A recent study has found that people who study a social science at university are the most employable after they graduate. The study showed that 84 percent of social science graduates are in employment three and a half years after their degrees. This is in comparison with 79 percent of graduates who had taken a humanities degree and 78 percent of graduates who had studied a science, engineering or mathematics based subject.

The study was undertaken by the Campaign for Social Sciences, an initiative that began in 2011 to work on raising the profile of social sciences. James Wilsdon, the Chair of the Campaign said, “the Campaign was set up a couple of years ago to try and raise the visibility of social sciences in policy debates, in the media and in broader public debate.”

He commented on the results of the study saying, “It should help to remind decision makers of the critical importance of those subjects and of the value that they are bringing to the workplace.”

Oxford students were similarly enthused by the news. An E&M finalist said “As a finalist job hunter, it’s heartening to hear that social science students are seen as more employable. When facing such a grim jobs market, it’s good to know that the skills I have developed whilst doing my degree can translate into tangible results.” Paul Moroz, who studies PPE, said “It’s great to know that all those 9am lectures will be worth it.”

Other students however were not intimidated by the success of social science graduates. A third year Classicist commented, “As a classicist, I think that my degree, or any arts degree, fosters skills of analysis and communication just as much as a social science degree does. I do not think that I’m disadvantaged by studying for an arts degree, nor would I have picked a social science degree in preference because it may be more employable.”

This sentiment was shared by Shearer West, the Head of the Humanities Division at Oxford who claimed students should not be put off studying humanities or scientific subjects because they might be less employable. She said “Generally, I feel that the collective evidence demonstrates that pupils at school should feel confident in choosing an academic subject that reflects their interests and passions and not feel deterred by anxieties about their future career prospects.”

The study also found that not only do more social scientists find employment after they graduate, but there are also more social science graduates in jobs like senior officials or managers. 7.6 percent of people who have social science degrees are in jobs like these compared to only 3.6 percent of people who did mathematics or science based degrees.

A Balliol Chemist however was unconvinced by the findings; he said “I find it hard to believe. The statistical maths and computer programming, and complex problem solving learned during a science degree can be applied almost anywhere. Scientists have the widest range of transferable skills and I think employers know that.” 

An Arabic businessman in his thirties is offering a €146,700 a year job to anyone who can tutor him so that he can gain a place at the University of Oxford.

The successful applicant must ensure that the businessman is taught English (which he does not currently speak), jazz piano and  an appreciation of Shakespeare. He must also receive enough formal schooling to enable him to pass GCSEs and A-Levels. The businessman is currently unsure as to which subject he would like to study at Oxford.

The advert, placed in the Times Education Supplement, recognises the businessman’s “hugely ambitious goal, which will take several years’ hard work”. It however suggests that a “highly intelligent, erudite, well read, musically accomplished, and both socially and culturally versatile” tutor should succeed in gaining him admission. Certainly the criteria for applicants are stringent and the job itself is no less daunting.

A successful applicant must be able to “ignite a passion for reading across the gamut of literature, including plays, poetry and all manner of novels. The client also wishes to learn to speak English so that his Arabic background is no longer evident”. Clearly recognizing the need for a cultural education to pad out his personal statement the advert stipulates that the tutor must draw up a “life-curriculum”. This will necessitate “planning a culturally rich range of musical and dramatic performance, visits to art galleries and museums, restaurants, sites of historical or contemporary interest”.

Despite being very specific on certain points (“should lead a healthy lifestyle and be in good physical shape”) the advert is strikingly vague on the matter of whether men can apply for the job. Despite never excluding them directly it talks only of the tutor using the pronoun “she”, implying that a man would be unsuitable.

A further area of contention within the article is the matter of the hours the successful applicant would need to work. “Typically the Tutor should expect to be available 8am-11pm, five days a week… Friday and Saturday evenings will be spent with their charge”. For time off the tutor will be entitled to two consecutive days off per week on average.

Student reactions to the advert have been largely cynical. A first year PPEist at Jesus commented, “The intentions of the advert are clearly not completely above board, essentially if he wants a middle-aged ‘retired head-teacher’ to live in his apartment having ensured she’s ‘in good shape’”.

A University of Oxford spokesman was keen to quash the suggestion that one can effectively buy a place at the university, stating, “There is no trick or secret to getting into Oxford University – selection is based purely on academic ability and potential.”

More than a dozen Xbox games, with a total estimated value of £500, have disappeared from Wadham College JCR in a recent spate of thefts.

The latest incident, involving the theft of FIFA 14 and Grand Theft Auto V, is said to have occurred on the evening of Wednesday 6 November between 7pm and 11pm.

This has prompted an investigation by Wadham’s security staff and student union. SU technical officer Sam Greenhalgh issued a circular to the student body, offering an amnesty on returns of the stolen goods, but so far none have been forthcoming.

JCR president Anya Metzer described college members’ reaction as one of “annoyance and disappointment”.

Although confident in the integrity of her fellow students, Metzer said it would be “naïve” to dismiss the possibility of a culprit from within.

“The JCR is accessible only with a Wadham Bod card, though we are considering the possibility that external people have stolen the games.

“It is hoped that if they have been taken by a student then offering a chance to return them without repercussions would accelerate their return.”

Greenhalgh has told Cherwell that college members reported four people acting “suspiciously” and “out of place” near the common room on Wednesday evening. No one recognised the interlopers.

Witnesses later spotted the individuals playing one of the games before being escorted from the JCR.

While external suspects remain unconfirmed, Greenhalgh suggested, “It is possible that they are members of the general public and gained access to our JCR through tailgating or a propped-open door.

“We are investigating all avenues of inquiry,” he asserted. “I have taken appropriate steps in cooperation with the lodge to retrieve CCTV footage from the time, and shall notify members of the SU to be more vigilant.”

However, he expressed pessimism about retrieving the items, and said it is “unlikely” they had been “borrowed”.

The replacement of the most recent thefts will cost Wadham’s student body at least £90, and has disrupted the college’s FIFA tournament, organized by sports officer Jack Firth.

He said, “The football team use FIFA as their main training tool and their performances have since slumped, including a 2-0 defeat by Worcester today. However the tournament will continue on older formats of FIFA.”

One irate third year issued a stark warning to the thieves: “I don’t know who you are. But  I have a very  particular set of skills… I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you.”

Due to government cuts to tertiary education, UK universities are increasingly being left to source their own funding – with Oxford and Cambridge leading the way, according to the findings of a recent report by the international credit rating agency Moody’s.

The report, which looks at data from the last six academic years, also suggests that universities are increasingly  following the funding model of American universities. Although the £13.8 billion in charitable donations received by top US universities still dwarfs the record £774 million that UK institutions received, the rate of growth of private donations was far higher in the UK. It was further suggested in the report that the growth in both the number and size of donations comes out of necessity.

However, the highest ranked universities received far more funding than their academic rivals, with Oxford and Cambridge collectively receiving almost half of all charitable donations made over the last six years.

The statisticians found that “in both the US and the UK, philanthropic support is concentrated among the market leading, elite and highly rated universities, showing that brand recognition and a strong market presence are keys to successful fundraising in higher education.”

Fire interrupted the lives of Regent’s Park students on Sunday evening as a fresher’s dinner plans turned sour. Lucy Clarke, a first year studying History and English, was cooking in one of the student kitchens and accidentally caused a series of potentially deadly incidents.

At first she burnt her dinner mildly, setting off the fire alarm in the process. Students were evacuated from the building and waited outside whilst University Services investigated and the alarm was reset.

Once given the all clear, the students returned inside and Clarke went back to the kitchen in an attempt to salvage the remains of her dinner. Whilst trying to prepare another meal, she unwittingly knocked a pack of butter wrapped in wax paper on to a still-hot hob. Unaware of the error, Clarke was talking to a friend when the butter went up in flames; they both turned around but the kitchen was quickly engulfed in thick black smoke before they could do anything to put the fire out. The smoke eventually spread to other rooms and students were forced outside once again.

Speaking of the incident, Clarke said, “‘Towering Inferno’ were the only words my mind could provide other than ‘Oh sweet Lord, what have I done now?’”

Fortunately, University Services were already on hand, having arrived to deal with the first incident just before. Students were once again evacuated on hearing the alarm and University Services successfully extinguished the fire before it spread beyond the kitcken.

The hob and the surrounding area were destroyed but the damage was limited to the kitchen. Clarke has been asked to pay damages to the college in order to repair the affected areas but has received no other punitive sanctions. Clarke stressed that the college have been very understanding and sympathetic, as were her fellow Regent’s students who were forced out into the cold twice. Clarke was also pleasantly surprised with the conviviality of University Services given the situation, saying, “I would have thought anyone would get upset with the sort of idiocy I displayed, but they were really kind and sympathetic!”

Regent’s JCR President, Harrison Denner, downplayed the drama of the event, insisting, “The whole thing did not last very long.”

There is a beautiful, tragicomic moment in Norman Mailer’s famous book on the march on the Pentagon, Armies of the Night, where he writes of being beaten and bundled into the back of a police wagon before being carted off to a cell. Thrown in with him is a uniformed member of the American Nazi party, and a dour, slight scholar with a burning fight in his eyes. Mailer says the man reminds him a bit of Woody Allen. It turns out to be Noam Chomsky.

The anecdote above has more to it than just its obvious gallows humour, as it shows Noam Chomsky as the ultimate example of what the activist academic should be. From the very start of the Vietnam War, through long forgotten American wars of aggression in Indochina, Latin America, Africa and South East Asia, to the more vividly remembered conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, he has been the leading light of intellectual opposition.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%8568%%[/mm-hide-text]

Illustration: Sage Goodwin

He is also the model scholarly academic, considered the most influential figure in the field of linguistics since the discipline was founded. Chomsky has a reputation for extreme generosity — offering his time to anyone and everyone who wishes to consult him for the purpose of political debate or scholarly research. He personally replies to each and every one of the hundreds of emails he receives. He is the utter antithesis of the detached professor in an ivory tower — despite being voted the most influential public intellectual in the world.

We talked initially about the lingering shadow of American power and the hope that was once vested in President Barack Obama to change the direction of the United States. Why, I ask, did he disappoint his supporters on the Left? And why did political anger against the US government manifest itself mainly as right wing populism, such as in the tea party movement?

“Its true he’s regarded as a disappointment on the Left, but there’s really no reason for that. He’s a master of illusion and many people fell for the illusion — even Europe, which is typically much more sceptical about American leaders. But there was never any basis for it. I don’t say that in retrospect, I was writing about that before his first election. Vote for him maybe, but without any illusions. He’s sort of a centrist liberal, and could easily be a moderate Republican.

“He has no particular principles that I can identify. In fact, the advertising industry enthusiastically gave the best marketing campaign of the year to Obama, the year he was first elected. The business press, like the Financial Times reported to executives that they were euphoric at his being elected: they knew he wouldn’t try and rock the system. So, we really have no reason to be surprised.”

He tells me that he did not vote himself. “If I was in a swing state I would have voted against Romney and Ryan, not because I was for Obama, but because they are very dangerous people, and I would vote to keep them out.
“The United States doesn’t have anything close to a functioning democratic system. Democracy is supposed to be a system where public opinion strongly influences public policy; that’s the general idea. In America, we have a very heavily polled society, so we know a lot about what people want. The eminent Princeton authority on elections in the United States concluded that the bottom seventy per cent of the population in terms of low income has no influence on policy whatsoever. The very rich get everything they want, and the remainder get a small bit of leeway on deciding social issues. That’s not a democratic system that I can recognize.”

Chomsky goes on to invoke Gore Vidal’s comment that American politics has one party: the property party, with two right wings. In an interesting example he says the last progressive liberal president was Richard Nixon.
“Nixon was actually the last real liberal president of the United Status, and far more so than the incumbent. The US establishment is now dedicated to dismantling his legacy: the Environmental Protection Agency, the protection for workers’ rights, the properly graded earned income tax, which essentially gives a subsidy to working people who could barely afford to pay their taxes. This was the peak of the 1960’s activism. They’ve been trying to repeal those ‘mistakes’ ever since.”

We move on to the role of the United States’ power over the rest of the world, particularly the precarious position it holds in the Middle East. Should the West ever intervene in the Arab spring to ensure the spread of democracy?

“The West is strongly opposed to the Arab Spring — based on the terminology of course. The US and their allies don’t want to see democracy develop in the Arab world. It’s very obvious why there’s not much public opinion undertaken by leading Western polling agencies in these countries. Take Egypt, in many ways the most important country. A huge majority of the Egyptian population regards Israel as its greatest threat, followed closely by the United States. And yet, the West is trying to press the idea that Iran is the greatest threat in the region. They [people in the Middle East] don’t particularly like the Iranian regime, but they don’t see it as much of a threat. Sometimes they even believe the region would like Iran to have nuclear weapons to counteract the threat of the US and Israel.

“These are not the opinions that the US and Great Britain want to see put into policy. Whenever you see corporate elites or US politicians citing Arab countries fear of Iran, you’re really seeing them cite the opinions of the dictators, like Mubarak or the Saudi royal family. But of course they’re going to be opposed to democracy; they’re going to try to stop and limit the spread as much as possible. The US is often considered opposed to radical Islam, which is why they say they stand up to Iran, but the most extreme radical Islamic state in this part of the world is Saudi Arabia, the United States greatest ally in the region.

“There is a long history of Britain and the US supporting radical Islam as a barrier to secular nationalism. Secular nationalism is a real concern for these powers, because it threatens to use the resources of the country to benefit its own populations, rather than Western investors and so on.
“They don’t like radical Islam, if it negatively affects the interests of the United States, but they also strongly oppose the Catholic Church when it negatively affects their interests. There was a war with the Catholic Church and its associated liberation theology in Latin America in the 1970’s and 1980’s — conveniently glossed over in most accounts of the period.”
We finished by discussing the case of the most controversial activist in the world, Julian Assange, currently languishing in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

“If there are charges against Julian Assange in Sweden he should face them. In fact he’s been entirely willing to when he’s in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, the Swedish prosecutors have been invited inside by the Ecuadorian government multiple times. But the sex issues are not what this prosecution is about. The issue is that he acted the way a responsible citizen should. He tried to bring to the public information about what their governments are doing.
He compares Assange’s experience to his involvement in distributing the Pentagon Papers, the controversial files about US policy in Vietnam released in 1971. “We were trying to do exactly the same thing. There are cases where there is genuinely a need for secrecy, but they have to be treated with the utmost scepticism. If you’ve ever studied declassified documents, you find almost nothing that needs to be concealed for reasons of national security. Mostly the classification system is only a defence of those in power against their own populations. He [Assange] was helping release to the population.”

He ends with the perfect note of irony when I ask him if he has any closing comments. “I have a lot of comments, but nothing ever closes.”

University staff at Oxford and across the country will conduct another day of industrial action on 3 December in response to an ongoing argument over pay.

It has been confirmed that members of UNISON, Unite and the University and College Union (UCU), will walk out again unless the pay dispute is resolved.

Union members are discontented with a 1% pay offer, which the UCU claims has resulted in a real-terms fall of pay by 13%.

However, the Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) argues that pay awards in the higher education sector have been in line with the major public sector bargaining groups over the period 2008/09 to 2013/14.

UCU head of higher education, Michael MacNeil, commented, “Staff have suffered year-on-year cuts in the value of their pay and have made it clear that enough is enough. We remain committed to trying to resolve this dispute and the employers now have until 3 December to sit down and positively engage with the unions. If they don’t, then our members and those from our sister unions will be out on strike again, as well as continuing to work to contract.”

A spokesperson for the University of Oxford said, “The University respects the right of individuals to take part in lawful industrial action. Contingency plans are in place aimed at minimising any disruption or inconvenience such action may cause to students, staff, and visitors to the University.”

Nathan Akehurst, a prominent member of the student movement ‘Support Our Staff’, told Cherwell, “Academics will be striking again because employers have failed to negotiate in good faith. Little, if anything has changed since last time. It is important that students continue to show their support and given the enthusiasm of people last time I believe support could be expanded for the second strike.”

Xavier Cohen, another student who has been involved in ‘Support Our Staff’, said, “I fully support academic and non-academic workers from UCU, Unite and Unison who are taking further strike action. Myself and many other students care greatly about workers’ pay, workers’ conditions, the gender-pay gap and the path of marketisation that higher education continues to be dragged down. “

He added, “Although limited strike action may not be enough to make the government comply with workers’ demands, I am sure students will be out again en masse to support their staff.”

Students at Somerville have been subjected to decanal action after their involvement in recent Halloween celebrations.

After receiving noise complaints, the deans shut down the party and noted the violation of several college rules. As a consequence, those involved were fined £20 each.

An email sent by the dean, Dr Annie Sutherland, to members of the Somerville JCR and residents of the Vaughan building states that, “On Thursday 30 October, a large group of Vaughan residents decided to have a Halloween party, breaking several college rules and incurring complaints from other students as well as fellows who live in the adjacent buildings. Alcohol was consumed, loud music was played until 2am in the morning and students from other colleges were present.

“Despite the duty dean’s requests to clean up the building after the party had been closed down, the Decanal Office was informed by the Housekeeping Department that the scouts were forced to clean up vomit on Friday morning.”

Somerville’s college rulebook states that all parties or gatherings must end at 10.45pm on weekday evenings, with quiet music permitted between 8am and 11pm, whilst events involving the consumption of alcohol are prohibited without the prior permission of the Catering and Conference Manager.

The college rules also maintain that a maximum of 8 persons are allowed to be in a student room at any one time, and that any guests from outside college must be signed in at the Porter’s Lodge in order to comply with fire safety regulations.

Due to the violation of these rules, the deans have proposed monetary fines for all those involved, giving these students until 10am on Wednesday 13th November to step forward. If a list of participants is not provided, however, all residents of the Vaughan building will be fined as the “next smallest entity”.

The email continues, “The only repercussion this time will be a small monetary fine, which, the Decanal Office has decided, will be incorporated into the JCR budget and will thus stay within the JCR. We hope that this decision will encourage all students involved to come forward out of fairness to their fellow residents of Vaughan building who were not present at the party.”

One Somerville student has claimed that, as first year only accommodation, the Vaughan building may already receive more attention from the deans when compared to other parts of the college, due to noise-levels.

Another student living near to the scene of the party comments that, “Music was played rather loudly upstairs and it seems that this was simply a Halloween party that escalated a little further than the college would allow. Although rather inconsiderate towards members of Vaughan who were in bed at the time, many students were awake past 2 o’ clock given the nature of the occasion (Halloween).

“I believe it’s therefore somewhat unrealistic for the deans to require gatherings to be limited to eight people and for parties to end at 10:45pm, particularly on a night such as this, and for the consumption of alcohol to require so much regulation inside college.”

Godfrey Bloom resents the idea that he’s ever offended anyone. As a man who’s been criticised heavily in the press over the last year, he has resisted the urge to cry “offense” harder than most politicians. As he notes,  “I’ve been vilified and misquoted in the media for the last eight years – I found that upsetting, I found that offensive. We need to get to the point where people aren’t held back from saying what they think because of perceived ‘offense’, mock ‘offense’.”

Since arriving as a UKIP MEP in 2004, this ‘offense’ has dominated his career. Last month, a decade of gaffes culminated in his expulsion from the party.

In June he’d referred to UK aid sent to ‘bongo-bongo land’, and at conference in September he jokingly called a group of women ‘sluts’, before hitting journalist Michael Crick with a party programme. The whip was withdrawn on 21st September.

Bloom blames the political climate for his treatment. “We seem to take the most shallow view of politics. I mean, when I raised in my speech in Birmingham, for example, the fact that we’re sending one billion pounds a month in overseas aid with no audit trail, when they are closing A&E wings in hospitals … all people wanted to talk about for the first twenty-four hours was the fact that I’d used the word ‘bongo.’

“Who was offended? The answer is nobody was offended. That’s the truth of it, nobody was offended.”

The media are also culpable. “The people who write these things, I think you’d agree, tend to live in more metropolitan areas. It’s in London, not even all of London, where everybody around the dinner table agrees and everybody in the Westminster-bubble agrees with what they’re saying, even if it’s out of touch with the rest of the country.” The media are unrepresentative, he notes, “I’ve never had a bad piece written about me by somebody who had taken the trouble to get the train up here.”

But Bloom has also chosen his notoriety – he’s aware of the political value of generating controversy. He describes the need for ‘spice’ in articles and speeches. “People need to be outraged, even if it’s fake most of the time; they need to be outraged, or amused, or laugh. Otherwise I wouldn’t sell an article… My articles need a bit of spice, otherwise nobody would read them.”

This ‘spice’ was Bloom’s downfall. He’s been constantly accused of misogyny ever since he stated in 2004 that women “don’t clean behind the fridge enough.”

Yet he remains adamant he’s not sexist. “I’ve always been a very big supporter of women, the advancement of women in both sport and business, and I also sponsor ladies’ equestrian sport. All of which is very well documented, but none of which is ever touched by the newspapers because it doesn’t touch the pigeon hole… What it might actually give an indication of is that any accusations that I’m a misogynist are clearly ridiculous.”

Nevertheless, his views on gender are undeniably provocative. He constantly refers to gender differences “that we don’t fully understand”. He refers to men’s dominance in music. “If you were to sit down with pen and paper, and I’m a keen classical music buff, you would get your first hundred great works of musical genius and you would not in your first hundred names… come to a female name.” While he hasn’t “the faintest idea why”, Bloom maintains that gender is too inexplicable to legislate on.

Since leaving UKIP, Bloom has attacked the party. This week, he told The Times that Nigel Farage has “lost touch”. Today he’s similarly critical of UKIP. “I would like to see an admission that drugs policy both in America and in the United Kingdom in the last couple of years has been a dismal failure… it’s something that UKIP are absolutely determined not to talk about.”

“Politicians are only interested in what’s going to happen in 2015, electorally. How can it be that the country has 1.3 trillion pounds of debt? … The answer is that it’s the most unbelievable incompetence, and failure to address fundamental economic issues, and I now feel much freer to address those.”

Bloom differs from UKIP economically. He’s an advocate of the Austrian School, condemning Oxford University because “you won’t have a single Austrian economist, not one. There’ll be Keynesians, and some Chicago School, both schools of which have palpably failed completely. But your undergraduates are still being taught the most ridiculous nonsense in their economics classes.” His libertarian agenda has been “side-lined” by UKIP in the last eighteen months.

Yet Bloom can’t escape his politician’s mind-set. He refers to UKIP as “we”, and is evangelical about its strengths. “The media tends to worry about Conservatives switching to UKIP, but the long and the short of it is that it isn’t like this. I mean, I won a Labour seat up here – most of my activists are Labour, old Labour. So this Conservative Party splinter group thing doesn’t play.”

UKIP has won voters who’ve been “abandoned” by Labour and the Tories, “the artisan classes”, who are “pithead winders or joiners, people like that, the real middle England people who are conservative with a small ‘c’, used to vote Old Labour, and have a picture of the Queen in the parlour.”

Bloom’s party career is over. He’s described anybody who enters politics as “insane”: “I went into politics for the same reason my father climbed into a spitfire in 1940 – it was to save the country.”

For Bloom, there’s too much emphasis on delivery, not enough on policy. “It’s a bit like you getting a message – I send you a message with a very important letter, and you then spend hours agonising over the choice of envelope, and how I addressed it.” Politicians “need a hide like a rhino. I hide most of my stuff from my wife: she’d be horrified.”

This disillusionment with politics doesn’t mean Bloom is leaving Parliament. He’s unsure whether he’ll stand again in 2014, now the whip is withdrawn. “People are asking me to. People are saying for God’s sake, let’s send an Independent! Somebody who doesn’t represent any party, will you stand again? The answer is I don’t know.”

Although this optimism about re-election seems delusional, Bloom’s populist ramblings have won him thousands of fans. As he says, he’s been elected by those “completely and utterly disengaged” from mainstream politics – maybe Bloom will be gaffing through Brussels well into his seventies.