The NUS discount card has traditionally been seen as the most obvious benefit of NUS membership. However, with many shops and restaurants now offering a generic student discount and some Oxford colleges setting up their own discount schemes, some students are increasingly questioning whether having an NUS Extra Card is worthwhile.

St John’s and Balliol both have college discount schemes, with the Oxford Union also negotiating ‘Treasurer’s Treats’ for its members at various businesses. These are perhaps more useful to Oxford students on a daily basis, considering the number of independent businesses in the city. On the other hand, access to these discounts requires membership of a college or society that operates a discount scheme and claiming to represent a market of seven million consumers is an obvious advantage for the NUS, when negotiating discounts; especially with national chains.

By far the most valuable discount available with an Extra Card is the partnership the NUS announced in September 2013 with The Cooperative Food. They negotiated a discount of 10% for all Extra Card holders on their groceries from the Co-operative at more than 3,600 of their food stores. At the same time, given that many Oxford students eat their meals in their college hall, the usefulness of this discount may be limited. 

Other discounts which cardholders are entitled to, such as 10% off at ASOS or 20% off at Vision Express are also worthwhile. But it is questionable how useful or substantial some of the discounts the card offers are. For example, the offer of Virgin Balloon Flights for £89pp or 4% off holidays with easyJet Holidays are less appealing.

Finally, the NUS Extra Card is not prohibitively expensive at £12, and can be used effectively if one is aware where discounts are available. This makes the loss of eligibility for the card Oxford students will suffer, if disaffiliation occurs, something that many are likely to consider when they vote.

This investigation also includes C+ examining the NUS Extra Card, what the alternatives to the NUS are, Tom Rutland and Eleanor Sharman on the pros and cons of NUS membership and James Elliott on how the NUS works. 

A referendum will be held between Monday and Wednesday of 4th Week on whether OUSU’s membership of the NUS should be renewed for the academic year 2014-2015. The official question put to students shall be: “OUSU is currently affiliated to the National Union of Students (NUS). Should it continue to be affiliated: yes or no?”

The decision to hold the referendum was made at 7th Week OUSU Council in Trinity Term 2013. The Education Act (1994) requires OUSU to decide annually whether it wishes to remain affiliated to external organisations such as the NUS. The decision to affiliate to the NUS was previously made by OUSU Council. However, due to changes in OUSU’s funding, a referendum is now to be held.

OUSU’s membership of the NUS was previously paid for by earmarked funding from the University block grant. This meant that, if OUSU was not affiliated with the NUS, it would not otherwise get this funding. However, in its budget for the academic year 2013-2014, OUSU had its block grant from the University increased to approximately £500,000. As part of this, the earmarking of funds was removed.

For the first time, OUSU now has full discretion on how its block grant from the University is spent. This means that OUSU now has the option of spending the part of its grant previously reserved for NUS membership elsewhere. In 2012-2013, NUS affiliation cost OUSU £25,308 and was projected to cost £27,987.80 for 2013-2014, at the time that the motion to hold the referendum was passed.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%9599%%[/mm-hide-text] 

A C+ Investigation in the 5th Week of Hilary Term 2014 found Oxford’s cost of NUS affiliation to be £26,118 in 2013-2014 – 3.26% of OUSU’s £801,318 budget. However, the cost of NUS affiliation as a percentage of OUSU’s budget will be higher in future years, as part of the current block grant given by the University to OUSU is a one-off deal due to a loss of £58,000 which OUSU incurred in 2009.

The leaders of the respective ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ campaigns for the referendum were chosen on Sunday of 1st week. Nominations to lead either of the campaigns were open from Sunday 27th April until Saturday 3rd May. However, both campaigns had only one nomination each.

Current OUSU President Tom Rutland was elected leader of the ‘Yes’ campaign, while former Chair of OUSU Council, Jack Matthews, was elected to lead the ‘No’.

Both candidates attended the NUS Conference this year, for which Oxford had seven delegates. The NUS National Conference took place in Liverpool between 8th and 10th April. Motions passed at the conference, included motions to oppose UKIP, oppose the privatisation of student loans and introduce gender balancing for all NUS committees and delegations. Current NUS President Toni Pearce was also re-elected.

The ‘No’ campaign has already begun campaigning on social media, branding itself ‘Believe in Oxford’. The campaign has so far attempted to ask Oxford students whether they feel the NUS represents them. ‘Believe in Oxford’ have also attempted to emphasise how cost of affiliating to the NUS, roughly £25,000, could be spent elsewhere.

Matthews has previously campaigned extensively for reform of the NUS, creating the website TheyWorkForStudents.co.uk. The website aims to ‘unlock’ the NUS by making the NUS’ governing documents more readily accessible, as well as providing information on how the NUS is run and the contact details of NUS officers. In a recent blog post, Matthews compared the idea of disaffiliation from the NUS to that of a “strike”, using OUSU’s payment to the NUS as an incentive for the organisation to change.

‘Yes’ campaign leader Tom Rutland wrote a note on Facebook in April laying out what the NUS does for students. The piece emphasised the importance of rallying and organising students together on a national level. Rutland also listed some of the NUS’ achievements in the past year, including securing £45 million in postgraduate student support and the training that they provide to Students’ Union officers.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%9602%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Cherwell has conducted a survey of 150 Oxford students to test students’ thoughts on the matter. The survey found that the majority of students currently favour re-affiliation, despite being unsure of what the NUS does. The survey shows that 66% of respondents either ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’ with the statement that they understand what the NUS does for Oxford students, while a further 11% of students answered ‘neutral’.

In contrast, only 10% of students said that they ‘strongly agree’ that they know what the NUS does. Even if this is combined with the percentage that ‘agree’ with the statement, that means that only 23% of respondents claim to understand what the NUS does.

Most students surveyed currently wished to remain affiliated with the NUS, despite the majority of them not understanding what it does, with 47% of respondents answering that they ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ that OUSU should remain affiliated.

Importantly, 33% of students are still undecided about which way they will vote, meaning a large body of students have not yet formed an opinion on the issue. Furthermore, while our survey suggests that the ‘Yes’ campaign are starting with an advantage, the majority of students still do not back actively re-affiliation.

It appears voter turnout will have a major impact upon the outcome, with only 20.8% of the student population voting in the OUSU elections in Michaelmas.

Given the extensive coverage this received and the more immediate relevance of those elections for Oxford students, the turnout for this referendum is likely to be lower.

When Cherwell asked students whether they were going to vote in the NUS affiliation referendum only 38% said they planned on doing so. In addition, 34% of students claimed they did not plan on voting, while 28% responded that they had not yet decided.

Therefore, even if most students are currently sympathetic to remaining in the NUS, whether they feel strongly enough to participate in the referendum will be a key determinant in its outcome.

Voting will take place between Monday and Wednesday of 4th Week.

A team lead by researchers at the University has found that the lead in solar cells, which is toxic, may be able to be replaced by tin.

Lead-free perovskite solar cells promise to be cheap and easy to mass produce and have already achieved a 17% efficiency at turning sunlight into electricity after just two years of research.

‘Perovskite’ is the term for a particular mineral crystal structure, most commonly a calcium titanium trioxide mineral, but the term is applicable to anything else with the same kind of structure.

In a paper to be published in the journal Energy & Environmental Science, the researchers report that they have created the first lead-free perovskite solar cell. Previous experiments with lead perovskite cells had shown them to be quite efficient.

Nakita Noel, of the University’s Department of Physics, said, “The amount of lead in perovskite solar cells is actually quite tiny. However even in small quantities, the toxicity of the lead could be a barrier to commercialization and as such we’ve started looking into different non-toxic elements to incorporate into the solar cell.”

Tin has been reported to work in pervokskites before, but not in solar cells, which is why their use in this way is so innovative. The metal is completely non-toxic and is capable of carrying a high charge of electricity which make it great for use in solar cells.

The technology is not without its current problems, however, as tin perovskites are unstable in the form in which they are used in the solar cells. This means that when the tin comes into contact with moisture or oxygen it reacts to form a more stable compound, which destroys its charge neutrality and causes the structures inside the solar cell to break down. The team of scientists are currently working on ways to prevent this oxidation.

A mathematician at Exeter College, said, “I think that it would be great if they can get this to work better in the long term. If they can make solar cells more efficient, people would see them as a decent alternative to fossil fuels.”

Nakita Noel agrees, saying, “Hopefully our research will cause a bit of a stir in the academic community and prompt more research into lead-free, more environmentally friendly solar cells. It certainly opens up more avenues for the development of perovskites using different metals. Who knows, we may even find something that surpasses the efficiency of silicon cells.”

Lord Patten has confirmed that he will be staying on as Chancellor of the University, despite stepping down as BBC Trust Chairman.

He has recently had major heart surgery, and explained in a statement that he was resigning with immediate effect on the advice of his doctors. “I have concluded that I cannot continue to work at the same full pace as I have done to date, and that I should reduce the range of roles I undertake.

“On this basis I have decided with great regret to step down from much the most demanding of my roles – that of Chairman of the BBC Trust.”
A statement from the University stressed that he would continue his unpaid role at Oxford.

A university spokesman said, “We are pleased that Lord Patten intends to continue to serve the University in the role of Chancellor.”

The news comes a week after Patten received criticism in an open letter from the BBC Radio Forum to culture secretary Sajid Javid, claiming that he had been, “distracted from serving licence-payers properly” by his other roles.

The letter added, “He has been a dreadful advertisement for the BBC due to his astonishingly patronising approach to anyone who has ever questioned him on any matter relating to the BBC.”

As well as being Chancellor, Lord Patten, is an adviser to three private firms, including Lockheed Martin, where he is a non-executive director.
Patten has attracted controversy during his time as BBC Trust Chairman. He had been at the BBC for a year when it was revealed that a Newsnight investigation into sex abuse by Jimmy Savile was cancelled just before broadcast. In the next month, Newsnight incorrectly accused Lord McAlpine of child abuse.

One month later, an audit revealed that in the three years running up to December 2012, the BBC spent £25 million on redundancy payments to high-ranking staff.

On the day of his resignation, Lord Patten pulled out of a planned engagement at the Oxford Union, citing health reasons.

St Cross College has lodged an appeal against Oxford City Council’s decision to reject its recent planning application.

St Cross applied last year to construct an extension with 53 new bedrooms, a lecture theatre, library and seminar rooms. The planning application for the extension was rejected in October, on the basis that, “In a sensitive historic location… [the project] would have an unacceptable impact on the special character and appearance of the conservation area in which it lies.”

There were strong objections from residents concerning the impact of the extension upon the local area.

Cherwell understands that at least eight of the original objections to the proposals came from Oxford academics.

St Cross mentioned in its appeal that it is currently able to accommodate only 3% of its students and has the lowest number of library spaces per student of all Graduate Colleges.

It also noted that the dining hall is currently unable to provide daily breakfast and dinner due to the low levels of students living on-site.
Oxford City Council has responded with an 80 page document and will defend their decision.

The Oxford Civic Society has also objected to the appeal, claiming that the extension will have negative effects on a Grade 2 listed historic wall and reduce sunlight on Pusey Street. The Society has requested to speak at the hearing.

Brendan Riley, a student at St Cross, told Cherwell, “Top-notch facilities are an integral part of the academic mission and to the future of the college. I hope there will be a positive resolution to the current impasse.”
Another student, Jonathan Askonas, said. “I hope St Cross will use this opportunity to commission a design that furthers the strengths of the current proposal and continues to address the wishes of the current students.”

Another commented, “St Cross is in urgent need of first-rate facilities to remain competitive with bigger, more well endowed colleges. A new quadrangle will go far to address this deficit.”

However, not all St Cross students are in favour of the expansion. One graduate anonymously commented for the Cherwell, “I think it is ugly, and though modern architecture has its place, it does not fit well in Oxford, or with the other buildings on the site”.

Details from St Cross’ appeal suggest that the college is keen to get the process over as quickly as possible in order for construction to proceed in the summer, minimizing disruption.

Sir Roger Bannister, distinguished athlete and Oxford academic, has recently revealed  that he has been suffering from Parkinson’s Disease for a number of years.

The announcement came during the days leading up to the 60th anniversary of him running the record four-minute mile.

85-year-old Sir Roger said that he “does have this disability, particularly with walking, from Parkinson’s but I make as light of it as I can”.

On 6 May, 1954, Sir Roger made history when he ran a mile at the Iffley Road track in an unprecedented 239.4 seconds.

Though he only held the record for 46 days before Australian John Landy took the title, Sir Roger’s run was a momentous moment for modern athletics with this standard being used as a modern common benchmark. The current men’s mile record is held by Moroccan Hicham El Guerrouj, who made the run in 223.13 seconds at the Grand Prix in 1999.

On Tuesday, Exeter College celebrated the anniversary of this achievement with a lunch in Sir Roger’s honour. He opened the refurbished Vincent’s Club on the same day. Vincent’s Club bursar Stephen Eeley noted the club has recently included a lift to accommodate Sir Roger and others with walking difficulties.

Sir Roger began studying medicine at Exeter and running for Oxford in 1946, when he was 17 years old.  He participated in the 1952 Helsinki Olympics, but did not medal. Disappointed by his results, Sir Roger was inspired to return to Oxford and attempt to break the four-minute mile mark, a feat many at the time claimed was impossible.

At age 25, Sir Roger broke the four-minute mile barrier by 0.6 seconds on a windy Oxford day. He collapsed into the arms of reporters at the finish line, later recalling that his body felt “like an exploding flashbulb”.

Sir Roger continued his studies in medicine, later becoming a noted neurologist and master of Pembroke College. When interviewed by the BBC on the 50th anniversary of his four-minute mile, Sir Roger said that he was more proud of his achievements in neurology and academic medicine than his athletic career.

Speaking about the anniversary of Sir Roger’s run, the rector of Exeter College, Frances Caincross, commented, “We at Exeter College are amazingly proud of him, it’s such a great achievement.”

University of Oxford spokesman Matt Pickles further said, “The Vice Chancellor and other guests that Sir Roger wants to see will join him and his family for the lunch, where we will show footage of his famous race. We are looking forward to celebrating the 60th anniversary of Sir Roger’s legendary race with him.”

Many at the university were shocked by the news that Sir Roger suffers from Parkinson’s Disease, as none had been previously aware of the diagnosis. Oxford’s celebrations nevertheless focused on recognising Sir Roger’s athletic achievement.

This weekend marks the start of the Athletics Cuppers competition between various colleges. Many are keen to follow in the footsteps of Sir Roger Bannister, given that the event takes place at Iffley itself.

One student at New College commented that, “It is very sad to hear the news regarding Roger Bannister, he is a great inspiration that changed the future of the sport. I cannot wait to take part in this year’s Cuppers competition that takes place at a location that symbolises a turning point in modern athletics.”

Oxford University has scored 3 D’s in a Sexual Health report card published online.

The report card is based on research conducted by dred.com – an online doctor service – in conjunction with the Superdrug Online Doctor Service. They assessed and ranked 50 universities, using a combination of research methods, including mystery shopping, web research and an online survey.

The study was conducted between January and March of this year.
The report card grades the universities on a number of topics, including sexual health information found on campus, access to contraceptives and sexual assault service.

Out of 50 universities studied, Oxford came 25th, behind Cambridge (6th), UCL (10th) and Durham (19th). Bristol University came first, scoring 80 points out of a maximum of 100, despite getting a “D” for its sexual assault service. Cardiff University came last, scoring only 38, a “fail” grade.

Oxford scored 3 D grades in the areas, “sexual health clinic services on or near campus”, “clinic drop-in availability”, and,“sexual health information on website”.

However, it also scored an A grade for sexual health events and STI testing and B grades for categories including, “sexual health information found on campus” and “access to contraceptives”.

The largest area of criticism was over the availability of sexual health clinics to students. In order to receive a full range of sexual health services, students currently have to go to the Genito-Urinary Medicine (GUM) Clinic at the Churchill Hospital, near Headington, which is two miles’ walk from Oxford City Centre.

The company said, “with STI infection rates on the increase and public funding for essential services being cut, the Sexual Health Report Card aims to raise awareness of the importance of student sexual health.” 

A survey by Cherwell C+ in March found, “Only 61% of Oxford students always ensure that they or their partners wear protection during sex.” But it also found that only one in 20 Oxford students have contracted an STI, lower than the national average of around one in four.

Simon Lea, business development manager for Superdrug Online Doctor, commented on the report, “This comprehensive Report Card shows that for students specifically, many of whom will be in the ‘most at risk’ group for contracting STIs, access to relevant, up-to–date information can be hit or miss.

“Only through a combination of service innovation, and people willing to try something new to tackle these problems, will we be able to reduce the rate of STI infections on University campuses.”

A University of Oxford spokesperson said in response to the news, “We note the findings of this survey and would like to make students aware that information and advice on sexual health is readily available at college level through college doctors and nurses.

“Clinical services, including drop-in servicesw, are available locally through the NHS. Further information can be found at www.sexualhealthoxfordshire.nhs.uk.”

Colum McGuire, NUS Vice-President for Welfare, said, “NUS represents seven million students UK wide, and sexual health is a reality that each needs to be aware of.

“We recognise the importance of providing easy to understand, accessible information like the sexual health report card to safeguard sexual health.”

Recent research suggesting that Oxford University and other top institutions perform badly when it comes to social mobility has been condemned by the Russell Group Director General.

The research was conducted by CentreForum, an independent, liberal thinktank that aims to develop evidence-based, long-term policy solutions to the problems facing Britain.

The report claims that institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge would do poorly in a league table which ranked universities on the number of students from poorer backgrounds who go on to gain graduate employment.

A social mobility league table released as part of the report put institutions such as Edge Hill University and Huddersfield University near the top, whilst leaving Oxford, Cambridge and St Andrews trailing at the bottom (with Oxford coming in at second from last).

The report, written by Professor Michael Brown, former Vice-Chancellor of Liverpool John Moores University, recommends giving all students tuition in presentation skills, IT, and building relationships, as a core part of their degree.

It further suggests that the UK’s top universities are especially in need of this provision.

Professor Brown, who worked with CentreForum, the liberal think-tank with close ties to Nick Clegg, to write the report, said that selective universities, “do not necessarily deliver the best professional graduate outcomes for disadvantaged students”.

However, the report’s findings have been met with derision by Russell Group universities who have suggested that it makes “very strange assumptions” about social mobility.
Dr Wendy Piatt, Director General of the Russell Group, has said that the report “fails to recognise that those students from more disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to complete their degree at a Russell Group university than they are at other institutions.”

Indeed, Oxford has one of the lowest drop-out rates in the UK. Figures published in March 2014 by the Higher Education Statistics Agency show that only 1.2% of Oxford students dropped out, compared with the national average of 6.7%.

She further stated that the report focused largely on students who were six months out of their degree, resulting in its marking down of students who had gone on to further or graduate study.

This suggestion was supported by an Oxford University spokesman who told Cherwell, “Thirty per cent of Oxford undergraduates continue their studies after graduation, but these students are given a much lower weighting in this analysis than those who go straight into a job, even “non-professional level work”.

“Ninety-five per cent of all Oxford leavers are in work or further study six months after leaving,” she added.

The spokesman went on to say, “We have carried out our own analysis of the destinations of four years of Oxford undergraduates and found no statistically significant difference between the proportion of leavers in a graduate-level job who are from the most disadvantaged backgrounds and those who are not.”

A second-year Keble student, while agreeing that the report appeared to have some big flaws, went on to suggest consequently that Oxford needed to do more to encourage poorer students into applying to Oxford in the first place.
“The research does seem to have missed out a few of the facts,” he commented.

“However, Oxford could certainly be doing more to encourage students from poorer backgrounds to apply – it turns over £1 billion every year, yet a miniscule proportion of that money goes into access schemes.
“I’d be interested to see if Oxford has fewer poor students going into graduate employment simply because it has fewer poor students in the first place.”

A question mark hangs over an ambitious multi-million pound building project that plans to bring humanities subjects together in the Radcliffe Observatory quarter.

Quoted in an Oxford Mail article, Mike Wigg, university Director of Capital Projects and Property Management, told the Jericho Community Association that “some of the ideas are under reconstruction” due to the “massive” cost. According to a brochure published online, although the central University has already agreed to invest £70 million to fund the extensive construction of the building, there is a funding gap of “around £100 million” that still needs to be filled by donations.

In the campaign brochure, Professor Sally Shuttleworth, Head of the Humanities Division, urges prospective donors to contribute to the new Humanities building, saying that it will “only be possible with considerable philanthropic support”.

With the site of the prospective library and teaching facilities between Walton Street and Woodstock Road currently boarded up, the section dedicated to the new humanities building on the Radcliffe Observatory Quarter website describes the project as “on hold”, despite planning permission having been granted in as May 2010.

The brochure goes on to describe how English, History, Philosophy and Theology, Linguistics, Modern Languages, and Oriental Studies would all move into facilities within the proposed site, next to a new “unified” humanities library which would consolidate all the former subjects’ collections. The Ruskin School of Drawing and Fine Art as well as the Music Faculty, would also transfer to new, purpose-built facilities in the quarter.

University Media Relations Officer Matt Pickles told Cherwell, “over the course of this year the Humanities Division and Bodleian Libraries are opening up a wide ranging debate about how to realise the original vision for the site. We will have more to say once this discussion has been completed”.

Bennetts Associates, the architects behind of the project, have recently been responsible for the design of the Royal Shakespeare Company’s new theatre in Stratford Upon Avon.