Sussex Not For Sale

Last week, in a meeting attended by over 300 students and staff, a statement with our demands was drawn up by the Sussex Not For Sale campaign. You can pledge your support by emailing sussexens@gmail.com.

We assure staff that no names will be published until at least 100 people have signed up and no names will be circulated to the press.

After a large and successful meeting attended by over 160 students and staff, we can safely state that there now is a forum where widespread discontent about the management's proposed reforms can be voiced. We have organised another mass assembly for this Thursday where we will draw up a statement and demands for the campaign, and work towards our demonstration/library square rally in week 9. Your input would be valued by many students and staff alike. THIS THURSDAY 21/02 5PM ARTS A1

The active dispute between Associate Tutors (ATs) and the management of Sussex University has now been ongoing for almost a month. Yet, despite a range of meetings, announcements and promises of a “Special Review”, nothing concrete has actually occurred to progress the situation, and more dishearteningly there has been little meaningful communication from any senior figures towards the Associate Tutors, or their representatives.

Education Not for Sale Friday 22nd February Minutes 1. Introductions 2. Feedback from yesterday? what was good, what could be improved WHAT WAS GOOD * Turnout * Quality of speakers, should be repeated next Thursday WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED * The facilitator should be someone who will be less involved in the discussion * Defensiveness on the part of the 'old hands' when new proposals were raised * New people not encouraged to attend Friday meeting. It should be emphasised that the process is open and all are welcome to Friday meetings * Unclear process after discussion

Last term, the Vice-Chancellor in the Badger vowed to “promote very vigorous debate within the institution – students and staff – about what are their inspirations and visions for the future” (quoted in the Badger week 1). In the same interview we did with him, he did also admit: “I’m not pretending it’s democracy”, giving his personal perspective on University governance. The Green Paper has been subject to consultation to the wider University community since a couple of weeks, but we all know that consultation is not the same as debate. There is a significant difference between sending emails to an address with suggestions and critically debating substantive proposals in a constructive way. The VC meetings failed to deliver this, and staff seemed to be very scared of speaking out, fearing for their future careers at Sussex.

Tuesday the 22nd of January, the University’s Council met for the 2nd time this year, and was this time presented with the University management’s Strategic Plan – the Green Paper. In Autumn of last year, the University management set out a timetable to create a new strategic plan for the period 2008-2015. Following discussion with the academic community and a series of questions put to us by the VC titled Describing the Preferred Future, a series of papers were produced by the management.

BADGER PIECE 28 JAN - Koos Couvée The University of Sussex is entering a crucial time in its relatively young history. In the Green Paper, a draft for their Strategic Plan for the period 2008-2015, the senior management has set out their vision for Sussex’s future. What you are about to read will affect not only you, but most significantly, members of faculty and non-academic staff, as well as future generations of students at our University. This is therefore not an ‘ordinary’ news article – it is a call for critical reflection and debate. Debate not only about the future of this institution, but more broadly a debate on what higher education, academic research and scholarship is all about. When you read the document, you will find quickly that the language used is highly ambiguous. The text must be interpreted within the context of Labour’s Higher Education policy, as set out in the government’s 2003 White Paper, titled The Future for Higher Education. First and foremost, the notion of students as “customers” or “investors” is clearly transpiring in the Green Paper - “students are paying customers who are offered increasing choice and flexibility”. This idea is not very old. In fact, top-up fees were passed through Parliament with a tiny minority, only four years ago. The rationale is that students now pay much more for their University degree, but they will earn more after graduation. This justifies the expense and subsequent debt (on average this is a nonsensical argument, getting a job that pays well is much more dependent on factors such as the degree award and social class). Education thus has purely instrumental value. It is reduced to “training” to acquire “skills” for future employment – an investment made by individuals seeking future remuneration.

BADGER PIECE 28 JAN - Koos Couvée Education policy expresses at the deepest level the societal vision of any governing party. It contains their view of the role of public services, as well as the kind of subject that they want to see produced by these. In Britain’s case, the idea that universities have to become part of a market economy rests on the assumption that economic competition is the essence of human existence. And viewing students as “customers” rests on the idea that education has strictly instrumental value, and that “student demand” is the same as employer demand – the needs of business. The logic of the government’s plans, which also transpires through our University’s Green Paper, is that “the world is rapidly changing”. Britain must keep up in order not to fall behind other universities and institutions competing on the global education market for research funding and students. The irony is that indeed, the world is changing, but the governments and managers (the latter less so however) are actively bringing about these changes. It seems that, after Thatcher, “there is no alternative” (to the market). Although we might have some archaic ideas of social equality and education for its own sake, we need to be realistic, grow up, and make some money otherwise we will perish.