My Name is Benjamin Westhead. I am the Education Officer working on the sabbatical team in the Students’ Union for the University of the Arts London.

I am writing to you about the recent Higher Education White Paper produced by your department. More specifically I am concerned that the White Paper has failed to acknowledge the application and selection process implemented at most arts universities.

University of the Arts London has around 20,000 students studying a diverse range of creative subjects. However, within this large range of different specialities a common feature of the majority of courses is that they have an application process not acknowledged by the White Paper. I am sure you are aware, as it is with most creative institutions, UAL does not conform to the traditions of A-level and UCAS application system. A large proportion of the university’s student places are awarded in light of academics viewing portfolios, interviews and auditions, then assessing talent on this basis. The new proposal on the manner in which student numbers will be regulated, particularly in reference to ‘AAB students’, fails to account for this difference -  not only the application process that fits the courses we offer, but on a more rudimentary level on learning style.

Our process of application is one that must be preserved as our current system is tailored to fit the manner in which the university and creative sector operates. Many students who excel in the creative arts may perform less well in traditional academic subjects and be even more constrained by the conventions of the standard academic examination process. The current proposal discriminates against the creative sector. It is fundamentally wrong to punish universities and students for failing to meet guidelines that are not applicable.

I urge the government to review their blanket-policy as it has the potential to be devastating not only for my own institution but for creative teaching establishments across the nation. This issue stretches further than Art and Design courses – music and the performing arts will all feel the pressure of this policy. I am speaking not only for University of the Arts London, but even more so for the smaller colleges that may be left with no way to develop and expand to the point of destruction under a system that is clearly biased against them. Whilst the AAB approach attempts to ensure that the most academically able students are prioritised for University places, it does not ensure that the most creatively able students will be prioritised for places at arts institutions.  The White Paper and in particular the proposal to regulate student numbers through the ‘AAB’ approach, must be revised to include flexibility for creative institutions to use the appropriate process of portfolio or performance application to recruit the best and most creatively able students.

The modes of learning and the facilities that are required by creative courses are different to other disciplines, and a different approach should be applied if we are going to get the most talented creative students to the best courses at the best universities.

Benjamin Westhead

Benjamin Westhead SUARTS

This is my first post to Artsgroup. My name is Benjamin Westhead I’m the new Education Officer at SUARTS. I realise that Artsgroup has gone unused for sometime now and I’m looking to revitalise a little.

Many of you will have already (I hope) received this message or one very similar to it – I am Sorry for cross posting as I know how annoying it can be.

The message I’m trying to spread is one in reaction to the government’s new white paper and more specifically how the content of that paper might effect institutions who either specialise or have a vested interest in creative courses.

I’m working under the assumption that most of us who represent or have links to universities and colleges of a creative nature  operate a non-standard application system that is based on portfolio/interview/audition rather than the traditional A-level results ‘UCAS system’. I am also working under the assumption that our current application process is one we want to preserve. Students who excel in the creative subjects should not be punished for not jumping through the hoops of the traditional academic grading system.

At this point the government has not made any official statement about how our specific circumstance will be dealt with – so it might be wise to work under the expectation that we will be given no special circumstance until we hear otherwise. The government has already decimated that creative sector with massive cuts to arts and humanities and we have no reason to believe they are going to change their stance now.

I would encourage everyone to write an email to their rector/vice chancellor/ whoever is at the top, asking them what they are doing to tackle this pressing issue. On top of that I would suggest that we all start writing to our local MPs and more specifically David Willetts in order to pressure a reconsideration of these blanket rules.

Click his face to get linked to his contact page

More than anything I would encourage you all to forward this message on to others who work in similar institutions to ours so we can build a network.

I have pasted in a copy of the email I sent to the rector of our university regarding the issue (with all of the personal, UAL specific talk removed) which you can use as a template or at least a jumping off point if you want.

Dear ( X ),

I am writing regarding the universities stance on the government’s white paper on the future of the university system.

Having read in some more detail some of the information on the white-paper and its implications I have come to realise what a drastic effect it will have, especially on our institution because of our non-traditional application process. I am sure we will both agree that our current entry process based on portfolio and interview is one we want to protect.

This is clearly an issue that has the potential to affect the university in a very real way and I was hoping I could get some more information on what the university is doing in way of tackling this. This is an issue that I personally consider very important and so any information or ways that the students’ union might be involved in safe-guarding our application process would be very useful.

I was also wondering what the situation will be from the university perspective if the government refuses to recognise our special circumstance?

Thank you,

( X )

There is also an excellent article entitled:

‘Ten things everyone working in or studying art should know about the White Paper for Higher Education in England’

That can be found here.

Benjamin Westhead - SUARTS

Cheers guys and good luck

Ben

SUARTS are campaigning to ensure that any additional course costs (on top of tuition fees) are upfront, transparent and reasonable.

This means additional course costs should be stated on all Entry Profiles, there should be no compulsory fees further to those stated, there should be support and structured programmes in place to help students with their fundraising and sponsorship and student should receive a breakdown of what their additional fees have been spent on.
Currently additional course costs are administered on an ad hoc basis that varies widely across different colleges and courses – some students are asked to pay £100 towards materials at the beginning of each term. After this, the extra costs students are asked to pay could be almost anything. Often sprung upon students with little or no notice and at difficult times of the year. This affects every student, but we all know that those from lower income backgrounds and those hard up of cash are going to suffer the most.

It is not unknown for students to enter the last few weeks of Uni not knowing whether they will be able to afford the obscene amounts of money that are needed for a Final Show.

We accept that costs for materials must come from somewhere, but if students are going to be asked to pay for something which they need for their course, the University needs be upfront, transparent and reasonable. Something which currently does not happen.
Over the course of the next term SUARTs be collecting raw data on the extent of the hidden course costs that you have to face. We will be distributing blank Compulsory Costs guides (through Course Reps) so you can all feed in to this. This will be analysed to highlight the breadth and disparity of the problem. This will then be taken to the University to ensure these are addressed and to highlight the absurdity and unfairness of the situation.

What can you do?
• Report any ‘surprise’ costs that you are asked to cover this year by emailing campaigns@su.arts.ac.uk
• Fill in your blank Compulsory Costs Pro Forma when it is distributed this term
• Stand as a Course Rep!

Last week their travelling campaign ‘Hidden Costs’ went on a whistlestop tour of all the University of the Arts London colleges.

They gathered pics of students looking surprised by these outrageous extra costs -looks like they had fun!Ssee the facebook group (tinyurl.com/UALhiddencosts), tag yourself to be in with a chance of winning some great prizes! Prizes include…
DAB Digital Radio
£50 cash
£20 HMV vouchers
and other mystery prizes!

Winners will be announced 22nd January

http://www.suarts.org/content/213845

 Like many of our generation, I have taken the route of an internship with a Member of Parliament. There are some interesting responsibilities, press releases, case work etc. Then there are the usual pitfalls; the lack of direction in the office mainly. One of the key problems for interns is that those directly responsible for them often forget that the principle reason for you being there is to increase your skills. Often the lines are blurred between Bob, the unpaid intern who is here for the benefit of his career, learning essential skills for public affairs, and Bob, the office lackey who is here (almost literally) to sweep up after us. To a negligent supervisor, recently graduated university students often do seem to be there to do unpaid grunt work. When you're on the receiving end of it, it is practically sickening.

 It can leave you with a feeling of intense resentment towards the world of public affairs and media, which thrives on this practise and often ostracises outsiders.

 Whilst undertaking this internship I have been reading The Triumph of the Political Class by Peter Oborne. I don’t think I could have picked a worse book to cement these feelings of bitterness.

 ”As they professionalized and grew more homogenous the Political and Media Classes began to restrict membership to the middle classes, and increasingly to each other's sons and daughters. This was in large part because of the special pay structure of the Media/Political Class. Though stars in both arenas were capable of making very large sums of money indeed, new graduates are impoverished. A young researcher reporting to an MP, or a television producer starting out, are both extremely poorly paid. They are, however, expected to work in Central London, which is prohibitively expensive and only possible with subsidy from well heeled parents”

 The whole of the public affairs and media domain is made possible by backhanders, press leaks, favourable stories and a slimy mutability between actors serving themselves and their friends. Even my university's careers page recommends the practise of ‘networking' in order to progress in this arena. The story goes that Peter Mandelson got his big break in the world of politics by offering a cup of tea to a senior Labour figure who missed his train. Upon the Minister seeing Mandelsons' poster of him on his bedroom wall, the young prince of darkness's fate was sealed. Am I expected to hang around London with a hot coffee in my hand, waiting for a stray Milliband needing some refreshment to pluck me out of my provincial nightmare?

I wonder which lucky bastard bought this for him

 The underlying request amongst most users of interns anonymous is that these internships should be regulated with a statutory minimum pay. This might seem like the reasonable thing to do when so many of us are suffering at the hands of that amorphous tentacled monster in London. However, as media and public affairs have been professionalized, certain principles have slipped. Our constitution is gradually eroding and our reporting remains as unreliable as it was during the yellow press period of Hearst's America. The prospect of increasing the regulatory powers of the state sector and paying interns in the media will only entrench these problems or create further negative consequences.

I think one of the key problems of this intern generation is that we're seeking for these organisations, companies and governments to pluck us out of our situation and place us at the peak of their power. For some reason we expect the process of pouring coffee and sending emails for buffoons to be beneficial for us and for that to lead to greatness. Of course it's possible that this minion service we are subjecting ourselves to can be rewarded. However, there is something distinctly unhealthy about requiring umbrella groups to reward us in this way. In order to match the loyalty of this familial cabal set for promotion within London's inner circle, we lose the ability to produce anything of value ourselves. How many people of our generation can actually say they have created something with their bare hands? I think the idea of being self-reliant and creating something with integrity is lost on most of us. I think before we complain about the meagre existence of internships, we need to reflect on what way each of us has attempted to create our own opportunities, our own products or our own campaigns.

As students across the country get ready to receive their A-level results and look forward to going to university, new research by the National Union of Students (NUS) in conjunction with HSBC today reveals the ‘hidden’ costs associated with certain degree subjects.

The figures, which are taken from a forthcoming student experience report, will come as a shock to many whose chosen subject appears in the top half of NUS’ league table of ‘most expensive degrees’. Someone taking a degree in mathematical or computer sciences, for instance, will be looking at a whopping £1,430 yearly spend on books, equipment and fieldwork on top of their tuition fees and living expenses, compared to £432 for someone taking an education degree*:

Additional annual spend by degree course:
• Mathematical Sciences and Computer Science: £1430.40 • Medicine and Dentistry: £902.16 • Business and Administrative Studies: £873.36 • Creative Arts and Design: £701.04 • Engineering and Technology: £651.60 • Law: £642.48 • Languages: £635.28 • Historical and Philosophical Studies: £568.56 • Social Studies: £539.76 • Biological Sciences: £539.52 • Physical Sciences: £499.20 • Subjects allied to medicine: £461.52 • Education: £432.48

NUS President Wes Streeting said:
“It is completely unacceptable that applicants are left in the dark about the true cost of degrees. Many students preparing to go to university this summer may be in for a real shock.

“Universities need to be much more open about the hidden costs associated with different courses. There should be better information, advice and guidance about student finance on university websites and in their prospectuses.”

The report also suggests that students’ financial situations deteriorate during their time at university, leaving them more reliant on sources of funding other than their grants or loans. 29% of first year students rely on paid employment or other loans or credit as a source of funding, compared to 50% of final year students.

Wes Streeting added: “Universities should also provide students with better financial advice and support whilst they are at university, so they do not have to get into commercial debt or jeopardise their studies by taking on more part time work just to get by.”

Courtesy of the Farnham Herald via the fantastic Ms Maria Pryor!:

STUDENTS at Farnham’s University for the Creative Arts held a protest last week over an “unfair” hike in tuition fees that has seen graduate debt double since 2006.
The protest, which involved the release of hundreds of helium filled balloons, was organised by the UCA Students’ Union to draw attention to the ever increasing debt faced by many upon graduation.
Protesters were encouraged to write down their debt onto tags that were attached to the balloons, but unlike the resulting spectacle in the sky, students say their debts wont just blow away in the wind.
Part of the problem, organisers explained, is that the amount of money on offer in the form of a university bursary is lower than that available at different institutions.
As most degree courses at UCA require students to pay large amounts towards materials, many feel as though they are being left severely out of pocket with inadequate help.
Kaylie Nugent, currently in the second year of her studies for a degree in film, explained how she would be in £24,000 of debt when she graduates.
“Living in Farnham is so expensive – you get all of the London prices but without any of the financial support that London students are entitled to,” she said.
“Other universities will offer up to £1000 in bursaries but the maximum we can get, if we are lucky enough, is £300. In the third year we are expected to spend up to £6,000 of our own money creating a film. The whole point of this protest is to try to make the university realise just how expensive it is to come here. In this time of recession I think it’s outrageous that there is so little help on offer.”
Another student on the film degree course, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “Usually the university pay for our film stock but in the final year it is up to us to fund everything. I don’t have any money and I’m overdrawn so to fund this I’ve had to get credit cards. This means that I’ve put myself in even more debt just so I can finish my degree.”
She went on to say that she has so little money that she can’t afford to shoot her final project on film but is having to use digital instead.
“I’m not happy about that, it’s not what I really want to do and as such it’s compromising my entire degree but I simply can’t afford to do anything else.”
Maria Ann Pryor, vice president of the Students’ Union, said that when she graduated in 2006 average debt was around £12,000 now it is more than £24,000.
“We want people to realise how bad this situation is for our students and how it is only going to get continually worse. People are now coming out of university with the same amount in debt that you would need to put down as a deposit on a house, it’s crazy. We want to make sure that these unfair tuition fees don’t get any higher because we now have students who are leaving because they can’t afford it. We have a lot more students now who choose to remain living at home and who commute here just to study.
“I’ve had so many students come to me and complain that they can’t afford to look after themselves properly because of their course costs. It’s quite frightening that for most it is a choice between eating or finishing their projects.”
She called on the university to consider increasing the amount of money available in bursaries and means-testing students to ensure that the truly impoverished receive the most financial help.
“Other universities means-test those eligible for bursaries and offer them up to £1000, which UCA could and should do for its students. At present they offer the absolute minimum.”
A spokesman for the University for the Creative Arts said: “It is regrettable that fees have had to increase so much over the past three to four years. However, in order to maintain the high standards of course provision and investment in the student experience, this increase in fees has been unavoidable.
“Research has demonstrated that higher education is an excellent investment in future earning potential. The creative industries in particular have outstripped growth in the economy as a whole in recent years and are in a much stronger position to weather the current recession.”