jump to navigation

Thu 8 Dec: First or Fail – Futuretrack and UCL’s Malcolm Grant: first or fail? December 15, 2011

Posted by AaronPorter in First or Fail, Higher Education.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Futuretrack and UCL’s Malcolm Grant: first or fail?

A first for the timing of the latest graduate destinations survey, but a fail for the president and provost – although does he deserve one?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2011/dec/08/futuretrack-ucl-malcolm-grant

Malcolm Grant

Members of UCL’s staff and student unions voted for a motion of no confidence in UCL’s Malcolm Grant – but, Aaron Porter asks, does he deserve it? Photograph: Dan Chung/The Guardian

Heading for a first … tracking the destinations of graduates from 2009

At a time when there is so much focus on identifying the benefits of higher education, and increasingly the destinations of graduates, it’s timely that the latest Futuretrack survey has been launched, this time tracking students who applied through Ucas in 2005/06 and therefore likely to have graduated in 2009 (or 2010 if they were on a four-year programme).

The Futuretrack survey is probably the most comprehensive cradle-to-grave (or rather from application to post-graduation) study looking at cohorts of students through their journey in higher education. At a time when there are increasing questions about what is actually happening to students after they graduate, how many are getting jobs, at what level, how many are going on to further study, the findings will be of real interest to the sector.

The survey itself is independently conducted by a research team at Warwick University on behalf of the Higher Education Careers Service Unit (HECSU), but the results will be of interest to prospective students, parents, institutions and government.

Heading for a fail … Malcolm Grant

This week an extraordinary members meeting of UCL Union, the student union at UCL, passed a motion of no confidence in Malcolm Grant as president and provost of University College London.

A motion entitled “Hands off the NHS, hands off our education: Malcolm Grant has got to go”, set out its objection to Grant accepting the role as chair of the NHS commissioning board, which he will undertake part-time alongside his role as provost and president. The objections were that he has been complicit in the coalition’s NHS reforms, lobbied for the cap on tuition fees to be increased and claimed that a living wage at UCL was a “luxury that could not be afforded”.

The motion did not hold back in its criticism of Grant, was one-sided, and had the fingerprints of the Socialist Workers’ Party all over it. It failed to to mention that: Grant has brought unprecedented success to UCL and bolstered its international standing and reputation; a living wage is indeed being introduced subsequent to his comments; he’d agreed to take a 10% paycut and he publicly criticised Lansley’s reforms as “unintelligible, very messy and not clear”. And although the motion mentions that Grant is the most highly paid university leader in the UK, it failed to say that he intends to donate his salary from the part-time role as chair of the NHS commissioning board to UCL.

While the NHS reforms continue to be deeply unpopular, if Andrew Lansley is going to appoint someone to chair the commissioning board, I feel confident in Malcolm Grant to at least deliver results with objectivity and impartiality. Although a lawyer by background rather than an administrator, Grant is a man who delivers results and has an impressive track record at UCL.

Due to capacity issues in the room, more than 250 students were allowed to vote. Of those present, a healthy 160 backed the motion of no confidence with 86 against and 28 abstaining. But with a total student population of well over 20,000 at UCL it’s hard to say with any confidence whether this reflects the views of the student body as a whole, or just a vocal minority. That question should soon be answered as there is about to be a referendum on the issue, giving all UCL students the chance to have their say.

Whether the motion is backed or overturned by the UCL student body, it will undoubtedly generate a significant debate. But for critics of Grant and his decision to accept the role, I would say that if anyone is going to knock some sense into the NHS reforms, I’d be prepared to say that he is one of the few people I can imagine doing it.