UK Students’ Unions respond to Russell Group statement ruling out ‘no detriment policy’
UCL was among the 24 Russell Group Students’ Unions to write a joint letter responding to the Russell Group’s statement against extending the “no detriment” policy.
Source: UCL Imagestore
The initial Russell Group statement, released on January 7, recommended that the “safety net” and “no detriment” policies introduced last year are “not necessary or appropriate this year.”
The collective response of the Russell Group Students’ Unions points out that students are actually in a very similar situation to that of March 2020. With London in Tier 4 since December, “certain libraries, resources, and study spaces that are necessary for many students to succeed academically,” are once again inaccessible.
The Students’ Unions requested that universities “individually and clearly publish what mitigations they are putting in place for students.” This would rectify confusion and ease the anxieties surrounding the Russell Group’s statement, which failed to clarify whether universities would be automatically implementing its recommendation.
In a Facebook video posted January 8, UCL’s Education Officer Ayman Benmati reassured students that “the statement from the Russell Group is not binding. UCL is going to keep its autonomy.” The Russell Group later released a second statement in response to the Students’ Unions letter, asserting that, “each university will take its own approach…”
The joint letter had also asked that students be able to “self-certify for mitigating circumstances,” removing the stressful process of obtaining proof. They note that students “should not have to prove that living through a pandemic has affected them and their studies.”
The Russell Group’s responding statement warned of the possibility that these measures could undermine the integrity of students’ degrees in the future. They reminded their members it must be ensured that, “students leave university with strong qualifications that command the confidence and respect of employers.”
The current debate surrounding mitigating circumstances was brought to the forefront of national attention just over a week ago, when a video of a Cardiff University professor mocking her students for requesting more time on an exam went viral.
Dr. Helen McCarthy, a senior lecturer at Cardiff’s School of Biosciences, unintentionally uploaded the video amongst her online lectures. She expresses her frustration at some students for posting a petition link to her lecture page, asking for 24 hours to complete an exam as had been offered last year, rather than four.
The lecturer states: “This is what happens you give them a safety net and all of a sudden you take that away and they’re like ‘oh my god’. Students have graduated for hundreds of years without the bl**dy safety net policy – how do you think we all got here?”
When her co-worker, also in the video, suggests absences may be in protest following her refusal to lengthen the exam time, she replied: “What are they doing? Protesting with their absence? Idiots. Absolute Idiots.”
Dr McCarthy was chair of the school’s undergraduate Extenuating Circumstances Committee, a position she was asked to stand down from after the incident. Cardiff University issued an apology, stating that they recognise students must have “confidence” in the mitigating circumstances procedure, something Dr McCarthy’s comments had undermined.
This lecturer’s dismissive attitudes towards the “safety net” reinforced what many students across the country are increasingly concerned about; not being taken seriously during the pandemic.
UCL’s decision to review its “no detriment” policy, in spite of the Russell Group’s recommendation to abandon such measures, is wholly welcome to many students.