- Canais RSS
Campaign for the Public University
Actualizado: fai 6 horas 57 min
This article in the Independent outlines the call by academics and Citizens UK for UK universities to do more to support refugees and asylum seekers by offering scholarships and bursaries as needed. This is linked to an open letter to Universities UK calling for a sector wide response to the situation. In the last couple of days, both the University of Warwick and the University of York have announced packages of support for students and academics in such situations. This is very welcome news. Colleagues at the University of Brighton have also set up a petition to encourage their university to support this call. We would be happy to list all the initiatives taken by universities on this page. Please email us at public firstname.lastname@example.org For colleagues wanting more detailed information, we would strongly recommend that you contact any or all of the following organisations for guidance and support in terms of how best to develop any proposals locally. The Refugee Support Network‘s Higher Education programme offers advice and support to young asylum seekers and refugees who are seeking to access university in the UK. For more information about RSN’s free helpline for young people and practitioners, its ‘Thinking Ahead to Higher Education’ Toolkit, its training package for university and voluntary sector staff, and other helpful links and resources, please visit this page. Article 26 is a project of the Helena Kennedy Foundation. The main aim of Article 26 is to promote access to Higher Education for people who have fled persecution and sought asylum in the UK. CARA, the Council for At-Risk Academics, helps academics and scientists fleeing from discrimination, persecution, suffering and violence in some of the world’s most dangerous places.
To the Vice Chancellors of UK Universities,
A Call on UK Universities to provide Scholarships and Bursaries for Students and Academics seeking Refuge
We are writing to you in the context of the current refugee and migrant crisis that confronts Europe. We are aware of the excellent work done by some universities in collaboration with third sector organisations such as Article 26, STAR (Student Action for Refugees), CARA (Council for At-Risk Academics), and the Refugee Support Network among others. However, we believe that the time is right for a sector-wide response and a public commitment.
Europe is faced with a challenge to its human values and whether it will meet its obligations in the face of suffering.
As you will be aware, many of those fleeing violence and war are young people whose education has been disrupted and as well as seeking freedom from persecution are also wishing to rebuild their lives through education. Article 26 of the UDHR sets out the right to education. It specifies that ‘higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit’. Yet, those who have been forced to flee face difficulty in accessing education because they do not have access to loans or employment to support them in pursuing it.
Academics also need support. Many of those now being forced to flee say that they want to return home, when circumstance allows, to help re-build their societies and higher education systems. Many UK universities are already helping; but the scale of the problem means that universities need now to go further.
1) that each university in the UK set up at least 5 scholarships and bursaries at undergraduate, postgraduate and post-doctoral levels for those fleeing from violence and conflict, to be available from this academic year.
2) that these scholarships and bursaries be attached to the initiatives established by CARA and Article 26.
We also request:
3) that each university in the UK should advertise and promote a welcome to those who have been forced to flee violence, war and persecution.
4) that each university in the UK makes and / or maintains active links with CARA and sets up a working group of academics to support at-risk academics in their local communities.
5) that each university seeks to support those with qualifications seeking recognition or enhancement of those qualifications.
This call is supported by Citizens UK and the Campaign for the Public University.
With the current media attention on the plight of refugees and migrants, colleagues may be interested to know about Article 26, which is a project of the Helena Kennedy Foundation. The main aim of Article 26 is to promote access to Higher Education for people who have fled persecution and sought asylum in the UK. The Article 26 project works in partnership with universities to provide advice and guidance on creating packages of support for students seeking asylum, which enables them to not only access but succeed in Higher Education. This includes a full tuition fee bursary and funding to meet some of the additional costs associated with studying.
The universities currently offering bursaries to asylum seekers for the 2015-16 academic year are listed here:
A number of colleagues have expressed an interest in getting their universities to offer bursaries and so I thought it might be helpful to circulate this information. Some universities are doing things independently but it would be helpful to coordinate efforts via Article 26 as it expresses a collective wish to do more and can help to persuade other universities to do more still. There is a suggestion that all universities could offer at least 10 such scholarships and bursaries. We have appended below a draft letter that can be adapted for use to contact senior admin at your universities.
We are writing to you in the context of the refugee crisis in Europe. As you will be aware, many of the refugees are young people whose education has been disrupted and as well as seeking freedom from persecution are also wishing to rebuild their lives through education. We are asking you to consider setting up 10 scholarships and bursaries to support refugees and asylum seekers in obtaining higher education. We are asking you to do this as part of a coordinated effort via Article 26.
Article 26 is a project of the Helena Kennedy Foundation whose main aim is to promote access to Higher Education for people who have fled persecution and sought asylum in the UK. The Article 26 project works in partnership with universities to provide advice and guidance on creating packages of support for students seeking asylum, which enables them to not only access but succeed in Higher Education. This includes a full tuition fee bursary and funding to meet some of the additional costs associated with studying. For more information, see here:
By Charles Kowalski
The REF was meant to measure research excellence, but is far from rational process that enhances research. Now a metrics based ‘teaching REF’ – the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) – has been announced by the Universities and Science Minister, Jo Johnson, following on from a manifesto commitment. As Bill Readings argued though: ‘all departments of the University can be urged to strive for excellence, since the general applicability of the notion is in direct relation to its emptiness. [… Indeed,] Cornell University Parking Services recently received an award for “excellence in parking”’ (1996: 23-24). The empty meaning of decontextualised ‘excellence’ is no barrier to neoliberal audit culture.
In the recent highly regressive budget which saw grants for poorer students replaced with loans, the Tories announced that the fee cap could rise in-line with inflation for those institutions that ‘could offer high teaching quality’. This will go some small way to pleasing the Vice Chancellors. Universities UK called for the ability for universities to charge more than £9000, arguing that the real value of this cap had been eroded by inflation, even though inflation is low because of austerity. In the year that saw the trebling of the tuition fee, the average pay of VCs went up 8.1%. Johnson though is heading for excellence in flimflamming. Whilst promising ‘incentives’ to improve teaching he rowed back on these being financial.
What metrics the TEF would attempt to measure ‘excellence’ with is yet to be decided, with Willetts just noting that ‘quite an eclectic mix’ may be needed, presumably in recognition of the elusive nature of ‘excellence’. If discipline specific tests are used then academics may well end up, under heavy managerial pressure, teaching to the test and getting students to memorise model answers. Moreover, if tests are to be discipline specific then it could be argued that moving from A levels to 2:1 or 1st class degree level work ought in itself to indicate progress. Given this, either the test as a meaningful measure is redundant or, if the degree grades are not to be trusted, the entire system of university marking is not trusted, in which case one would have a discipline based test sitting alongside a system of discipline based education that was implicitly not trusted.
To make the measures scientific there is talk of using grade point averages (GPAs) so numbers can be recorded and graphs drawn, praise given, admonitions administered, and departments closed, on an ‘objective’ basis. Seeing the GPA as a gold standard created by the bureaucrats’ stone ignores the fact it just translates existing grades into a more bureaucratic form, in which case the existing grades would function as indicators of progress and any extra test would be pointless. Alternatively, there may be general tests of ability independent of disciplines. Again there could be teaching to the test, making it redundant. Or, if it were like an IQ test then, leaving aside problems raised with IQ testing, it would only end up measuring a putatively static ability.
One stated objective of the TEF is encourage ‘cognitive gain’ with ‘distance travelled’ being important, to reward (somehow) institutions that took students from disadvantaged backgrounds and significantly enhanced their cognitive ability. The Tories state that by 2020 they want to double the number of disadvantaged students in higher education relative to 2009. However, removing grants and raising fees may well put people off, given the staggering debt that would be amassed. Further, the repayment cap is now frozen at £21,000 meaning that the real rate at which graduates begin repayment will reduce with inflation. It is also possible the interest rate may be hiked and 25 year cut off extended, as McGettigan (2013) notes.
Employment opportunities were also mentioned as one possible measure of excellence. This may well serve the interests of the Russell Group who have many students from privileged backgrounds tending to go into privileged positions in the labour market, which may happen on the basis of their accent and mannerism. Any fee increase will be least off-putting for such students, especially those from fee paying schools who parents are used to paying a lot more than £9000 a year in fees. Meanwhile, other institutions will face a de facto funding cut. This is in a context where working class students with higher grade A levels are less likely to apply to Russell Group universities. So, posh students may get posh jobs having gone to posh universities, which may be able to charge more, with bright but not posh students going to universities that may be facing funding cuts, in a system supposedly designed to deliver teaching excellence especially to disadvantaged students.
Perhaps though the method for raising social mobility here, other than redefining child poverty and disadvantage by fiat, is to put the emphasis on the customer purchasing the most useful type of educational capital. If they fail to invest in themselves with the ‘correct’ educational capital then under or unemployment is their fault, with the reducing welfare state then taking this into account. This may apply to disciplines as well as university ‘brands’, with the Education Secretary Nicky Morgan stating recently that non STEM subjects led to significant labour market disadvantage. Interestingly though there is evidence that philosophical discussions about truth, fairness and kindness (things that may be good as ends in themselves) are also a useful means to improve literary and maths in primary school teaching, contrary to the demonisation of subjects that are deemed not to be instrumentally useful for business, in a world that wants children manufactured into corporate drones. Repeating model answers in STEM subjects and hoping to pass the posh test may be the way to achieving neoliberal excellence in higher education, with those who ‘fail’ working on zero hours contracts as ‘parking excellence associates’, parking the cars of the fat cat VCs, going forward into the new Victorian era.
McGettigan, A. 2013. The Great University Gamble. London: Pluto.
Readings, B. 1996. The University In Ruins. London: Harvard University Press.
By Charles Kowalski
Tony Little, the current headmaster of Eton, who is stepping down to work for a Dubai based chain of fee paying schools, wrote in the Times Higher Education that first year university students were receiving substandard education. The article appeared just before publication of his book, which describes Little as a visionary who just had to speak out. It says: “One of the most progressive and imaginative people in British education today he has hitherto kept a low profile”. There is also a plug for a possible TV series too.
Little complained that pupils from his school, which charges £34, 434 per year, felt that university teaching was not up to scratch and he added to this the conjecture that an emphasis on research had to undermine teaching, except with a few younger staff. To remedy this, he called for university lecturers teaching first years to undertake internships in schools to see how it should be done.
Clearly reliance on anecdotal data and inferences based on a non sequitur coupled with a ‘get out clause’ (research must undermine teaching (except where it does not)) are teasingly bits of joshing designed to whet our appetites to buy the book and see the TV series.
Let’s consider a few points though. School and A level education is based on teaching to the test. Model answers are memorised as a means to pass a test. Fee paying schools have more resources to pay for this spoon feeding. University education is meant to be based on students becoming independent learners who are able to undertake their own research, motivated, hopefully, at least in part, by a love of learning for its own sake as much as any concern to ‘do well’. If a private education enhanced pupils’ ability to be independent thinkers and problem solvers then they should adapt well to the new challenge that university presented and enjoy the golden spoon being put away. However, a study by the Sutton Trust in 2010 and two separate studies in 2013 undertaken by researchers at Cardiff University and Oxford Brookes University, found that pupils from comprehensive schools outperformed those from fee paying schools. In other words, those with higher grade A levels who had less resources spent on them were better able to adapt to university than those from more privileged backgrounds. The Telegraph also reported in 2013 that data from the Higher Education Funding Council showed that those from private schools got better grades. However, as an article for the Local Schools Network argued, the HEFC study had over 16000 respondents with ‘unknown’ schooling backgrounds and the data suggested that financial concerns may impact on degree results. With the cap coming off tuition fees and the abolition of the grant for students from poorer families (replaced with a loan), money worries may only rise amongst those who do not regard annual fees of less than £34,000 to be a big reduction in tuition cost.
Nonetheless, students from privileged backgrounds tend to get higher paid jobs with privilege being reproduced. A number of factors contribute to this, such as the ability to undertake unpaid internships in central London and social networks. Recently, research by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission found that recruitment panels often used accent and mannerism as proxies for intelligence and ability, which acted in effect as ‘poshness tests’ to screen out bright graduate from non privileged backgrounds.
So, if Little wants to improve education it would be better to send his privileged pupils to comprehensives rather than send lecturers off for training on how to spoon feed privileged students. However, if education is just a means and not something valuable in itself, then having a posh education may be the best means to get a posh job from a posh seeking selection panel. The 3 gap yahs from privilege do not seem to do that much harm to the reproduction of privilege.