My tale of me - Chris Jenkinson

After a long Law School meeting this afternoon I am pleased to report that the earlier decision to reduce the number of lectures by 10, per 20 credit unit, and replace them with ’surgery hours’, has been reversed. The lack of involvement of course representatives in the working group, and the lack of consultation with students more generally was also recognised.

There will be a review of teaching quality in the Law School in the future - as there rightly should be - but it will be less rushed, engaging more people, staff and students. I hope that next year’s law students do take part and contribute critically, in the way that the law course representatives I have known this year have done so since the proposals first became public.

I took the opportunity today to talk to many Heads of School across the University on the importance of involving students in these debates, as partners. Students I have known who have contributed to discussions about improving student support or feedback have made insightful comments which have often led to major changes when those students’ views were listened to properly.

I am very hopeful that there have been major lessons learned from the past few weeks and that students in the future are not consulted in a tokenistic manner but will be an intregral part of future discussions around teaching and learning across the University.

I’ve just finished reading (online) a book called “Sustainable Energy - Without the Hot Air“, by Professor David McKay from the University of Cambridge. It’s an insightful guide about energy consumption and renewable energy production, and the options available to policy and decision-makers. It’s an important read - and is clear and consise (and witty). It’s not feel-good, it’s not easy, but it is fascinating.

In case you’re wondering whether it’s more environmentally friendly to read it online, or buy a paper copy - it depends how fast a reader you are! If you’re a fast reader or will use a laptop, go with online, otherwise there’s no real difference.

One of my favourite paragraphs:

One of the main sinks of energy in the “developed” world is the creation of stuff. In its natural life cycle, stuff passes through three stages. First, a new-born stuff is displayed in shiny packaging on a shelf in a shop. At this stage, stuff is called “goods.” As soon as the stuff is taken home and sheds its packaging, it undergoes a transformation from “goods” to its second  form, “clutter.” The clutter lives with its owner for a period of months  or years. During this period, the clutter is largely ignored by its owner,  who is off at the shops buying more goods. Eventually, by a miracle of modern alchemy, the clutter is transformed into its final form, rubbish. To the untrained eye, it can be difficult to distinguish this “rubbish” from the highly desirable “good” that it used to be. Nonetheless, at this stage the discerning owner pays the dustman to transport the stuff away.