The University’s Vice-President of Education, Mary Vincent, has reassured students studying “unfashionable” degrees that their course will not be closed as a result of the institution’s new restructure.
This comes after some critics of the University’s new project turned, in Vincent’s view, “rather conspiratorial”. With it being suggested that the proposed mergers of individual departments into fewer, larger schools would allow for a less public way of axing less popular courses.
Speaking anonymously to Forge Press, a member of staff at the University backed the theory:
“It makes sense. After the closure of archaeology, there was a massive PR nightmare [for the University]”.
He agrees that in the new structure, you could perform a similar closure with less publicity. Instead of axing an entire subject-focused, individual department, it would be seen as “just a programme” shutting down.
In an exclusive interview with Forge, Vincent quickly dismissed this accusation.
She said: “The University has an absolute commitment to retain all the disciplines we currently teach, so we will not be closing things surreptitiously.
Speaking personally, over my dead body [will those courses close]. We’re a Russell Group institution, we teach a wide range of disciplines.”
She also questions the logic of her critics, noting that the less popular subjects are often “really cheap”, because “you can teach them in a room with a piece of chalk.”
“Of course we want people to come here to study chemical engineering and medicine, but they cost an awful lot of money to teach. So why would we close subjects that it takes very little money to teach? It’s mad.”
The University is currently made of forty-two separate departments, who each have administrative responsibility for the teaching of their subject. The proposed restructure would see multiple similar disciplines fit into, and be managed by, the same school.
The shift will be completed in phases over the next two years, and finished in time for the start of the 2025/26 academic year.
Vincent argues these changes will improve how the University functions and will deliver a better service for students.
She describes the current model as a “patchwork” system, which is “an impediment on delivering a consistently excellent student experience.”
In her view, the current system leads to students studying in smaller departments and those on joint-honours courses not receiving the same level of service from the University as their peers.
She observes that departments “vary greatly” in size – the largest having 2,821 students and the smallest only 82 – meaning there are varying “levels of resources” between them, leading to some students missing out on the same services that are provided in the larger departments.
“I have always found that uncomfortable. Students all pay the same fee and study at the same university. They should have an equitable experience.”
As for joint-honours students, they are “receiving the same service, delivered in different ways under different names under two departments. That’s difficult.”
She believes academics will also benefit as “you will get more synergies between departments, as there will be more mingling and intermixing.”
The proposals, drawn up by the University Executive Board (UEB), are currently undergoing a consultation period that began in early October. The UEB will ask the University’s Senate – the academic authority of the institution – to vote through the plans in mid-December.
This timeline has further angered some critics, with Sheffield’s branch of the UCU – the University and College Union which represents all higher education staff – stating that the plans are “being pursued with a reckless degree of haste”, arguing that the consultation process should be more exhaustive.
In response, Vincent notes that the University is a “huge institution”, so involving all parties from the start of the planning process would have simply taken too long.
The University management’s approach of internally drawing up a set of proposals, then later sharing them for consultation allowed for “making headway faster”.
She is keen to stress the importance of the consultation process for the UEB, and that they are not trying to force these changes through.
“I can absolutely say we will listen to and take onboard all academic feedback.
The proposal is undergoing engagement and consultation, there will be some changes to the recommendations that go to the senate. I’m absolutely sure of that.”
She stresses there is “an awful lot of work going on” to reach an agreeable outcome.
The President of the Students’ Union, Lily Byrne, emphasised the importance of students in the restructure.
“We are working to ensure that student voice is embedded across the entire University and at the heart of the restructure, regardless of the outcome.
We want to support and encourage students’ to get involved and contribute in any way they can, whether that be through our Academic or Liberation forums, or Student Staff Committees. Your past experiences, opinions, questions, and suggestions should be taken into consideration every step of the way.”
More information about the changes can be found on the university website.
Image Credits: World 100 Reputation Network
