issue 51

19 March 2009

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

'Truth: lies open to all'

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

Every fortnight during term-time.

All editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors [at] lancaster.ac.uk.

Please delete as soon as possible after receipt. Back issues and subscription details can be found at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext.

The editors welcome letters, comments, suggestions, and opinions from readers. subtext reserves the right to edit submissions.

subtext does not publish material that is submitted anonymously, but is willing to consider without obligation requests for publication with the name withheld.

For tips to prevent subtext from getting swept up into your 'junk email folder', see http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/dejunk/.

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

CONTENTS: editorial; news in brief; Tony Evans; attendance monitoring; science park; Storey Institute; urban myth; letters.

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

EDITORIAL: THE FUTURE OF THE COLLEGES

Earlier this month saw the announcement of the membership of (another) working group set up to look at various issues surrounding the future of the Colleges at Lancaster. With it one might be forgiven for experiencing an acute sense of déjà vu. The LUSU President was right to press University Council and the Vice-Chancellor for this initiative, even though at times it must have felt akin to pulling teeth, as the concession was grudgingly extracted. The omens, however, are not good.

There is already a group reviewing the role of the colleges in the academic life of the University (did you know that?). The additional one has been asked to examine various aspects surrounding the vitality of the colleges at Lancaster, but its terms of reference would appear to be somewhat narrow and based on a perspective that sees the issues and any problems as essentially internal to the colleges themselves. So it intends to look at how student engagement in college life can be increased and whether and how college activities and facilities reflect the diversity of student interests. All well and good we hear you say, but this is perhaps to miss the point. What the colleges lack are institutional commitment and understanding - which can take different forms and are not just about additional financial resources - and effective representation and advocacy at the highest level.

subtext has a suggestion to offer which could save much time and effort for the group. It is for all its members to be given a copy of the 1994 Audland Report (SASA/93/1595r). Though now a little dated it will repay careful reading. Unlike the current small group, this Committee was established as a joint committee of the Senate and the Council and was chaired by the then Pro-Chancellor, Sir Christopher Audland. Its membership, likewise, reflected the seriousness with which it approached its agreed task: to review the workings of the college system. In a careful and at times critical appraisal it indicated that the role played by the colleges has evolved over the years and that, whilst they were likely to have a limited role for the majority of academic staff, for students they have achieved a great deal. This is a message which has been echoed in other investigations, including QAA audits. The report also had valuable things to say about the optimum size and resourcing (including distribution of the bar profits) of the colleges. One of its basic conclusions bears repeating here: '... the University must reaffirm the importance of the college system and re-define what is expected from the colleges. They should be given clearer mission statements and clearer organisational guidelines; and they should have modest but real resources under their own control. The University should make clear by deed as well as word that it places high value on service to colleges by its members' (p. 4).

Over the last 25 years, of course, much has changed, both internally and externally. The student body has also changed and pressures on it and staff have intensified. The colleges have not been immune from such changes, nor should they be, but similar problems continue to arise and are compounded by new ones. If the vitality of the colleges is an issue, however, perhaps it is because much of it has been drained away by actions and decisions taken at the centre, especially in recent years. The University makes much of the role of the colleges and the distinctive character they bring to Lancaster in its publicity (see, for example, the University homepage), and it is more than happy to rely upon the efforts of college students and staff for high pressure events such as Intro Week and Graduation but this disguises a different reality. Funding and resources have been driven down; staff, especially academic, are discouraged from taking on college roles and responsibilities; space has been unilaterally taken away on the basis that there is no 'private' space, only University space; and the role of the colleges within university governance has been diluted and undermined. Tens of thousands of pounds have been spent on employing consultants to 're-brand' the colleges whilst basic facilities and amenities have been allowed to deteriorate. The colleges are often criticised for being inflexible and insular but it is conveniently forgotten by the current senior management that the willingness and magnanimity of two of the undergraduate colleges, Cartmel and Lonsdale, to relocate to Alexandra Park released large amounts of space on the main campus for academic use. This has been of immense benefit to the institution.

The Audland Committee considered whether alternative structures, such as Halls of Residence, might better suit the University and still achieve the necessary objectives relating to the provision of social facilities and a framework for student life. It concluded that they wouldn't, stating that 'it is not clear what the University might gain, but much of value would be lost. It has always been recognised that Lancaster's colleges are very different to those at Oxbridge, but the Committee believes that they do and should amount to far more than glorified halls of residence'. Many staff and students, past and present, would agree with this, but the real question is whether the senior management do. Reviews such as the current one would not be needed if the colleges could rely on proper support from the University itself and be treated far more than now as a positive asset.

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

NEWS IN BRIEF

Redundancy Committee

Tomorrow's meeting of the University Council will see the return of the proposal to establish a Redundancy Committee. Apparently, the previous meeting only agreed the next steps prior to taking such a decision (see subtext 49). This time it may do so for real on the recommendation of the secretive HR Committee. The proposal is for Council to agree 'that it is desirable that there should be a reduction in the academic staff ... by way of redundancy' and that a Redundancy Committee should be established to oversee all redundancies arising within the University (academic and non-academic). There are accompanying details of its terms of reference and operation. An extract from the draft minutes of the Senate meeting on 25 February is also in the papers (see last issue). The order paper from the University Secretary makes clear that Council will be asked to discuss both the HR Committee's report and the Senate draft minute before taking any decision. The likely outcome? We should like to be proved wrong, and would be delighted to have to hold up our hands if the Council were to follow the clear Senate lead and set the proposed Redundancy Committee to one side. Unfortunately our expectation is that the Council will approve this unwanted and unnecessary machinery to go ahead. The consequence? At the very least, damage to staff morale and the external reputation of the University and who knows what else.

******

Canal corridor

As we reported in subtext 50, the plan by the developers Centros to develop the canal corridor site in Lancaster has been called in by the Government - the first application in the northwest of England to be so acted upon since 2001. However, on 11 March Centros announced that they will not be attending the Public Inquiry to defend the proposal. In a rather testy press release, Centro's chief executive, Richard Wise, said: 'Having been lobbied by English Heritage and local minority objector group It's Our City, the Government has effectively valued a handful of mediocre unlisted buildings above the delivery of a major regeneration scheme and a thousand new jobs'. Unless the City Council decide to abandon the scheme, the Public Inquiry will still go ahead, with the scheme defended by the Council and opposed by It's Our City, English Heritage and SAVE Britain's Heritage. SAVE have meanwhile announced their own regeneration plan for the site, designed to preserve the historic buildings and street pattern (http://bit.ly/save62).

******

LUSU Elections

Congratulations are due to the winners of the LUSU Sabbatical elections held in week 8. The new team will take office at the beginning of July and consists of five Vice-Presidents: Andrew Johnston (Finance, Events, Democracy and Societies), Sue Wynes (Sports), Torri Crapper (Equality, Diversity and Welfare), Danny Ovens (Academic Affairs) and Liam Richardson (Media and Communications/SCAN Editor). They will be led by the President, Michael Payne, who has successfully ran for re-election. The latter circumstance is both unusual and intriguing. It means no learning curve is necessary and Michael will already have considerable experience and knowledge of ongoing issues and developments within the University, which can only be advantageous as he continues to represent the student body. He has already demonstrated that he is not easily intimidated and will not be fobbed off if he feels student interests are being ignored. subtext wishes him and his colleagues well in what is likely to be a difficult year in office. We will, of course, follow developments with interest.

******

QAA inquisition

The QAA team took up their positions at Lancaster last week to evaluate the quality of Lancaster's teaching and student support, including the so-called collaborative provision that extends through the North West and across the world, especially to China, Malaysia and India. No outcome is yet known: it's a bit like going for hospital tests, where the best outcome is that the results show no cause for concern, rather than going for some big accolade. People directly involved were muted during the visit - slightly concerned about the make-up of the panel, but in general feeling that any issues raised were capable of being dealt with to the satisfaction of Lancaster.

******

New Writers' Group

In case you had forgotten that Lancaster is a place of learning ... subtext is pleased to announce the formation of a new writers' group on campus. It's an initiative to bring together those interested in writing and reading the novel of ideas. For more information, contact George Green (g.green [at] lancaster.ac.uk).

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

TONY EVANS

Many subtext readers will doubtless wish to join us in wishing Tony a long and happy retirement as he leaves the University at the end of this month. He joined us in September 1995 as Head of Security having previously had a very successful career within the Police, rising to the rank of Chief Superintendent. As a Divisional Police Commander based in Lancaster he had knowledge of the institution but that didn't put him off. He has brought with him an honesty and integrity which quickly gained him the respect of staff and students alike. When asked, professional advice was offered without fear or favour, even if not always taken. He has always been prepared to engage openly with people to solve situations and issues, whether this be encouraging a LUSU sports team to improve its wayward behaviour or dealing with the inherent antagonisms involved in being identified as 'responsible' for car parking. One of his many lines is the definition of a University as a 'collection of individuals bound together by a common hatred of the car parking regulations'. At meetings with parents of new students during Intro Week he has spoken reassuringly about Lancaster being a safe campus and it is - thanks to the work of Tony and his staff. His preference has been to get out and about and he has 'walked' the job. It has been an important way of keeping his fingers on the pulse of campus life. He has also been a firm supporter of the college system at Lancaster and an extremely effective and popular Senior Tutor of Furness College from 1998 to 2003. It was therefore fitting that his retirement was marked by the Colleges last Friday at a well-attended informal gathering in what used to be Furness SCR. Earlier he had been awarded a Fellowship of Furness College and one hopes this means contact with him will continue in the future.

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

ATTENDANCE MONITORING

Spring is coming, and it's time to talk about attendance monitoring again. The Registry working party has now reported back, and appears to be a model of common sense. Broadly speaking, Departments will decide which sessions are compulsory for students, will monitor them, will put the results into LUSI, and will develop procedures to deal with non-attenders. The Armageddon Solution (all lectures compulsory, expensive machines at the entrance to every room, students swiping their library cards every time they enter - no possibility at all of breakdown, confusion or malarkey there, then, no sirree) has been pushed backwards in favour of a light-touch approach which should nevertheless ensure that students don't slip through the net. There is a slightly worrying aside about 'a separate proposal being pursued ... to develop an automated attendance monitoring system' but we'll assume that this is merely to help departments deal with the necessity of wrestling with LUSI every week. This looks a good example of the University resisting being stampeded into a hasty - not to mention potentially confusing, easily side-stepped, expensive, largely unnecessary and hideously complicated - measure, taking a step back and adopting a common sense approach. We at subtext carp when necessary, but we do the other thing too.

The above, of course, refers to the 'let's make sure that students get educated by making sure they attend lectures' type of monitoring. The other type of monitoring, 'let's do the government's work for it by making sure that we keep a very close eye on any student not actually a blood relative of the Home Secretary, just in case, eh?', is proving more contentious. Many are concerned that the duties being places on higher education institutions to inform the Border Agency if any non-EEA student misses 10 or more 'expected interactions' amounts to discrimination, and will threaten the relation of trust between staff and students. However, even the University and College Union, which is unsurprisingly campaigning against this development, points out that carrying out these duties is a legal obligation, and recommends that members comply, but at the same time register a protest. It will be interesting to see how close to the wind departments at Lancaster are prepared to sail in showing their unhappiness at adding border policing to their list of administrative duties.

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

LANCASTER SCIENCE PARK

As reported in subtext 50, the plans to build a science park on the fields bounding the north edge of campus have been revived. The original planning application for the development was withdrawn in November 2007 by the main funder, the Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA), after objections from the Highways Agency that the increased rush-hour traffic would overload the crossroads at Hala Road in Scotforth and in Galgate - and even tail back onto the M6 at Junction 33. But it is now expected that an application for outline planning permission for the park, with a revised plan and associated traffic-easing measures, will be submitted next month.

The revised plan, now being taken forward by Lancaster City Council, is for a 9.8 Hectare site, bounded on three sides by the current campus boundary, the A6 and Bailrigg Lane. To give you an idea of the size of the site, it's roughly equivalent to that of Alexandra Park and the hotel combined, or the area inside of the campus perimeter road north of the underpass. The plan is for a mixture of two- and three-story buildings, offering an eventual total of 36,000 m2 of floor space. A pedestrian/cycleway would cross the park from Bailrigg Lane, offering access to the campus and the proposed new sports centre.

The plan seems to be to development the park slowly over the next 10-15 years, along with traffic easing measures designed to mitigate the effects of each new phase. All sounds reasonable, you say. And the Council and WYG Consultants have been holding consultation events in Lancaster and Galgate. The plans and 'aspirational images' used at these events are on display at Lancaster Library until tomorrow, and can be downloaded from http://www.lancaster.gov.uk/sciencepark, as can a nice questionnaire that you can fill in to express your views on the development.

But in the consultation materials you won't find any discussion of alternatives to the greenfield, out-of-town location for the development, or of alternative ways that the money might be spent to improve the local economy (the City Council alone have set aside over £17m for the project). Neither will you find any report of the demand assessment that was carried out in 2006. We suggested in subtext 24 (http://bit.ly/24bsp) that the science park might fall foul of, and further contribute to, the current oversupply of employment land in the area, and could well end up being a fairly conventional business park, of little real benefit to the University.

Nor do the consultation materials mention the traffic implications of the park, and of the traffic-easing measures that will have to be carried out in Galgate if the objections of the Highways Agency are going to be overcome. subtext was told by the WYG staff at one consultation event that these will include such measures as the introduction of queue-sensitive MOVA traffic light technology, a Puffin crossing and the creation of an off-street bus lay-by - all fairly uncontroversial, and all capable of speeding traffic flow a bit. But, more controversially for Galgate residents, there are also plans for the removal of on-street parking to reduce traffic 'friction'. And if the park is ever developed to its full capacity, it might be necessary to invoke the doomsday option of shifting M6 junction 33 to Hazelrigg Lane, as we reported in subtext 36 (http://bit.ly/36uj), opening up a whole new can of worms.

No, such weighty issues seem to have been deemed outside the remit of this consultation. Instead, the questionnaire simply gave consultees the option of saying what they 'like' and 'dislike' about three fractionally different layouts for the site. Maybe it should be called Hobson's Science Park?

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

STOREY INSTITUTE

The Storey, which for those who aren't quite sure is the big Victorian building on your right as you go up Meeting House Lane towards the railway station, has been closed for over a year for refurbishment. It is soon to reopen as the centre-piece of 'Creative Industries' in the area. Inter alia it will house the Literature Festival, the Storey Gallery and the Tourist information Centre. There will be an independent bookshop, a bar and restaurant, a performance space, offices and so on. It'll host arts events, obviously, but it'll also provide some commercial space, and will even be suitable for weddings and that sort of thing. (Some weddings have already been booked.)

The building itself is rather Victorian-glorious, with a totally inappropriate staircase, stained glass windows and suchlike. Well worth a visit when the place opens, which is projected for June, though it'll be open informally before that. One unique feature; in the Gallery, high up, there are two busts, representations of Queen Victoria and her Consort Prince Albert. Not unusual in itself, you say, but here's the thing. The bust of Albert depicts him in his prime, just before he died in 1861, whereas the bust of Victoria shows her as she was 40 years later. She's dreaming of him, you see ...

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

URBAN MYTH

This story we know to be true, in that we ourselves saw the events described below take place on TV. What we didn't know until a week ago is that the young people involved were Lancaster students. Or so the person who told us swore on a nearby stack of beer-mats. Anyhow, we very much hope that the students were from Lancaster, as it's a nice story.

A few years ago during the Party Conference season, a senior member of the Lib Dems was being interviewed outside the conference venue. As the politician chuntered on, a group of young men and women became visible some distance behind him. They were carrying a large placard and chanting something, but they were as yet too far off to make out the words of either the placard or the chant.

As they approached it became obvious that the politician was becoming increasingly uncomfortable at the thought of a group of youngsters, probably revolutionary socialists high on crack cocaine and carrying AK47s, disrupting his interview, and was trying to bring it to an end quickly. He might have been less worried if he had been able to see what those watching now could; that the sign they were carrying said 'Young Liberal Democrats'. Just as the interviewer was wrapping it up, the group got close enough for listeners to be able to make out the call-and-response chant that they were shouting. It went:

'What do we want?'

'Gradual and careful change.'

'When do we want it?'

'As soon as reasonably practicable.'

Almost enough to make you want to vote for them, really.

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

LETTERS

Dear subtext,

May I use your esteemed organ to raise the question of the new Sports Centre? This may have already been raised in an issue of subtext that I missed. I am concerned that the new Sports Centre, when eventually built, will be located so far from the main university buildings.

I understand that the new Centre will be located close to the A6 at the main entrance to the campus. This is quite a contrast with the current Centre, which nestles amongst the academic buildings. I can see why our planners wish to use the existing site for academic buildings, but I can't see the logic of locating the new Centre so far away.

It may have escaped our planners' notice but the Bailrigg site is on a slope and also is rather a rain magnet. Hence, staff and students descending to use the new indoor facilities will need to be much more determined than at present, unless we provide a mega car-park alongside it or a shuttle bus. Indeed, I suspect that use of indoor facilities by staff and students will drop once the Centre is relocated.

I presume that the new location is preferred so as to attract more external users. However, I fear that such a strategy may be misplaced. There are now several sports and leisure centres in the area and all seem keen to attract trade. I presume there's a business plan that sets out how much extra is expected. I hope, too, that such a plan recognises how competitive the local sports and leisure market has become.

I fear that we could end up with a Sports Centre that is less used by staff and students than our current one but attracts no extra external trade. Perhaps I'm alone in thinking this?

Regards

Mike Pidd (Department of Management Science)

******

Dear subtext,

Whoever decided on the name 'Central Services' either hasn't seen Terry Gilliam's 'Brazil', or has a marvellous sense of humour. For example, see this scene here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eosrujtjJHA

I'm not going to let anyone from Central Services do anything without a 27B/6.

I invite subtext readers to watch the whole film on DVD and also to decide what part of our administration is most like the Information Retrieval department: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFlFIG22Y9E

Barry Rowlingson (Maths and Stats/Health and Medicine/Information Adjustments)

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

The editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order) of: George Green, Gavin Hyman, Bronislaw Szerszynski and Alan Whitaker.