Wendy, 

As Iestyn has very ably clarified some of the key points, I will limit
my remarks.  My basic point is very simple:  we cannot allow difficult
circumstances to force us into inappropriate solutions to problems.  At
the root of this debate is the mismatch between the funding regime and
the configuration of higher education provision in the UK.  We are
unlikely to be able to change the funding regime back to the model for
which the sector has traditionally been configured and therefore we
should move on.  However, we cannot provide potential loop holes through
which students can use their work commitments as mitigating
circumstances.  We must provide structured and academically sound
opportunities for students to both support themselves and achieve their
educational goals.  As I indicated, the solution to this problem lies in
improving flexibility of delivery rather than potentially compromising
academic standards.

We should not attempt to find solutions to this problem which undermine
our very purpose.  Students want worthwhile qualifications and, given
their financial standing, need to be able to work and study together.
This is the challenge to institutions and will be the basis of their
survival.

Bryan.


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Wendy Shaw [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:	Monday, January 18, 1999 11:04 AM
> To:	[log in to unmask]
> Subject:	Re: Guidelines on employment
> 
> 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/
>   ---------------------------------------


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%