Royal Holloway Students’ Union (SURHUL) is hugely disappointed in the proposals to “restructure” the Departments of Classics and Philosophy, School of Modern Languages, Literature and Culture, Computer Science and the English Subject Centre.
SURHUL condemns the decision to make these proposals during the break between academic years. The 90 day consultation period began whilst students were on holiday and was scheduled to end just weeks into the first academic term.
The proposals have not been communicated to students until significantly after their presentation to College Council and the majority of people remain in the dark over the contents of the College’s suggestions. Students have not been properly consulted and were not given the opportunity to enter into meaningful dialogue with the College. Discussions on Facebook – at the time, the only medium which had provided students with an account of some of the proposals – were criticised by the Principal, despite there being no official forum for students. Even now, the proposals put forward by college are not easily available. The Students' Union has faced questions from both the incoming students and the students who are continuing regarding the fate of their degree. This lack of communication on these proposals is both unfair and indicative of a wider problem of communication and representation between the college and its students.
An update to the proposals presented to College Council on June 29th 2011 has been released to the College Council members. Whilst updates regarding Classics and Philosophy have been placed on Facebook and the Royal Holloway website, students are not permitted access to the same documents that are being given to the College Council. The fact that the College can propose such radical changes and not consider that its students have a right to know about their intentions is deeply unfair.
We are alarmed by the methods used by College to draw together their proposals. Whilst choosing to make decisions on human lives, both present and future, the College at no point spoke to its students, relying on the highly flawed NSS results and outdated admissions figures. Furthermore, we remain unconvinced by the economic arguments put forward by the College: according to government guidelines, Royal Holloway makes a healthy surplus and has done for several years running. In turn, every academic department covers their direct costs. Unfortunately the continuing rise in indirect costs – contributions to non academic areas such as finance and the registry - is putting pressure on department finances. It’s the cost of these overheads that is moving academic departments into deficit. The College is reacting to the government’s cuts within tertiary education before the outcome of these cuts is clear, making sweeping changes to the College’s structure which are pre-emptive and misjudged.
We urge the College to reconsider and look at alternatives to these proposals. Furthermore, we thoroughly support the UCU in their negotiations regarding redundancies. We cherish a wide intellectual community at Royal Holloway, and these departments are a part of that and give strength to our world-renowned academic selection. We believe these proposals will weaken Royal Holloway and demonstrate a lack of forward thinking - jobs and academic departments should not fall victim to the sweeping cuts to education forced upon students by the government.
This statement was written by the Sabbatical Team 2011/2012 on behalf of the Students' Union. Any questions should be directed to the Vice President (Communications and Campaigns) via email (vpcomcam@su.rhul.ac.uk) or the President (president@su.rhul.ac.uk).