The activities officer gets to be SCAN’s editor-in-chief, but only as a small part of their brief.

How, though, did the proposal get through to allow undergraduates to vote (and so have the decisive vote) on the postgraduate (who doesn’t have to be a postgraduate) officer? We’re told that, ‘as the officer would be a senior/full-time officer of the students’ union and a trustee, legally any student will be eligible to vote for them. It wouldn’t be restricted to postgraduates.’ What’s more, ‘any full member of the students’ union would be eligible to stand for this role – even if they’re not actually a postgraduate student themselves.’

Our legal correspondent describes this as ‘bollocks’. Exhibit A – UCL Union, which has a sabbatical Postgraduate Students’ Officer, open only to, and chosen only by, postgraduate students. Admittedly, we wouldn’t be the only students’ union to let undergraduates choose its postgraduate officer – Warwick seems to do it, and of course whenever Warwick does anything, Lancaster soon follows.

SHREDDED POSTERS MAKE GOOD SNOWFLAKES

Everyone’s least favourite fascist not-quite-a-student-society has been putting up posters on campus this week. In an unintentional parody of the ‘back to the good old days’ element of their rhetoric, the posters are composed mainly of cut and pasted ‘newspaper headlines’ that actually seem to have been printed off the internet. They are largely sensationalist in tone, with the usual semi-deranged rants about marginalised groups. Keeping up the virtual note, this non-soc suggest you contact them via their social media channels. How about you don’t do that.

HOW TO GET THE ANSWER YOU WANT – A CONSULTATION MASTERCLASS

Lancashire’s schools used to be a mostly academy-free zone. The previous Labour-led administration at County Hall were strongly against them, and even devised a cunning plan to employ if the government ordered them to ‘academise’ every school in the county. This would involve establishing a wholly-owned but technically arms-length company to act as an ‘academy chain in name only’.

How things change. It’s likely that, by the end of 2018, there will be no more local authority controlled mainstream secondary schools in the Lancaster district. In the last 12 months, Heysham High has been taken over by Star Academies (prop. Tauheedul in Blackburn), Carnforth High has been taken over by the Bay Education Trust (prop. Ripley St Thomas) and now the last two, Morecambe High and Central Lancaster High, seem likely to join the Bay Education Trust also.

In Morecambe’s case, this is happening against its will – if you do badly in an Ofsted inspection, you must suffer – but Central’s bid for conversion, which has not yet been confirmed, is voluntary, led by the head and (most of) the governors. An extraordinary meeting of the governing body on Wednesday 21 November will make the final decision, taking the views of parents, teachers and the local community into account.

In theory. Looking at the consultation documents, in particular the formal letter sent to parents by the head on 5 October, subtext predicts a strong majority in favour of conversion. Why? Naturally the letter is careful not to show any bias on the part of its author: ‘Working together […] will enable teachers to share resources and training […]; we hope to make all three of the strong schools in the Trust even better!’ And the response form is a masterpiece of even-handed data gathering, as parents are asked to choose from options 1, 2 and 3:

‘Option 1 – I have a number of comments I would personally like to make and I attach a letter for consideration of the Governing Body.’

‘Option 2 – I would like to know more about the proposals and would be interested in attending a short meeting on 17th October with other parents to ask further questions for clarification.’

‘Option 3 – I am quite happy with the proposals and I don’t need more information.’

In other words, if you just tick the box, we’ll leave you alone; but if you don’t share our vision, you need to tell us WHY, and we want DETAILS, and we want to hear from you PERSONALLY. And if you want to just say you aren’t happy – well, that’s not on the list.

UP ON THE ROOF

Musical subtext readers will be aware of the Lancaster Music Co-op. Founded by former students in 1985 in a semi-abandoned former coachbuilder’s premises, the Co-op has run as a not-for-profit rehearsal rooms and recording studio for 33 years. A lot of people credit the Music Co-op as being the reason that Lancaster has a disproportionately large live music scene for its size (and can thus support large tourist-attracting events such as the Music Festival).

But the Music Co-op is under threat, having recently been handed an eviction notice from Lancaster City Council because their building is unsafe, mainly due to the state of the roof (although curiously – they have six months to depart so there is clearly no immediate danger to life and limb). So what, you might ask, why should we care if a bunch of musos can’t manage their building properly? The wrinkle in this story is that the Music Co-op is an island of creativity in a sea of car parks that has picturesquely been designated the ‘Canal Quarter’ (see subtext 179). And also: the building is owned by the City Council.

The City Council have kept the Music Co-op on an rolling 2-week lease with a peppercorn rent for 30+ years, a lease that effectively prevents them from accessing any funding to develop the premises or the enterprise, as what funder wants to give money to a project that could be kicked out with two weeks notice? And each developer (Centros Miller, British Land) that has been involved in the regeneration of this area of Lancaster has dangled different carrots in terms of rehoming the Co-op or fixing the building. As owners of the building, the Council have done no repairs themselves.

There is an ongoing campaign by the Music Co-op to rescind their eviction notice, which went viral last month, with national press attention and support from The Lovely Eggs (who started at the Co-op), Phill Jupitus, Marc Riley, Sleaford Mods, John Robb and Billy Bragg amongst others. Thousands of people signed a petition to save the Co-op; local MP Cat Smith has called on the Council to sort things out; and within the Council itself a cross-party group of Councillors is pushing for the rescinding of the eviction notice and for constructive talks about how the Co-op can be supported.

Want to know more? You can watch ‘Glass Roof’, the documentary made to celebrate 30 years of the Music Co-op, here: https://youtu.be/UuHCa-khx-Q (get ready to spot at least one member of LU staff, and the most ingenious indoor rainwater diversion device ever!). If you’ve got the urge to donate, you can contribute to their crowdfunder here: https://www.gofundme.com/save-lancaster-music-co-op

WITHERING HEIGHTS

People in the Management School have been confused in recent weeks by signs visible around the fire doors outside Lecture Theatre 4 stating ‘CAUTION: Men Working Overhead’ – many staff on the top floor of LUMS are actually female! On closer inspection, it appears that the signs were put up by Bagnalls Painting & Decorating, who seem to operate a strict men-only policy for work that’s too high for the ladies to reach, even in heels. The subtext collective are left wondering whether University procurement regulations require external contractors to demonstrate equal opportunities practices, and whether we can invite external contractors to Gender Pay Gap meetings.

A LITTLE TOO DRY?

We’re used to seeing the fire brigade on campus, often due to a false alarm, but they were really needed at 10pm on Monday 15 October when a fire started in Furness Launderette due to a faulty dryer. Furness was evacuated, dozens of students gathered to watch from the hill leading to the residence blocks, and the porters were looking worried for a while. Everything was brought under control, fortunately, and the next morning the only sign that all had not been well was that the launderette was closed for repairs. Well done to everyone who worked hard to avert what could have been a very serious incident.

HOME IS WHERE THE OFFSHORE COMPANIES ARE

Choosing somewhere to live as a student is no mean feat. With the advent of ensuite accommodation, the days of a manky shared house and rows over whose milk is whose in the fridge may be gone for many, but there are still hurdles that the student renter has to face, not least: is their hard-borrowed cash ending up helping offshore investors evade UK income tax?

Research by Lancaster City Councillor Tim Hamilton-Cox shows that a number of flats or houses rented out to Lancaster University students are owned or managed by offshore companies:

– 1-3 Cable Street (233 rooms) is part of Global Student Accommodation (GSA). GSA is ultimately incorporated in the Cayman Islands, and the Cable St property is owned by a Jersey company.
– The site of the Bulk Road student village (631 rooms, and nicknamed ‘Asthma Towers’ by one of our long-standing readers), currently under development by American company Hines, is owned by a Jersey-based company called HPH Lancaster Limited.
– A house in Dallas Rd is owned by a Seychelles-based company, and properties on Greaves Rd, Albion St and Prospect St are owned by a Jersey-based company.

This information has been provided to the students’ unions at Lancaster University and University of Cumbria, who will hopefully steer students away from paying rent to these companies in favour of landlords who aren’t avoiding UK taxation.

TOO FEW NUMBER TWOS

Our bus correspondent reports… locals in Bowerham and Hala are becoming increasingly irritated as they realise that what was a rather good number 2 bus service (6 double-deckers an hour) has become a distinctly inferior service (4 single-deckers an hour). This wouldn’t matter so much if they could get a seat, but for much of the day, as subtext readers know very well, this is a forlorn hope. What’s happening?

subtext understands the main problem is that, whereas previously the number 2 only went to and from the underpass, it now makes the circuit of Alexandra Park formerly taken by the number 3 (RIP). If you’re getting on at Cartmel, you’re unlikely to want to change to a number 1 at the underpass, so you’ll sit tight, despite the longer journey time. Hence the number 2 is now trying to ferry more people with fewer buses.

Longer term, the only solution looks like running more double-deckers – which Stagecoach currently doesn’t have. Stagecoach Group plc’s pre-tax profit in 2017-18: £95.3 million.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE

It’s happened. From this week, the teaching day lasts from 9am to 7pm.

And it’s likely to stay that way. Despite the Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s acceptance that the sudden announcement of an extension from 6pm to 7pm (via a staff intranet post in the last week of July) was ‘less than ideal’, and involvement of staff and students’ unions in a task group to ‘mitigate adverse impact’ and develop ‘recommendations for 19/20 and beyond’, nobody is seriously expecting evening lectures to be ceasing any year soon. The students’ union has loudly protested about the loss of time for extra-curricular activities and family life – although we’re still not sure what the dressing up as cows was all about – to no avail.

You’d be forgiven for thinking that this has been caused by an increase in our overall student numbers, but in fact, the number of new registrations in 2018 is nigh on identical to the number of new registrations in 2017. What we have are larger numbers of large courses, trying to fit into the same number of large teaching spaces – i.e. not many.

Here are the figures. If you have a class of 200 or more that wants teaching, there are five places on campus you can put them: Biology Lecture Theatre, Bowland Lecture Theatre, Faraday Lecture Theatre, George Fox Lecture Theatre 1 and, for those seeking the ‘school assembly experience’, the Great Hall. If we want to Keep Wednesday Afternoons Free – and we do – that gives roughly 200 slots available in large theatres over the course of the week. Doesn’t sound too bad … but now assume your class size has gone up to 300. You’ve only got George Fox 1 and the Great Hall to play with, and suddenly the timetable looks likely to fall over.

What’s the solution? Slowly and surely, double teaching has become the norm. Well, after all, you spent so long preparing for that lecture, that it seems a bit of a shame that you only have to give it once, eh? But then … double teaching a class of 300 might mean that you aren’t crowding out the big theatres any more, but now you’re causing logistical hell for the medium sized rooms. Something’s got to give.

Across campus, sage minds have pondered this problem and shrugged their shoulders. What else can you do?

Lectures at 8am, perhaps? They’re the norm in many parts of Europe, after all. A few months ago, Durham made the … courageous decision to bring these in for 2018/19. It didn’t end well: https://www.palatinate.org.uk/exclusive-durham-university-cancels-plans-to-introduce-8am-lectures/

Live-streamed lectures? This is popular with many students – possibly the same students who aren’t great fans of 8am lectures – but has been ruled out by our senior management. ‘I didn’t pay 9 grand in fees to watch lectures in my bedroom’ and so forth.

Our disgruntled moles in the Law School (should that be Law moaners?) have reported that they recently received an entreaty from their Head of Department that there should be no consumption of alcohol during lectures. Perhaps this is one of the coping strategies that students – or staff – have had to resort to when forced to take part in a lecture at a time more usually spent cocktail-making than note-taking.

So 6pm lectures it is, then. Fingers crossed we might get a big new lecture theatre some time soon. We wish the Deputy Vice-Chancellor well in his new position as Dundee’s Vice-Chancellor.

DOCTORIN’ THE PAY GAP

Following the recent rescue of her three new friends from the deadly vacuum of space, and her recollection of who she is, the Doctor is looking forward to new faces, new worlds and new times. Her trusty ship, the TARDIS, whirls through time and space, swerving exploding supernovae and sliding between parallel universes. However, she hasn’t yet remembered how to steer the TARDIS, and so it plummets through a wormhole to arrive in Alexandra Square at Lancaster University on 26th July 2018.

Surveying the external scene on the scanner, the Doctor wonders what they are doing in this 1960s brick-and-concrete landscape, then gasps in horror. There is a Gender Pay Gap! The group of companions demand an explanation – will their teeth be extracted and stuck on anyone’s face? No, this is not as glamorous or exciting as a blue-faced alien tooth-pulling hunter of humans, but a monster that slowly strangles women by denying them equal pay for the same work as men. The Doctor points to the screen – apparently, this place has a Task Group that’s fighting it – let’s go and help them.

Yasmin, Ryan and the Doctor burst out of the TARDIS, and start making their way towards Lecture Theatre 4 in the Management School, whilst Graham lags behind bemoaning the lack of alien excitement and wondering why this place they’ve arrived in is a building site. It takes them 20 minutes to make a 5 minute journey, including following Design the Spine diversion signs in a circle round Edward Roberts Court until they achieve escape velocity near the Deli. They finally arrive just as the presentation is beginning, and slide in at the back and make themselves inconspicuous.

As the presentation winds up the Doctor presses a button on her makeshift sonic screwdriver and freezes the other people in the room in a bubble of spacetime as she and her companions huddle round for a discussion. I can’t believe that out of 32 Band 3 Professors at the University only one is a woman, says Yasmin. What’s wrong with that, asks Graham, and gets a icy stare from the Doctor. And there’s more male senior professional services staff than female, points out Ryan. So what, asks Graham, who shuts up and wanders off to stare out of the window when the other three glare at him at once.

They all agree that the Task Group analysis that ‘where the money and status is at LU, women aren’t’ is largely correct, and yes, the overall problem identified, that female staff are clustered in lower grades, male staff in high grades, is also true. It’s been a while since I was last a woman, says the Doctor, but this is getting worse over time. Listen, I think I remember that I used to work at a university, leave this to me.

With a sound like foghorns squabbling underwater, the bubble of frozen spacetime begins to disintegrate, and the audience is asked for questions. Dr Jane Smith of the Foundation for Advanced Temporal Calibration And Transportation Studies steps forward to take the microphone. It’s a crying shame about the professors and senior professional services staff and all that, but according to my sums that’s a lot fewer people than the 936 women in Grades 6 and below. Wouldn’t the most sensible, equitable and immediate way to reduce the gap be to raise the wages of the lower paid staff? And then work on smashing the patriarchy?

As the Task Group insist that they will be looking at as many options as they can, but they have limited resources, Graham turns from the window, his face white with fear: Doctor, you’d better have a look out here. A bevy of barnacled compost bins decorated with plungers are floating down from the clouds. The Daleks are here! The Doctor spins her sonic screwdriver around and slips it back into a pocket. This problem will be a lot easier to solve.

You can find links to the presentation and audio of the first open staff meeting to discuss the Gender Pay Gap here [staffwall].

STOP PRESS: A second open-staff meeting has been announced for Thurs 18th Oct, more info here [staffwall].

SPAWT: NOTHING COMPARES TO UA92

On 27 September the University provided staff with another update on progress with its UA92 project. Senior managers were present to give us a most positive spin on the work which has taken place over the last year; including Simon Guy, FASS Dean and Interim Principal for 2017-18, and Craig Gaskell, the new Principal and CEO of UA92. Judging by the number of empty chairs in the Great Hall, attendance was clearly down on what was expected. Most of the allocated hour was taken up with promotional videos (x 2) and Simon and Craig giving us their take on things. ‘Exciting things’ are happening. UA92 will be ‘unlocking greatness’ through its ‘pioneer portfolio’. A UA92 degree is ‘more than just a degree’ – it is ‘game-changing’. Although it’s been a ‘tough, tough journey’ to date, with ‘bumps along the way’ and this year ‘we’ve got to bake this into a proper cake’ (big Bake Off fans, apparently), UA92 will be ‘making a massive difference to lives’ with the ‘amazing opportunities’ which will be on offer. Wow!

Except that when it came to explaining what a UA92 degree is about, it turns out it’s not that different from anything else on offer in HE apart from the Target Talent Curriculum, which runs through the programme (think ‘stick of rock’). Twenty credits per year are devoted to the TTC which is essentially about ‘character development’, for example resilience (how does that get assessed?). Anyway, the UA92 degree will be delivered in modular blocks (innovative!), with flexible start and finish dates (innovative!), admission to lower level awards, i.e. CertHE and DipHE (innovative!) and even possibly enabling a degree to be taken over two years (innovative!).

Not a few of us at the University have been asking for some time why Lancaster has bothered to join up with the likes of Gary Neville and private business in such a venture. Whilst proclaiming all the time that this venture was about a commitment to social mobility (called into question immediately by the huge efforts to obtain a Tier 4 licence in order to be able to recruit international students from the get-go), this presentation gave a clear answer, even though the question wasn’t asked. It’s about getting a physical toehold in Manchester, a springboard from which to tap into the business opportunities provided by the ‘Northern Powerhouse’ and grow student numbers (650 in 2019, forecast to increase to a total roll of 6,500 in 2028). Make no mistake about it, this is first and foremost about growth in student numbers, not just in the UK but globally.

Despite Lancaster’s top-ten position in the league tables, it seems its size and geographical location are seen as constraints. So, with the venture having been awarded government funding of £3m, Lancaster has been moving ahead fast over the last year, with admission of the first cohort due in September 2019. And yet…

– Programmes have been approved, but no modules have yet been written (how does that work in the world of the Competition and Markets Authority where applicants to universities are supposed to have clear information about course content?)
– No teachers have yet been recruited.
– The project is camping out at facilities provided at the Lancashire County Cricket ground.
– The old Kellogg building which has been purchased as the initial facility for this venture needs refurbishment – yet to get started let alone finished.

Cripes! Better get a move-on then. If the Resigned to the Spine project, the Health Innovation Building Site and the LUMS Space Gazing projects are anything to go by, the signs are not good. But perhaps contractors work faster in the big city.

Oh, one last thing. In case subtext readers don’t yet know the business partners involved in UA92, these are Microsoft and KPMG. KPMG? Yes, that’s right – the audit firm which was recently slammed (along with three other auditors) in the report of the Carillion Inquiry carried out by the government’s Work and Pensions Committee and the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Committee, with the chair of the BEIS Committee asserting that the auditors should be ‘in the dock’ for the ‘catastrophic’ Carillion collapse. While KPMG took a £29m pay packet as Carillion’s auditor for 19 years, the inquiry said that it ‘complacently’ signed off ‘fantastical figures’ and that ‘in failing to exercise professional scepticism towards Carillion’s accounting judgements over the course of its tenure as Carillion’s auditor, KPMG was complicit in them’. So a fit partner for the University? We will leave readers to judge. Thank goodness that the financial viability of UA92 itself was assessed by another big financial firm, PwC, which is of course much more competent than KPMG (except perhaps when it comes to organising academy awards ceremonies, or not advising clients to invest billions into offshore tax havens, as detailed in the Panama Papers and subtext 159).

ALUMNI NEWS

News reaches subtext that our former VC Paul Wellings is continuing the friendly, inclusive style he pioneered at Lancaster, in his current role as VC for the University of Wollongong. UOW staff were striking this week over insecure work and unfair pay, in particular Wollongong’s use of casual and fixed-term contracts. Australia’s National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) has ‘accused University of Wollongong management of misleading and coercing staff ahead of a strike this week. […] A letter from management was posted on the UOW staff intranet on October 4 which directed employees to notify managers, via an industrial action participation form, of their intention to strike. Union branch president at UOW Associate Professor Georgine Clarsen said the letter was illegal.’ In response, UOW management has stressed its commitment to ‘supportive and flexible career pathways for staff.’

Where Lancaster leads, others follow, it seems. According to the NTEU, management at UOW were ‘seeking to bully intimidate and coerce staff not to participate in legally authorised and protected industrial action.’ The NTEU has asked for an apology from Prof Wellings, but doesn’t appear to have received one so far. You can’t teach an old VC new tricks, it seems.

subtext readers are encouraged to show their solidarity with UOW workers – the local NTEU branch can be contacted via:

https://www.nteu.org.au/uow

Full story at:

https://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/5689713/union-accuses-uow-of-coercing-staff-ahead-of-strike/

HEATON, HEAT OFF

A few readers may still have distant glimmers of a memory of Chris Heaton-Harris, the Conservative MP who tried to force universities to reveal which nasty academics were poisoning the minds of young and impressionable students with the idea that Brexit might not all be jam and prosecco (see subtext 167). While we are still waiting for an answer from our own VC as to what exactly he told Heaton-Harris, the New European reports that Worcester VC David Green was more or less vindicated in his decision to tell Heaton-Harris where to go. A ruling by the information commissioner on a different Freedom of Information request which sought to see all his emails containing the word ‘Brexit’ was firmly in favour of the University’s right to keep its correspondence private in this case.

This may lead to some mixed feelings among advocates of transparency who are also worried about Brexit alongside the UK Government’s increasing surveillance of and interference in university activities (for instance, the draconian new monitoring rules for PhD students on Tier 4 visas). Knowledge wants to be free… but also free from too much interference by governments!

OH BROTHER WHERE ART THOU?

As usual, dozens of societies were out recruiting during Welcome Week. subtext’s drone footage identified one group which, despite its long historic pedigree, we hadn’t seen on campus before – not openly, anyway.

Yes, if you’re a ‘man of good standing’, you too can join the Freemasons! The City of Lancaster Lodge No. 281 is the local lodge for those connected with Lancaster and Cumbria universities, and it’s interested in attracting members from ‘undergraduates, graduates, staff and alumni.’ It’s transparent, apparently, embracing ‘all the fundamental principles of good citizenship.’ Freemasons are not only completely free to acknowledge their membership, ‘they are encouraged to do so.’

Lancaster is quite the hive of activity for masonry – the district website lists 23 active lodges and 11 Royal Arch chapters, not to mention several Mark lodges and Rose Croix chapters. Certainly a way to make connections. As long as you’re a man, obviously.

WHEN 3 BECOME 1

Stagecoach’s new timetable has been unveiled, now the Greyhound Bridge has re-opened, and the big news for vintage subtext readers is that the number 1 bus, much loved by Lancaster students and staff at the close of the last millennium, is back! This is, roughly, a rebadged number 3, shuttling up and down the A6, but more often, using double deckers. Meanwhile the number 2 carries on, with fewer double deckers, although there seem to be teething troubles with its new schedule. On more than one occasion in the past week, whilst waiting (and waiting …) at a bus stop, subtext’s correspondent has been told ‘there are no number 2’s at the moment!’, said by someone clearly in the know.

Early evidence suggests that the changeover is proving very helpful to less organised members of our community, as ‘I missed the bus because of all the number changes’ becomes the go-to reason for lateness.

THE STUDENTS’ UNION

It all started so well for the Students’ Union. In subtext 169 we reported on their campaign against an unnecessary rent increase of up to £249. To make their displeasure known, LUSU set up a stall and put £249 worth of pasta on display. A little gimmicky, we thought, but enough to get the usual ‘our costs are going up and we have the best halls ever anyway’ line trotted out by the university. And so, we sat back, and then… nothing. There was no further campaigning action, no publicity releases about negotiations, and no attempt to actually mobilise students into a General Meeting, or a protest, or anything.

And then the SU was complicit in the abolition of University Court (detailed above under UNIVERSITY COURT), the decision making body with the largest student delegation, the only one to which any student representative could propose motions and policy, and at which students had fought and won against the university.

But the University Court was due to be abolished anyway, and perhaps it wasn’t the best hill for the SU to die on if it wanted to pick more important fights. As the industrial action took hold of the entire higher education sector, and the student body increasingly swayed towards the side of the staff, subtext eagerly awaited the SU’s statement of intent, and its plan of action, before issue 173 went to print. The plan, it transpired, was to ’empower [student] opinion with impartial information.’ Yes. After making clear that it wasn’t best pleased that the action was going ahead, the SU decided that it wasn’t even going to OPPOSE it. Instead, it put out some tepid ‘on the one hand this and on the other hand that’ infographics. Thankfully, hundreds of students spontaneously organised, many of whom were heard shrieking with derision at any mention of the SU, joined by striking UCU members.

Even JCR officers weren’t safe. A series of posters denouncing the Vice-Chancellor’s salary and lack of funding for the counselling service quickly disappeared from campus, and LUSU’s higher-ups were reported to have advised the JCR officers responsible to take a different tack, apparently pledging to help ‘broaden’ the campaign and attract wider attention. As we predicted in subtext 177, such a campaign never came to fruition – LUSU simply quashed the activism.

LUSU might have made better decisions, be it on Grad Ball (which this year was cancelled for the first time since the 1970s), opposing strike action, or allowing fascism on campus to be funded, if it were more accountable to students, and hadn’t gutted almost all of its accountability structures in 2015 (as we recalled in issue 174). Could LUSU’s ‘scrutiny panel’ have curbed this behaviour? No. In subtext 174, we noted that the ‘scrutiny panel’ hadn’t met at any point during the nine months that the sitting sabbatical team had held office, and was denounced by a former appointee for producing toothless reports that ‘nobody reads.’ Perhaps a General Meeting of the student body could have passed policy? Not a chance – LUSU’s General Meeting failed to reach quoracy, because they failed to seize the enthusiasm around the rent increase in the first term, or the industrial action in the second term to drive attendance. In lieu of a quorate General Meeting, LUSU instead held an ‘online general meeting’, which is completely unconstitutional and has zero powers to authorise LUSU to do anything.

There must have been SOMETHING keeping LUSU’s political wing busy, because one now-former officer appeared on Bailrigg FM back in May boasting to a Labour Party representative that by-election turnout was healthy because LUSU had bothered to do a bit of promotional work, even though it ‘isn’t their job’ (it is).

subtext keeps a close eye on all of the university’s most influential wings, and the SU is one of them. You can read all of our reporting on the SU’s activities throughout 2017-18, which is far more detailed than our VERY brief recap, below.

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2017/11/23/the-rent-is-too-damn-high/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/02/01/court-the-final/ |

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/02/15/student-citizens-advice-bureau/|

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/02/15/student-activism-shows-some-signs-of-life/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/03/01/special-report-scrutiny-mutiny/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/03/01/analysis-lusu-elections/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/03/15/lusu-news/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/04/26/gradballs/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/04/26/sufferin-succofash/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/04/26/general-fiasco/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/05/10/poster-boy/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/05/24/democracy-does-good/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/05/24/general-knowledge/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/05/24/sheer-brass-balls/

http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/2018/06/07/another-glorious-victory-for-subtext/

***

STOP PRESS – ALL IS FORGIVEN, LUSU!

That was then. This is now. subtext is pleased to report that the new team of LUSU full-time officers seem to have got off to a blistering start, by calling a student demonstration against the proposed introduction of 6pm to 7pm lectures, during this Saturday’s Undergraduate Open Day. The details:

https://lancastersu.co.uk/articles/join-our-teaching-hours-protest

Don’t miss your Week 1 subtext for our full report on the ‘extended teaching day’ proposals, including why you shouldn’t dramatically increase your undergraduate numbers without also dramatically increasing your lecture theatres, and why this problem isn’t going to go away any time soon.

A MINOR PROBLEM

In subtext 168, we reported on ‘A proposal for radical improvement’, drafted by the Dean for Academic Quality. The subtext collective postulated at the time that the implementation of those proposals could have meant the end of Part One at Lancaster. News reaches subtext of another proposal – well, an instruction – from the Dean for Academic Quality that could have further implications for Part One. This concerns Welcome Week activities, whereby it is intended that students will spend an increased amount of time during Welcome Week in their major department. The purpose of this is to help the new students to engage with their academic disciplines at an early stage, so that they can feel more embedded in their academic community. This is seen to be of vital importance, contributing significantly towards high student satisfaction, performance and retention.

To facilitate this bonding experience all minor taster talks, normally delivered on Tuesday of Welcome Week, are to be scrapped. This, we are told, is an idea which has found widespread support throughout the University among academics, professional service staff and the Students’ Union, although subtext is not aware of any consultation fora where this has been discussed.

Minor talks are to go online. Details are sketchy at the moment but subtext understands that the plan is to set up a repository for information about every minor option across the university. This will probably have a standard template as a ‘front page’ for each option, and departments can then add links to anything else they want, which could include readings, handouts, videos etc. It has been made clear to departments that no additional money will be available to facilitate this.

Information for students about how to access this repository will be given to them in their welcome packs, and they will be encouraged to access them before they arrive, with further ‘prompts’ by their major departments when they get here. Let’s hope that these prompts aren’t used to apply pressure to students to choose a particular minor, otherwise the days of Marketing students choosing Criminology or Gender and Women’s Studies as their alternative for Part One may be numbered.

As we pointed out in our initial coverage, a number of departments or degree schemes with small student numbers are very dependent on the revenue that Part One minor students provide. Quite a number of departments welcome face-to-face interaction with potential Part One students and see it as a good recruitment opportunity. Anything that threatens such arrangements should be considered very carefully.

The fact that this proposal apparently emanated from the working group charged with looking at radical improvement set alarm bells off in the warehouse regarding ulterior motives i.e. the dismantling of Part One by the back door. Other wiser heads point out that such joined-up thinking is not normally how the University operates and we should take the proposal for what it is – an attempt to foster greater identification with the students major department and aid retention. Thoughts and letters to the usual address.