An independent review to determine whether Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was radicalised during his time at University College London (UCL) was announced on Monday by President and Provost, Professor Malcolm Grant.

Mr. Abdulmutallab is accused by the FBI of attempting to blow up a US passenger aeroplane on Christmas Day, 2009. He denies the six-count indictment.

The review will examine Mr. Adbulmutallab’s time at UCL, including the three years he spent as President of the Islamic Society. Efforts will also be made to understand whether conditions at UCL contributed to his radicalisation.

The review will be chaired by Dame Fiona Caldicott, principal of Somerville College, Oxford, and pro vice-chancellor of the University of Oxford.

Dame Caldicot stated, “I am pleased to be able to lead the independent inquiry that has been set up to look into events at UCL during the period of study there of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. I hope very much that through chairing this inquiry I can help to produce a report that will have credibility and utility both within UCL and beyond.”

Professor Grant stated, “We are setting up a full independent inquiry into what transpired whilst he was here and his association with the student Islamic Society and their activities.”

Criticisms were levelled at UCL after the attempted attack. It was claimed by London-based terror expert, Peter Neumann, in an interview with the AP, that the university Islamic society is known for being particularly hardline.

However, Professor Grant has made it clear he feels that such criticisms are unfair.

In a statement, he drew attention to the legal obligation British universities are under to guarantee freedom of speech within the law on campus.
Professor Grant stated, “Campuses are and should be safe homes for controversy, argument and debate. This clearly does not include incitement that could lead to terrorism and murder.”

In an interview on Monday, he further clarified his position, commenting, “We must continue to regard students as adults. We must of course ensure that universities are not converted into hotbeds of radicalisation. But this is a long way from reality. There has been so much hyperbole and hysteria whipped up around this.”

He added, “I don’t think radicalisation works by radical preachers coming in and acting like drill sergeants recruiting into a group. We must dispel any misapprehension that universities can substitute for the security services. We are not capable of acting as policemen.”

A spokesperson from Oxford University stated that the University holds a similar position. “Freedom of speech is a fundamental right respected by the University and we also need to ensure that we do not discriminate against either staff or students on the basis of their political or religious views.”

They further commented, “Oxford University takes the security of students at Oxford University extremely seriously. Locally, Oxford city and Oxfordshire county councils are leading on what is known as the Prevent Strategy and the University has met with local councillors and Thames Valley Police to discuss the guidance given. These actions form part of the UK Government’s overall Prevent Strategy, rather than relating to any specific concern about Oxford.”

The other members of the review, which will begin in February, are yet to be announced. The finding of the panel will be published, and UCL has said that it will “act on whatever recommendations it makes.”

Last week the Oxford Academic Tariq Ramadan had a ban from travelling to the United States lifted.

Professor Ramadan is an Islamic scholar who was banned from going to US after giving money to Association de Secours Palestinian (ASP) between 1998 and 2002, an organisation which in 2004 the US ban on the grounds that it supported terrorism and funded the Palestinian group Hamas.

Professor Ramadan said in a statement that “The decision brings to an end a dark period in American politics that saw security considerations invoked to block critical debate through a policy of exclusion and baseless allegation”.

However many friends you may have on Facebook, humans brains cannot cope with more than 150 friendships, according to a recent Oxford study.

Robin Dunbar, who studies social circles and the brain, developed “Dunbar’s number” in the 1990s. He says it is the neocortex, a part of the brain, which limits the size of our social group.

Despite the rise of social networking sites where many members have thousands of friends, the professor of Evolutionary Anthropology insists his theory still holds true today. Preliminary results from his research on the “Facebook effect” looking at Facebook traffic show that even the most sociable people do not really care about more than 150 friends.

Dunbar commented, “People obviously like the kudos of having hundreds of friends.”

He added, “There is a big sex difference though … girls are much better at maintaining relationships just by talking to each other. Boys need to do physical stuff together.”

The Governing Body at Somerville has decided to stop offering Human Sciences undergraduate degrees. Within two days, hundreds of students, alumni and tutors have reacted with dismay and conviction against the ruling.

The online petition called Stop Somerville Dropping Human Sciences has been already signed by hundreds of students.

No interviews for Human Sciences were offered to the incoming applicants for 2010, a decisive move which occurred without student consultation or public announcement. The decision is for a “trial period” only, but its reversal is unlikely as Somerville follows the trend for colleges independently dropping the course.

Caroline Lennartsson commented, “Purists may well consider Human Sciences a mongrel subject, but mongrels are those with hybrid vigour and durability.”

This week Cherwell revealed that LMH had admitted a student with a fabricated set of qualifications and entirely fictitious personal statement. But we’re all at it, a straw poll of students and Cherwell staff shows.

Duke of Edinburgh awards, unread books and dropped ‘B’-grades featured heavily on our Oxford application forms and CVs for jobs and internships – if not to the extent of 13 imaginary A-Levels.

A tutor commented: “It is suprisingly common for candidates to come up blank when asked even the most general questions about a book which they have professed to have read and enjoyed.”

One student said that the biggest lie he had put down on his application form was to “pretend I had any interest in my subject.” Another confessed that he had put down a Duke of Edinburgh award, despite having never taken part in the programme.

Other than Oxford applications, students admitted to lying on or exaggerating their CVs for professional work. A Magdalen undergraduate said that he had an advanced medical qualification to work as a lifeguard, while an anonymous member of Cherwell staff confessed he had claimed to be a CNN journalist to land a job on a paper, when he had only ever worked as an intern at the organisation.

News reporters admitted that on University qualifications they had “bigged up the number of books I’d read”, “put down more books and then flicked through them before interviews,” and “read books in English translations when I said I’d read them in the original foreign language”.

Another current undergraduate said they were put off from lying in their personal statement, after the example of their brother – who had falsely claimed to have read Ulysees, but was then quizzed on the novel in his interview and was not offered a place.

A national survey late last year found that ten percent of Oxford educated students went on to lie on their CV after University. However, the number of Oxford graduates found lying was shown to be far fewer than alumni of other universities – with 24.8% of job candidates from universities or colleges outside the top 100 admitting to lying on their applications.

A separate survey showed that state school students are more likely to lie than their privately-educated counterparts.

Oxford students are taking on paid jobs during term time, despite measures taken by the University to discourage part-time work.

A Cherwell investigation has shown that the majority of students who work during their time at the University do not have serious financial troubles, but appreciate being able to make some money to spend on recreational activities. Others cited various reasons for working, such as social benefits.

The students take up a variety of jobs, ranging from staffing Oxford’s cafes, through representing major companies such as PricewaterhouseCoopers, to working in departmental libraries.

One second-year student who works in Argos had previously worked for the company before coming to Oxford. He said, “At home all my friends have part time jobs while at uni so it’s the done thing to try and get by. I really enjoy working and it’s nice feeling good at your job when you’re maybe not doing so well at a particular week’s work.”

He claims working does not interfere with his studies saying, “I can balance my time and know how I work so it usually levels out.

“There are certain weeks which can be quite heavy and it’s definitely not fun getting up after a Bop and heading straight to Customer Services but I am glad I work. It gives me a sense of achievement and use, separate to my degree. I don’t understand why there is such a stigma attached to the subject at this university.”

However, a spokesperson from the University emphasized, “Students are discouraged from working during term time as terms are short… the holiday periods are therefore long, giving many students the opportunity to take up paid work outside term time. If a student is worrying about finances the University and colleges would prefer they came to talk about the wide range of financial support available.”

Many Oxford students choose to work for catering companies, both in the holidays and during term time. Working hours are flexible and the majority of staff are students.

One student explained her reasons for deciding to work for an Oxford-based catering company. “We had a lot of free time in Trinity as our exams were in Hilary and we didn’t have any tutes. Then someone mentioned this company and I thought why not?”

The student, who is a scholar, believes working does not interfere with her studies, especially as her work is flexible. She thinks students should be able to work if they want to. “I think it’s a bit harsh that there is a strict rule, because to be honest there is not that much time, and I think students would only work when they have time.”

While this student does not have pressing financial problems she added, “I guess I think its a bit unfair that someone who needed the money quite a lot would feel intimidated by the rules. I know the university claims there’s a lot of support, but I’m sure that there are still people struggling. And to be honest, Oxford claim we should be working just as hard in the holidays so does it really make a difference when we choose to earn money?”

Some students are employed as campus representatives by high-profile companies, such PricewaterhouseCoopers. These students are paid well, up to £10 an hour and are expected to represent the firm by handing out fliers and organising events for up to 10 hours a week.

One student who worked for a major firm in Oxford told Cherwell he took the job on mainly for the freebies and because he enjoyed the “freedom to organise events or whatever I wanted in Oxford.”

He appreciated the flexible hours of the job and said the responsibility was probably similar to being president of a medium-sized society in Oxford. However, he said extracurricular activities do not have “pressure to do the hours” and are “not the same responsibility”. The student decided to give up because he felt working was interfering with his academic work, though he stressed this is probably different for people at various stages of their degree.

Other jobs taken up by students include tutoring for companies such as Bright Young Things and freelance work over the internet. Tara Isabella Burton, a second year Oriel student has earned $2053 in the last six months through elance.com commissions. Her tasks included editing a novel and writing articles for travel websites.

While Oxford strongly discourages students from working outside of the University, many students are employed by their college or University faculties.
One third-year student who works for her faculty library for an hour and a half a week said she decided to work because “the job was advertised and I thought it would be a good, constructive thing to do in Oxford that wasn’t related to academic studies. The pay is good too.”

Liam Milner, a St. Anne’s student, described his experiences of working for the college telethon. He worked for two weeks and was paid £7 an hour for his efforts. Students were also provided with free accommodation by the college.

He said, “The main bulk of the telethon didn’t really interfere with my work, because it was mainly in the evenings and left plenty of time during the day for working. I thought the extra weekend was a little more problematic, however, as it rather got in the way of what could’ve been a far more productive couple of days.

“One thing I would say is that I don’t think I could do any regular work for college, working behind the bar for instance, because I think it would get in the way with both work and socialising. The telethon was fine though, and I couldn’t turn down £500 for two weeks work.”

Some students operate their own companies during term time. Duncan Turnbull from Brasenose and Lincolnite Oliver Bridge set up their own companies before coming to the University and now they continue to manage them on part-time basis. Turnbull even confessed to the Financial Times that the tutors at Brasenose college provided him with additional support by allowing him to take time off, while he should have been studying.

Students are divided over whether working can realistically be balanced with studies. One third-year St. Hilda’s student commented, “There is a difference between existing and enjoying life. Grants and loans provide students with enough money to eat but students want to be able to have nights out and buy new clothes, especially at Oxford where we have so many wealthy students supported by their parents.”

“I think that if someone has time to work during term time they obviously have an issue with either their university work or their social life,” said another third year Orientalist.

Sarah Reder, a second year student said, “Some students play a few different sports and dedicate up to fifteen hours a week to extracurricular activities. Why can’t a student with financial incentives dedicate the same time to paid work?”

Oxford has reacted strongly against claims in the Sunday Times that it has frozen the number of places it offers to British undergraduates in direct response to a funding crisis.

Other universities, including Cambridge, Durham, King’s College London, Imperial College and Warwick have all announced that they will be forced either to freeze or to cut the number of places available to undergraduates in 2010.

However a spokesperson for the University told Cherwell, “It is misleading to imply that Oxford is ‘freezing’ places as a result of government cuts. We have had about 3,000 places a year for many years and this remains unchanged.”
Despite the face that this policy is consistent with the past, increased competition for places is inevitable as the demand for higher education increases.

Jonny Medland, OUSU VP for Access and Academic Affairs, commented, “While undergraduate numbers would ideally be expanded, there are a range of outside pressures which make this difficult. The City Council has a limit on how many students can live out and colleges are also constrained by their own capacity. The Oxford tutorial system is also expensive, meaning that taking more undergraduates means the university has to find more money from somewhere.”

Elsewhere, universities have announced that they will be cutting the number of places available. The London School of Economics and Essex universities will both be offering fewer places to students next year, and Edinburgh University will be reducing its intake by 1,300 – nearly a third of this year’s total.

Such moves have been prompted by the announcement of Peter Mandelson, the First Secretary of State, that universities will have their funding cut by £914 million under a Labour government. The Conservatives have hinted at plans for similar cuts.

This year there was an increase of 12% in school-leavers applying to university, bringing the total to around 720,000. A similar increase this year will leave several hundred students without university places at all; moreover the 10,000 extra places offered by the government last year will not be made for 2010 entry.

Bahram Bekhradnia, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said, “Universities will be faced with a choice of recruiting more students with lower amounts of money, which will inevitably damage quality; and on the other hand, cutting student numbers, which will be very hard on potential students.”

This year some British universities reported that the numbers of applications they had received from abroad had risen by over 40%. Bekhradnia said, “Most universities are frankly taking as many overseas students as they can.”

The first public meeting of the ‘No Cuts at Oxford University Movement’ took place at the Kings Arms pub. The meeting was held to raise awareness among students about the potential cuts facing Oxford and other universities due to the fall in public spending.

The meeting, chaired by a current Oxford undergraduate, heard from four speakers; Terry Hoad, vice-President of the University and Colleges Union, Ben Sellers, the Student Union President at SOAS, Michael Chessum, founder of the National Convention Against Fees and Cuts and Joanna Pinto, an anti-cuts campaign student at the London College of Communications.

All detailed the negative effect the budget cuts would have on the student learning experience and stressed the need for immediate action from higher education institutions in conjunction with their students and staff.

Sellers underlined how important he felt the issue to be, stating, “your course is getting cut, your lecturers are getting sacked”.

This sentiment was shared by Pinto, who commented, “it’s up to you to make it sexy; it’s up to you to put it on the news.”

The UK currently spends 0.9% GDP on higher education, less than the average 1% from comparable countries. With the economic downturn, this gulf is expected to grow, and the panel highlighted that this, together with the reclassification of universities to the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills in Government, leaves higher education resources vulnerable to being slashed in order to increase institutions financial efficiency.

Chessum and Sellers illustrated this argument with examples from KCL and UCL, both of which generated a large profit margin last year, yet still forced compulsory redundancies. Specifically UCL, at which Chessum is a student, had a 6% budget cut made by its management in response to just a 2% decrease in funding.

The repercussions of any cutbacks are expected to be felt by all students, with many courses closing, arts subjects neglected in favour of the more profitable science degrees and every graduate having to justify their research’s economic benefit to society. Sellers highlighted concerns that if the current fee cap is raised or lifted, higher education will become a competitive market, in which more financially able students will be able to pay for a better quality of degree.

One audience member commented, “Students feel useless” and said that tangible cuts will have to be felt by students before they will get involved.

The panel explained that with the average undergraduate degree lasting just 3 years, it is difficult to excite any long-term engagement from students on the issues which affect them. The suggestion to combat this is to engage support from local communities, by offering the resources of the students and the institutions in skills shares.

Action is currently being taken by the University and Colleges Union in order to protect student interests; on the 26th January leading members lobbied Parliament with their new education manifesto, reinforcing the need to allow generous funding to maintain high academic standards in universities.

The panel concurred that although the focus of the campaign appears fairly narrow, it is a part of battling a wider economic injustice in the UK which, as Sellers puts it, “supports people who are marginalised in society”.