I am delighted to be the first ever representative of taught postgraduate students on NUS’ national executive council, and I’ll be using this blog (among other ways) of keeping postgraduate students updated on the work of the postgraduate committee and NUS more widely.

I have taken part in two periodic reviews since my last report, for the schools of Dentistry and Environment and Development. Both went well, and it was each panel’s feeling that both schools are performing well, with some excellent practice but some improvements still to be made. Before the next meeting I will be reviewing the School of Law, which I will be happy to answer questions on.

Course representatives

I have finished the final set of meetings with course reps by school, where the main topics of discussion were discussing ways to pass on their knowledge to their successors next academic year as representatives, and the best suggestions will be taken forwards. They include a short end-of-year report and including outgoing reps in the course rep training. We also discussed the Union’s support this academic year and ways to improve the support for next academic year.

I held a discussion with two course reps developing some guiding principles for schools to follow regarding student representation, which was productive and these suggestions will be consulted more widely with course representatives, before being taken to the University. My aim for this project is to have these principles adopted by the University, improving the involvement of course representatives and students more generally within discussions of teaching, learning and the student experience.

I met with staff in the University to discuss ways in which the University can help support course representatives, which was a productive meeting and I believe with increased awareness of the Union’s work in this area at an institutional level the course representation system can be more effective in future.

University meetings

I attended my final meeting of Senate in my capacity as Academic Affairs Officer, where the statistics for appeals, complaints and disciplinary hearings were discussed. The figure for international students was disproportionately high, and I took the opportunity to recommend extra support for students who have previously studied in overseas institutions, as they are often not used to the British system of referencing.

I attended teaching and learning meetings for Engineering and Physical Sciences and Humanities, and contributed a student perspective on several issues, particularly anonymous marking, improving feedback, academic advisors and personalised learning.

I attended a meeting of the Exchange Project Board, which is overseeing the upgrade of the email system for students. The system being proposed is a ‘cloud’ system by Microsoft, meaning if the Board decides to do so, Microsoft will host students’ email externally. There are a few particular criteria that I am keen the solution meets, such as data protection and privacy.

I attended, with several course representatives, a session reporting the findings of a survey the School of Social Sciences conducted into teaching and learning, which was useful as it added to the evidence base for many of the improvements I have been arguing for, and in a sufficiently robust way.

I went to the University’s inaugural teaching and learning conference, and attended sessions on novel assessment techniques, academic advisor implementation, peer mentoring, online formative assessment, and curriculum mapping, and contributed my thoughts on them.

Other activity

I chaired the open meeting with the President and Vice-Chancellor, which had a disappointing turn out. I thought the questions were generally excellent and I hope they continue in the future, with more effective communication so students are aware of the event.

I have been continuing to prepare the handover for my successor and work with her to ensure she can be an effective officer from the start of her term in office.

There will be a review of teaching quality in the Law School in the future – as there rightly should be – but it will be less rushed, engaging more people, staff and students. I hope that next year’s law students do take part and contribute critically, in the way that the law course representatives I have known this year have done so since the proposals first became public.

I took the opportunity today to talk to many Heads of School across the University on the importance of involving students in these debates, as partners. Students I have known who have contributed to discussions about improving student support or feedback have made insightful comments which have often led to major changes when those students’ views were listened to properly.

I am very hopeful that there have been major lessons learned from the past few weeks and that students in the future are not consulted in a tokenistic manner but will be an intregral part of future discussions around teaching and learning across the University.

In case you’re wondering whether it’s more environmentally friendly to read it online, or buy a paper copy – it depends how fast a reader you are! If you’re a fast reader or will use a laptop, go with online, otherwise there’s no real difference.

One of my favourite paragraphs:

One of the main sinks of energy in the “developed” world is the creation of stuff. In its natural life cycle, stuff passes through three stages. First, a new-born stuff is displayed in shiny packaging on a shelf in a shop. At this stage, stuff is called “goods.” As soon as the stuff is taken home and sheds its packaging, it undergoes a transformation from “goods” to its second  form, “clutter.” The clutter lives with its owner for a period of months  or years. During this period, the clutter is largely ignored by its owner,  who is off at the shops buying more goods. Eventually, by a miracle of modern alchemy, the clutter is transformed into its final form, rubbish. To the untrained eye, it can be difficult to distinguish this “rubbish” from the highly desirable “good” that it used to be. Nonetheless, at this stage the discerning owner pays the dustman to transport the stuff away.

As an officer in the University of Manchester Students’ Union, I was shocked at the recent announcement by two-thirds of vice-chancellors, speaking anonymously, calling for an increase in the cap on tuition fees to at least £4000 per year, with some calling for it to be £20,000.

I strongly believe that this would be a very regressive move for Parliament to take, and will put off many people from applying to university. Students already graduate with thousands of pounds of debt, and the National Union of Students have estimated that if fees were to rise to £5,000 per year, students would graduate with upwards of £30,000 of debt, a magnitude of debt which is really only on a par with a mortgage on a house!

I am also disappointed that the vice-chancellors are speaking anonymously on this issue, and are not coming out publicly to ask for funds. I support their argument that higher education is underfunded, with class sizes out of control, underpaid staff and a lack of learning resources, but the solution cannot be to pass on the cost to the students.

I would like a debate on funding for higher education, but its terms of reference cannot just be ‘how much more should students pay’, and it cannot be conducted anonymously.

I urge you to oppose any plans by vice-chancellors to increase the cap on tuition fees or pass on costs to students, and I call on you to push for increased funding, from general taxation, for higher education, which must be a priority for this country in times of economic recession.

Yours sincerely,
Chris Jenkinson”

Please write to your MP about this issue as well. Feel free to use some or all of my letter for inspiration or the financial facts within.

It’s ridiculous that vice-chancellors are hiding behind anonymity and making these kind of statements. I want a debate on higher education funding – I don’t believe that higher education is funded well enough -  but I want it to be open and transparent. I want to discuss why universities don’t receive enough resources to pay their staff a decent salary, or why class sizes are out of control, and why there aren’t enough books in the library. I don’t want it to be restricted to ‘how high should the cap be’, or done in the shadows.

I want a debate – but not this debate.

I haven’t put as much time into my campaign as I’d like as I’ve been busy helping the current chair of Liberal Youth Manchester, Kate Little, run for a sabbatical position in our Students’ Union.

As a sabbatical officer myself, I know I’ve developed a huge amount as a liberal, as a campaigner and as a person, and if I’m elected I’ll be a loud champion of encouraging our members to stand for election in your Unions.

I’ve also brought liberalism into my Students’ Union and the University (through introducing online voting so more students are engaged, making decision-making more transparent, and supporting widening participation so access to higher education is based on merit, not one’s social background).

I know the reputation student politics has, and some of it is deserved. But student politics also teaches valuable skills like preparing for meetings, holding others to account, public speaking, lobbying and campaigning. I want membership development to be more than just increasing the number of members on the books.

Elaine Bagshaw, who I’m backing for Chair of Liberal Youth, visited Manchester yesterday and spent most of the day with Kate campaigning. I’m proud to support her – she has done a fantastic job as Chair since she took office and I know she will do even more if re-elected.

I’m voting for Elaine as I know she has a plan. A plan which means more branches, more campaigning, more communication, more socials, more teamwork, more policies, more activists, more members, more elected young people, and a Liberal Youth of which we can all be proud.

I hope you support her too – please join her group on Facebook.

I’ve already got strong opinions on the issue, so I sat back and enjoyed the discussion, occasionally clarifying some facts or asking some questions. It was significant that no one was that in favour of exams, other than in recognition that other methods of assessment take longer to mark and staff time is limited.

The two preferred methods suggested (though there were others) were more coursework essays spread throughout the semester, and more assessed group work or presentations. Someone made the point that in most careers, when people are asked to research a topic they are unlikely to spend crazy hours close to the deadline frantically cramming and then write a report in two hours without reference to the subject. Others talked about how, upon reflection the day after an exam, they’d already forgotten a fair amount of what they had just revised.

I’d be interested to hear what other students think about exams as a method of assessment. Do they work? What are they for? How would you prefer to be tested on your understanding of a subject?

My full manifesto is available to read. Please show your support by joining my Facebook group or become a supporter on Facebook. I’m also on Twitter, and can be contacted via email at memdev@chrisjenkinson.org.

If you’ve got any comments about my manifesto or campaign please let me know!