Tag Archives: UA92

SPAWT!

Posted on March 15 2018 | Comments Off on SPAWT!

TRAINING GROUND MOVES

News from Manchester of continuing local opposition to the onward march of Gary Neville’s Barmy Army (subtexts passim ad nauseam). The campaign this time is to protect Turn Moss, a stretch of open green space on the outskirts of Trafford. The Council is backing Gary’s plan to turn this public amenity into the headquarters and training ground for Salford City FC, owned by Gary and his billionaire financial backer Peter Lim.

According to local opposition group Save Turn Moss, this will involve ‘building a new floodlit 3G football pitch with 4.5 meter enclosed fence, building sports changing facilities; the development of a new football training facility including 3 enclosed (fenced off) training pitches for SCFC, goalkeeper training pitch, running mounds, changing/office facility, gym; removing healthy mature trees, drainage, extension of car parking area, highways alterations, erecting bollards at the entrance and other works’. This would then be leased back to Salford City FC, but only after the development costs had been paid for by Trafford council tax payers. Although the plan is for the new facilities to be open for public use, there is considerable scepticism about how much access local residents will be allowed. It has emerged that the new Salford City FC centre will also be the main sports facility for UA92, whose students will have first dibs on use. (Readers may well wonder how all this squares with the noble conservation sentiments expressed by ‘Green Lancaster’ but hey, it’s not on our doorstep).

None of these details were made clear during Trafford Council’s ‘consultation period’, and residents are understandably up in arms about it, catching the attention of local media, including Granada Reports. Nearly 900 objections have been lodged with Trafford Council and it is anticipated that this will reach 1000 by the deadline of 28th March. Organisers hope that the local opposition will cause a re-think by Trafford Council, or at least encourage some discussion about how, as one activist put it, ‘we can get something for people who aren’t Gary Neville or UA92’.

Further information on the plans, the local opposition and the green space under threat can be found at https://saveturnmoss.tumblr.com/

***

HAIL TO THE FOUNDER

Recruitment firm Anderson Quigley’s search for the ‘Principal and Chief Executive’ for UA92 continues. As revealed in subtext 174, the ideal candidate doesn’t need to have any experience of HE, but being able to provide ‘a disruptive approach to teaching and learning’ is a must. But, needless to say, what will most concern candidates will be the amount of dosh on offer. Perhaps mindful of the public outcry over bloated VC wage packets, Anderson Quigley are somewhat coy about specifying a salary range, which will be agreed with the successful candidate. Other goodies will include ‘a generous holiday allowance, a direct contribution pension scheme, a range of positive lifestyle benefits and perhaps a share scheme’. The recent revelations about VC expenses perks should provide some insight into what ‘positive lifestyle benefits’ will encompass. And a ‘share scheme’ as well!

So far there has been little information on the selection process, apart from the fact that the final decision will be taken by a nine-member panel. Readers will no doubt be intrigued as to how the selection panel will identify the candidate with the most ‘disruptive approach to teaching and learning’. (Candidates could do worse than take a few tips from UUK, who have shown themselves to be the leading experts in this regard). However, it is a very distinguished panel, and includes the VC, the Principal of Trafford College, the CEO of Trafford Council and other Lancaster University senior officers. And top of the list, with the simple but eloquent title of ‘Founder’, is Gary Neville, whose own career as Man Utd and England right-back exemplifies what is meant by a ‘disruptive approach’.

For readers who may be interested in getting a glimpse of those making the shortlist, interviews for the post will take place at the University on 27th April. We’ll let you know when we find out where.

***

ANOTHER GLORIOUS VICTORY FOR SUBTEXT

In subtext 174, we noted that recruitment firm Anderson Quigley described UA92’s Target Talent Curriculum as being ‘underpinned by 10 principles that prepare UA92 graduates for the workplace’… before going on to list 11 principles. We can now report that, in another glorious victory for subtext, the firm has corrected the error on its website. Eleven was the correct number all along, and the text has been amended accordingly. Which is a relief – the thought of UA92 having to drop ‘survival’ or ‘life skills’ or ‘self and peer group analysis’ from its remit for the sake of clarity just doesn’t bear thinking about.

***

COMPETITION

What is a ‘disruptive approach to teaching’ anyway? We were somewhat glib to suggest that candidates should take tips from UUK, and would like to offer some serious suggestions as to what it might entail.

Candidates who have a ‘disruptive approach to teaching’ may, for example: set off campus fire alarms during peak periods; enter exam halls with an airhorn and casually blast it at random intervals; deliver lectures in a sort of raspy whisper; have open book exams with magic 8-balls instead of textbooks; set group work but in every group there’s a saboteur; set presentations but every time a speaker says ‘ummm’ they get a little electric shock; have everyone come to your lecture but you aren’t actually there and when everyone is seated the doors lock and a voice on a loudspeaker says ‘I’m sorry to have lured you here under false pretenses’; in the middle of a gym session, have an elephant fly out of the score clock with a parachute to see how the students react; set problems which are insoluble due to missing data or logical flaws, then berate students who complain; start every lecture with ‘welcome to logical positivism 101, please leave now if you’re in the wrong room’ (unless you’re teaching logical positivism); respond to all student feedback with ‘I know you are, but what am I?’; arrange for major campus building works during term; set up an electronic attendance monitoring system which doesn’t work and then use up valuable lecturing time logging in students whose phones won’t connect.

We welcome contributions from readers who might have their own ideas on what constitutes a ‘disruptive approach to teaching.’ To the usual address, please.

***

BAD MARKETING NEWS

Who, really, is UA92 aimed at? A read through the 2019-20 undergraduate prospectus has left subtext none the wiser.

Clearly, UA92 needs to target the local market. Trafford College is a partner institution and it’s easy to imagine UA92 developing as a collaboration à la Lancaster University and Blackpool & The Fylde College. So how will students from Lancashire, Cheshire and Greater Manchester be persuaded by UA92? Well, according to the prospectus, if you come to UA92 then you can ‘do as a real northerner and get stuck into a ‘proper pint’ at a ‘proper pub’ – there are lots of them.’ Erm. Right. Meanwhile, if you like music (from 20 years before you were born), ‘Joy Division, The Smiths and The Stone Roses have all called Trafford their home.’ Quite how this is relevant to today’s applicants is not explained.

How about recruitment from overseas? Given the Class of 92’s much-publicised South East Asian business connections (see subtext 158), careful marketing to China, Malaysia and Singapore will be critical. We wonder, then, what some of Gary & Co’s investors will make of the description of the links between the Class of 92, Lancaster University and Microsoft as the ‘UA92 Golden Triangle’. Let’s look that term up on Wikipedia, shall we? ‘The Golden Triangle is one of Asia’s two main opium-producing areas. It is an area of approximately 950,000 square kilometres that overlaps the mountains of three countries of Southeast Asia: Myanmar, Laos and Thailand.’ Oh dear.

Come to think of it, the very name ‘UA92’ could have unfortunate connotations in some markets, particularly the USA, where it might be interpreted as a very tasteless pastiche of Flight UA93. Did anyone think of this?

The subtext collective would like to make clear that we aren’t making any of this up. There’re 70 pages of this – UA92-Master-Prospectus-Digital – and we encourage readers to submit their own analysis of UA92’s marketing strategy to the usual address.

***

IT’S RAINING UA92’S

There’s exciting news for those interested in UA92 Manchester, as detailed information about the project has now been published online. According to the blurb, ‘our academy provides unparalleled opportunities for aspiring professionals to study university degrees in football business, coaching and/or related industries alongside their football training programme, giving them the best chance at a successful career in the beautiful game, whether on or off the pitch.’ Students will be ‘based at our inspiring campus in Manchester’, with direct access to ‘world-class coaches’ including former MUFC assistant manager Mike Phelan, and a number of 100% scholarships available to the best players.

We can see you’re looking a bit confused …

… ah, sorry! Did you think we meant UA92? We were referring to UA92 (see subtexts 171 and 174), the venture backed by Burnley FC director Brendan Flood and his ‘football university college’ UCFB, launched in partnership with Bucks New University: https://www.ucfb.com/programmes/ua-92-manchester/

Whilst we suspect that UCFB’s appropriation of the UA92 name, backed up with several registrations at Companies House as discussed in the last subtext, amounts to little more than gentle trolling on Mr Flood’s part, subtext continues to wonder whether the titans behind Gary Neville University have factored UCFB’s ambitions into their forward planning. UCFB can showcase ready-made facilities at Etihad Stadium and Wembley. Gary and the boys can only respond with artists’ impressions and planning applications. One-nil to the Blues…

Comments Off on SPAWT!

Posted in news, special feature

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

SPAWT!

Posted on March 1 2018 | Comments Off on SPAWT!

APPLICATIONS WELCOME FROM AXE-WIELDING MANIACS

The search for a permanent full-time Principal for UA92 has begun. As our own HR department was clearly not up to the job, the task of finding the right person has fallen to posh recruitment consultants Anderson Quigley. Prospective candidates logging into their website will discover a mine of information to help their applications. Candidates, we are told, will need to ‘embody and exemplify the values and behaviours through which UA92 has been founded’ – (a trawl through numerous back issues of subtext will be of enormous help in this regard). However, they do not have to come from ‘an academic background’ to be eligible, clearly a recognition that the academic claims of UA92 will be somewhat elastic. But they will be required to provide ‘evidence of adopting a disruptive approach to teaching and learning’ (we’re really not making this up). Good to see that UA92 encourages applications from all sections of the community.

Our recruitment specialists also provide a lot of useful information on the thinking behind UA92. Central to this is the Target Talent Curriculum (TTC), with its ‘Ten Principles that prepare UA92 students for life’. They then go on to list eleven. It seems that a grasp of simple arithmetic will not be an essential requirement for this post.

***

‘I’M UA92!…NO, I’M UA92!

One of our friends from the M32 Masterplan and UA93 Facebook group has spotted some rather curious anomalies concerning the entity known as ‘UA92’. It seems there is more than one of them. There is ‘UA92 Ltd’ registered at Companies House (managing director, Brendan Flood). This, it transpires, is actually ‘Undergraduate Academy 92’, a part of UCFB, the rival Man City-linked outfit based at the Etihad Stadium which Flood wants to become ‘the Harvard of sport’. Another Flood manifestation of the title is ‘UA92 Manchester Ltd’. Then there is ‘University Academy 92 Limited’ and ‘UA92 Old Trafford Limited’, both based in Enfield in London and both naming one Clifford Donald Wing as chief officer. To complicate the picture further, Wing is a business associate of Gary Neville and sits alongside him on the board of Zerum Consult Limited, one of a number of Zerum companies linked to Neville and all registered at the same address in Manchester.

So where is the Official UA92? Or even the Real UA92? And is there a Provisional UA92 and a Continuity UA92 lurking somewhere in the background? Will students know which one they’re signing up for? But perhaps there is a more mundane explanation for this proliferation of UA identities. Could it be that some of Gary’s erstwhile business mates have stolen a march on him and registered all the varieties of the UA92 brand, rather like internet domain names, hoping to flog them back to him at a later time?

***

SPACE RACE

We have received reports of Acting UA92 Principal and Dean of FASS Simon Guy and his team being ejected from a meeting room for failing to go through room bookings. It is standard for bodies which aren’t ‘officially’ a part of the university to have difficulty securing space on campus, as the Putin fan club has found (see story below). Since, according to the VC, we’re still seeing if our partnership with Gary Neville ‘hangs together’ (even though we feature in most UA92 publicity and news coverage), it makes perfect sense to ensure that only officially affiliated bodies and societies get first dibs on space. Well done to all involved.

Comments Off on SPAWT!

Posted in news, special feature

Tagged , , , , , , ,

LETTERS

Posted on March 1 2018 | Comments Off on LETTERS

Dear subtext,

Mr. Fleming’s letter (subtext 173) is factually inaccurate, and shows complete disregard for the strength of staff feeling on this issue at his alma mater, which had the highest turnout in the ballot in England and third highest in the UK, with over 88% endorsing strike action. I would like to respond to each of the points made in the letter in turn.

1. UCU has a strong mandate for industrial action, given by its members through an average turnout of more than 58% across all 68 institutions that were balloted (a record), with 88% voting for strike action and 93% for action short of a strike. Membership is at record levels, with over a 100 members joining UCU at LU in the last two-three weeks alone. The only thing that seems to be over the top is UUK’s intransigence to negotiations, given a number of VCs across the sector, including institutions like Loughborough, Glasgow, Warwick, Birkbeck, Goldsmiths, Strathclyde, London School of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine and others are publicly calling for a resumption of national talks.

2. While previous pension arrangements are indeed protected, under proposed changes the future pension arrangements will not be protected from 2019. Proposed changes mean our pensions will move from the current defined benefit scheme (which guarantees the rate of pension received in retirement), to a defined contribution scheme (fixing the rate of pay contributing to pension). Crucially, when the chief executive of USS was asked when he visited Lancaster how USS would protect members from the vagaries of the financial markets and that put members pensions at considerable risk, no answer was forthcoming.

3. We are not working in the private sector – our pensions are just a small recompense for our very modest salaries. Modest in relation to the private sector, with very little movement between grades over the lifetime of work, and with the ‘initial investment’ of time and effort spent in gaining qualifications to work in a University that many in the private sector are not required to make. It seems disingenuous to make any comparisons with the private sector, and hardworking academic and related staff would find any comparisons with employer contributions to a pension scheme in the private sector particularly odious. Those who work in the education sector do so because they have a special set of values, of public good and not individual benefit. Our lifetime contributions to our pensions are being put at risk of markets, with it being left to the individuals to decide what they want to do with their pension pot upon retirement. Do we think vultures would be circling? We only have to see what has happened at British Steel recently.

4. UCU has proposed a range of models that illustrate how defined benefits can be maintained by modest increases in contributions (for e.g. 1% for the employees if employers decide to accept the September valuation), lowering of accrual from 1/75th to 1/80th, and willingness to negotiate on salary thresholds. UUK have rejected all proposals outright saying they will only accept a defined contribution scheme.

Sunil Banga

UCU Exec, Pensions Officer

***

Dear subtext,

I have been trying to understand the reasons for the current pensions dispute, and have found this talk by Carlo Morelli, an economics lecturer at Dundee University really useful:

Most interesting in the talk to me was that the changes appear likely to make the resulting scheme very unattractive to potential new members, causing the very shortfalls in money that Universities UK claim to want to prevent. Over time, USS could fall apart, and each University is legally required to act as guarantor to the current scheme. As I understand it, the danger is therefore not limited to staff pensions, but in the worst case could even affect each university, because each would be required to fund their ex-staff’s existing final salary defined pensions. I am left wondering whether Universities UK are doing a good job of representing the interest of UK universities.

Mike Cowie

***

Dear subtext,

I was disappointed to see, in your most recent mailout, the claim that SCAN’s UA92 debate column was ‘its first mention of the Gary Neville University since the story broke a year ago.’

This is incorrect. The debate column was published on October 23 2017. We first reported on the Gary Neville University in March 2017 (tinyurl.com/yaw4q7go). We published a second article on October 5 2017 [tinyurl.com/ydftypme].

A Google search for ‘SCAN Gary Neville’ would have produced these articles as the first two results. Alternatively, the SCAN editorial team are happy to search our archives if you need clarification of our coverage in future.

Best,

Michael Mander

SCAN Associate Editor

***

Dear subtext,

I would like to issue a complaint regarding your recent article entitled ‘Alt Wrong’. The article is blatantly libellous on numerous accounts, among which are your claims that we are somehow affiliated with the ‘alt right’, that we are ‘fascists’, ‘national socialists’, in favour of ‘pure blooded ancestry’, and further that we were ‘verbally aggressive towards colleagues’ leading us to be ‘ejected by security staff’. There are many other examples of these outright falsities, and the fact that subtext never reached out to our society for comment only reinforces the impression that you did not intend to fairly represent our society, only to defame it. We have numerous eye-witness accounts that can corroborate this.

While you may argue that the article never mentions our society by name, you made explicit reference to us, such that the article incited opposition to the society which may have escalated to violence were it not for the measures put in place by the University. The University felt the need to hire security and have a member of the police present to ensure that peace was kept, which demonstrates the threat that arose directly from the misrepresentations present in your article. Given these threats, I would ask that my name is not posted on your site, due to the false perception of our society that exists both on and off campus.

Your newsletter claims to be one in favour of free speech ‘without fear of backlash’, yet here our impression is that you are presenting things that did not happen as fact, in order to manufacture backlash with the intent of de-platforming our society.

We request that you remove this inflammatory article and issue an apology, in the interests of preventing further undue backlash and promoting intellectual diversity on campus.

Name withheld on request.

[As the writer acknowledges, subtext did not name the organisation they claim to represent – Eds.]

Comments Off on LETTERS

Posted in letters

Tagged , , , , , ,

UA92 IN THE TOONS

Posted on February 1 2018 | Comments Off on UA92 IN THE TOONS

It’s been a tale of mixed fortunes for the Class of ’92 since the last subtext. Although Trafford Council has now given them the go-ahead for UA92, the plans for the main student accommodation have been knocked back and another site within the Stretford regeneration zone will have to be developed. Still, as a huge part of the cost of the whole gig will be borne by Trafford council-tax payers, the boys can hardly complain. However, things have not been going so well for Gary Neville’s other big project in Manchester, the Jackson’s Row development. Having been forced to withdraw his original scheme because of fierce local and national opposition, Gary recently submitted a revised scheme which involved building one 39-storey skyscraper instead of the two smaller ones in the original plan. Sadly, this has not found favour with Historic England, whose opposition to Gary’s first proposal had done so much to scupper it. They have written to Manchester City Council to say that they cannot support the new plan because of its visual impact on existing heritage buildings. So, is it back to the drawing board, or will Gary’s legendary charm persuade the Council to ignore Historic England’s advice?

But the news hasn’t all been about Gary. As well as Ryan Giggs’ elevation to manage Wales’ national football team, there has also been the appointment of Phil Neville as manager of the England women’s team. There was some surprise at this as Phil (a) has no experience of managing a team, apart from one game with Salford City FC, (b) has no experience of women’s football in any capacity, and (c) was appointed without having to go through the tedious business of actually applying for the job. That’s what being in the Class of ’92 can do for you. As is now the norm when anyone is appointed to a public position, there was an immediate trawl of his social media history, and some (allegedly) sexist tweets were duly revealed before he could delete them. Embarrassment all round. Phil embarked on PR blitz to try to repair the damage, which included a press conference where he denied that he was sexist (but rather spoiled the effect by stating that he ‘was the best man for the job’). Strangely, he neglected to mention the Class of 92’s support for the Lingerie Football League, surely something that would have been a suitable riposte to those who criticised his lack of experience of the women’s game.

Finally, the proliferating activities of the Class of ’92 has come to the attention of Guardian’s excellent strip cartoonist, David Squires. Readers unfamiliar with his work should think of him as a sort of sports-related Steve Bell. We at subtext particularly like his Orwellian take on UA92. This offering did not appear in the Graun’s print edition so for readers who don’t access the web version, the link is here: https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2018/jan/23/david-squires-on-ryan-giggs-phil-neville-and-the-class-of-92s-expanding-empire

Comments Off on UA92 IN THE TOONS

Posted in news

Tagged , , , ,

COURT: THE FINAL

Posted on February 1 2018 | Comments Off on COURT: THE FINAL

Unloved by the people organising it, but defended by the people attending it, the final meeting of Lancaster University’s Court on Saturday 27 January 2018 in George Fox Lecture Theatre 1 ended up being very long, occasionally lively, and rather enjoyable.

By subtext’s count, 116 members turned up, with 53 sending apologies. The student numbers had increased from 2017, while the numbers travelling from outside the region seemed to be slightly down – why make the effort when you don’t feel wanted?

As is fitting for any good meeting of Court, there was a rambunctious, intense, and highly explosive political demonstration outside the building – well, four UCU activists politely handing out leaflets about their pensions, and chatting with Court members about the current dispute. There had earlier been disagreement with the organisers over where UCU should stand – just inside the foyer of George Fox, or outside in the rain? The dispute was resolved, not entirely amicably, when the Director of Governance and Strategic Planning called on six members of security staff to stand around near the front of the foyer. When questioned, they reassured the activists that they had definitely not been called to escort them outside! So that’s all right then. A great way to defuse tensions in advance of a major industrial dispute.

Into the meeting at 10am, and an opening address from the Chancellor, on his 60th birthday. ‘Welcome to the university of the year!’ began Mr Milburn, in what seemed like a mostly improvised speech. He was particularly proud of his recent trip to Accra, where he had conferred degrees on the first cohort of LU Ghana graduates.

Onwards to the Court Effectiveness Review, and leading the case for abolition were the independent reviewer, David Allen, and lay member of Council, Robin Johnson. Mr Allen, a friendly soul, was upbeat about his proposal to dissolve Court, noting that 65 Court members had commented on his consultation paper and he’d carried out over 20 interviews last summer. ‘Universities are private corporations,’ he noted, ‘but they are accountable to the public.’ Court should be disestablished in favour of an annual public meeting. Mr Johnson addressed Court as if it were a much-loved employee who, with much regret, Mr Johnson was now going to make redundant. Court was analogue. The world was now digital. It was nothing personal. And the recent appointment of a PVC for Engagement, Dame Sue Black, showed that Lancaster cared about its stakeholders.

A spirited discussion followed, albeit one where no-one was allowed to vote. Opposing the changes, and the procedures that led to them, were Cat Smith MP, Lord Judd, former Chair of Court Stanley Henig, alumnus Richard Morrice, city councillors Lucy Atkinson (Labour) and Charles Edwards (Conservative), and Management Accountants representative Richard Kenworthy. The only person in the audience cheerleading for the proposals was alumnus Don Porter, while LUSU President Josh Woolf and city council leader Eileen Blamire stayed diplomatically uncommitted. The strongest speech against came from former Chair of Court Gordon Johnson. ‘History and tradition play an important role in the life of this institution,’ he noted, adding that he’d not responded to Mr Allen’s consultation because ‘the direction of travel had been set some time before.’ And that, it seems, is that.

The Pro-Chancellor, Lord Liddle, was next. Today’s discussion would be reported to Council, although Council had already approved the first reading of the proposals to abolish Court, when it met yesterday. The Pro-Chancellor seemed receptive to suggestions for how to make the annual public meeting work, however, and in particular he ‘wouldn’t like a meeting to which the local MP couldn’t attend,’ suggesting that next year’s replacement will remain a Saturday event. Tributes were paid to former Council members John Hadfield and James Carr, who died during 2017, and departing Director of Facilities Mark Swindlehurst, who was sat at the back.

‘I want myself and my fellow officers to be remembered as real changemakers,’ announced Josh Woolf. The LUSU President’s report was certainly entertaining and will be remembered for its montage of outdated brands, including Marathon and Opal Fruits wrappers, over which he suggested that however well-loved Court was, maybe we needed to move on. No retro sweets for Sarah Randall-Paley, however. The days when the Director of Finance would battle with the LUSU President for the most extravagant presentation at Court are long gone, perhaps reflecting the increasingly secure nature of Lancaster’s finances. The biggest bombshell in this year’s financial report was the announcement of a preferred new measure of financial health, the Adjusted Net Operating Cashflow (ANOC).

The Vice-Chancellor rolled up to the rostrum shortly after 12: ‘Good afternoon, everyone!’ There was clearly concern about the timing of Court’s successor, and it needs a name ‘that reflects the nature of what we’re trying to achieve.’ He paid tribute to Mr Hadfield and Mr Carr, and thanked Mr Swindlehurst, while wondering why he was still here: ‘the job’s gone, mate!’

The VC focused on the new regulatory landscape, following the approval of the Higher Education and Research Act. It was very complicated, he didn’t yet know what it would mean, and neither did the new Secretary of State or the new Minister for Higher Education. Our big challenge would be ‘retention’, where we perform poorly against our competitors, but on the plus side we have a Gold rating in the TEF.

subtext readers will want to know that, yes, the VC mentioned UA92, ‘in case I was asked a question on it.’ Top table are still in the final stages of seeing whether it hangs together. Is the VC aware that all of UA92’s publicity says that Lancaster has fully committed to it?

Pensions were the ‘big elephant in the room’ – significant and ongoing industrial action was likely. Would the proposed changes affect the recruitment of academic staff? ‘Only time will tell,’ he said. It might affect international recruitment, but probably not from the UK. What can the VC do to resolve the dispute? Not much. ‘Our level of deficit pales into insignificance compared to the big beasts. Those people don’t want that on their balance sheets.’ Last autumn, the VC had been relatively hopeful, but then the pensions regulator sent a letter to trustees which almost closed all options. ‘It will be a very disruptive term,’ he concluded, and ‘students will be in the middle.’

The final words at the final Court went to the Chancellor, just after 1pm. He thanked members for ‘sharing my birthday with me’ and praised the quality of debate, suggesting that other chambers could learn from us.

And so the Court ended for good, as members joined the queue for soup served in coffee mugs. Did someone forget to order any bowls?

Comments Off on COURT: THE FINAL

Posted in official meetings

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

subtext 171 – ‘the stable genius of a shithole subtext’

Posted on January 18 2018 | Comments Off on subtext 171 – ‘the stable genius of a shithole subtext’

Fortnightly during term time.

Letters, contributions, & comments: subtext-editors@lancaster.ac.uk

Back issues & subscription details: http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/about/

In this issue: editorial, tech, groveling apology, website, UA92 bonanza, court, leadership bonanza, UCLan, BAM, lowercase letters, shart, concert review, letters.

*****************************************************

EDITORIAL

We had it all sewn up – the editorial was written, the issue was edited, and we were seconds away from hitting our big red button…

… and then we heard this breaking news:

Stretford residents have just scored a major success in its opposition to Trafford Council’s regeneration plans, to which the Gary Neville University is integral. The Council has withdrawn its plans for Lacy Street, the proposed site for UA92 student accommodation. They now want to focus on a significantly reduced size, with commercial use alongside joint student and key worker accommodation, and on a much slower timescale to allow for proper consultation. The delay is expected to be a year. There is no information as yet on how this will impact on the main campus development on the old Kellogs site, but this is likely to be a major blow for UA92, which is supposed to be ready for the first student intake in September 2019. Close observers of recent events in Stretford will realise that locals have worked hard to make their voices heard. Their success is, apart from anything else, a lesson to us all in the power of organised opposition.

Welcome, readers, to another year of subtext!

Comments Off on subtext 171 – ‘the stable genius of a shithole subtext’

Posted in editorial

Tagged , , , ,

UA92 UPDATES

Posted on January 18 2018 | Comments Off on UA92 UPDATES

UA’INT SEEN NUTHIN’ YET

Local opposition in Manchester to plans for UA92 continues to grow. Stretford residents are increasingly sceptical of the claims from Trafford Council that the scheme will be the major driver for the regeneration of their area. Detailed information from the Council on exactly how the local population will benefit has been sparse, to say the least. What is particularly concerning to residents is that the success of the whole regeneration scheme is totally dependent on the viability of UA92 as a commercial proposition. In this regard, Lancaster University has been even less forthcoming than the Council in providing hard information about how the proposed new university is expected to prosper.

With this in mind, the local MP, Labour’s Kate Green, came to Lancaster last week to find out why Lancaster thought that there was a market for UA92, given that its proposed curriculum is already well covered by other providers in the area. Our senior managers’ response was that the 18+ age cohort is set to rise over the next decade, so there will be plenty of students to go around. Ms. Green, however, managed to glean some information that had not previously been forthcoming, and has posted this on her Facebook page. Firstly, she received confirmation of what we had long suspected – that Gary Neville and co. had approached other universities before contacting Lancaster. We can safely assume that the response of those other institutions to Gary’s proposal was of the terse, two-word variety. Secondly, UA92 will be teaching-only, so those students can forget about receiving the benefits of Lancaster’s ‘philosophy of research-led teaching’ enjoyed by our own students. Finally, it appears that our leaders are also looking at the possibilities for two-year degrees to be offered by UA92 (and if it works there, well…).

***

COMMERCIAL ACUMEN

Some Stretford residents have tried the Freedom of Information route to prise information from Lancaster, to no avail. One inquirer wanted to know details of the market research that had convinced Lancaster that the scheme was commercially viable, to which the response was the familiar ‘commercial in confidence’ evasion. Such information ‘may enable our commercial competitors to gain commercial advantage’. Not only that, but as Lancaster University was ‘partially funded by public monies’ it would not be ‘in the public interest for this information to be released’. This claim to be acting in the public interest is ludicrous. The ‘competitors’ are universities who are already operating in this field and who are also ‘partially funded by public monies’ and could reasonably claim that they have a ‘public interest’ in accessing this information. The only other competitor is UCFB (see below), whose founder and Board Chairman is Brendan Flood, also named in Companies House as the Managing Director of UA92. We would have to presume that he was privy to all this commercially sensitive information that Lancaster cannot possibly divulge. What, then, is the University playing at? Are there other competitors lurking in the background, too shadowy to identify? Or is it the case that, like the government’s ‘Brexit impact assessments’, no meaningful research has actually been carried out and that Lancaster has entered this partnership with eyes wide shut?

***

UALL KNOW IT MAKES SENSE

One of UA92’s selling points is the ‘unique connections and secured placements’ that will help students ‘stand out in the competitive graduate job market’. One whole year of a three-year degree programme would be spent on work placement with a major employer. Certainly, an ambitious offering, given that by the time UA92 reaches its full 6,500 student capacity, it will need to have over 2,000 available placements on its books. And these can’t be any old placements. If they are to be integral components in a Lancaster-validated degree, they will have to meet the requirements set out in the Lancaster University Placements Policy, adopted last April. These requirements seek to ensure that the placement is capable of being fully integrated into the degree programme, that it will provide the support and opportunities needed to meet the programme’s learning outcomes, and that it will actually pay the students for the work they undertake.

So how is UA92 faring on the placements front? Which major employers have committed to its ‘unique vision’? Well, so far it has signed up Microsoft… and that’s it, really. Trafford Council, MUFC and Lancashire Cricket Club might also stump up some placements but nowhere near the scale needed. The only other partner who might conceivably come up with the goods would be Lancaster University itself. Would our departments be willing to donate some of their hard-won and carefully nurtured placements to help out Gary Neville and his pals? No, we don’t think so either.

Such is UA92’s desperation to nail this down, that it is now using Twitter to get help in designing and delivering its courses:

‘Want to work with #UA92? Our partners have the opportunity to work with the academic team to help co-design our #university courses & build the curriculum, ensuring that we develop students that have the right #skills for the #workplace’.

This was accompanied by a graphic exhorting the tweet’s recipients ‘To help us unlock greatness’, illustrated with a drawing of an opened padlock that looked like it was composed on an Etch-a-Sketch.

Yes, this is what trashing the Lancaster University brand looks like.

***

UA92’S POOR RELATION

If Lancaster’s senior management thought that a football-related university was an original idea when it was first spun to them, they were sadly mistaken. There already exists in Manchester an institution called UCFB (University College of Football Business), with campuses at Wembley, Burnley FC and Manchester City’s Etihad Stadium. UCFB, in the words of its Chairman, Brendan Flood, is ‘the first higher education institution in the world dedicated to the delivery of degrees in the football, sport and events industries’. By a simply enormous coincidence, the same Brendan Flood happens to be the Managing Director of UA92. The existence of UCFB and Mr Flood’s involvement must have been unknown to the University, because surely it would have been mentioned when the proposal was first presented to Senate.

UCFB’s degrees are validated by the University of Buckingham, an institution ranked much lower than Lancaster in the league tables but one which is coming up fast. Admittedly, their degrees are of the old-fashioned type, where ‘academic discipline’ is central, as opposed to UA92’s dynamic new approach which puts ‘character development’ above academic learning. Despite this handicap, UCFB does appear to be prospering, offering a wide range of sports-related first degrees and, recently, postgraduate courses. The latter involves a partnership with Real Madrid and its own graduate school, the prestigious Universidad Europa, where students will spend part of their course. An attractive offer, perhaps, but surely incapable of competing with the opportunities that will be provided by the Class of 92’s very own Salford City FC when UA92 finally comes on line.

Comments Off on UA92 UPDATES

Posted in news, special feature

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

LETTERS

Posted on January 18 2018 | Comments Off on LETTERS

Dear subtext,

Leadership is a worthless, dangerous concept, in your account of UA92 and its focus thereon. I presume, therefore, subtext welcomes the reorganization/merging of the Department of Leadership and Management in the management school that it has previously bemoaned. As for personal development not being worth of a university programme, it indeed wouldn’t be if it accorded to the banal stereotypes in your criticism of the UA92 ethos.

However, Lancaster has for a long time led the world in the provision of intellectually rigorous degrees which have at the core the principle that the personal development they offer inevitably requires a deep understanding of the social and political structures and processes within which the individual exists and operates. Lancaster is a lead partner in the International Masters in Practicing Management, along with Universities in Japan, Brazil, India and Canada; and its MBA, certainly while I was there, led the world in its development of the concept of managerial mindfulness, integrating this with both the usual business disciplines, and a deep understanding of sustainability and ethics.

OK, I left Lancaster for York. My underlying interest is that I live in Manchester, a great city, but still characterized by inequality and social exclusion. Manchester lost a University, UMIST, on its merger with the Victoria University of Manchester. That merger was a mistake, and a path Lancaster did well to avoid with Liverpool. Particularly with the downsizing of Manchester Business School, and Manchester’s humanities departments, there is a civic gap in the city where another university should be. UA92 might fill that gap. How it does so is up to you guys. But my hope as a Mancunian is that it does what it says it will about leadership and self development, but with the imagination and rigor that already characterize Lancaster.

Professor Bill Cooke

*****************************************************

Dear subtext,

Did you know the total amount of money the library received from the payment of overdue items (excluding costs of replacing lost book as far as I can gather) was £14,541.95 for the period 7 October 2016 (start of term) to 6 October 2017. Wonder where that went! What do we think of that… certainly not a drop in the ocean.
See freedom of information link for a little more: https://tinyurl.com/ycbem68u

All the best

Alison Clifton

Comments Off on LETTERS

Posted in letters

Tagged , , , ,

NEVER MIND THE QUALITY, FEEL THE LEADERSHIP!

Posted on December 7 2017 | Comments Off on NEVER MIND THE QUALITY, FEEL THE LEADERSHIP!

As we draw nearer to the Xmas break this is the time when stories emerge to guide us through the shambles in which we find ourselves. Of course, we always were in a state of confusion but the events of the last year have made the nature of what is around us much clearer. The beast has come out of the shadows and is showing its face. We have made a terrible mistake and as the flaming omnishambles of the UA92 project is revealed, the one option that nobody seems to want to discuss is the one that would cause the most embarrassment in the short term and the least pain in the long run: cancelling the whole thing and moving on. In this there are many parallels with Brexit, not least that the decision to go ahead came about through the same mixture of ignorance, complacency and wishful thinking.

As with Brexit, those charged with trying to make it work are facing an impossible task. If UA92 degrees are to be accepted as being on a par with Lancaster degrees (as promised on its website), they must meet the same quality assurance requirements. Anyone who has had to steer a new module proposal, much less a new degree scheme, through the QA process will know just how exacting it is. However, the UA92 degree model is the polar opposite of Lancaster’s. The core is ‘personal development’, not academic achievement, and the role of traditional study is to be a supporting mechanism in enabling that to happen. It would be like telling our own students that the Lancaster Award is more important in getting their degrees than, say, a well-argued dissertation. How will this be consistent with MARP? Unfortunately, our already overworked staff are now tasked with trying to square that particular circle. And they don’t have much time to do it. If the target date of September 2019 for UA92’s first intake is to be met, everything needs to be ready for UCAS approval and publication by March 2018, just under three months away!

Among many concerns about the UA92 model is the obsessive focus on ‘leadership’ and the bogus implicit assumptions that: a) ‘character’, not social structures and processes, is the primary determinant of individuals’ life chances; and b) roles other than that of ‘leaders’ are inferior, so that a successful/good life can only mean being in a position of dominance relative to others. A (the?) primary job of university is to produce well-informed citizens capable of critical thinking, including being able to see through this kind of nonsense. Unless we do this, we are failing. Those behind the UA92 project are confident that its degrees will be seen to be as good as Lancaster’s. The fear of a growing number of staff is that in time our own degrees will be seen to be only as good as UA92’s.

Comments Off on NEVER MIND THE QUALITY, FEEL THE LEADERSHIP!

Posted in news

Tagged , , , ,

SENATE REPORT

Posted on November 23 2017 | Comments Off on SENATE REPORT

The November session started with a written question to the VC asking if there were any plans to build lecture theatres capable of accommodating larger groups of students. The lack of such space was causing major problems for the larger teaching departments. Replying on behalf of the VC, Deputy VC Andrew Atherton said that indeed there was a plan for just such a facility, for up to 500 students. However, this was only a partial solution to the problem. As student numbers increased in line with the University’s strategic plan, other approaches would need to be adopted to deal with larger cohorts. These could include more flexible timetabling and extending the teaching day to enable more double-teaching. All this, of course, would have to happen without any detriment to the ‘student experience’. Nothing, though, was said about the detriment to the staff experience, a point made by a number of Senators during the ensuing discussion.

On next to the Vice-Chancellor’s report on current issues. There were plenty of positives – the record student intake this year (in contrast to much of the HE sector), becoming University of the Year and moving up to 6th place in the Times league table, the first LU Ghana graduation and the positive impact we’d made in that country. There was also a mention of the launch of UA92 (which he clearly believed was a positive development) and the current consultation on the plans in Manchester. The VC stated that he had been pleasantly surprised by the generally positive reception from local people and that any opposition was more to do with ‘Manchester politics’ than the merits of the plans. (Oh really? See letter from a local resident below – eds).

On the gloomier side, the VC had just received a consultation copy of the draft new regulatory framework for HE. The proposals, he reported, are overly heavy-handed and appear to put into regulation what the government had been unable to achieve in Parliament just before the last general election. Then there was the matter of what he termed ‘the pensions squabble’. The USS Board was seeking to change the pension from a defined-benefit scheme to what was essentially a savings scheme. This was being resisted by UCU and as a result the university was likely to be facing industrial action beginning next February. ‘But we are not the enemy’, protested the VC, who happens to be the current chair of UCEA, the employers’ group which has not opposed these changes. Lancaster staff facing major reductions in their pension benefits, while having to make increased contributions, may beg to differ.

Senate then went on to discuss the Court Effectiveness Review. This was to be an opportunity for Senate to make any final comments to the Review Group before it made its final recommendations. One of the LUSU Senate reps made a strong plea for Court to retain its role in university governance, and for its single annual meeting to be given more support and prominence by the university. He took issue with the Chief Administrative Officer’s briefing document which stated that there was a lack of diversity in the Court membership but did not offer any evidence to support this claim. He pointed out that Court was far more diverse and representative than the membership of University Council or the senior management team. He also questioned whether Court required ‘a considerable amount of resource’ to support its function, as was claimed in the document. The Chief Administrative Officer responded by restating what she had already said in her briefing paper. There were some further contributions in favour of the current Court arrangements but the discussion was effectively ended when the VC declared that his preference was to remove all governance responsibilities from Court and to retain its annual meeting as only ‘a stakeholder event’. So that, we must presume, is that.

There then followed a report on the institutional Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for 2016/17. The VC indicated that overall, we were doing well against targets, though he was concerned that Lancaster is not doing as well as it should in retaining its students. Mental ill-health was identified as a major factor but for too many students there is no information on why they drop out. They simply leave without telling anyone why. Finally, there was that bit of the agenda covering written reports not presumed to warrant discussion. Thankfully, one eagle-eyed senator spotted a hugely important issue that was about to be nodded through without discussion- a reference to the Review of Part 1 which appeared to suggest that proposed changes would now be implemented after consultation with departments. Senate, of course, has yet to discuss and approve these changes. It was agreed that the report would be amended to make this clear. Just goes to show that careful reading of Senate papers is always worthwhile.

Comments Off on SENATE REPORT

Posted in official meetings

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

SURVEY MONKEYING AROUND

Posted on November 23 2017 | Comments Off on SURVEY MONKEYING AROUND

The VC is said to have been pleasantly surprised by the warm reception given to the plans for UA92 by the people of Stretford. We have to wonder how he gained that impression. At a recent public consultation, Gary Neville and our own Professor Sharon Huttly experienced at first hand the frustration felt by local people at the lack of information from Trafford Council, the Class of 92 and Lancaster University (staff here will no doubt fully sympathise in this regard). Reports from the meeting suggest that they were in fact taken aback by the strength of the opposition.

Perhaps the VC was relying on the results of an online poll conducted by Trafford Council, which apparently showed that 75% of local residents were in favour of the scheme. However, doubts arose about the reliability of this poll when it emerged that respondents were presented with four options for each survey question, three of which could be interpreted as positive responses. This is an approach to assessing opinion familiar to anyone who has ever completed a Lancaster staff satisfaction survey. Oh, and it was possible to fill in the survey as many times as you wanted. We must hope that further decisions on UA92 will be informed by better research. Perhaps if we are really lucky, they will create a word cloud (see subtext 160)!

Comments Off on SURVEY MONKEYING AROUND

Posted in news

Tagged , , , ,

THE ONLY WAY IS UA92

Posted on November 23 2017 | Comments Off on THE ONLY WAY IS UA92

It is with sadness that subtext noted that the authors of the letters in subtext 168 regarding the plans for UA92 all wished to remain anonymous, implying concern about expressing views other than that lending our collective academic credibility to this scheme is a fantastic idea.

It is noticeable that the ubiquitous propaganda screens which have appeared all over the refurbished areas of campus portray only one acceptable body type for anyone associated with UA92 i.e. beautiful, young, muscular, athletic and healthy, combined with a Serious Expression* (presumably indicative of ‘academic excellence’).

It would be a great shame if the repeated reinforcement of the message that ‘the university’ welcomes this association with the world of sport has also led to a perception that there is also only one acceptable mindset for anyone associated with Lancaster University i.e. blind agreement with the leaders’ decisions.

*if you haven’t clocked this expression on the UA92 PR machine then imagine a cross between Einstein, the Curies, de Beauvoir and Confucius at their most contemplative. Now forget that, and instead combine a lot of boredom, a touch of bewilderment and just a hint of belligerence.

Comments Off on THE ONLY WAY IS UA92

Posted in letters

Tagged , , ,

LETTERS

Posted on November 23 2017 | Comments Off on LETTERS

Dear subtext,

Why is it that every time I contact the central Travel team for some bookings I find that they cost much more than I thought they would? I’ve been consistently finding the quotes that Travel get to be more expensive than what I could find anywhere online. This is especially true for airline tickets, which are at least 10%-20% more expensive booked through Travel than through any respectable airline website.

Corridor conversations always stumble upon them providing ‘additional care’, but I did not find this to be true at all. I recently needed help during 2 conference trips where there were misunderstandings about the booking with the hotel. It was extremely difficult to get in touch with either Travel or Key, their provider, which resulted in frustrating experiences that required many non-fun hours of undoing with Travel and the Expenses admin team upon return.

Furthermore, I find that many times the bookings Travel make are expensive but not necessarily better. Even when I do the homework of researching hotels, flights, etc, I often end up with a sub-optimal itinerary from Travel that costs much more than expected. So on top of wasted time, I find that my hard-earned research funds are unnecessarily depleted by an aloof team that seems indifferent about spending taxpayers’ money.

Name withheld

********

Dear subtext,

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it? Your drones could assist Lancaster’s current management a little by unearthing the story of Lancaster’s first experiment in importing a head to a thriving department.

In an attempt to suppress the young revisionists in Sociology (such as Nick Abercrombie, the late John Urry and John Hughes) in 1972 Vice Chancellor Carter recruited Michelina Vaughan, an author of a letter to The Times attacking the 1968 LSE student protesters, to the first chair and to take over as head of department.

The rest is history…

John Wakeford

********

Dear subtext

Show me the way to go! How exciting the new high-tech, illuminated maps that have popped up all over campus are! I’ll be even more excited when the second phase is completed – and the magnifying glasses are attached so I can read the text…

Joanne Wood

********

Dear subtext,

Regarding your piece on sedentary professions (subtext 168). Television weather presenters. I have never seen, in this country or abroad, anyone present the weather forecast sitting down. I wonder why this is?

Best wishes

Cheryl Simmill-Binning

********

Dear subtext,

Lancaster University Contracts of Employment have referred to ancillary documents relating to sabbatical leave entitlement. With that detail ever changing, a request went from the VC’s forum on sabbatical leave (May, 2015) for a time-line of contractual changes. Having kept no records, HR was unable to provide that information, so leaving it for individuals to inform HR of their contractual terms. Effective from August 2017, this ‘embarrassment’ has been resolved. All earlier statements are now void. For example, an entitlement to sabbatical leave ‘as of right’ (PS/97/782 March 2007) is replaced by ‘the granting of Academic Research and Education Leave which is not an automatic right’ (http://tinyurl.com/ybxxxb2f). That it is still possible to download ‘Sabbatical Leave – 10 Question and Answers’ and ‘Lancaster University Application for Sabbatical Leave (HR111)’, shows that there is some tidying-up to do. The legal implication of losing an entitlement ‘as of right’ is beyond the layperson, whose best guess (in the case of this writer) is that the change is analogous to an individual being ‘innocent until proven guilty’, to one who is ‘guilty until proven innocent’. That the presumption of leave in the absence of any contrary argument is gone; replaced by the presumption of no leave without the approval of an HOD.

Gerry Steele

********

Dear subtext

You may be interested to learn of the recent UA92 meeting (9 November) for Stretford residents. I attended in that capacity.

Your own Prof Sharon Huttly was in attendance as well as Gary Neville. They both gave bland presentations then we proceeded to question.

The background is that as part of UA92 they want to put high rise student accommodation on a small site which is currently a well-used car park. The proposed building would be out of scale with the rest of the area and right next to our two listed buildings, Stretford Public Hall and the Essoldo building. It is true that some people support the idea, and Gary Neville’s fame no doubt contributes to that. We also have a dated shopping centre with a high vacancy rate, so some people believe the student accommodation will give that a boost. The whole project is being sold by the council as ‘regeneration’.

There is also much opposition among people who think the building will be far too overbearing in the proposed location and that it will have a detrimental effect on the area in terms of amenities, etc. It seems to be these people who are attending the meetings, including myself. Both Gary and Prof Sharon looked a little shocked at the negative reaction from locals.

Since that meeting, there has been a change of tone from the council in my opinion. There has been another meeting (21 November) to discuss Stretford Town Centre, were it was stressed that nothing is decided. There was more listening, and less of the ‘selling of their plan’ approach we had initially. There are, however, obvious concerns. The council will be landlords of the student accommodation, so there’s an obvious financial incentive for the proposed site to be as densely populated as possible. It is in a Labour ward of a Conservative held council, so there’s no political backlash for the majority of Councillors to worry about. We are now coming towards the end of the consultation so we will soon find out if the Council have listened to locals. To reiterate, neither I nor the locals I speak to are against students coming here. The concerns are the very high density accommodation proposed, and the prospects for the area if this is built and UA92 does not succeed.

Best regards,

Mike

Comments Off on LETTERS

Posted in letters

Tagged , , , , , , ,

SPORTS NEWS

Posted on November 9 2017 | Comments Off on SPORTS NEWS

TAKING ON THE STRETFORD END

In this issue, we publish a letter from a Stretford resident stating some of the objections from local residents to the siting of the new UA92 in the middle of their community (see Letters below). This is symptomatic of the growing – and strengthening – opposition in Stretford to the plans announced with much fanfare in September. Shortly after that announcement an online petition was launched which within days attracted over 900 signatures. The petition – addressed to Trafford Council – highlighted the environmental and social impact of having a 6,500-strong ‘student village’ built in the area. Local people have long campaigned to have the damage caused by previous ‘regeneration’ schemes to be put right, and were hoping that the current Stretford Town Centre Masterplan would at least begin to address this. Instead, they are having to deal with a scheme which, in their view, would make their situation worse.

Residents are particularly incensed that all this has been presented as a fait accompli by Trafford Council. There had been no consultation with residents and even local councillors had been kept in the dark. Since the plans were announced there has been one public consultation meeting, with another to come. However, some of those who attended the meeting are of the opinion that the Council is simply going through the motions and that it was all a done deal. At this stage, it is not clear if it was UA92 that first approached the Council for a piece of the Trafford Masterplan action or if it was the other way round. What we do know is that MediaCity in Salford was under consideration as the UA92 site when, late in the day, the Stretford option appeared on the table, suggesting that it was Trafford Council who made the approach. It would appear that the star appeal of the Class of 92 was such that the Council was prepared to make a significant change to its own development plan in order to accommodate their wishes.

Trafford is not the first local authority in the area to be dazzled by the glamour of these footballing legends. Earlier this year the Salford Star announced the winner of one of its annual awards for ‘the most deserving individuals and organisations in the city for their stupid statements, dodgy dealings and iffy activities over the last twelve months’. And the winner of this accolade for 2016 was Salford City Council for ‘the very strange manner in which planning permission was obtained for Salford City FC to develop its Moor Lane stadium’, the same club that’s 50% owned by the Class of 92. And who owns the other half? Why, none other than Mr Peter Lim, who already controls 75% of the said Class of 92. The Salford Star also highlighted the role of a company called Zerum Construction Management Ltd, which seems to specialise in helping development companies find the cheapest way through those pesky planning regulations. A quick search of the Companies House database reveals that Zerum is 75%-owned by a Mr Gary Neville. Not for nothing has the Star decided to name its annual prize the ‘Gary Neville Finger in Pies Award’.

***

GIGGSY THOUGHT ON HIGHER EDUCATION WITH FOOTBALL CHARACTERISTICS IN THE GETTING RICHER ERA

The UA92 website continues to astound with its philosophical pronouncements and its steadfast refusal to be bound by niceties of syntax and logic. Its ‘Vision’, we are told, is to ‘educate preparation to realise dreams’. And what does this mean? Apparently, it’s about ‘giving our graduates the tools, challenges, support and confidence to make amazing happen.’

Ryan Giggs, long-experienced in giving 110% effort when he played for Man U, gives his own prescription for ‘making amazing happen’. ‘Here at UA92’, he states, ‘we believe that tenacity, preparedness, passion and hard work play an equally important role. Add commitment, inner fire and the right preparation, and you can compete at a level far beyond your inborn potential…’

While we at the Mother Campus limit our ambitions to helping students develop to their full potential, at UA92 they will be encouraged, nay enabled, to go ‘far beyond’ that potential. To infinity and beyond, indeed. And all this, in the closing words of the ‘Vision’, will be ‘underpinned by the academic rigour of top-performing, world-renowned Lancaster University.’

We have been warned.

***

MAN-U-SPLAINING

Aside from lauding its ‘good character building’, UA92 has also been publicly committing itself to a widening participation agenda.

Presenting educational opportunities to people from marginalised communities requires tact, empathy, and an understanding of the barriers that people face, and who better to smash stereotypes and level the playing field than the Class of ’92? A body whose commitment to ‘closing the gender pay gap’ and ‘generating… public interest in the women’s game’ culminated in their sponsorship of the Lingerie Football League (http://tinyurl.com/yce32ouz)

We look forward to UA92’s positive presentation of poor, disabled, and ethnic minority students. We suggest a flashmob of soot encrusted children in Victorian dress, Joey Deacon impressions, and a black and white minstrel show [that’s enough – ed].

Comments Off on SPORTS NEWS

Posted in news

Tagged , , , , , , ,

LETTERS

Posted on November 9 2017 | Comments Off on LETTERS

Dear subtext,

I suspect I’m not alone in asking if you’ve seen our latest signage but if not I suggest you pop ‘down south’ for a look. At first it all appeared very corporate and professional, a smart look with clear white on black text (though some colleagues feel the text is too small). However as of this week we’ve had a very odd black monolith appear at the south end of the spine with a map so small you’ll need to be issued with a magnifying glass to view, and a step ladder if you’re under 6ft tall. To cap it all Charles Carter has gained purple, black and white signage and the ISS building itself has a nice place for students or staff to rest their pint glasses, empty bottles and ashtrays on. The funny thing about the ISS building is you’d have to walk right up to the door to even read the sign!

Also has anyone commented on the removal of the location grid from the maps, replaced by some sort of numbering scheme? Patently the designer of the map has never had to use one to find anything! Nah let’s just get rid of the grid lines, we don’t like boxes, we’re not a box university! You can just imagine the meeting.

Name supplied

********

Dear subtext,

The new UA92 campus will educate 6500 new students – a 50% increase on Lancaster’s current numbers. This is being imposed on a town in Manchester which has a settled, established community of 30000. Many residents are very worried about the impact of such a high influx of students on our infrastructure and existing community. Part of the plan is to build a 20 storey tower on a very small site in the heart of Stretford which will house 1700 students. In a ‘masterplan’ consultation, our local council has shared vague information about how it will all work, hiding the most alarming plans within very long documents. It feels like our concerns are going unheard. We have yet to have any direct input from UA92, or from Lancaster. We would really like to hear evidence that all parties involved are considering the local community – perhaps some commitments to widening participation schemes and other outreach locally. But there is nothing, and we feel like our town is just being used to make more money for people who already have lots.

A Stretford resident (name supplied)

********

Dear subtext,

Your concerns over posters on campus advertising a public meeting on the centenary of the Balfour declaration (HOW NOT TO PROMOTE A POLITICAL MEETING, 26 Oct. 2017) seem to me misplaced. subtext objects to the ‘alarm’ likely to be caused among members of the University community by discussion of ‘Jewish opposition to Zionism’. There will doubtless be those that that disagree with speaker Robert Cohen’s views on Zionism, but is there really any reason to be alarmed at this subject being discussed?

subtext also objects to part of the poster’s blurb which states: ‘most Jewish communities around the world will be celebrating the anniversary’ of the Balfour declaration. This is actually the first half of a sentence, which in full reads: ‘While most Jewish communities around the world will be celebrating the anniversary, Palestinians see it as an historic betrayal of their rights, the implications of which are still being played out today’. Again, it is hard to see what is objectionable about this statement.

The piece goes on to cite a survey recording that ‘93% of British Jews feel that Israel is important to their identity’. The argument that seems to follow is that a similar number of British Jews regard the Balfour declaration as ‘on the whole, probably a good thing’ and would therefore not feel welcome at the advertised event. It seems a stretch to interpret British Jews seeing Israel as ‘important’ to their identity to represent any value judgement about the modern state of Israel, let alone a statement by a British Foreign Secretary made 100 years ago – even one as important as the Balfour declaration. More worrying is the inference that because a certain group holds something to be central to their identity, critical debate of this subject should be discouraged for fear of offending members of that group.

In a week when Chris Heaton-Harris MP seemingly united academia in defending freedom of political expression on university campuses it is disappointing to see subtext (usually a staunch defender of these values) objecting to a poster advertising discussion of a controversial topic – even if it is in a silly font.

Yours sincerely,

Thomas Mills

********

Dear subtext,

Have you seen the promotional video for the UA UA92? https://www.ua92.ac.uk/about-ua92. It is wrong on so many levels! Coming from a University that used to pride itself on its Centre for Women’s Studies we now seem to have slid into a very ‘iffy’ area of marketing. Entire thesis could be written about this representation of women in this presentation (the funding should be easy to achieve in the current Weinstein climate). It is so inappropriate that it would take an entire edition of subtext to discuss. Am I the only person who feels this presents Lancaster University in a very bad light? Sorry but on this one I feel Lancaster is way off trend.

Name supplied

Comments Off on LETTERS

Posted in letters

Tagged , , , , , ,

NEVILLE MIND

Posted on October 26 2017 | Comments Off on NEVILLE MIND

Phil Neville is the somewhat less famous of the two brothers in the Class of 92, our new partners in UA92. In recent years he has become better known for a brief and inglorious career as manager of Valencia FC (owner, Peter Lim) and for his narcolepsy-inducing football commentaries for Sky Sports. This has not deterred him from seeking to branch out into the world of political punditry. The recent appearances of Hillary Clinton on TV to promote her new book prompted him to tweet: ‘Hillary Clinton on the One Show’ along with a laughing-face emoji, followed by: ‘Hillary you lost move on’. Nice.

This was not Phil’s only foray into the maelstrom of American politics. After the Presidential election result was confirmed, Phil announced via twitter: ‘I knew Trump would win’. This prompted a certain degree of scepticism among his many followers, several of whom responded along the lines of: ‘Yeah, sure you did, mystic Phil’. But others were grateful for this enlightenment, with one remarking: ‘Thank God you let us know. I was only asking the lads earlier: I wonder what Phil Neville thinks of it all. Delighted I know now’.

Comments Off on NEVILLE MIND

Posted in news

Tagged , , , , ,

I GOT 92 PROBLEMS BUT A PITCH AIN’T ONE

Posted on October 26 2017 | 2 comments

Faced with UA92, the new higher education venture fronted by ex-manchester united players , one must confess to a certain confusion. One’s immediate reaction was, frankly, hilarity. This was then tempered by a realisation that this project was a rare example of sportsmen putting their (considerable) money where their (also considerable) mouths were. Then one realised that the project is, however well-intentioned, primarily a money-making venture, and one starts to feel uneasy.

Anyway, cleaving close to the subtext mission statement to carp and criticise, it is perfectly possible to think that this project is a jolly commendable idea in many ways while also thinking that it is not necessarily something that Lancaster University (yes, that’s uppercase) should necessarily be hitching its wagon to. Of course, we don’t know the fine details of the deal, but we’re sure larger and better-informed minds than ours have no doubt thought long and hard about how it will work, and what our commitment and investment should be. However, a number of questions persist, most of them under the umbrella of ‘what could possibly go wrong?’ University teaching is described in the publicity as the third leg of a triad, along with sport and business. Even allowing for the VC’s recent comments on building links with business, this goes beyond links and into partnership. That’s a sea-change. Maybe a good one, but it’ll be difficult to distance ourselves if this all goes wrong, and it might. UA92, it seems, aims to fill a gap somewhere between HE and FE, mixed up with a kind of Matthew Arnold-esque emphasis on mens sana in corpore sano, building character and quadriceps with equal enthusiasm, maximising self-reliance and oxygen uptake in the same programme. If it works, fine. If it doesn’t, our name is all over it.

Which is odd, because you can go through the UA92 website for a long time without discovering what Lancaster University will actually do for these lucky students. You will discover that ‘Universities have traditionally placed academic learning at the core of the curriculum, supported by character development for the world of work’. By comparison, UA92 will deliver ‘a curriculum with employability and character development at the core wrapped around by academic development.’ Um, ok, well, that doesn’t sound so much like a vision, more a change of emphasis at most. And are we happy to be the afterthought in this arrangement?

We learn further that the ‘Target Talent Curriculum’ (harrumph) seeks ‘to put personal development at the core of the learning experience’, and that it will focus on providing students with ten attributes: academic learning, life skills, work experience, how to survive in demanding workplace situations, leadership skills, peer group analysis, participative learning, fitness, and presentation and financial skills. Leaving aside the Blair-esque meaninglessness of a phrase like ‘Target Talent Curriculum’, we note that of the ten desirable attributes, academic learning is just one. Not their priority, then. Is this to be like the Associate College scheme, where students come here for a top-up degree in their third year? If so, will these students, however bursting with peer-group analysis skills they may be, find the academic playing field to be level? Or will the field be re-marked to fit them, in which case how will their degrees compare to those students who have been here for three years, pale of skin and character, and short on resilience and the ability to survive in demanding workplace situations, but nevertheless well-trained in passing exams?

But harken we to the words of the VC. ‘This is a good time to test the appetite for a venture of this nature for two reasons. Firstly, the government wishes to open up the Higher Education marketplace to new and innovative ways of delivery. Secondly, businesses are becoming increasingly interested in how Higher Education can prepare students for working life. This project is designed to address both of those ideas head on.’ So that’s all right then.

2 Comments

Posted in news

Tagged , , ,