Staff Redundancies in Modern Languages

[Dave25]

This discussion has focussed a great deal on the question of the SOML losing money and spending money, but what should be important to the University is creating value. I used to work in business and banking before I got the insane idea that I wanted a degree. It's readily accepted in business that there are some aspects of an operation which lose money in themselves but still add value to the entire operation, which means that the more profitable parts of the business have to subsidise areas that lose money. Businesses often do this, investing in a sector for a long time even while making a loss, because it raises the profile of the overall brand. Branson did this for years with Virgin Atlantic which took a long time to make a profit, but he recognised that it added value to all of the less glamorous parts of the Virgin empire which actually were making money.

There are a couple of ways this is applicable to the situation of the Modern Languages Department and the SLTs. Firstly, the University is a charity devoted to education and it is not short of money as a whole. It should therefore not be run like a business in terms of making a profit, where each of the component departments is expected to deliver the same amount of contribution to the university. The Principal seems to be trying to copy business models on profitability but she is missing the big picture and is drawing conclusions that many leading business people would reject. The SOML as a whole delivers a huge amount to the University in terms of prestige. By having such an excellent SOML with five separate language departments, this sets us apart from lesser universities which have decided to close language departments. One reason that the FCO has a long record of recruiting people from St Andrews is because of its reputation for excellent language teaching. This is a distinction we need to maintain and not join the ranks of these inferior universities. St Andrews is too good for such a short-sighted and short-term step. The SOML also delivers to the University in terms of its university rankings. With the German, French and Spanish departments all ranked in the top ten nationally, this clearly adds value to the University both in terms of prestige as well as contributing to a higher ranking for St Andrews University as a whole.

It seems demonstrably clear that the loss of the SLTs would negatively impact on their respective departments, the overall quality of the teaching, research and student satisfaction, which would all ultimately feed into the University’s rankings and general prestige. The Principal should therefore think more than ever, like Sir Richard, about the huge amount of value that the SOML adds to the university as a whole and not simply the bottom line of its contribution.

[Let's all create ficticious usernames to make it seem our arguments have more support]

I'm sorry Miss Fact not Fiction but simply posting your defamatory material under 'reality check' does not make your case any stronger. If I were you though I would be more worried that by disclosing this type of sensitive information in a public forum because of your privileged access to HR and payroll information within the university, you are breaking data protection law, misusing computer information and are contravening the Defamation Act of 1996. These acts all carry civil and criminal penalties.

[rham]

I agree with everything Dave25 wrote, but you could say that about every school in the University. For all we know they all may need money too. In business I thought you assigned priorities, yours may be SOML but other may differ.

As to having lots of money, the times higher reported we have the biggest debt relative to turnover to ANY University in the UK by almost a factor of two (in many case by factor of 4). We have whopping loan which has to be repaid.

My central comment unless you think the Louise Richardson is a devious schemer with a vendetta, there is an issue with money that needs to be solved. (Quite why they bought a paper mill is beyond me.)

The attacks on the tutors voiced by Facts not Fiction or reality check are off the mark. These people are human beings not to be tossed aside by a stream of invective that unless you are close to this is uncheckable. However the other responses are largely pleas for an undefined someone else to to pay to fix it and are cop outs.

[elyettoner]

Perhaps Fact not Fiction and Reality Check could be made redundant and their salaries diverted to plug this supposed deficit modern languages are running up. They clearly dislike their jobs, they clearly dislike students and they are clearly unaware of data protection, not to mention their failure to grasp basic irony.

[Why?]

I think a fundamental point is being ignored.

If someone wants to learn a foreign language there are plenty of products available for the purpose - most could even be completed whilst taking a proper degree. Why should a top University spend any amount of money - let alone £700,000 - making it easier for school leavers to order food on holiday. Scrap the department and be done with it; giving a copy of Rosetta Stone (or some other such product) to every student on matriculation would be a far cheaper (if just as pointless).

[donpablo]

Maybe the same reason why the whole University doesn't just abandon teaching altogether and point everyone to Google and Wikipedia.

Troll be gone.

[Haunted]

I think a fundamental point is being ignored.

If someone wants to learn relativistic physics there are plenty of products available for the purpose - most could even be completed whilst taking a proper degree. Why should a top University spend any amount of money - let alone £700,000 - making it easier for school leavers to measure the apparent trajectories of fast moving stars on holiday? Scrap the department and be done with it; giving a copy of "Quaternions, Clifford Algebras and Relativistic Physics" (or some other such product) to every student on matriculation would be a far cheaper (if just as pointless).

[Why?]

I think a fundamental point is being ignored.

If someone wants to learn relativistic physics there are plenty of products available for the purpose - most could even be completed whilst taking a proper degree. Why should a top University spend any amount of money - let alone £700,000 - making it easier for school leavers to measure the apparent trajectories of fast moving stars on holiday? Scrap the department and be done with it; giving a copy of "Quaternions, Clifford Algebras and Relativistic Physics" (or some other such product) to every student on matriculation would be a far cheaper (if just as pointless).

Hundreds of millions of people of people manage to learn modern languages without university tuition. Physics is harder.

Again the point is missed, the arts faculty has to exist to fund the science faculty, a loss making department in the arts faculty is about as useful as a chocolate kettle.

Lets look at typical week for two different students:

1) Chemistry student - 25+ contact hours a week, uses millions of pounds worth of equipment and comes into contact with maybe a half a dozen faculty members minimum.

2) History student - a couple of hours looking at a power point presentation, a couple of hours talking about what they read at the weekend.

The fact that the history student pays the same in fees as the chemistry student for what is clearly - by some order - a lesser product is an acknowledgement that they understand how the system works. The only question is how long it takes for modern language students to come to the same realisation.

[Al]

"Why?", I know one shouldn't respond to trolls, but the fact you're being so monumentally stupid warrants comment. Study of Modern Languages is not simply about learning foreign languages. I would have thought that would be obvious. If not, a quick look at the relevant web pages would have shown you the light.

[5HT]

Quite why they bought a paper mill is beyond me.)
.

let me explain.. to go into partnership with a property developer who couldn't get planning permission on their own but will as part of a university package which will create employment, they'll probably make a huge amount of cash from this.

[elyettoner]

It's quite clear that Why? has never attempted to learn a foreign language to a decent standard. Yes, there are plenty of products on the market which will help you grasp the basics. Can they get you anywhere near a level necessary to actually have a conversation with someone? No. Trust me, you NEED contact with a native speaker and you NEED good, face to face tuition. Why?, when it comes to commenting on learning languages you haven't the foggiest. Really, leave it to those who have some idea of what they're talking about, i.e. those of us who have learnt to speak a foreign language fluently.

[jollytiddlywink]

Hundreds of millions of people of people manage to learn modern languages without university tuition...

Yes, and most of those people manage to write grammatically, too.
Numpty.