Dear Bryan
As Paul has put his head on the block and been bitten I feel someone
else should venture a few mild remarks!
Firstly I don't think Paul was concerned for those who deliberatly
neglect their studies but unfortunately even for those who can manage
their financial affairs and can "discern what is an appropriate
balance between their educational needs and their need for a reasonable
standard of living while studying" the number of hours of low paid work
needed in order to maintain even a low (let alone reasonable) standard
of living can be incompatible with educational needs. This is not a
social pressure but an economic one. Obviously this depends on such
things as rate of pay, availability of work etc. But what is your
solution if a student simply cannot earn sufficient in the hours left
after educational needs are met?
Secondly this is exacerbated where a student is not receiving their
parental contribution. What do you do there?
Thirdly not everyone can manage their money. The inability to do so
apparently has nothing to do with academic ability or with level of
income or status in society or with being free thinking and intelligent
etc. What do you do with a very able student who cannot manage money?
Like Paul I would make the plea for realism in looking at the
circumstances in which individuals are found which are many and varied
and unfortunately in some cases include exploitation by employers and
sudden job loss.
Yours
Wendy
Bryan Thomas wrote:
>
> Paul,
>
> Please forgive a flaming response on Friday afternoon but I must say I
> think this is utter nonsense. The possibility that a full-time student
> could neglect their studies, while working and then claim mitigating
> circumstances is a nauseating case of having one's cake and eating it.
> It is not a service to our students to believe that they must be
> protected from their own inability to discern what is an appropriate
> balance between their educational needs and their need for a reasonable
> standard of living while studying.
>
> It is our place as institutions to deliver provision in such a way that
> students can do both; that is essentially what modular credit
> accumulation systems are about! We do not sacrifice either students'
> futures or academic standards to the belief that everything must be done
> within three years on a shoe-string budget for the convenience of
> institutions. We must gear up to ensure that students who have to work
> can pursue their studies over a flexible period of time, entering and
> exiting as financial pressures fluctuate.
>
> To suggest that it is a mark of a mature institution to take a student's
> inability to prioritise and balance their work and study into account at
> an exam board is a disservice to every member of university staff who
> believes in academic standards and to every student who is working to
> achieve a worthwhile qualification. I need hardly add, but I shall,
> that your approach is utterly patronising to the students themselves.
> What is higher education for if not to encourage some free-thinking
> intelligent individuals capable of resisting social pressures and making
> effective judgements about their futures?
>
> Bryan Thomas
> Quality Assurance Division
> De Montfort University.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hubert, Paul [STU] [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 15, 1999 4:33 PM
> > To: Admin-student list
> > Subject: Guidelines on employment
> >
> > I've read the replies on guidelines on employment with some interest.
> > Passages quoted sound to me simultaneously sensible enough as academic
> >
> > guidelines as to what is required to be a full-time student and
> > completely
> > out-of-touch with the world in which many students live.
> >
> > Perhaps necessarily, many students arrive with only a vague idea of
> > how
> > difficult it will be to manage if they have to live on the levels of
> > funding
> >
> > provided through the mandatory system. Most students will either not
> > have
> > lived away from the parental home before or they will never have tried
> > to
> > survive on such a low income. I include in the latter people who have
> > been
> > living on means-tested benefits, since they may still expect to be
> > better-off
> > as students but will probably be worse off.
> >
> > Institutions to the best of my knowledge do a very limited amount to
> > promulgate the hard facts, and a very great deal to paint an
> > attractive
> > picture of their institutions. After all, their own income stream
> > depends on
> >
> > it.
> >
> > The systems in place once students arrive offer limited help - access
> > funds
> > are essential at present, but can only meet a proportion of the
> > demand.
> > Delays can be extensive. There is help if things go wrong - but not
> > everyone
> >
> > can have it. Whenever students have unexpected difficulties (whether
> > of
> > their
> > own making or other people's) or, heaven forbid, have to repeat a
> > period of
> > study, they will have money problems.
> >
> > If the above is correct and working on the side is *essential* to many
> >
> > students, why not be honest about it? If there is a small pool of good
> >
> > quality jobs compatible with full-time study and a much larger pool
> > where
> > employers are taking advantage, many students will end up working for
> > low
> > money or unsocial hours for bad employers, possibly far away from the
> > institution and all the hours they can get.
> >
> > As an undergraduate (or a post-graduate, come to that) I didn't have
> > to work
> >
> > most of the time. But I know our generation was lucky and privileged.
> > Unless
> > the system is going to be dominated more than it is now by students
> > with
> > nice
> > mummies and daddies to help them out in a crisis or the institutions
> > are
> > going to stop pleading their own poverty and come up with a
> > substantial pot
> > of money, this problem is not going to go away. Why shouldn't
> > responsible
> > institutions recognise that employment problems can represent
> > acceptable
> > mitigating circumstances? Perhaps more to the point, why can't this
> > recognition be made openly and consistently?
> >
> > It seems to me that some of the passages from regulations and
> > handbooks rest
> >
> > on assumptions of free intelligent individuals with full information
> > making
> > fully-informed choices without any kind of social pressures to distort
> > their
> >
> > decisions, but it ain't so!
> >
> > Paul Hubert
> > Advice worker
> > Leeds Metropolitan University Students Union
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
---------------------------------------
Wendy Shaw
Welfare Information
Tel 01904 433730
Fax 01904 433724
http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/welfare/
---------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|