"Nice" end of year email from lecturer (not)

[Badbadbunny]

DS has just forwarded me an email from one of his lecturers. When he saw the sender/subject he thought it was going to be "happy holidays" kind of email as they officially finish the year this week end and are all packing to go home.

What a shock when he opened it as it's a real old rant.

"Us lecturers have been working flat out all year....."

"I've started marking the end of year exams and am appalled at the standard of answers....."

"We've already lengthened the exam times to allow for technical problems...."

"We've already reduced the pass marks required...."

"You're all going to have to pull your socks up next year if you hope to get a degree....."

This is on the back of none of his lecturers actually being on campus all year, he's had no face to face teaching, seminars, etc all year. Many of the "live" lectures were actually recordings of the previous year with just a "live" introduction for a few minutes at the start from the lecturer. A few pieces of work he submitted before Easter still havn't been marked. Even work that this lecturer has marked hasn't included any feedback, just a "raw" mark with no comments, no suggestions, etc.

He's absolutely gobsmacked that a lecturer has sent that email and him, and lots of others in the groupchats have already complained to the Uni. It's not just this email they're complaining about, it's sparked them to complain about the other aspects too.

What a lovely ending to a truly miserable year for them!

www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jun/18/concern-students-grades-liverpool-and-leicester-universities-respond-to-strikes

Looking for the Aldi product now

www.thestar.co.uk/education/sheffield-student-slams-process-to-shut-down-department-of-archaeology-as-unethical-3277758?__twitter_impression=true
Choice quote

“In the meeting, one of the students present asked Gill Valentine directly why we couldn't lower the admissions requirements for the department in order to bring in more undergraduates, and therefore more money for the university.

"Her response was, 'We need to protect our brand. If you shop at Marks & Spencers, and then Marks & Spencers brings in Aldi-level products, then people won't want to shop with you anymore.'

"She referred to the University of Sheffield as 'Marks & Spencers' and students with lower grades as 'Aldi-level products'.

"In doing so, this makes students at the University of Sheffield both the purchasers and the products."

Sheffield are also in trouble over their cuts to language teaching

@Delphigirl Thats a great quote! And supports what I said above which is actually quite subtle - it's the students who are the products i.e. what we think of us a good university is one that has the best rep for the best students and this is not usually judged by how well a university teaches these students but by their intake. for those on this thread who focus mainly on what/how a university does things - the quote above is indicative on how unis think about thes things i.e. they will remain good so long as they keep their grades high and get the top students.

by contrast - liverpool has not only just become ridiculous with their grading but have lowered their entry grades but because they are still in the Russell group - they will still be ok as people prefer to go there than to a former poly.

They are correct @Delphigirl, good sleuthing!

But my point wasn't particularly to draw attention to those universities. It was that when prospective students are considering how a university has behaved during the pandemic and using that as part of their decision-making processes, it is important to apply some critical thinking, to consider what is reasonable and what is important.

The past year and a bit has been disappointing for students, they have not got everything they may have hoped from their university experience. And no-one is wrong to express this disappointment. But with all these loud voices crying 'shame' about this university or that university, it is easy to be carried along by what is, in the end, the understandable sound and fury of individual people who didn't get exactly what they hoped, and in doing so to lose sight of the reasonable, the important, and the things that you should be paying attention to when considering how a university might treat its students in the future.

Yesterday, it was reported in the press that Manchester is the first university to inform its students that their lectures will be online next year. Terrible. What an awful university. Clearly they care nothing for their students.

But actually, Manchester is not the first, and it is far from the only university that has or will announce this. And even if it were, Manchester has faced some of the harshest restrictions and greatest disruption of anywhere during the pandemic, and now they are facing additional problems and restrictions due to the local spread of the Delta variant. Returning to normal will be more difficult and more uncertain for Manchester than for many other universities.

So while it is disappointing for their students, of course it is, a university reflecting on their circumstances and announcing clearly and early a response that favours clarity and continuity for their students and clear information for prospective students over a load of hopefully one day maybe's may be disappointing, and may cause a great deal of outcry on the internet, but in itself it probably doesn't really tell you that this is a terrible university that treats its students so poorly that it is to be avoided at all costs. It tells you that if you really want in-person lectures, then you probably should look elsewhere, and because Manchester was clear and early in its announcement, you can.

@Phphion

They are correct *@Delphigirl*, good sleuthing!

But my point wasn't particularly to draw attention to those universities. It was that when prospective students are considering how a university has behaved during the pandemic and using that as part of their decision-making processes, it is important to apply some critical thinking, to consider what is reasonable and what is important.

The past year and a bit has been disappointing for students, they have not got everything they may have hoped from their university experience. And no-one is wrong to express this disappointment. But with all these loud voices crying 'shame' about this university or that university, it is easy to be carried along by what is, in the end, the understandable sound and fury of individual people who didn't get exactly what they hoped, and in doing so to lose sight of the reasonable, the important, and the things that you should be paying attention to when considering how a university might treat its students in the future.

Yesterday, it was reported in the press that Manchester is the first university to inform its students that their lectures will be online next year. Terrible. What an awful university. Clearly they care nothing for their students.

But actually, Manchester is not the first, and it is far from the only university that has or will announce this. And even if it were, Manchester has faced some of the harshest restrictions and greatest disruption of anywhere during the pandemic, and now they are facing additional problems and restrictions due to the local spread of the Delta variant. Returning to normal will be more difficult and more uncertain for Manchester than for many other universities.

So while it is disappointing for their students, of course it is, a university reflecting on their circumstances and announcing clearly and early a response that favours clarity and continuity for their students and clear information for prospective students over a load of hopefully one day maybe's may be disappointing, and may cause a great deal of outcry on the internet, but in itself it probably doesn't really tell you that this is a terrible university that treats its students so poorly that it is to be avoided at all costs. It tells you that if you really want in-person lectures, then you probably should look elsewhere, and because Manchester was clear and early in its announcement, you can.

Absolutely spot on. And far more eloquent than I could put it. My brain is fried from homeschooling an isolating 6 year old and trying teach/support my students!

I entirely agree. However in Manchester’s case one also has to look at the history of seriously poor decision-making through the pandemic - building metal barriers around their residences, heavily security presence riding roughshod over student’s rights (including racial profiling), sending in police to peaceful protests in university buildings etc and the fact that 85% of students who voted expressed no confidence in the vice chancellor. That has caused me to ensure that my dc do not apply to Manchester at the moment and probably until there is new senior management, which I really sad as I am an alumna and think the university is a great one. But not one, seemingly, that currently has its students best interests at the heart of the leadership.

“Us lecturers” - s/he doesn’t have a grasp of basic grammar.
What a miserable git, to boot.

Oh yeah @Delphigirl, I wasn't remotely suggesting Manchester had otherwise covered themselves in glory during the pandemic. They have done some suspect things and, perhaps more importantly, have not had enough consideration or thought for their students to bother to give them an explanation for why they have made some of the decisions they have made.

A couple of other primary schools near us have sent the entire school home to self-isolate, so we are just waiting for that axe to fall for DD too, @TheDevils. On the plus side, she has become quite a competent administrative assistant during our various periods of home schooling, and her rates are low!

DS just prefers to make guest appearances in lectures - he loves an audience 😂
Luckily he's cute enough to get away with it!

Fingers crossed you get to the end of term without having to isolate

So while it is disappointing for their students, of course it is, a university reflecting on their circumstances and announcing clearly and early a response that favours clarity and continuity for their students and clear information for prospective students

And let's turn this around: Manchester is also exercising its duty of care for the health of its staff and students.

They are responding to the high number of infections, and the spread of the Delta variant (which is more transmissible & more severe in its effects) by looking at ways in which 'normal' teaching practices may constitute a health risk. We know that the virus is spread via droplets from speaking (and singing) as well as coughing & sneezing. And that infections happen best in enclosed and crowded spaces.

Sounds like the definition of a large group lecture to me.

So Manchester is making a balanced judgement: removing one teaching practice (and one which is not necessarily pedagogically the best way to learn) in order to keep students & staff, and their families, and the local community, as safe as possible.

I would imagine that while lectures are going to be online, small group teaching: seminars, labs, workshops, tutorials, will be in-person. These are much better and more effective ways to learn anyway.

As we've discussed in other threads in this forum, the lecture has been under fire by learning experts in pedagogy as not the best way to learn. It's an efficient way to get a lot of basic/standard information to students, as a way of teaching, but teaching and learning are often quite different things/processes.

The lecture is not a gold standard which should be sacrosanct. Many lecturers are already "flipping" the classroom, and working with other ways of teaching. It's a quite old-fashioned way of teaching, and it's only one part of the way a modern university facilitates student learning.

So Manchester is to be commended, not only for its clarity, but also for its care of students and staff health. And for the health of the surrounding community. Parts of Manchester campus are situated next door to some of the most deprived parts of the country.