Skip to main content

Day: 17 March 2018

Johannessorger @ Wikimedia Commons

Degrees to be rated in new government scheme

Written by Nicole Wootton-Cane on . Posted in News.

The government is proposing to introduce a new system that will see degree courses rated gold, silver, and bronze by quality.

The scheme will rate courses subject by subject and builds on the Teaching Excellence Framework ranking that announced its first results in June.

The new scheme is to be piloted with 50 universities, but the results will not be live for students to consult until 2020.

Universities Minister Sam Gyimah told the BBC that under the system “universities will no longer be able to hide if their teaching quality is not up to the world-class standard that we expect”.

However, the National Union of Students (NUS) are anxious about the scheme’s link to the TEF and said: “Unfortunately the Teaching Excellence Framework does little to measure teaching excellence and extending it to subject level won’t solve the problem”.

The announcement comes after thousands of students plan to boycott the National Student Survey (NSS) for a second year running due to its links to the TEF.

The TEF’s initial aim was to grade universities and Bronze, Silver or Gold based on the quality of teaching. Following this, TEF was to link Gold and Silver status with raising tuition fees.

However, after strong student opposition from the first NSS boycott, the House of Lords demanded that the link between the TEF and tuition fees should be severed.

Currently, the link still exists but has been delayed until 2020 when tuition fees could be unfrozen. The TEF is currently under an independent review.

Education officer Emma Atkins called the new system ‘subject-level TEF’ and told The Mancunion: “You can’t measure education like this, it shouldn’t ever be linked to fees and you can’t put all the complexities of education into 3 boxes”.

The government has launched a consultation into the way the new system will operate, which is expected to last 10 weeks.

The University of Manchester has been contacted for comment.

Why are students disinterested in the Students’ Union?

Written by Lucinda Obank on . Posted in Features.

Student voting remained low for this year’s Students’ Union Executive Officer elections, with a turnout of just 19.8 per cent. Although higher than last year’s 16 per cent, it was a lot lower than 2015’s peak turnout of 34.4 per cent.

Yet, these statistics don’t seem reflective of the volume of students concerned by recent issues across campus and student areas of the city that SU officers are positioned to address.

During a semester which has seen students riled by the disruption of the UCU strikes, the closure of Antwerp Mansion, ongoing safety concerns in Fallowfield, and thousands taking to the streets of the university campaigning against sexual violence and gender discrimination, what is preventing students from voting in the elections where candidates have explicitly outlined their proposals to confront these issues?

After speaking to students, there seems to be a general lack in understanding about the role the Students’ Union plays and its power as an institution to impose change on campus. Despite being the largest Students’ Union in the country, many I spoke to admitted to only entering the the Students’ Union building for a coffee or a slice of cake, or not at all.

Many remain blissfully unaware of the services it offers: a platform for creating campaigns and funding opportunities, student media outlets, advice on academia/finance/housing/wellbeing, supporting the wide range of societies on campus, volunteering and charity work, a resource hub providing training from finance to fundraising, an Insight Department conducting research related to students and lots more. This may be a vital reason for poor voter turnout, as many students remain disengaged in the functioning of the Students’ Union.

Students also expressed doubt in the Exec officers’ ability to make a difference, and believed the painfully slow process of changing things at university made voting “pointless.” As many students feel little has been done recently in relation to the strikes they have started to question their capacity to intervene. Third year student Rebecca Neary commented that changes will be made long after they have left so voting won’t make any difference to their life at university.

Another belief expressed was that the members of the Exec team are unrelatable — that they are too broad in their plans, and the ways they will go about issues are unclear.

Anthony Menezes ran for Activities and Development Officer, but lost to Lizzy Haughton by 20 votes. He told The Mancunion: “students are completely indifferent to who wins the annual exec elections. This is because there is a growing divide between officers and students students don’t feel like they can easily communicate with an officer if they have an issue. There aren’t enough opportunities for the students and officers to mingle.”

During the campaign, he said he tried to remain approachable and emphasised he would remain so if successful.

When speaking to students who did vote, the majority did so because they knew a friend campaigning and so voted for them, not necessarily because of their plans when running.

Student Hattie Willicombe said, “I voted because they were giving out free lollypops”, and Saskia Casanova added: “I voted because I got a free cupcake”. When talking further to these students they revealed that their voting was random and they only did so because of the free food.

However, they did express an interest in the elections but felt it was difficult to find information on the candidates and suggested that perhaps a campaign video would be useful to watch which goes through the candidates individually. They felt that coming in during lectures and shouting information was not effective in trying to gain votes.

Alex Tayler, the outgoing General Secretary, told The Mancunion after this year’s election that he was impressed with the results, despite the turnout percentage not matching up to other universities.

“Given the issues around the building works, strike action, and terrible weather, I think it’s impressive that we’ve managed to increase on last year.”

He added that another factor may have been that “some people were put off by the crap that comes with student politics”.

Striking lecturers host ‘teach-outs’

Written by Hana Jafar on . Posted in News.

Staff across schools at the University of Manchester have launched a series of public teach-outs taking place throughout the weeks of industrial strike action, as part of a protest against the USS pension scheme.

The informal talks are not intended to replace missed course material, but as an alternative form of teaching and learning to encourage discourse, often with a socio-political focus. They may address the marketisation of higher education, or explore the historical context of past protest movements.

A recent teach-out hosted by the English Literature and American Studies department was held on Thursday the 8th of March in a packed room at the Students’ Union, with almost forty students and academics sitting, standing, and kneeling wherever space was available. Talks covered a myriad of subjects from grime rap in the courtroom to the politics of sugary desserts in literature.

Eithne Quinn, one of the academics contributing to the teach-out called it a “special event” offering a chance for “powerful political critique”.

Noelle Gallagher, head of the English Literature department delivered a talk called “Why study Literature of the Past?”. She commented that teach-outs were about making research work “visible and explicit” and highlighted the pressure that academics often faced in having to prove that their work was ‘relevant’ in the increasing marketisation of education.

Her talk argued that perceived “cultural capital” posed a risk of “forgetting” important issues, using the example of Jane Austen’s ‘photoshopped’ image on the ten pound note to illustrate the glamorisation of figures in Literature.

Academics were not the only speakers. Two final year students also played a video of University of Manchester Chancellor Lemn Sissay performing his poem ‘Making A Difference’ which was released at the Social Responsibility Awards in May. Their commentary of the poem emphasised the supposedly ironic nature of the poem, in light of increasing marketisation of education, and the University of Manchester’s refusal to divest from Fossil Fuels.

Ella Aurora, a second year student in attendance spoke to The Mancunion about how the teach-outs created “a sense of a community of people who share a love for academia and a desire to defend it [sic]”. Other teach-outs are scheduled to take place during strike days in cafes, bars, and inns. These are not limited just to talks, but poetry readings, discussions, and historical walking tours.

Many other Universities are following the same practice, with the likes of Cambridge, UCL, Oxford, Leeds, and Cardiff University hosting teach-outs alongside the National four week staff walk outs. With recent negotiations between Universities UK (UUK) and The University and Colleges Union (UCU) resulting in a continued strike, students across 61 Universities in the UK are increasingly worried about the impact of industrial action on their education.

Striking staff are not allowed to answer e-mails during strike days, teach course material, or assist with any course related queries. Some lecturers and tutors are allegedly making appearances at recruitment panels, rearranging missed lectures, or releasing podcasts. However, the majority of striking faculty members are refusing to reschedule missed lectures, maintaining their stance on pensions and industrial action.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Queer Eye – Lessons in self-love

Written by James Johnson on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Netflix’s latest, explosive phenomenon Queer Eye manages to do in eight episodes what many others fail to achieve; a cult-like following based on a truly wholesome message- self-love.

Dropping the ‘straight guy’ from the title of its former inception, Queer Eye is a new and re-vamped series that sets to rejuvenate the lives of eight ordinary Americans, both straight and gay, because a little self-love need not be relegated to a single orientation.

Take a cursory glance at the opening of the first episode and you may be forgiven for thinking it a fickle exploration into superficial standards of beauty.

A little redoing of the bathroom cabinet and a little shave of the hair and bam, everything in the world is okay again. But be mistaken at your own will, Queer Eye is a whole world away from a materialistic makeover show.

Ten minutes in, you’ve likely fallen head over heels for the unadulterated likeability of Grooming Expert, Jonathan Van Ness, and you’re wondering why Queer Eye hasn’t been filling the world’s happiness void for years gone by.

In a nutshell, Queer Eye is comprised of five experts, known as the ‘Fab Five’; Tan France, Style Expert, Karamo Brown, Culture Expert, Anthony Porowski, Food and Wine Expert, Jonathan Van Ness, Grooming Expert and Bobby Berk, Interior Design Expert.

This compilation of five experts blends seamlessly to overhaul the lives of eight Americans from a spectrum of different backgrounds – backgrounds that may cause the viewer to raise an eyebrow or two, especially considering the bold and undeniably wonderful ‘Queerness’ of the ‘Fab Five’.

The original ‘Queer Eye for The Straight Guy’ based itself in New York City but its revival sees the ‘Fab Five’ relocated to Atlanta, Georgia, a metropolis in the heart of the Deep South.

Herein lies part of the success of Queer Eye– a confrontation of the uncomfortable, and an attempt to continue changing perspectives.

In the many interviews given by the Fab Five since Netflix dropped the new series in February, the message has been consistent; ‘it’s so much more about what’s happening on the inside, more so than the physical appearance of those undergoing makeovers’.

Culture Expert, Karamo Brown explains that his role is as much a Lifecoach as it is an expert in culture.

Helping the subjects of each episode understand what it is that holds them back from achieving their potential goes hand in hand with a makeover of their appearance and of their homes.

So, whilst the format of the show remains largely unchanged since its initial inception in 2003, why is it that Queer Eye is connecting so much with the 2018 audience?

In part, Queer Eye is a blunt confrontation on masculinity. Set in Atlanta, the Fab Five reach out to a largely conservative set of subjects, and the results of their transformations will likely bring you to tears.

The show also devotes equal time giving focus to the emotional, as well as the physical, wellbeing of each person.

Food and Wine Expert, Anthony Porowski helps them to use food and wine to foster well-being in their lives and Fashion Expert, Tan France always underscores that their style is whatever makes them feel good about themselves.

Queer Eye transcends the television screen and forces us to ask ourselves: how much care are we really taking of ourselves?

As with any reboot of a successful format, viewers will begin watching, sceptical of a cheap remake.

New viewers will likely find the unfiltered personas of the Fab Five a little much at first, but herein lies a main theme of the show, and a problem in queer culture more generally.

As a gay/queer person more generally, it’s easy to fall guilty to misplacing perceptions of others in the community. At first, the cast of Queer Eye seems a little predictable. But the cast is anything but predictable.

They are instead, a display of living out your identity in its truest sense, unashamed, proud and projects how that can only ever be a force for good- removing the binary of either straight or gay acting queer folk only adds to the insatiable likeability of the show.

So, indulge yourself in eight episodes of pure joy, because if the newly gained following of the Fab Five is anything to go by, Queer Eye is set to be a television staple for years to come.