Council Agenda 1st Week Hilary 2008

a.    Minutes of the Previous Meeting

b.    Matters Arising from the Minutes

c.    Ratifications in Council

d.    Elections in Council

e.    Reports from the Sabbatical Officers

f.    Reports from the Executive Officers who wish to make reports

g.    Questions to Members of the Executive

h.    Emergency Motions

i.    Passage of Motions Nem Con

j.    Motions of No Confidence or Censure

k.    First readings of Motions to Amend the Constitution or Standing Orders

l.    The Budget or Amended Budget

m.    Motions Authorising Capital Expenditure

n.    Other Motions

i.   motions affecting ousu members as ousu members

ii.  motions affecting ousu members as students at Oxford University

iii. motions affecting ousu members as members of the student movement

iv. motions affecting ousu members as residents of Oxford

v.  motions affecting ousu members as residents of the United Kingdom

vi. motions affecting ousu members as citizens of the world

o.    Any Other Business

j.    Motions of No Confidence or Censure

1.    Motion of Censure

Details of motion will be distributed separately.

n.    Other Motions

1.    Protecting OUSU Members

Council notes:
1.    Previous discussions over the OUSU No Platform policy.
2.    The proposed referendum on the No Platform policy to be held during Hilary term.

Council further notes:
1.    Referendums cost significant time and money, and are best used to decide matters of principle when significant disagreement within the student body is anticipated.
2.    The undesirability of Student Union policy that restricts the legal use of free speech and expression of an individual.
3.    The desirability of a Student Union policy that prevents our resources being used to aid individuals who seek to commit illegal acts.
4.    Should such a policy exist that the majority of elected student representatives support, and believe their constituents support, a referendum on that issue would be unnecessary.

Council resolves to:
1.    Replace any previous ‘No Platform’ policies with the following statement, which will be unnamed:

1. To empower the Executive to deny any OUSU medium (except those already covered in independent agreements) to individuals attempting to use such mediums to advocate, incite or perpetrate violence against other individuals, groups or communities such as ethnic, religious, cultural and sexual minorities. An OUSU 'medium' within the terms of this policy shall include all OUSU elections, referenda, and office resources, other than those covered in independent agreements.

2. To empower the Executive to deny any OUSU medium (except those already covered in independent agreements) to individuals attempting to use such mediums to actively aid individuals or groups in efforts to advocate, incite or perpetrate violence against other individuals groups or communities such as ethnic, religious, cultural and sexual minorities.

3. Any decision taken by the Executive in either of the above regards must be ratified by a simple majority of Council at the earliest possible opportunity. In instances relating to OUSU elections and referenda, the decision taken by the OUSU Executive must be ratified by an Extraordinary Session of Council to vote solely on this issue, which shall be called immediately after the Executive’s decision, unless there is an Ordinary Council being held within the notice period of the Extraordinary Council.

2.    Cancel the proposed referendum on OUSU’s ‘No Platform’ policy later this term.

Proposed: James Lamming (OUSU VP Access and Academic Affairs)
Seconded: Jonny Medland (Queens)

2.    Access and Admissions Policy

Council notes:
1.    Elected officers represent the views of students on issues such as access and admissions to the University.
2.    That these elected officers should be guided by policy so that they can be confident they are represent the views of the majority of students on important issues.
3.    Recent media attention on Oxford undergraduate admissions, most notably the Sutton Trust Report in September 2007 and Institute of Public Policy Research Press release in October 2007, and its current importance to the University’s agenda.
4.    This motion is being proposed to be amended as necessary, so that the views on admissions policy reflect the views of a majority of students.

Council believes:
1.    Academic Potential: Admission to study undergraduate courses at the University of Oxford should be on the basis of the academic potential of the student.  The University should make every effort to ensure that the students applying and being admitted to study at Oxford are the top students, in terms of academic potential, in the world.
2.    No Positive Discrimination: There should be no form of positive discrimination or use of contextual data not related to a students educational potential used in the admissions process at Oxford.  Such data includes, but is not limited to, an applicant’s race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, geographical location, gender, sexuality or religion.
3.    Use Educational Context data to judge academic potential: When judging academic potential, educationally based contextual data must be used to inform decisions about admitting students at the margin.  This contextual data includes the number of students getting 5 GCSEs A*-C, the number of student getting 3 As at A2 Level, and average class size at the individual applicants school.  This contextual data does not include the number of students in receipt of Educational Maintenance Allowance or free school meals, as these reflect the socioeconomic status of an applicant’s background, and do not reflect on the applicant’s own academic potential.
4.    Characteristics of data used: When contextual data is used, it must be reliable and verifiable.  The weight placed on any contextual data used in decision making should be proportionate to its proven usefulness of academic potential, measured against examination results in Prelims and Finals.  For example, information on an applicant’s parents’ background and educational level is not reliable or verifiable because the student discloses this information.  Its use may also create a false perception about positive discrimination in the University’s admissions process.
5.    International Student Recruitment: Oxford benefits from attracting the best students in the world.  This is because it helps our worldwide reputation, attracts the best academics and allows cultural opportunities for British students at the University.  The admission of international students should not be based on their ability to pay but their educational potential and aptitude.  The University should be as concerned about the needs blind admissions of international students as it is with needs blind admission of students from the United Kingdom.  The University should make greater efforts to encourage recruitment of the best students from abroad and provide more bursaries and support for international students.

Council further believes:
1.    Admissions Tests: Pre-Admissions tests should only be required when there is a demonstrable need, for example many more applicants per place than could reasonably be interviewed.  All admissions tests should be designed to test aptitude, and clear guidance about what to expect including past papers should be available online.  Students should not be able to be coached or prepared for the tests.  The tests implementation should be designed with the ease of operation by the schools and students at the forefront of the University’s mind, for example with a standard date, standard time, standard length and use of regional test centres as an optional extra location outside of schools like Driving Test Centres.  This is to avoid the tests being perceived as or becoming an additional hurdle to applying to Oxford.
2.    End the use of written submissions: Written submissions do not accurately reflect academic potential, but the educational preparation of a student, are open to abuse, do not offer systematic comparison between students and therefore should not be used as part of the admissions process. The University and Colleges should provide greater support to new students in adjusting to learning at Oxford and developing skills necessary to succeed, including guidance on essay writing, reading, self-learning, getting the most from tutorials and lectures and dealing with the overall workload.  Such additional support should include greater guidance in preparatory reading and work before new students arrive in Freshers’ Week, the provision of model answers when students first start at Oxford, a greater mindedness from tutors in helping students develop their own skills and greater information and support from colleges, faculties, departments and divisions for general learning skills students will require to succeed at Oxford.
3.    Do not use AS and A2 Module Marks: Oxford should not collect or use individual AS and A2 module marks during the admissions process.  The differences between A Level modules syllabuses, exam boards, marking systems and mark scaling mean that the individual marks are not useful or accurate data for comparing students educational potential.  These marks are also irrelevant for all students not studying A2 syllabuses, whilst the use of such data will create unhealthy pressure on individual students.  Other methods that allow for more direct comparisons, such as admissions tests and structured interviews should be preferred.
4.    Structured interviews vital part of admissions process: Structured interviews are a vital part of the admissions process, allowing tutors to assess directly just the educational potential and aptitude of a student to respond to the unique teaching methods of Oxford University.  For admission to Oxford, ‘educational potential and aptitude’ includes desirable attributes, such as the suitability of a student to the Oxford system, their motivation and the ability of the student to think for themselves when responding to new material.  Interviews are therefore vital because they allow tutors to make distinctions between students on these attributes, and that these attributes cannot be accurately measured from a purely paper based admissions processes.  Interviews are also beneficial because they give applicants a genuine insight into studying at Oxford, helping to break down remaining preconceptions about their future study at the University.

Council further believes:
1.    Collection information: Oxford should only collect information as and when it is absolutely necessary, and avoid requiring extra forms, tests or submissions that may be perceived as creating further hurdles to entry.  Oxford University should aim to administer all its forms via UCAS directly, rather than needing any additional forms.
2.    Scrap Application Fee: Oxford should immediately scrap the additional fee for applying and find the lost income for the University Admissions Office from elsewhere in its budget.  This fee creates an impression that Oxford is more expensive than other Universities, whilst the implied principle that you should pay extra to apply to Oxford is wrong.
3.    Provide honest information on subjects, but do not introduce a black list: Oxford should provide clearer and honest information about school subjects that are required for application, and make it clear the necessary mix of at least three subjects to be suitable for making an application to Oxford.  When there are no required subjects, it is still important to provide useful information such as the need for an applicant to have studied at least three subjects from a longer list of possible subjects.  The University should not produce any list of subjects that if studied will harm an applicants chances, and all subjects should be considered on their merits, not their stereotypes.  The University Admissions Office should provide information and training to tutors about subject syllabuses and requirements to break down any prejudices.  The University should concentrate efforts on communicating the best subjects to aid a student’s application to careers advisors, Connexions advisors and teachers within schools so that students in Year 11 can be advised effectively.
4.    Travel Costs: Provision for reducing the travel costs to interviews should be investigated to help students from the poorest backgrounds.
5.    Greater information about process: Oxford University should provide greater information about the admissions process and clearer guidelines of what is expected of the best students, so that applicants better know what to expect.  Resources should be invested in providing preparation and guidance for students in schools who historically have not enjoyed success in having their students admitted to Oxford.

Council further believes:
1.    Access strategy: Oxford University must continue to reach out to every school in the country to recruit the best students, dispel myths about the University and encourage greater applications.  However, it should target its resources at underrepresented groups and talented students in weaker schools to help raise aspirations and provide additional support to these students and teachers of such students when they are applying to Oxford.
2.    Efforts of Colleges: All Colleges should contribute to widening participation initiatives.  Their concern should be to raise the aspiration of students towards higher education and to applicants to Oxford University, not recruit students for their own colleges. 

Council resolves to:
1.    Mandate the VP Access and Academic Affairs to communicate these policies to the relevant authorities.
 
Proposed: James Lamming (OUSU VP Access and Academic Affairs)
Seconded: Martin McCluskey (OUSU President)

3.    Student Advice Service Review Group and Indicative Poll

Council notes
1. OUSU's commitment to ensuring the highest levels of welfare provision.
2. The results of the Indicative Poll on the future of the Student Advice Service in Michaelmas 2007.

Council further notes
1. That the results of the Indicative Poll were inconclusive.
2. That changes to the Student Advice Service remain urgent and necessary.

Council resolves
1. To note the membership and terms of reference for the Student Advice Service review group to report no later than 1st week Trinity term 2008.

Proposed: Louise Randall (OUSU VP Welfare and Equal Opportunities)
Seconded: Martin McCluskey (OUSU President)

4.    Holocaust Memorial Day

Council Notes:
1.    That Holocaust Memorial Day takes place on 27th January.

Council Further Notes:
1.    That many groups in Oxford are planning to hold events to commemorate the day and remember the victims of the holocaust and other genocides.
2.    That OUSU has always supported these events and helped co-ordinate activities around Holocaust Memorial Day.

Council Believes:
1.    That Holocaust Memorial Day plays an important part in educating the public about the Holocaust and other, more recent, genocides such as Rwanda.
2.    That commemorating lives lost in the Holocaust and other acts of genocide is importance in widening understanding and promoting action around issues relating to genocide.

Council Resolves:
1.    To support groups who are organising events for Holocaust Memorial Day and assist them in co-ordinating these events across the University.
2.    To investigate running an OUSU event for Holocaust Memorial Day,
3.    To encourage Common Rooms to run their own events and advertise other events to their members.

Proposed: Hannah Smith (OUSU Equal Opportunities Officer)
Seconded: Martin McCluskey (OUSU President)

5.    Appointment of New Vice-Chancellor

Council Notes:
1.    That the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. John Hood, recently announced that he would not seek a second term in office and, as such, would step down in September 2009.
2.    That the Nominating Committee for the Vice Chancellor held a preliminary meeting on 30th November to begin the process that will lead to the nomination of Dr. Hood's successor.
3.    The Vice Chancellor has wide ranging powers in setting the strategic direction for the University.
4.    The Vice Chancellor is also the public face of the University to the rest of the country and the world.


Council Further Notes:
1.    There is no student representation on the Nominating Committee for the Vice Chancellor.
2.    That an email address has been established – nomcom@admin.ox.ac.uk - for members of the University to express their views "concerning the requirements for fulfilling the role of Vice Chancellor".

Council Believes:
1.    That the students of Oxford University should have an input into the decision over who shall lead the University in the near future.
2.    That in the absence of any formal representation on the nominating committee, making representations in writing and discussing this issue in OUSU Council are of most potential benefit.

Council Resolves:
1.    To encourage JCR and MCR Presidents to advertise this email address around their colleges and on their email lists.
2.    To discuss the qualities we would like to see in the next Vice Chancellor and amend the "resolves" section of this motion as necessary.

Proposed: Martin McCluskey (OUSU President)
Seconded: James Lamming (OUSU VP Access and Academic Affairs)

AMENDMENTS

d.    Elections in Council

Rules Committee
Elliott Golend (Pembroke)

OUSU Complaints Committee   

John Maher (Keble)
Jack Matthews (St Peters)
Elliott Golend (Pembroke)
   

PLEASE PRINT A COPY OF THIS AGENDA AND BRING IT WITH YOU TO THE MEETING