Thursday 17th July 2025
Blog Page 604

Transcriptions for ‘illegible’ exams cost students over £30,000 since 2014

Angus Brown
-
0
Transcriptions for ‘illegible’ exams cost students over £30,000 since 2014

Transcribing “illegible” exam scripts has cost students £30,938 since 2013, representing an average cost of £144.57 per student.

According to University data released to Cherwell following a Freedom of Information Request, 214 students have been made to transcribe “illegible” exam scripts in the last six years, with 50 students sitting for transcriptions in the 2012/13 academic year alone.

University guidelines state that: “If a chair considers a script to be illegible, they must inform the Senior Tutor of the candidate’s college as quickly as possible.

“If there is a dispute between the Chair and the Senior Tutor as to the illegibility of a script or scripts, the question should be referred to the Proctors for a ruling.

“Chairs will need to return any illegible scripts, by hand, to the candidate’s college asking for them to be typed.

“The college will either make arrangements to use the Examinations and Assessments team transcription service or else will contact the Proctors for permission to type the script(s) in house.

“Chairs will be informed about the arrangements. The cost of the typing and invigilation shall not be a charge on the University.”

In addition to a £40 administrative fee for each four-hour transcription session, students are also charged £24 per hour to cover a £12 fee for both the invigilator and a typist.

The hourly pay rate for both is £10 per hour. This cost per hour has decreased since 2015/16 when the hourly rate charged to students was £20 for both the invigilator and typist, double their payment of £10 per hour.

The cost is also substantially higher than at other universities.

St Andrew’s University’s guidelines on exam transcriptions says that “Charges vary between Schools but are generally set at around £25 per transcription”.

Similarly, the University of York charges £8.08 per hour for transcriptions to cover the transcriber’s wages, almost a third less than Oxford.

Although official costs are not given, the University of Cambridge’s rules do not specify that students should bare the cost, although they do say that “the College may choose to pass on the associated costs to the student concerned”.

In 2017, Cambridge held a consultation with students on whether the university should allow all students to type in their exams, following complaints of a “downward trend” in students’ ability to write by hand, though this did not end written examinations.

Speaking to Cherwell, a spokesperson for Oxford University said: “Fees for the exam transcription service are designed to help cover elements including room bookings, IT support, staff payments and associated staffing costs such as employer contributions and recruitment fees.

“In practice, these fees only go some way towards covering the overall cost of the service.

“Many colleges offer financial support to students whose exam scripts require transcription – students should liaise with their colleges over the level of support available.

“The University offers alternative exam arrangements for students who require them, such as the use of a word processor for students with specific learning differences or physical disabilities that make writing difficult.”

Oxford, Oil, and the tragedy of Brother McAuley

Jorrit Donner-Wittkopf
-
0
Oxford, Oil, and the tragedy of Brother McAuley

Last month, Peruvian authorities found Paul McAuley’s body in the remote city of Iquitos on the Amazon River. McAuley had been murdered and his corpse burnt at the hostel he ran for indigenous youth.

McAuley was a renowned environmental and human rights advocate who reached global prominence when he was awarded an MBE in 1995 for his services to education. After studying at Oxford, McAuley became a priest and moved to Peru, the fifth-poorest country in Latin America. He set up a school and dedicated the rest of his life to campaigning for the protection of the Amazon and its inhabitants.

McAuley ended up spending much of his time fighting the corrupt Peruvian government and the giant multinational corporations destroying the rainforest, McAuley was branded a ‘terrorist’ and an ‘incendiary gringo priest’ by the predominantly right-wing national press. He was accused of driving big businesses and their jobs away from the ailing Peruvian economy: in 2010 the government attempted to deport him. Nine years later, he was murdered in cold blood.

Who killed Paul McAuley? We will most likely never know. What is for certain is that his death is part of a disturbing trend across Latin America, where environmentalists and human rights campaigners are indiscriminately murdered by crime syndicates to pave the way for multinationals to move in and exploit countries’ natural resources. 4 Peruvian campaigners were murdered by a local cartel in November last year; 125 Latin American land activists were killed in 2017 alone.

To us in the UK and specifically in Oxford, what is even more alarming are the close links our own university fosters with the very companies McAuley spent his days fighting against.

In many ways McAuley’s is a familiar story: he organised protests against the same big-money corporations which have been operating almost indiscriminately in countries such as Peru for decades. More often than not, the cost of their business practices is the devastation of the Amazon and its inhabitants’ livelihoods. Multinationals are free to do as they please in amongst governments plagued with corrupt officials and overly lenient regulation. The continued presence of these oil and gas companies perpetuates the vicious cycle of corruption and exploitation enveloping much of the Global South.

Three years after the Paris Climate Accords, Oxford University continues to enjoy close ties with oil and gas companies that completely disregard the possibility of a climate catastrophe. These connections run far deeper than college investment schemes or hosting controversial guest speakers. They are direct links to some of the few hundred oil and gas giants which account for more than 71% of global emissions.

In 2009, McAuley volunteered to help locals blockade the Napo River in western Peru. They were attempting to obstruct an Anglo-French oil company’s supply barges from proceeding upstream and commencing oil extraction operations in ‘Lot 67’, a vast swathe of land in heart of the Amazon. After a few days of protests, the then-president, Alan García (who has since attempted to flee the country on corruption charges), declared the drilling of Lot 67 ‘of national interest’. The army broke through the blockade: McAuley and his fellow activists were left to watch as the oil corporation hauled $200 million’s worth of drilling equipment into one of the fragile – and internationally-safeguarded – ecosystems on the planet.

The oil company which had gained access to Lot 67 was Perenco GL, a company registered in London and owned by the Perrodo family. The Perrodo family enjoys close ties to St. Peter’s College: exactly one year after the lucrative drilling on Lot 67 began, the Perrodo family donated £5 million to St. Peter’s.

Most of the details concerning Perenco’s dire human rights and environmental record can be found in Cherwell’s article here. In short, Perenco has a history of accusations levelled against it for funding paramilitary groups which explicitly target environmental and trade union activists. In 2012, the company was accused of funding ‘death squads’ in Colombia which killed an estimated 50 000 people.

Perenco has also amassed a series of bribery allegations. Just last year, the company was alleged to have bribed Venezuelan officials with $5 million in return for ‘priority drilling status’ in the tumultuous country.

Perenco is not the only company with links to Oxford operating in Latin America. Tullow Oil – an oil and gas company with a similarly chequered record – has repeatedly voiced its intentions to extract oil off the Peruvian coast.

Tullow originally signed a deal to gain access to the nature conservation area with former Peru President Kuczynski (currently in jail for corruption), but it has since become apparent that neither Tullow nor Kucyznski made any kind of effort to establish what the environmental and humanitarian ramifications of drilling in the area would be.

Tullow was also recently accused of bribing members of the Ugandan parliament to gain access to oil fields. Meanwhile, protests against Tullow’s expansion in Kenya have become so extensive that the company was almost forced to withdraw entirely from the region.

Mike Daly, a Visiting Professor of Earth Sciences at Oxford University, sits on Tullow Oil’s board as a non-executive director. In the face of UN warnings that environmental catastrophe is imminent, Professor Daly and his colleagues at Tullow have recently announced that they intend to up their company’s oil and gas exploration efforts in 2019. In West Africa alone, Tullow intends to up its oil extraction from 93,000 to 101,000 barrels per day.

Another Oxonian, Lord Browne, sits on the executive board of the University’s Blavatnik School of Government. The decision to accept funding from British philanthropist Blavatnik – who also made most of his fortune from oil extraction – was descibed by the University’s own specialist on corruption as ‘incomprehensible and irresponsible’ shortly before he resigned.

Lord Browne has recently begun working for Wintershall, an oil and gas company which also recently announced plans to massively increase its fossil fuel extraction project. Wintershall has been accused of witholding $900 million in profits from the UN-backed Libyan government.

Lord Browne was also previously the CEO of British Petroleum. The University continues to run the ‘BP scholarship scheme’ and accept funding from BP for the Centre of Analysis of Resource-Rich Economies. Just like Perenco, BP has been accused of funding Colombian ‘death squads’. Elsewhere, Shell, which continues to sponsor over twenty academics in the Shell-Oxford Research Collaboration, is currently embroiled in a £1 billion corruption scandal in Nigeria.

Perenco, Tullow and Wintershall are the very companies Paul McAuley dedicated his life to fighting against. It is yet to be seen how any single one of these oil companies – let alone their larger competitors BP and Shell – are doing enough to combat climate change and avert climate catastrophe.

What’s more, the Perrodo families and Professor Mike Dalys of the world – those profiting from Latin American natural resources at a grave cost to regional stability and locals’ lives – enjoy a hero’s welcome at Oxford University. Their names are engraved on plaques on magnificent constructions; their academic writing is published under the University’s name.

Last year marked a milestone in the campaign to make our institutions divest from fossil fuels. Over £80 billion was divested in the UK; globally, $6 trillion dollars were moved away from the most harmful industries. And still, Oxford University’s flirtation with oil money continues.

The Perrodos, Professor Daly and Lord Browne need to be held to account for their role in global warming and the seemingly devastating effect their companies are having on the environment.

Even philanthropy, as in the case of St. Peter’s and the Perrodo family, is never a one-way street. A donation to an educational institution must be seen as a transaction. Just as the University legitimises Professor Daly and Lord Browne’s business practices, St. Peter’s legitimises the way in which the Perrodo family make their millions. Equally, the Perrodo family are able to turn the spotlight away from the string of allegations levelled against their company, Perenco.

Why is the University continuing to turn a blind eye to the accusations levelled against its benefactors and employees? Why is it continuing to endorse individuals who work in very industries which are at the heart of the problem? If we are to avert the whole-sale destruction of our life support systems then we must continue Paul McAuley’s good work and stand up for those who are most vulnerable. It can never be a question of ‘take it and run’ when there is nowhere to run to.

Wadham’s Race Symposium: has British multiculturalism failed?

Zehra Munir
-
0
Wadham’s Race Symposium: has British multiculturalism failed?

The event description for this year’s Wadham Race Symposium panel was all-encompassing. It read “With the latent xenophobia of Brexit, the overt racism of Windrush and the electricity of Extinction Rebellion, Britain’s colonial past is finally forcing itself into the spotlight. At a time when illegal deportations are happening under our noses and ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ is dividing students, what exactly does it mean to call Britain multicultural?”.

It seems then, that Wadham’s POCRE officers were determined to tackle every aspect of this multifaceted topic in their symposium. They did not fail to deliver. With an electric panel line-up, and careful mediation, they ensured a truly incisive discussion took place last weekend. The panel featured local Labour councillor and anti-racist activist Shaista Aziz, future NASUWT president and local teacher Michelle Codrington-Rodgers, local artist Sunil Shah, and Orwell prize-winning journalist Amelia Gentleman (most famous for breaking the Windrush story last year). Karishma Paun and Leela Jadhav chaired the conversation jointly, drawing from their own lived experience and musings to shape this exploration on whether British multiculturalism has failed.

The discussion began with each panelist attempting to define what multiculturalism means to them. There appeared to be a general consensus that multiculturalism was a shifting term, one which had once signaled the welcoming of new migrants into British society, but was increasingly being used in a negative sense. Indeed, as Michelle pointed out, when her grandmother migrated from the Caribbean, her arrival was not about multiculturalism. Rather, it was about a sense of belonging. This is a point that was raised again and again in the ensuing conversation – the idea that for the Windrush generation, they were moving to another region within their home country of Britain. Leading on from this, Sunil pointed out that the word multiculturalism has always been associated with race, linked to those who have migrated from the colonies. He argued that the assimilation of Welsh and Scottish migrants is not considered to be part of a multicultural society in the way that the assimilation of brown and black peoples is.

The discussion then moved onto whether multiculturalism is a brand that people of colour have to buy into in order to be accepted into British society. The clearest theme that emerged was that this country’s current version of multiculturalism is not nearly good enough. Shaista spoke of a session she had with the young daughters of immigrants in a school in London International Women’s Day. She asked the students in the room when was the last time they saw someone on TV, or the internet, or in a book, that looked like them. One girl with a headscarf put her hand up and said “Shamima Begum. But Miss, they say she is a terrorist as well”. Shaista’s story had a visible impact on the audience – it is an indictment of our times when a young girl in a hijab has only a child bride groomed by terrorists to seek representation in. Similarly, Michelle talked about how multiculturalism sees the celebration of a single month for Black history, thus delineating a time when black people are allowed to be visible and remembered. She spoke passionately about how Black people have been here since the Roman times, and it is about time that her community and their experiences were mainstreamed. This process is taking too long, and indeed, it has now taken steps back.

She pointed out how Brexit effectively ripped off a ‘bandaid’, and now the world can see Britain’s racial dynamics for what they really are. This idea of regression was present in Amelia’s sad retelling of her interviews with the original Windrush incomers. She related that an uncomfortable question she had to ask her Windrush interviewees was whether they considered themselves British. Usually she was “put in her place” and told that they were obviously so. However, since the start of the Hostile Environment (the term that denotes Theresa May’s creation of an environment that has embedded harsh immigration controls into everyday interactions between public sector workers and the people they see), she has seen a shift in answers to her question. Now, she said, this generation feels less British than they did before. Despite having been invited to this country in the previous century, the message they have received is clear. Due to their race, they were never considered truly British.

These points flowed into a dialogue about the weight of words used in current narratives around immigration and multiculturalism. All the panelists were united in their worry about the way language is currently being used. Sunil stressed the importance of developing a language that joins, rather than divides. Amelia used a political example of dehumanising terms, referencing internal Home Office files about people affected by the Windrush scandal. She spoke of a disturbing exchange from the notes of a telephone conversation between a caseworker and their appointed interviewee. The interviewee was maintaining that he was British, and was repeatedly being told that he needed to return to Jamaica. His caseworker notes “migrant insists he is British”, and “migrant says he has been here for 50 years”. This terminology, which could have been replaced by more positive words like expat or emigre, shows the way in which political structures continue to disregard naturalised person of colour immigrants.

And yet, despite the personal hurt most of the panellists have suffered through the rolling-back of ‘multiculturalism’, they chose to end the panel on a hopeful note. Shaista spoke powerfully about the need for working-class unity, one which rejects the construct of the “white working class” as fundamentally racist. In her view, true unity is present in white members of the working-class supporting their person of colour counterparts in racialised situations – as she saw her father’s white supervisor do when his trade union promoted him and his co-workers protested. She reminded the audience that people of colour have always been part of the history of struggle in this country, from trade unionism to the Southall Black Sisters. She preceded this point by talking about how other countries are in awe of Britain’s multiculturalism. For them, Britain is jalebis, samosas and yams. This is the Britain we must embrace, for this is the Britain that exists. When this fact is accepted, multiculturalism can truly succeed.

Women’s Blues win Twenty:20 Varsity

Chris Searle
-
0
Women’s Blues win Twenty:20 Varsity

A bleak day at Fenners was kicked off by Barnaby Harrison’s impassioned Authentics (Men’s 2nds). Aided early on by some wayward bowling to the tune of a gleeful all Oxford crowd, Tom Oliver and Ben Barber led the ‘tics to 40-1 off the powerplay.

The game was turned as an initially scratchy Freddie Freeman found the middle and put Cambridge’s first change bowler into the Hughes Hall accommodation. From there he never looked back and was finally dismissed for a swashbuckling 35 off 22. Callum Job followed suit with 20 off 14 before skipper Harrison finished the job with some characteristically lusty blows (22 off 11). The innings was honourably anchored by the ever-jazzy Barber who was eventually dismissed for 52 (50) – a potentially matchwinning knock with the aesthetics to match.

The second innings began in true ‘tics fashion with 60 being taken off the powerplay. This being a familiar scenario meant that there was no panic and the first change pair of Chris Mingard (4-0-1-25) and Fergus Neve (4-0-2-15) calmly reeled the Light Nlues back in, building pressure by taking wickets. By the time Jei Diwakar (3-0-0-12) and man of the match Ben Barber (4-0-2-21) came on, the pendulum had firmly swung back in ‘tics favour, and they finished the job impressively, leaving Cambridge 29 short after their 20 overs – a near perfect all round display until Freeman decided the job had become too professional and shelled a goober off the last ball of the game.

An elated group soon settled in for the remainder of the day, consistently clearing the few spectators in their vicinity and providing the majority of the noise for the afternoon.

The OUCC Women’s Blues notched their first varsity win of the season at Fenner’s on Friday afternoon, and did so comprehensively. Cambridge won the toss and chose to bat – a decision which surprised OUCC captain Vanessa Picker – but this minor disruption did not deter the girls for long, if at all. After a disciplined first over from Sam Bennett set the tone for the Cambridge innings, Amy Hearn made the crucial breakthrough with her first ball, Emily Wilkins taking a sharp catch behind the stumps to dismiss Cambridge opener Katie Gibson for 5.

Hearn then removed the other opener, Holly Tasker, in her second over, to leave Cambridge reeling at 15-2. Oxford sustained this pressure throughout the Cambridge innings, restricting them to 80-6, despite a battling 37 not out from their captain Chloë Allison, with two wickets each for spinners Elodie Harbourne and Surabhi Shukla.

Oxford started their chase well, as Picker and Olivia Lee-Smith, the incoming Blues hockey captain, put on 30 for the first wicket, before Lee-Smith was run out attempting a second. She was replaced by her predecessor, Shona McNab, who scored a run-a-ball 19 to help Oxford towards their target but was bowled by Coral Reeves in the 12th over. Reeves took a couple of quick wickets, but the middle order played sensibly despite difficult batting conditions, and Lucy Duncan saw Oxford over the line in the 16th over.

All in all, it was a comfortable win for Oxford, giving them confidence heading into some big games over the next ten days, including playing the MCC at Lords on Tuesday 28th May.

Inspired by the day’s feats thus far, the Men’s Blues were desperate to get going, particularly once Alex Rackow had won the toss under darkening skies and stuck Cambridge in the field. George Hargrave got us off to a flier, lingering blood alcohol allowing him to fully express himself undaunted by the occasion. When he was dismissed for 48 off 36 the going became tougher as the field simultaneously went back and singles became the desired currency.

Cambridge’s bowling became as miserly as their board charging £4 for entry, and against the backdrop of silence their spinners slowly turned the screw. In these tough conditions Matty Naylor, James Bevin and Tom Claughton battled hard to set a platform for the big levers of Pettman and Swanson to clear the ropes. Sadly, neither of these aims was quite fulfilled and Oxford staggered to 131 off their 20. Unideal, but hopefully enough.

Chasing in a Varsity game is like nothing else and no team had ever lost at home in this fixture. The pressure was very much on the Light Blues. Oxford started well with Old Oxonian Nick Taylor walking past the third ball of Ben Swanson’s first over, well stumped by Jake Duxbury. The powerplay went well with Toby Pettman, Chris Searle and Freddie Foster all doing jobs alongside Swanson. Duxbury’s ridiculous one-handed grab behind the stumps will go down as an innings highlight (after multiple recantations it has since become a particular lowlight).

Taking wickets at regular intervals meant the Dark Blues stayed ahead of the eight ball – led through the middle overs by a typically austere Matt Fanning spell – until their set batsmen, biding his time rotating the strike, had a successful swing at the end; a good display of patience and bottle. Oxford went into the last over of the game with the Tabs needing 4 off 6 Pettman balls. A wicket first ball gave Oxford a glimmer. 2 dots gave the Dark Blues ray. Cambridge ended up needing 1 off 1 and scampered a quick single to get home. An exceptional effort by Toby.

It was a really tough loss to take but one that will hopefully drive Oxford to victory in the forthcoming One-Day Varsity (at Lords, Tuesday 5th week) and Four Day Varsity (Fenners, 10th week).

Lady Pat. R. Honising – BJ or BJs?

Lady Pat R. Honising
-
0
Lady Pat. R. Honising – BJ or BJs?

Dear Agony Aunt,

I’ve come across a bit of a crisis and I don’t know what to do. I’ve recently started seeing a boy and we hit it off straight away – we’ve been on a couple of dates and I was really happy with where things were going. I won’t lie, he’s definitely a bit of an Oxford stereotype. He’s got the centre parting, the round tortoise-shell glasses and the superiority complex to match, so I don’t know why I didn’t see what happened last night coming. We went for a drink at a very bougie joint out of town and I went back to his Cowley house (because staying in college-owned accommodation is so overrated!). One thing led to another and it got a bit steamy, but this was before I looked up to notice a completely unironic poster of Boris Johnson in pride of place above his bed, and, as a Remain voting Labour leftie, I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a bigger turn off. Help me Lady Pat, how do I make like Brexit and get out of this situation?

Yours,
(Wishing I’d never) kissed a Tory

Dear Anon,

Oh honey, I am so sorry. There’s nothing like the crushing disappointment of falling for someone only to find out that they’ve got a potential hidden fetish for balding middle-aged men with very questionable morals – trust me, I’ve been there. No middle parting is worth it to end up second best to BoJo, though and to be honest it’s better you’ve realised it sooner rather than later. But don’t worry, your very unqualified Auntie is here to help you negotiate the best deal that hopefully sees you better off on the other side. 

So, should you stay or should you go? It’s a difficult conversation to have, but it might be worth mentioning how this made you feel (e.g. traumatised), and you never know, he might realise the grave, grave error of his ways and (for the sake of you and all future ladies who enter his room) remove the poster. If this doesn’t work then maybe it’s time to begrudgingly listen to the democratic majority of my survey, which says that you should get out of there ASAP, so let’s work with it. You could always try and negotiate some kind of deal here – although you should probably get out of there before anything goes any further romantically, it can’t hurt to have a little bit of freedom of movement (although definitely round yours). It could also turn out that BoJo doesn’t necessarily mean BoJo and the poster could be the result of a particularly savage odds on, but a girl can only dream.

In the case that neither of these eventualities are possible, then I think it’s time to take a metaphorical leaf from Boris’ book and go for a no-deal exit. Set your sights on bigger and better things – never underestimate Bumble and its invasive questionnaires that avoid having to have the awkward politics conversation/revelation in person. If nothing else, it’s an anecdote to tell at pres and in never-have-I-evers for years to come, and probably also has got a very strong lead in the race of most mortifying date experiences ever – so take that as you will! 

Stay strong, and better luck next time,

Auntie Pat xxx

Cherpse! Sofia and Maxim

Cherwell Life
-
0
Cherpse! Sofia and Maxim

Maxim, 3rd Year, History and Politics, Trinity

Now that I’m allegedly a finalist, you’d think blind dates are off the cards. Of course, you’d be wrong. There’s something quite giddying about venturing off to Turf the night before exams, but so it was with my date with Sofia… I’ll take escapism in whatever form I can.

What was your first impression?

When Sofia told me she was a scientist expectations were low as far as conversation was concerned, but I was pleasantly surprised.

Quality of the chat out of ten?

Chat gets a 6.4 – a 7 is out of reach as she is from Cambridge.

How did the date meet up with your expectations?

The piquancy of my drink was complemented by the punchy nature of her chat. As a medic, her concern for the health of my degree amused me greatly.

Most awkward moment?

Sofia informed me she was basic, unironically. I suppose such assertions are the epitome of basicness.

Kiss or miss?

Second date? Sign me up!

Sofia, 1st Year, Medicine, Hertford

I arrived at Turf Tavern ready to find the man of my dreams (spoiler alert: he wasn’t). He assumed I would have bad chat as I’m a medic, and he let me know that. He then told me he was on University Challenge (impressive – I felt like I’d met a celebrity). Turns out he got knocked out in the second round (less impressive). But then we hit the political roadblock. Rees-Mogg is his idol… a tad awkward. However, he is a lovely boy and I hope his final the next day went well!

What was your first impression?

He also looked a bit like a young ginger Steve Jobs.

Quality of the chat out of ten?

4/10 – lot of politics chat.

How did the date meet up with your expectations for it?

I was really excited, but ended up feeling a little like I was on University Challenge myself. He is, however, the meme king.

Most awkward moment?

I have two to choose from: “I promise you I’m edgy because I voted Brexit for the bantz” and “you might have a white coat, but I have a scholars’ gown”.

Kiss or miss?

Think I might have to take a miss.

SU Council frustrated by rep absences

Liam OConnor
-
0
SU Council frustrated by rep absences

The SU’s Student Council meeting could not pass any motions when they met this week, due to a lack of college representatives attending.

Committee elections, a resolution to ban slates, and approval of National Union of Students affiliations were all on the agenda. However, the meeting was four students short of reaching a quorum, so no business could be voted on.

“I’m sorry. We don’t have quorum, so we can’t do anything,” Chair of the Council Charlotte Sefton said at the meeting’s end. “Obviously, we have to emphasise that this is a real shame. We can’t pass anything. We can’t have our elections. Again, please encourage your common room representatives to come to these meetings.”

Realising that the Council did not have a quorum at the start of the meeting, the Chair proceeded to reports with the hope that more voting members would arrive in the meantime. No one else came in the ensuing half hour.

The Sabbatical Officers described the progress of their work over the past two weeks, and the international students campaign fielded questions about high overseas costs. Seeing that there still was not a quorum, the Chair moved up “Reports from and questions to Divisional Representatives” in the agenda – but the Divisional Representatives were not in attendance either.

Members discussed the possibilities of calling an Extraordinary Meeting of Student Council to conduct business or passing motions “in principle” that would be used as evidence for an emergency executive meeting. They rejected both options.

“Is it unreasonable for us to message people to come to this room right now from their colleges?” a JCR president asked. “It’s not unreasonable if the room is willing to wait,” the Chair replied, “But also if it’s going to go on for hours it’s whether people who are in the room are going to stay.” Two voting members had already left by that point, raising the number of students needed for a quorum to six.

The meeting ended forty-five minutes early without discussing any items for resolution.

The Scrutiny Committee will not have its report on the Sabbatical Officers available in time for seventh week because Council could not elect its members.

Only twelve colleges had voting members present, according to sign-in sheets after the meeting.

“Rules of the Student Council” states that Student Members are notified of meetings at least seven days before they are held.”

The halls and colleges whose representatives did not attend included: Blackfriars, Brasenose, Campion Hall, Christ Church, Green Templeton, Harris Manchester, Hertford, Keble, Kellogg, Linacre, Lincoln, Magdalen, Mansfield, Merton, Nuffield, Oriel, Pembroke, Queen’s, Regent’s Park, St Anne’s, St Antony’s, St Benet’s, St Cross, St Edmund, St Hilda’s, St Peter’s, St Stephen’s, Somerville, Trinity, Wolfson, and Wycliffe.

A JCR SU representative told Cherwell: “I love SU Council because no cares, so no one turns up, and nothing in particular happens. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

“It’s noticeable how few MCR representatives turn up, which is concerning for a body representing a population that is half MCR.”

Oxford UN Women #DrawALine at Rad Cam

Charlotte Moberly
-
0
Oxford UN Women #DrawALine at Rad Cam

On Saturday, Oxford UN Women held an event at the Radcliffe Camera to protest gender-based violence as part of the global #DrawALine campaign.

Participants in the event held a length of orange ribbon around the Rad Cam, signalling that they were ‘drawing a line’ under gender based violence.

The #DrawALine campaign, run by UN Women, raises awareness of and seeks to target gender-based violence, which disproportionately affects women and girls. Students from across the university attended the event.

One in four women in the UK are affected by violence. Many of these cases occur from a partner. According to UN Women, 23% of female undergraduate university students have reported having experienced sexual assault or sexual misconduct.

UN Women run several programmes associated with the campaign, as well as working alongside governments to implement legal changes to protect women. The event also included a bake sale to raise funds to support UN Women programmes which work to end cycles of violence

They also run outreach programmes for women and girls, and help to provide healthcare and psychological services for survivors of violence. This includes emergency contraception and information for women living with HIV, and training police, teachers and community leaders to prevent violence.

UN women held a sixteen day #DrawALine campaign in November and December last year. They lit up iconic buildings in orange to symbolise a brighter future without violence.

The #DrawALine campaign included a video supported by many different celebrities, including Billie Piper, Ella Woodward, Beverley Knight and Joanne Froggatt.

Some of those involved in the campaign also took photos holding placards with their explanation of why they were drawing a line. These included “everyone should have the right to feel safe”, “we deserve to exist fearlessly!”, “one woman is too many” and “there shouldn’t just be lucky ones”.

One student’s sign said: “A leading institution like this has the responsibility to make everyone feel comfortable.”

Imogen Harter-Jones, UN Women college rep for Hertford, told Cherwell: “The #DrawALine campaign by UN Women raising awareness about gendered violence was inspiring, successful and visibly striking.

“Women were literally connected in solidarity against this issue – which persists in both our society and globally – by an orange ribbon around the Rad Cam, one of Oxford’s most iconic landmarks.

“We gained much attention from fellow students, tourists and local who stopped to ask about the demonstration and discuss gendered violence. It was an important step to help create a safer society.”

In some parts of the world up to 70% of women are victims of violence, while around the world one in three girls’ first sexual experience is rape. Women aged 15-44 are more at risk from rape and domestic violence than from cancer, car accidents, war and malaria.

The chair of UN Women NC UK, Laura Haynes, said: “It is time to #DrawALine. For all the women who have said #MeToo, for all men who believe they should help and for all of humanity – it is time. This is your chance to turn words into action.”

Historian’s Oxford PhD error exposed on live radio

Amelia Horn
-
0
Historian’s Oxford PhD error exposed on live radio

Historian Naomi Wolf has attracted a storm of criticism after one of the central arguments behind her new book was exposed as inaccurate on live radio. The book is based closely on her DPhil thesis, which earned her a degree from Oxford in 2015.

Wolf’s book, Outrages: Sex, Censorship, and the Criminalisation of Love, centres on punishments for homosexuality in the Victorian era. It is Wolf’s first venture into LGBTQ+ history, having made her name as a feminist author.

One of the central arguments Wolf makes in her book is that men and boys were actually being executed for sodomy much later than is usually thought. However, this was based on a misinterpretation of the phrase “death recorded” in trial records. Contrary to Wolf’s claims, the phrase does not mean ‘executed’.

Wolf’s original thesis was awarded by Trinity College and supervised by Dr Stefano-Maria Evangelista. The book focuses specifically on two men – poet Walt Whitman and the lesser known poet John Addington Symonds. Whitman is known to have expressed his sexuality through his poetry.

Wolf told The Observer: “People widely believe that the last executions for sodomy were in 1830. But I read every Old Bailey record throughout the 19th century, so I know that not only did they continue; they got worse.”

Her research wrongly claims that Old Bailey records show “14-year-old” Thomas Silver was “actually executed for committing sodomy” in 1859. She stated: “The boy was indicted for an unnatural offence. GUILTY – Death recorded.”

However, in an interview on Radio 3 with Matthew Sweet, Wolf’s findings were shown to be false, as she had misinterpreted the legal term “death recorded.” Sweet, who is also a writer, said: “I don’t think you’re right about this. I looked it up. ‘Death recorded’ is what’s in most of these cases that you’ve identified as executions. It doesn’t mean that he was executed.”

He added that he had found the definition in the same Old Bailey records which Wolf had used for her research: “[Death recorded] was a category that was created in 1823 that allowed judges to abstain from pronouncing a sentence of death on any capital convict whom they considered to be a fit subject for pardon.

“I don’t think any of the executions you’ve identified here actually happened.”

Sweet argued that it was only from 1885 onwards when a less tolerant legal climate developed against consensual sex between two men. He said: “She argues that historians have misread this moment and we should see that 1857 was a more significant date. I think she is wrong.”

At Hay Festival last Saturday, Wolf said: “Some of you may have seen that there has been a healthy debate about two errors I did make in this book, and they’re on page 71 and 72. Hang on to your copies because it will be a collectors’ item, because it will not [be] in the next printing.”

She added that the mistake pointed out by Sweet had been corrected: “I thanked him and immediately corrected the future editions. But here’s what happened. ‘Death recorded’ in those two cases, the Old Bailey record which would have been reported in major newspapers that Symonds was reading … ‘death recorded’ was the most severe penalty, but Dr Sweet pointed out that ‘death recorded’ didn’t necessarily mean that an execution had taken place and I had misinterpreted the phrase.”

Wolf argued that the arrest itself would still have had a significant effect on gay men in the Victorian era such as Symonds.

“As today, if a doctor in Alabama who performs abortions is arrested or a journalist at the New York Times is arrested, it is the arrest that gets all the press. And if there is a sentence, that gets the national press.

“If there is a plea bargain or reduced sentence or parole, that isn’t usually in the press.

“And that was the case for Symonds, reading these terrifying sentences, and it absolutely led him, in my argument, to seek out alternative worlds where he could visualise freedom and love.”

In a statement, her UK publisher said: “Virago stand by their author Naomi Wolf and the thesis of her book Outrages which is based on her Oxford PhD. With Naomi Wolf and her American publisher Houghton Mifflin we will make any necessary corrections.”

Wolf’s US publisher Houghton Mifflin Harcourt said that while it employs “professional editors, copy editors, and proofreaders for each book project, we rely ultimately on authors for the integrity of their research and fact checking.

“Despite this unfortunate error we believe the overall thesis of the book Outrages still holds. We are discussing corrections with the author.”

The historian Richard Ward added to Sweet’s explanation of the term ‘death recorded’: “It empowered the trial judge to abstain from formally pronouncing a sentence of death upon a capital convict in cases where the judge intended to recommend the offender for a pardon from the death sentence. In the vast majority (almost certainly all) of the cases marked ‘death recorded’, the offender would not have been executed.”

He labelled Wolf’s mistake a “pretty basic error”, adding: “If all the people who were mentioned in the Old Bailey records as ‘death recorded’ were subsequently executed, there would have been a bloodbath on the gallows. Yet anyone who has a basic knowledge of crime and justice in the 19th century would know that that wasn’t the case.”

Christian blogger Alan Jacobs came to Wolf’s defence, writing: “Wouldn’t you — wouldn’t anyone — assume that the phrase “death recorded” means “death sentence carried out”? I know that’s what I would assume. Now, someone might say, “Well, she should have looked it up.” But we only look words or phrases up when we have reason to think that we have misunderstood them.”

Wolf’s other works include The Beauty Myth (1991) which has been lauded as a hallmark of third wave feminism, and The End of America (2007) which looks at the historical rise of fascism.

She was also a former political advisor to Bill Clinton and Al Gore and has written for media outlets such as The Nation, The New Republic, The Guardian and The Huffington Post. Wolf’s thesis supervisor has been contacted for comment.

Cambridge appoints first black leader of an Oxbridge college

Rit Anand
-
0
Cambridge appoints first black leader of an Oxbridge college

Businesswoman and media executive Sonita Alleyne was elected Master of Jesus College, Cambridge this week, making her the first black person to be appointed to lead an Oxbridge college.

Alleyne will take over from current Master Ian White this October.

She is also the first woman to lead the college since its establishment in 1496. Alleyne herself studied at Cambridge, reading Philosophy at Fitzwilliam College.

Commenting on her successful election as Master, Alleyne said in a statement: “It is an honour to be elected to lead Jesus College and I’m looking forward to becoming part of such an energetic and innovative community.

“Having met many Fellows, students and staff in recent weeks, I was struck by the positive and forward-looking ethos shared across the College.

“Supporting the work of the College to widen access and participation to all that it offers promises to be incredibly rewarding. “I left Cambridge thirty years ago, but it never left me. I am delighted to be returning.”

Alleyne, who was born in Barbados and brought up in East London, is currently the chairwoman of the British Board of Film Classification’s management council.

She previously held roles in production and media companies, including various board roles in prestigious organisations such as the National Employment Panel, the chair of the Radio Sector Skills Council and as a non-executive director of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

Alleyne began her career working in the publicity department of Jazz FM before moving into production. In 1991, after being let go from the station Alleyne was a cofounder of production company Somethin’ Else, which she led as chief executive from until 2009.

She has previously been a judge for the Precious Awards which celebrate the achievements of black women in business, and has herself received the Award of Excellence from the European Federation of Black Women Business Owners.

Concerns have been repeatedly raised about Oxford’s lack of access to black students, with one in four colleges not admitting a single black British student between 2015 and 2017. As of yet, no black person has ever been appointed to lead an Oxford college.

Labour MP David Lammy has long been critical of Oxford’s failure to improve their admissions track record in terms of diversity. He said: “The university is clearly happy to see Oxford remain an institution defined by entrenched privilege that is the preserve of wealthy white students from London and the south-east.”

Last year, Cambridge admitted the highest number of black students in its history, although the 58 undergraduates represented only 2% of the University’s total intake.

1...603604605...2,515Page 604 of 2,515

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