Wednesday, April 30, 2025
Blog Page 289

Science’s addiction to plastic: Something needs to be done

Rhian Gruar
-
0
Science’s addiction to plastic: Something needs to be done

Are scientists complicit in the increasing amounts of plastic waste polluting our earth? Or is the waste generated by research an unavoidable by-product of scientific progression? These are questions which struck me during my summer placement in a bioscience research lab. I was shocked by the sheer amount of plastic waste that can be generated from the simplest of experiments. Day in, day out I end up discarding countless single-use plastics: a pair of gloves here, dozens of plastic tubes per failed cloning attempt and an endless heap of pipette tips. 

I like to consider myself an environmentally conscious person but does my reusable water bottle and thrifted clothes really mean anything in the face of the massive volume of lab waste I’m generating? 

In the wake of the IPCC’s 2021 climate report that unequivocally attributes recent increases in extreme weather events to human action, I believe that the scientific community needs to take a stand. And I’m not alone. Researchers from the University of Exeterestimated that bioscience research may be responsible for up to 1.8% of annual global plastic consumption. Scientific researchers themselves need to think carefully  about the rate at which they consume plastic. A one litre plastic bottle takes two litres of water to produce and 450 years to decompose. By 2050, plastic may outweigh fish in our oceans. 

With  so much research funded by  government and public money, do researchers have a duty to limit their environmental impact and be held to similar standards as any other government funded project? Or is plastic a necessary evil to keep the cogs of scientific research running smoothly? 

Plastic’s durability, mouldability and cheapness makes it a versatile product that can survive in the hands of even the clumsiest scientists. Single-use plastic is also an easy work around for the eternal issue of contamination that plagues bioscience research. Contamination could be chemicals, left over in a test tube from a prior experiment, interfering with results or different strains of bacteria mixing while they are being grown. Simply disposing of equipment after an experiment greatly minimises these risks. 

Contamination doesn’t cease to be an issue once a piece of lab equipment has been discarded. Biological and chemical contamination is a major complication in dealing with lab waste. Material that has been exposed to harmful chemicals or biological matter cannot simply be sent to a local landfill. It must first be sterilised by high pressure steam in a process called autoclaving which requires a large amount of energy and water, exacerbating the negative environmental impact of research. According to the University of Oxford’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy, “laboratory buildings are responsible for over 60% of total energy consumption and carbon emissions across the university”. Labs are packed with equipment that demand  high energy supplies. For example, older models of lab freezers can consume four times more energy than the average UK household.  A move towards more sustainable energy sources may help mitigate some of these costs. 

Despite all this, science cannot be stopped. From medicine to sustainable eco-technology; we depend on the work  carried out in labs for almost everything. Researchers who are investigating plastic eating bacteria which  may help cleanse the oceans of plastic waste must utilise the very single-use plastic that they are aiming to eliminate. Of course, if they are successful, the eventual benefits will far outweigh the temporary costs.That’s still a big if. 

This issue may seem hopeless but there are measures that can be implemented today to help make science more sustainable. Scientists should be encouraged to return to the three Rs that have been drilled into us from primary school: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. 

Reduction can come by sharing resources with neighbouring labs, so nothing goes to waste, or opting for suppliers that limit unnecessary packaging. A switch back to glass equipment should be made in instances where contamination between uses is not an issue. 

Contamination makes reusing lab plastic more complex, but some companies aim to change this. Grenova, a lab supply company that focuses on sustainability, has developed a washer that sterilises pipette tips for reuse. Tips can be reused up to 40 times without compromising the quality of experiments. With this innovation, almost 1 billion pipette tips have been reused to date. 

Similar issues surround recycling lab waste as  reusing equipment. Most recycling plants are hesitant to receive lab waste due to contamination. Some specific services exist, such as a program that recycles lab gloves, but more work needs to be done in this area. 

As with all sustainability efforts, individual action is not enough, and change must come from an institutional level. The University of Oxford’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy aims for net zero carbon emission by 2035. Oxford labs need to work to find solutions to the problems of plastic use in their own labs in order for this goal to be reached. Advice is available to scientist on running a sustainable lab and there are opportunities for labs to gain sustainability accreditation. Funding bodies also need to exercise their power by favouring labs meeting certain sustainability checkpoints, to steer scientific research into a new, more sustainable age. 

Science labs will continue to work in this way  for the foreseeable future, churning out academic papers, new technology and tonnes and tonnes of plastic waste. Our understanding of climate change is due to the work of scientists, and many of our hopes to halt or reverse its effects also rest on the shoulders of scientists. They, and the institutions supporting them, need to turn some of their focus to how their own actions are damaging the planet and set an example to all those looking towards science for hope.

Extra-Terrestrial Environmental Destruction

Harry Chapman
-
0
Extra-Terrestrial Environmental Destruction

Humanity has set its sights on the stars for its future and envisions a new place for itself among the heavens. However, throughout history, human exploration has had disastrous consequences for the native environments encountered. At first glance, space exploration has decided there is no environment to ruin or indigenous peoples to displace. It seems, nothing much can go wrong. From the emptiness of space to the barren deserts of Mars, space appears hardened to potential ruin. Unfortunately, we have already begun to precipitate environmental disasters in space. 

In the Earth’s orbit,there  are thousands of satellites, tens of thousands of pieces of tracked debris, and staggering amounts of untraceable debris. Orbital decay is the main mechanism for removing orbital debris, wherein an object’s orbit is gradually reduced by external forces such as drag, tidal interactions, or radiation pressure. However, every year more debris is added than is removed. Eventually, the number of objects in orbit could reach a critical mass and cause a Kessler Cascade. At this critical level of debris, objects collide and split into more debris; The resulting increase in debris increases the likelihood of collisions, and leads to more debris being created. Even manoeuvrable objects such as satellites or stations would be at risk. This profusion of debris in or adjacent to useful orbits could eventually greatly reduce our ability to deploy and operate spacecraft, jeopardising the immense benefits of space utilisation.

Even before reaching critical mass, this debris causes issues and  makes operations in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) increasingly difficult. Micro-debris sandblasting satellites reduce solar panel efficiency and damage sensitive parts.Larger debris requires costly evasive manoeuvres if they can be spotted, and may render satellites inoperative if they collide. Low Earth Orbit is currently the main area of human activity in space and has been so for decades. The looming disaster is no surprise, however. The concept of a Kessler cascade was first theorised in 1978, over four decades ago, when our utilisation of LEO was much less valuable than today. 

Regulators are pushing for proper management and disposal of satellites to mitigate the proliferation of orbital debris and there are attempts to remove orbital debris. As more nations and companies achieve launch capability, the patchwork of nationalised mitigation efforts will cover a lower percentage of launches and be less and less effective. International efforts must be made to confront this possibility. 

Today, humanity has set sight on further targets. The Moon is the next major destination for many governments, both as a launch site into deeper space and a hub for industry. Human efforts on the moon are limited to areas with water deposits, mainly found in the polar regions. These areas could be jeopardised by contamination with dangerous fuels, damage from hazardous landings, and national competition. Speculated future explorations involve terraforming Venus, settling on the moons of Jupiter, and Space X’s efforts towards Mars. All these visions for the future exhibit a total lack of environmental awareness. Terraforming by nuking Mars or stripping off Venus’s atmosphere has incredible impact and lacks consideration of its side effects or long-term viability. Any large presence on other worlds will contaminate them and potentially disrupt ecosystems, jeopardising the discovery of life beyond earth. There is fundamental value to finding extraterrestrial life beyond avoiding any potential harm it could cause. These schemes would require a level of coordination and effort sustained across a timespan never seen before. Hopefully, they would encounter greater scrutiny as they approached realisation.

The impact of humanity’s expanding presence in space will be huge, and bring a multitude of benefits to Earth. The Apollo program reaped many rewards, and our expansion into LEO touches every aspect of life. Even the fight to preserve Earth’s own climate relies on humanity’s presence in orbit. All of these benefits are at risk, however, as we continue to threaten the environments of space. Action must be taken to prevent environmental collapses. International efforts must be made to mitigate damage done, to repair what can be repaired, and to establish legal frameworks for responsible endeavours in space. Military actions, which are some of the most damaging, must be heavily limited. Private companies, often culprits for the least transparent and most damaging terrestrial environmental disasters, must be globally regulated to prevent this being carried to the stars. Fundamentally, whilst all these practical measures would help, a change to the philosophy of space exploration is needed. Missions must be planned with their impacts in mind and the future of the environment and humans considered. This concept is not new; the early days of space exploration were characterised by optimistic and benevolent language about the future. The outer space treaty, written sixty years ago, wrote a noble sentiment into the preamble of the treaty: “Recognizing the common interest of all mankind in the progress of the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes”. Sadly, humanity has not lived up to its own expectations. As more nations reach launch capability these hollow words have rung false. Many nations and companies exploit space with as little consideration as possible, and we will pay the price for this. If humanity is to fully enjoy the benefits of our endeavours, we must return to a kinder philosophy of space exploration.

A Whole New World? Navigating Workplace Politics

Calista Chong
-
0
A Whole New World? Navigating Workplace Politics

This piece also featured in Oxford Women in Business’ termly magazine Insight in a collaboration celebrating the launch of Cherwell’s Business & Finance section.

If you have managed to secure an internship or job upon graduation – great! But if you feel intimidated about navigating the unfamiliar, working-adult world, read on to allay some of that (understandable) worry. Calista Chong, Vice-President at OxWIB, compiled a list of disconcerting dilemmas one could face in the workplace and spoke to three wonderful working women for some tips on improving one’s social and political savvy.

Peggy Klaus is a bestselling author, communication and leadership coach, and political consultant. Peggy has spent more than two decades helping thousands of professionals from Fortune 500s, mid-size and start-ups succeed in their jobs. She has also dedicated much of her career to empowering women of all ages. And, once again, she brings her passion and expertise into the spotlight with the launch of “Unstoppable!” — her new, cutting-edge program designed to address the key issues critical for women’s success: confidence, fearlessness, and purpose, among others. Peggy is the author of two best-selling books, BRAG! The Art of Tooting Your Own Horn Without Blowing It and The Hard Truth About Soft Skills: Workplace Lessons Smart People Wish They’d Learned Sooner. 

Shirly Piperno is now a trainee at emerging technologies at a financial institution after graduating in 2020 with her Master’s, where she focused on digital ethics around the UK census. Her previous experience lies in fashion and real estate, also focusing on the digital aspect of these industries. 

Stephanie Onukwugha is a Pharmaceutical Scientist and Business Development expert whose skills and experiences have been utilized by major healthcare, petroleum parastatals, telecom infrastructure, tech, and luxury clothing brands both in the USA and in Nigeria. Stephanie left the corporate world to focus on her passion, Entrepreneurship, and is now the proud founder of Premier Capacity Development Network (Nigeria’s premier Training Network) and UnveiledSkin (an Organic Skincare Brand) and the proud co-Founder of Iruka Holistics (offering Inventive Wellness Products).

Dilemma #1: I feel that I am not taken seriously in male-dominated spaces and I don’t know how to deal with being spoken over or interrupted in meetings. 

To Stephanie and Peggy, this dilemma needs to be overcome by a single, powerful word: mindset. In Peggy’s words: “Women have to decide that they want to make their voices heard. It is a commitment to courage and confidence.”  

“A lot of times, women focus on the obvious disparity in the ratio of male and female coworkers. Ignoring this disparity alleviates any subconscious pressure or insecurity you may feel to make yourself be seen or taken seriously. Ignore the noise, live with confidence and charisma and focus on being the best at what you do to create an undeniable impact for your team and organisation,” Stephanie shared. 

Peggy has advised her clients – many of them women in leadership – to write three behavioural prompts and repeat these to themselves: Speak first; speak often; I will be doing a disservice to my team, the company and myself if I don’t speak up. “The more they see these prompts, the more it reinforces better behaviour. Come prepared with things that you want to say – observations, facts, statistics – so you can contribute to the discussion confidently.” 

What about dealing with being abruptly cut off in team meetings? After overcoming the initial shock and flash of hurt, how do we react to this ‘snub’? While it is natural to assume ill intentions on the interrupter, Peggy recommended that we should first assume good intentions – an oversight or overexcitement on the individual’s part. “Start by giving a friendly, non-threatening comeback – identify the person, give a reason for calling them out, and tell them what it is that you are going to do.” 

This could look something like: John, I know you don’t mean to interrupt me. I really wasn’t finished yet – I’m going to continue what I was saying, because it is really important. 

“We really do have difficulty with boundaries, we worry about hurting people’s feelings, being disrespectful, being seen as difficult or aggressive,” Peggy said. Shirly, who works in a department with a ratio of 5 girls to 300 guys, advised to practice speaking up for others when it is difficult to assert yourself – whether it is because of power dynamics, or your relatively junior position. “Create a support system around the problem…include even guys who are a bit more junior. Make sure that someone has your back, and that you have the back of others.” 

Dilemma #2: People tend to claim credit for the results of my hard work – how should I claim credit where it is due, while still showing that I’m a team player? 

First, there is nothing wrong with claiming due credit. Peggy, who published the book Brag! The Art of Tooting Your Horn Without Blowing It said, “Braggarts are obnoxious because they talk incessantly; they steal credit; they exaggerate and condescend, among others. If you’ve done it, it ain’t bragging. Don’t feel bad about asserting your worth, where necessary. Just do it the good way!” 

But Stephanie has a word of caution. “A lot of bosses will do this, as you are there to help them accomplish tasks, it’s part of the job description. When it comes to supervisors – tread lightly. You don’t need to address the issue constantly. People know when you are a valuable member of the team. When you build up rapport with your supervisors and bosses, you can then mention that you would love to be recognized for your work. When it comes to your co-workers, however, calmly and confidently interject and correct their statements. If it is a recurring affair, pull the person aside and discuss it with them,” Stephanie said. When facing this potentially difficult conversation, Peggy asked for us to start, again, with curiosity. “State how you feel and list your contributions. End with something like: In the future, I’d like you to make sure that my work is acknowledged.” 

To Shirly, it is best if we can be “preemptive” about the problem. “Make sure that your managers are aware that you are in charge of the project in the first place. When there is a weekly call for updates, make sure that you are mentioning the steps you are taking to accomplish it to prevent people from taking credit for it later on.” 

Dilemma #3: I’m feeling very stifled as my boss is a micromanager. How do I convince them to trust me? 

It’s annoying, I know. 

But to our three ladies, it is an inevitable occurrence. According to Peggy, “At the beginning of a working relationship with anyone, it is “normal” for a manager to micromanage. Don’t take it personally. What I would suggest, is when your manager gives you a specific assignment, make sure you get specifics on how the manager would like it to be completed – ask them a lot of questions. Then ask them if they are open to you bringing new ideas to discuss. At your performance review, you can talk about your satisfactory performance and mention that you would like more freedom. And be specific about what that freedom looks like to you.” Stephanie concurred, saying that micromanagers micromanage because “they don’t feel like they would get the outcomes they desire, without interference.” 

From what I’m hearing, the best thing to do is not to feel frustrated and just go with the flow – fingers crossed that the rein will loosen over time. 

Dilemma #4: I have no idea how to approach networking, particularly with seniors or people outside my team. How do I create organic opportunities to meet new people? 

In Stephanie’s opinion, the two secret ingredients to networking well are preparation and charisma. “Be open, flexible and very alert to situations – and the last one is key – that when taken advantage of, will steer you closer to achieving your goals.” She advised us to identify the people in your company that can help you achieve your long-term goals and treat every interaction as the first and last. What we want to do is make sure that we are presenting the best version of ourselves to the people we meet, so that they will feel comfortable vouching for us when the need arises. Charisma goes a long way in making these goal-driven interactions natural.   

Shirly tries to email a different person once a month about something that she is interested in. For example, having been involved with Effective Altruism at Oxford, she spoke to someone at the Philanthropy unit of her company, hoping to find out more about different approaches to philanthropy work. She also spoke to a lady about their shared interest in fashion. “You don’t get to discuss these niche topics of interest at work, a lot of people miss these spontaneous conversations. I’d say the best way to approach networking is to have good conversations and follow your passions.” This was so refreshing to hear – who knew that your bachelor’s thesis could signal the start of a budding friendship? 

Dilemma #5: I’m struggling to stand out in the workplace. What could I do? 

Now, let’s get back to basics. “You have to have a great attitude. You have to be delighted to be there – be friendly, introduce yourself, offer to help. The emotional temperature that you bring into the organisation will permeate everything that you do, and punctuality and preparation are foundational attributes for anyone looking to be successful.” Peggy also recommended following up with colleagues or managers with pertinent information after meetings. These little gestures speak volumes about your work ethic and attitude.

Shirly adds, “Everyone is pretty good at their job. You’re not going to stand out by just doing your job well. If you can find a way to enrich your team and working space, go for it.” “Performance currency” – defined by an article in the Harvard Business Review as credibility that one builds through their work – is no longer enough to be recognised in the workplace. One has to prepare to commit to “extra-curriculars” to be indispensable and a valuable contribution to the team. Shirly walked the talk by starting a women’s support network in her workplace, scheduling monthly calls with them although they are working on different projects.

Lastly, we want to make sure that we are standing out…for the right reasons. Stephanie advised to steer clear of office gossip, especially when you are only an intern or in the early stages of your career. “Personality eventually goes a longer way than your output.” 

Dilemma #6: I’m at a stage where I’ve shown results and I’m ready to take on new responsibilities. How do I pitch myself for a promotion effectively, without coming across as pushy? 

First off, it is amazing that you are confident to take the next step forward in your career! Prior to pitching yourself, make sure that you have actually positioned yourself as a great candidate for the role. According to Stephanie, your pitch should contain the following elements – “How much you have excelled in your current role; your desire for something more challenging; and how your abilities align with the new role.” Rehearse and perfect your pitch, before requesting for a meeting with your supervisor. 

Peggy introduced interesting terminology for thinking about putting ourselves forward. One effective way to speak about your successes at meetings or in conversations is in the form of a “Braggalogue”, a short, pithy and entertaining story with facts and figures to support your claims. At key junctures, we should have a “Brag Bag” ready – a compilation of successes, accomplishments, testimonials by colleagues and employees from which you can pull out “Brag Nuggets” to support your pitch for a promotion at performance reviews. When it comes to salary negotiation for your new position, Shirly suggests to “do your research and see what other companies are paying employees” to get a benchmark. 

Dilemma #7: I’m passionate about creating an inclusive and supportive organisational culture. How do I deal with inclusivity in the workplace? 

Fostering a healthy and inclusive organisational culture takes a lot of work. Those at the top can do far more, and more quickly, than you can when you are at the beginning of your career. However, as Shirly said, “Try to act like we are a bit more senior than we actually are. Even if you may hold a junior position, take note of who is speaking less and try to include him or her in the discussion.” Stephanie advised the same – being sincere, having high emotional intelligence and being mindful of the language that we use, will go a very long way. 

On a more systemic level, though, Peggy reiterated that diversity and inclusion programmes should be “strategic, sustained and evidence-based”. Many of these programmes fail because far too many organisations do not have a real interest in fixing the lack of representation. Gender quotas, for one, are effective because they increase the competency in the workplace. “While quotas are a good way of increasing numbers, it is not an immediate fix as it overlooks [important indicators like] retention rates and the types of roles into which minorities are recruited.” 

Which dilemma did you resonate with? This new chapter in our lives brings not only excitement but also new challenges and uncertainty. I hope these bits of wisdom from Shirly, Stephanie and Peggy, all at different stages of their careers, have given you greater insight into navigating the world of the workplace. It’s less scary than it seems, we promise.

Money Diaries: A 20 year old media intern in London

Cherwell Money Diaries
-
0
Money Diaries: A 20 year old media intern in London

Occupation: Intern at a media start-up

Industry: Media/tech 

Age: 20

Location: London

Salary: £10.00 p/h (£1.6k per month)

Rent: £400 p/m with bills 

Over the summer, I was one of the lucky second years that was able to secure a paid, long-term internship in London. In a year where internship applications were particularly competitive, I secured my position by cold emailing, having been rejected by over 50 formal processes. A week after being offered my job, I moved to the city.

I went into 2020 with the explicit goal of saving up to move to London, and without this goal in mind from that point there is absolutely no way I could have afforded the move. I lived at home during Hilary, joined my remote college telethon, and took on two tutoring jobs, through which I was able to save up £1.1k. This is all of the money I had in savings at the start of the summer, and I poured all of it into moving, which gives you an idea of how expensive this process can get.  

Besides taking on ways of increasing my income besides just getting a student loan, I was also very strict with my budget in Trinity. The reality of saving up to move for an internship is that there’s just no way that it’s going to happen overnight, and I tried to stay focused on that goal of moving even when I didn’t have a job secured.  

Unsurprisingly, living in London on an intern’s salary is not very affordable. As I only finalised my job in week 10, with the expectation of starting the position a week after, I didn’t have time to hunt for a cheap sublet. I knew that if I was going to find one, it would need to be through the network of friends and acquaintances I have that already live in the city. By asking around, I was able to find a sublet for £400 p/m with bills included, in Haringey, a lesser known district in Zone 3 with great transport links. 

I was lucky to get a deal like this, but if you have time on your side, your best bet is to find the houseshare Facebook group for the area you’re interested in. Short-term sublets through landlords (e.g. those listed on Rightmove) will often be priced at a sky-high premium, and are generally out of reach for the average intern, unless you’re working in a corporate sector. 

Even though my rent was unusually good, I wasn’t prepared for exactly how expensive living in London actually is. Within offices, there’s often a culture of buying food and coffee out, and it’s difficult to turn down networking and bonding opportunities for the sake of saving money. On top of that, I racked up a huge amount of money on TfL, even with my railcard linked to my Oyster. 

I was saved by some freelance invoices that I had paid during my time in London, which amounted to £510 across the two months I lived there, but there’s still a clear affordability issue with taking on an opportunity like this that prices out those that might not live in the city or be able to save the amount that I did. At the end of each month, I was at £0 in my account, without any savings to fall back on. 

Low pay is a particular issue in the creative industries, where the prestige element of the job is used to justify underpaying those starting out. As of 2018, British Vogue was still not paying their regular rotation of 1-month interns at all. 

Had I wanted to, I could have taken on a weekend job or a tutoring job to supplement my income – which many people have to do. But being an intern in a start-up is extremely tiring. I was already trying to fit my degree and freelance work (alongside running this very newspaper) around a job that sometimes saw me finish the day at 6.00pm, but sometimes much later. 

Interning can very quickly become a recipe for burnout without the additional pressure of living on a salary that has you wondering whether it’s really worth it in the first place. The culture of interning in these prestigious jobs is one that is often facilitated by hidden wealth, and without more honesty around how people are able to make it work, things aren’t going to get any better. 

Pandemic sees rise in suspected exam cheating and collusion cases

Jill Cushen
-
0
Pandemic sees rise in suspected exam cheating and collusion cases

The University of Oxford investigated 27 cases of suspected cheating in the academic year 2020/21, Cherwell can reveal. Of the 27 suspected cases, only one case was upheld. 

This is a rise in the number of cases in the previous academic year during which there were 15 cases, and a significant increase in the number of suspected cheating cases before the Covid-19 pandemic. There were no suspected cases of cheating in 2018/19 and only 2 in 2017/18. 

The number of cases of suspected collusion dropped from 21 last year to 9 this academic year, with only 3 being upheld. However, the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic saw 18 students involved in suspected collusion cases, a rise from only 2 students in 2018/19.

Suspected plagiarism cases remained this year high with 36 cases, following 32 cases in 2019/20 and 33 in 2018/19. 13 of the 36 suspected cases were upheld. 

The majority of exams held by the University in Trinity term of this year were open-book assessments and were not invigilated. However,  a small number of exams were conducted using the ‘Safe Exam Browser’ in Inspera which restricts the use of other applications and websites outside Inspera. The University did not make use of Inspera’s proctoring or monitoring features for exams and instead asked students to sign an exam honour code. 

A spokesperson from the University told Cherwell: “Given the change in examination types, a change in the profile of misconduct referrals is to be expected, as students and staff adjust to new methods of assessments.”

They also said that the 27 cases of suspected academic misconduct referred to the Proctors Office “represents a very small fraction of the 55,000 exams sat, the vast majority of which were open-book exams.” 

They added: “The cases referred to the Proctors’ Officer this year were considered under Regulation 1 of 2003. We can now confirm that eight of these cases were upheld as a breach/penalty, while 19 were referred back to Exam Boards. These Boards have a range of options available to them, in accordance with their exam conventions.

“The University is committed to the highest standards of assessments, and will continue to respond as appropriate in the future as we adapt our examinations based on our experience during the pandemic.” 

Data from the University of Oxford

An article by Dr Lancaster and student partner, Codrin Cotarlan, published in the International Journal for Educational Integrity earlier this year, found there was nearly a 200% rise in the number of homework and exam style questions posted online since the beginning of the pandemic, supporting the rise in the number of academic misconduct cases being investigated across the education sector. 

Dr Thomas Lancaster, Senior Teaching Fellow in Computing at Imperial College London and specialist in academic integrity and contract cheating, told Cherwell that the rise in academic misconduct cases is in part due to the unsupervised manner in which assessments and exams have been carried out during the pandemic. He also said that “firms are marketing their offers very heavily to students, sometimes trying to disguise what they’re doing by calling this support”.

He believes that online learning was brought in quickly at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic without suitable consideration of online assessment and student support but that there is now time to find out what works best for institutions and students.  

He added: “I don’t know if high pressure and high stakes exams are the answer. It is possible for students to cheat in a face-to-face setting. It’s possible for online exams to be invigilated. But ultimately, the higher the stakes, the more temptation there is for students to find ways to subvert academic integrity. 

“Students this year have not had the same experience of taking in-person exams as those in the past and that’s just going to cause more anxiety. We have to ask if so much assessment has to be taken with such tight time pressures or if we can give students more freedom to research problems and work on longer-term assessments in areas of interest to them.”

Image: Sailko / CC BY-SA 3.0 via wikimedia commons

The future of film in a post-pandemic world

Rebecca Walker
-
0
The future of film in a post-pandemic world

The impact of the pandemic has become an inescapable discussion point. From the news to conversations in the street, it seems every aspect of life has been affected in some way. The film industry is one of many that has faced changes throughout the last year. With the closure of cinemas, streaming services have become ever more popular, and more films are increasingly accessible at the click of a button: all from the sofa at home. Is the cinematic experience in danger of decline? Or, is it a temporary phenomenon, just like “Video Killed the Radio Star” and the predicted death of cinema by the hand of the home VCR in the 80s? 

As of 2020, Netflix, the most popular streaming service in the UK, had more than 13 million subscriptions, while Amazon Prime had 7.9 million. These numbers rose during the pandemic. Time spent on these services almost doubled in 2020, with almost 5 million British households having signed up since the lockdown first began. Disney+ was a success story of the pandemic. Within 3 months of its launch in March 2020, it had over 5 million downloads for its app and 4.6 million subscribers in the UK. In a time when social interaction outside the household was limited, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+ and NowTV were able to provide entertainment and an escape from reality.

The “Golden Age of TV” that has reigned over the last 20 years has been spurred on by the rise of streaming services. Shows such as Game of Thrones demonstrated how a cinematic experience could be created on the small screen, with vast technological improvements. Various TV shows have had huge success because of the enjoyment people find in the extended character development over multiple hours and in binge-worthy content. Whereas films at 2 hours long, or even more, may be seen as a commitment, TV shows can feel shorter and snappier. Ironically, people often end up watching more hours of TV than the length of a regular film. TV streaming has made this possible. No longer do we have to wait for a weekly episode to be released; we can watch the entire season of Stranger Things in one sitting.

Streaming services have opened the door for TV. Now we can watch series at any time we like, from the latest releases to old favourites like Friends and The Office. TV shows were designed for the small screen: they were never meant for the cinema. So how have streaming services, and their increasing role in the industry during the pandemic, impacted film?

With streaming services so accessible, and the number of subscribers increasing during the pandemic, it perhaps gave more people the chance and time to watch films as well as TV. 

However, in many cases, the pandemic caused problems for the release and the success of films. Phillippa Lowthorpe’s Misbehaviour, about the women’s liberation movement interrupting the 1970 Miss World beauty pageant, was released in cinemas in the UK on 13th March 2020. However, its theatrical release was cut short due to the pandemic, and the film was instead released early to video on demand on 15th April. It grossed about £300,000 in the UK and a worldwide total of $1,200,000. Its box office takings were clearly impacted by the short theatrical release and meant that it failed to attract as much attention from critics and audiences. In a pandemic-world of streaming, films run the risk of becoming lost in the plethora of options available.

In contrast, A Quiet Place Part II, which was released after more than a year of postponements due to COVID in May 2021, was highly successful. Despite the delays, it grossed nearly $295 million worldwide: the 6th highest-grossing film of 2021. Although it became available to stream on Paramount+ 45 days after its cinematic release, it is noticeable that it did extremely well having had a full cinema release and being one of the first films to do so after cinemas reopened. There is surely something to be said here for the magic of cinema. People were clearly still keen to see this movie on the big screen. However, the fact it was released to a streaming service, if not immediately, then not long after its cinema release, perhaps shows that the pandemic has accelerated a shift towards streaming services. Not only are large production companies considering how to gain the most money from their films, but the high numbers of subscriptions also show the demand for TV streaming. Rather than pay for a cinema ticket on top of their various subscriptions, audiences can watch films from the comfort of their own home.

The future of cinema release versus streaming is now a litigious one. The controversy is highlighted in Scarlett Johansson’s lawsuit against Disney, in which she argues Disney broke her contract by releasing Black Widow simultaneously on the big screen and on Disney+. The film suffered a 67% box office decline in its second weekend, which has been directly linked to its availability at home. The pandemic encouraged Disney and others to change the way we consume film, as seen in their release of Mulan to Disney+ without a cinema release. It would be expected that the huge Marvel series would still lure fans for the big-screen experience, yet the box office figures say otherwise. If even Marvel is struggling to draw people to the cinema, perhaps streaming has gained the upper hand during the course of the pandemic.

Sadly, when Johansson finally got her own standalone film after 11 years, it was affected by the pandemic, placed on Disney+ immediately unlike any Marvel film before and then performed the worst of any MCU film in its second week decline. Disney’s next release, Free Guy, with the male-lead Ryan Reynolds, will be released exclusively to cinemas. It seems that perhaps Disney, like other streaming services, is still testing out the waters for the future of their film releases.

It was perhaps inevitable that streaming services would increase in popularity, and there are so many benefits, including its ease and accessibility of so many different films and TV shows. But do you remember the magic of cinema? As we are coming into the post-pandemic world, the experience of seeing a film on the big screen, becoming fully immersed, having the atmosphere of an audience and the smell of popcorn in the air, is one we can enjoy again. Now is a great opportunity to support local cinemas and help show that there is a future for cinema releases.

Athletics and aesthetics – how the media is sexualising athletes

Maddie Hooper
-
0
Athletics and aesthetics – how the media is sexualising athletes

In 2018, the International Olympic Committee published a set of guidelines addressing the media coverage of the competitors, with the end goal of ‘setting the  tone as to how women and girls in sports…can and should be…portrayed’ – in other words, attempting to knock back the sleaze that hangs around media coverage of elite athletes like a bad smell . It’s well known that sexism in media sports coverage is rife – during the 2012 London Olympics, for example, our own dear Prime Minister (then Mayor) wrote of the female volleyball players ‘glistening like wet otters’ in his Telegraph column and during the Games the same athletes often appear in multi-page tabloid spreads that usually fail to feature a single wide-shot set or spike, focusing instead on close-up shots of the female athletes’ bodies.

So how did they try to tackle the problem ?  In amongst the standard stipulation of clunkily squeaky-clean terms like ‘sportsperson’, and advice not to ask female athletes if their husband is proud of them came the section that seemed designed to tackle the more overt manifestations of sexism head-on, largely by advising ‘camera operators’ against certain angles. Specifically : the crotch shot’, ‘tight facial framing’ and ‘the ‘reveal’ shot from foot to head to depict aesthetics rather than athleticism ’. Whilst you might think we ought to give the IOC credit for trying to take action against the problem of athlete sexualisation – though, as the IOC has no actual control over the media outlets responsible for the filming/photographing of its events, recommendations, rather than rules, are about as much as it can do – the filming rules in particular are ones which made me wonder about the assumed link between aesthetics and sexualisation. That sexualisation is an unfortunate fate of many Olympic athletes, particularly in media coverage, seems somewhat inevitable– but how do aesthetics play into that? Ought we to blame viewers, or the camera operators ? And what really is the best way to ensure coverage that shows the competitors as athletes rather than objects ?

Take two of the three types of shot the guidelines advise against, which – crotch shot self-explanatorily to the side – you could easily argue to not really be all that inherently sexualising. Varied camera angles and the usage of both close-up and wide shots is a crucial part of the camera-crew and editors’ roles, as it helps add interest to whatever’s being filmed, heightening emotion and building tension. The pan-up could simply emphasize the sheer physical athleticism of the Olympian shown ; the facial close-up might be used to show concentration or to emphasize the pre-event tension between competing athletes. Whilst the IOC obviously has a responsibility to ensure respectful representation of the athletes performing under its umbrella, it’s not hard to wonder whether the blame for the sexualisation of athletes ought really to be placed upon the spectators themselves. In an ideal world, the Olympians themselves would not be inherently sexual objects, and film-crews would be able to do their jobs safe in the knowledge that audiences would merely admire the athletes as examples of peak sporting physicality.

Sadly, we live in a society that has a tendency to portray both muscularity and tight clothing (almost ubiquitous at the Olympics) as sexual so often that the qualities have almost become embedded within each other, which can make it alarmingly easy to objectify athletes – even unconsciously. So, is it really fair to put the blame on the camera-crews?  Wouldn’t it just be easier to allow them to use their own judgment when certain angles or shots are appropriate for the atmosphere they’re trying to build ?

Trouble is, the device of the camera itself is one which creates an uneven power dynamic between the viewer and the camera’s subject. In her 1975 essay ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’, the British film theorist Laura Mulvey argued that the dynamic created by a film camera between its object and the spectator is one based upon scopophilia, a Freudian concept referring to the pleasure to be gained by watching someone and by being watched. While the underpinning Freudian theoryis typically convoluted, the basic idea that film engenders a voyeuristic, unequal ‘gaze’ due to the fact that the subject cannot engage with the viewer is one that highlights the vulnerability of the athlete facing a lens, as they become an object to be viewed. Not an inherently sexual one, to be sure, but perhaps one that is easier to sexualise than they would be if seen in person. The objectifying role of the camera is also increased by the long tradition of its use specifically to sexualise its subject, and camera angles are a major part of this. Take the angles mentioned by the IOC – whilst non-sexual in themselves, the pan-up and the facial framing are so often used within everyday television and cinema to create or emphasize the audience’s perception of a character as a sexual object that their usage might easily trigger the viewer to sexualise an athlete upon which they were used (think Pavlov).

In light of this, it’s quite interesting to note that the guidelines only specifically address the ‘crotch shot’, making no mention at all of other such angles which focus on a specific area of an athlete’s body. In a way, it’s sad that  the IOC even had to address it at all, as it’s hard to think of any conceivable way anyone would think a ‘crotch shot’ would be appropriate in their coverage of an event, and yet there is clearly some sort of precedent the committee felt the need to address. More cynically, I wonder if the reason it was included was because it’s the easiest close-up type shot to blanket ban – exactly because it’s so completely unjustifiable. Coverage of women’s beach volleyball, for example, typically features close-up shots of the players from behind – to allow the viewers to see the hand-signals players use to signal strategy to their team. If you’ve ever watched one of the matches, though, there is definitely something uncomfortable about these shots, even if the camera never lingers longer than it ought – when all is said and done, they’re essentially extended close-ups of the player’s backsides, especially because your average viewer definitely isn’t going to understand the hand-signals.

Through the lens of Mulvey’s theory, such angles are objectifying above all others, as they reduce the subject to a body part in a way that is quite uniquely dehumanising, as the subject more or less becomes the body part – a physical object. They also stand as proof of the power the camera can hold as a tool of objectification and sexualisation. Sure, you (and I mean ‘you’ in the more general sense) as a live spectator could choose to zero in on an athlete’s bum, but it wouldn’t be as total as the image you’d see on a screen created by a camera-person doing the same thing. Human eyes don’t have a zoom function, so the athlete would still be wholly within your field of vision, whilst through a camera the athlete can be totally (if only briefly) reduced to the body part the camera zooms in on, as it’s all that can be seen on the screen for however long the shot is shown . Whilst, at the end of the day, it may really be the viewer’s prerogative to then sexualise the athlete shown, it’s clear that not only the simple act of filming but the way it’s undertaken play a massive role in this process – so, really, the guidelines are a good start. They may only scratch the surface of the issue of the sexualisation of athletes on camera, but, by acknowledging the issue highlight it in a way that ought to help the camera-crews be more aware of the implications of certain choices.

Historic Oxford pub to reopen

Charlotte Keys
-
0
Historic Oxford pub to reopen

For some, the news in January this year that the historic Lamb & Flag pub would not be reopening would have devastated their hopes of completing Oxford’s notorious pub crawl. This fate has changed upon support from the community interest company, The Inklings Group.

The Inklings Group, an Oxford based literary group recognised for their members J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, both former patrons of the Lamb & Flag, have rescued the pub from closure. The Group has signed a long-term lease with the pub, allowing the literary lover’s pub to keep their doors open. The Group formed in Oxford in the 1930s and 1940s and members frequented the Lamb & Flag and the nearby pub The Eagle and Child. 

Speaking to St John’s College, Kate O’Brien, Chairman of the Inklings Group, said: “Several hundred people, brought together by a love of Oxford and the Lamb & Flag pub, have established the Inklings Group to secure the future of this well-loved pub. We are determined to ensure that the next 408 years of this beloved pub will be as fun, interesting and impactful as the last 408 years.”

O’Brien said that this space is a “community project”  and will be a pub inclusive of Town and Gown alike. 

This comes after news of the pub closing earlier this year incited political involvement from the Oxford Liberal Democrats who highlighted that the pub is an important community asset.

In January this year, upon news that the pub was to close, it was hoped that support would come to prevent the closure of this 17th century pub. 

The pub was originally forced to close after being unable to breakeven in the summer of 2020 after the first lockdown. St John’s deputy bursar said at the time that the pub had been “hard hit by the pandemic” and continued that the college was unable to support the Lamb & Flag. “As a charity, [St John’s] is not allowed to financially support a loss-making business that is not part of its core charitable objectives”, he said.

Principal Bursar of St John’s College, Zoe Hancock, expressed that she was “delighted” that the Lamb & Flag could reopen and believes that “the vision of the Inkling Group will bring great benefit to all”.

The Lamb & Flag will remain recognisable in its traditional character but will also undergo a light refurbishment.

The Lamb & Flag has been serving Oxford students and academics alike since 1566 and will now, with the help of the Inkling group, be able to continue their trade this festive season. 

Image: *Robert*/CC-BY SA 2.0 via flickr.com

The Varsity Trip to take place in Val Thorens

Maurício Alencar
-
0
The Varsity Trip to take place in Val Thorens

The organisers of the historic Varsity Trip have announced that this year’s trip will take place in Val Thorens, located in Les Trois Vallées resort in the south of France. 

The Varsity Trip is the official ski trip for Oxford and Cambridge students. The trip coincides with the Varsity Races, in which the Oxford Ski and Snowboard Club competes with the Cambridge Ski and Snowboard Club. 

The event this year will take place between the 3rd and 11th of December. Michaelmas term officially finishes on Saturday 4th December for Oxford students, and on the 3rd of December for Cambridge students. 

The event organisers reminded followers on Facebook that it is currently “compulsory to be double vaccinated to go to France”, and that they are “expecting this rule to still be in force by the time Varsity Trip comes round”. 

The Varsity Trip was founded in 1922 in Wengen, Switzerland. There are multiple ski racing events, including racing and freestyle. Skiing is a discretionary Full Blue at Oxford. This means club members only receive their Full Blue if they finish 1st overall at the Varsity Races, or if they place in the top 10 at BUCS. 

Since then, the Trip has become available for 3000 students. The event is known as the “largest student-run snow sports event in the world”. The Trip is open to skiiers and snowboarders of all abilities. 

In addition to skiing and snowboarding, the Trip’s organisers arrange several après ski and nightclub events, often with famous music acts. Some acts to have headlined at The Varsity Trip include Tinie Tempah, Rudimental, Calvin Harris, and Shy FX. Sigala was one of the many to have performed at the last Varsity Trip in 2019. There are also other forms of entertainment on offer. 

Last year, the Varsity Trip was cancelled due to circumstances concerning the ongoing pandemic. In the antecedent year, the Varsity Trip was also held in Val Thorens. The other location to commonly host The Varsity Trip is Tignes, situated in the Tarentaise Valley in France. 

Oxford and Cambridge students who would like to go on The Varsity Trip will have to book their tickets on the 21st October. More information on the Booking Day process will be released in due course. Bookings for the event sell out very frequently.

Image: pxfuel

Review: How The Suicide Squad brings the Director’s Cut back to life

Khusrau Islam
-
0
Review: How The Suicide Squad brings the Director’s Cut back to life

Warning: This article contains spoilers for The Suicide Squad

“I’m a superhero,” cries Polka-Dot Man in the third act of the film. “I’m not just a superhero movie,” screams The Suicide Squad for the entire 2h12m runtime. James Gunn’s movie perfectly captures the essence of his source material, while also challenging the conventions of Marvel/DC films. Gunn has done this in a year that has seen Zack Snyder’s Justice League released, while demands continue for #ReleaseTheAyerCut, but he has risen above these controversies and put his stamp on the project. And so, The Suicide Squad comes as an entertaining breath of fresh air.  

The comic book influences are apparent throughout the movie – from the minor details, such as the film opening in Corto Maltese (a fictional island from DC comics), to the very spirit of the team. In the opening scene, pretty much everyone on the “Suicide Squad” dies – a risk apparent from the name of the team. On a more fundamental level, just like in the comic books, the team forms a family. This bond provides the heart to the film, such as when the group hang out and relax, and Peacemaker (John Cena) demands a drink for his new ally’s pet rat. This arc, wherein the characters turn from selfish individuals to ones willing to sacrifice themselves for each other, is a defining feature of the Suicide Squad comics. 

Along with powerful relationships, fleshed out characterisation gives a somewhat feel-good sense to the film, each very in tune with the film’s tone. Starting with (arguably) the film’s actual villain, Viola Davis’ turn as the strategic Amanda Waller is chilling yet addictive. She is based on a character reputed for cold but cunning strategies, and this is consistent throughout the film and acts as a foil for the characters. She manipulates Bloodsport (Idris Elba) and Savant (Michael Rooker) into joining the team, and in the first 10 minutes, condemns the latter alongside several others to death, and uses the former’s teenage daughter as leverage. Moreover, her threat of killing any of the members hangs over the team, and the periodic reminders of her callous nature make this threat real, adding tension to the film.

Meanwhile, the members of the team equally feel unique. While Bloodsport struggles with being a good father, Polka-Dot Man struggles with having a bad mother. Peacemaker (John Cena(!!)), certainly not a “good guy” by most metrics, is fuelled by his blind loyalty to America, and this clashes with Rick Flag’s (Joel Kinnaman) sense of justice to create an emotional climax, setting a contrast between American interests and ideals. Daniela Melchior’s standout performance as Ratcatcher 2 had me weepy as we saw her father (Taika Waititi) explain why rats deserve more love. She plays the role with the openness one would expect from someone raised to respect even the lowliest animals, and the heart in her acting turns King Shark (Sylvester Stallone) from a mere brute force into a wholesome force with which to be reckoned. 

It is also worth noting that Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) retains the character development she received in Birds of Prey, having escaped her toxic relationship with the Joker, carrying her growth into this film. In fact, she actively rejects that toxicity which she once faced. This was a positive move from Gunn, as it allowed the character to be one in her own right, rather than in the shadow of the sadistic clown. A certain level of careful, well-written characterisation is required to turn a group of villains and murderers into lovable rogues – and the movie meets those demands.

This vast array of characters lends the film a certain moral complexity. Admittedly, it is quite clear who the “good guys” are in the film – the Squad members – while, with a few exceptions, everyone else constitutes the “bad guys”. However, Gunn allows us to see clearly the motivations driving the characters on all sides. Waller has a job: protect the country’s interests. Flag has a righteous sense of duty at the film’s climax: he must let the people know that the US has sanctioned experimentation on everyone so there can be justice. Bloodsport just wants to protect his daughter. Meanwhile, Starro the Conqueror, a giant starfish from space, laments upon dying that it was happy floating among the stars, but it was the humans who captured it, tortured it, and experimented on it. If it hadn’t just tried to destroy an entire city, I might have felt sorry for it in the moment, but as it is, I do at least get the telepathic creature’s point of view.

A common accusation thrown at superhero movies is that they lack this complexity – as Martin Scorsese suggested, they’re “closer to theme parks than they are to movies”. Similarly, James Gunn said that he is now, generally speaking, bored by superhero movies. So, is this a superhero movie? Certainly not in regular terms: 4 of the main characters have nothing special about them other than the fact that they are good at what they do. Their key objective is not to save the day, while the main team practically fail at every turn. They  are supposed to rescue Rick Flag, but they inadvertently decimate an entire friendly camp. Harley Quinn freed herself. And when they do get Gaius Grieves (Peter Capaldi) to the right destination, the fortress Jotunheim, an over-excited Polka-Dot Man’s bodily expulsions explode, resulting in the early destruction of the tower. Peacemaker does not destroy the info regarding US experimentation, while Flagg does not publish it as he intended.

And so, we return to the core of the film: it has heart. It is a ton of fun. First, the visuals are incredible. A few highlights include the well-choreographed fight scene between Peacemaker and Flag, the escape of Harley Quinn, as flowers explode onto the screen as she brutally murders her captors, and the crew marching into Jotunheim through the rain. Gunn also brings his trademark banging playlists (there really is no other word for it), with ‘Rain’ (grandson, Jessie Reyez) offering a backing track to the march and Johnny Cash’s ‘Folsom Prison Blues’ to open the movie as we look upon inmates in a penitentiary. And frankly, the film is hilarious. For example,  Bloodsport and Peacemaker compete to see who can murder in the most innovative ways, only for it to be revealed that they have decimated a camp of people willing to aid their cause. Bloodsport is made leader of a team where one of the member’s ability is to control rats, only for Waller and the audience to discover he is terrified of rats. And John Cena’s delightful delivery of the line “I cherish peace with all of my heart. I don’t care how many men, women and children I kill to get it” still has me laughing when I think about it. A film with the complexity discussed above, but also the pure joy described here, perfectly encapsulates the superhero genre: it is simply a vehicle to tell stories, rather than a genre, very much in keeping with the source material.

The “Gunn cut” demonstrates why the Snyder Cut should have been released. Gunn took several risks in order to produce his sequel/reboot to David Ayer’s 2016 story about the team, adding his flair, and introducing several random characters that could have flopped but ended up being beloved, such as Ratcatcher 2 and Polka-Dot Man. He put his stamp on the film. He ultimately produced something that he himself enjoyed, and so he could trust that other people would enjoy his honest interpretation. David Ayer did not get to do that, nor did Zack Snyder. And so, Justice League and Suicide Squad were released in mangled states, and both flopped. But Snyder’s version proved to be a completely different film, almost double in runtime, and with a different overall villain. He ends the film on a personal note, dedicating it to his late daughter. His creative presence is felt throughout the film. Originally, I was not much of a fan of the Snyder Cut. However, watching James Gunn’s The Suicide Squad made me understand: the two directors were eventually allowed to present their own artistic vision, for better or for worse. And in this case, DC’s hands-off approach worked well with Gunn’s film. 

1...288289290...2,488Page 289 of 2,488

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley