The first University Conversation event between staff and students was hosted on February 19, touching on a variety of difficult topics.
The emphasis of the event was on dialogue between parties which might be opposed, with one staff member highlighting that university should be an “arena in which views can be debated”.
AI, global conflict and the climate crisis were centre points of the discussion, which was mediated by an external figure.
The discourse surrounding global conflict focused on what the university’s role in responding should be. One student pointed out that Sheffield’s history is intertwined with the arms trade, from the Firth family to the present.
The current relationship between the university and arms companies, the student continued, is financially reciprocal. However, it was countered that amid the university’s current funding crisis, dissociating from major funding sources would be a difficult task.
The nature of the questions handed out was also a point of contention, with another student pointing out their framing as being “overly submissive” towards the companies, which were referred to as ‘defence’ as opposed to ‘arms’.
While the dialogue remained mostly civil, there was an interruption in communication, as one student took the microphone to express their discontent at the university being “complicit in the murdering of thousands of innocent civilians”.
Demanding bravery was a common theme, with the group discussing sustainability also raising this issue. The university, they stated, should set a precedent for how to tackle the climate crisis, including changing all catering to plant-based options.
AI was also a significant concern, with both students and staff agreeing that education surrounding the positives and negatives of artificial intelligence, and how to harness it for good, was lacking.
However, the main recurrent issue was that of transparency. One international student said if they had been aware of the university’s funding sources, they “would not have studied here”. Many agreed this information, as well as information on the university’s climate policies and investments, should be more publicly accessible.
However, staff and students agreed on the difficulty of universities’ political position, being both a business and a charity, the latter of which limits their ability to have political leanings.
Higher education, the two groups agreed, is “reflective of the state of the economy”, and the stagnation of both has a twofold impact on both education and government, making university mobility difficult.
Ultimately, senior staff declared their desire for this event to be “the start of more regular encounters”. A similar meeting was held for staff members on Wednesday.
When contacted for this article, a spokesperson from the University of Sheffield said: “We are really pleased that so many students joined us to share their views on a number of topics that matter to them. We are committed to providing opportunities for students to discuss divisive topics and better listen to, learn from, and reflect on one another’s views.”
