Dedicated Diaries and Perfect Planners

Users on The Student Room recently discussed their favourite diary and planner for the academic year.

Most of them recommended the Palgrave Student Planner.

The Palgrave offering may not be the cheapest, but the layout and the extras were worth it for most users. One person goes as far as calling the planner “an absolute Godsend”.

Over at Amazon, one user has helpfully added a few shots of what’s inside the planner. It’s all specific to students (as you’d expect!) and laid out nicely.

I’ve never used this planner myself, but with a lot of love over at The Student Room, it’s worth a mention. The 44 five-star reviews and average score of 4.6 stars on Amazon paint a positive picture too!

A diary is a great step for sorting your life out and getting things on track. Timetabling is a mental necessity one way or another. Beyond these plans, you may also want to keep an academic journal about what you’re learning, why you’re learning, the things you want to learn more, and so on.

There are loads of different diaries and planners out there. Do you have a favourite diary that you return to every year? Have you discovered the perfect planner? Or do you have a completely different way to arrange your year ahead? Let us know!

photo by Amir Kuckovic

photo by Amir Kuckovic

Need a Basic Overview? Choose Simple!

Some of the big lifehacking and technology websites have reported a Wikipedia wonder that I’ve recommended for years now.

It’s Simple Wikipedia. When you need a really basic overview of a topic, some Wiki entries are too complex. As TheNextWeb says, just swap “en” in the web address to “simple” and load the new page. All of a sudden, you’re given an article that’s easy to follow and just right to get a basic grasp of.

I suggest Simple Wikipedia to Freshers, especially before they’ve started uni. It’s an easy way to read up on major concepts without getting bogged down with the detail that will come your way soon enough anyway.

With an introduction to the main topics, you’ll be prepared for the juicy details far better than if you were being fed everything at once.

So check out simple.wikipedia.org and get the lowdown on all the stuff you were afraid to tackle!

Practice or Flawless?

I like Pat Thomson’s comments on academic writing. It’s rare to think of writing as a process you practice and fine-tune before getting the best results.

Instead, you sit down and your internal editor rushes you to be instantly perfect. Sometimes a flash of brilliance comes about straight away, but not often.

Thomson says, “We all assume that we ought to be able to just do whatever writing task comes before us”. However, she continues, “we would never assume this of music for instance”.

Anyone can play guitar... Perfectly? Straight away? (photo by ginnerobot)

Anyone can play guitar… Perfectly? Straight away? (photo by ginnerobot)

Writing a song may start with a few random chords or a stab at some lyrics. As you go along, you get more adventurous, add better chords, change words, and pick away until you’re satisfied. On the odd occasion, a song-writer may strike up a riff out of nowhere and get a song finished in minutes. And, like with writing, that’s rare.

With music, we’re aware that you need to practice. It’s important to practice how to play an instrument and it’s important to practice as you compose new material.

Yet with writing, perfect feels possible. No, wait, perfect feels NECESSARY.

Why?

I talked about 750words a while back. 750words is one way to let a stream of writing happen without getting bogged down with the finer detail. Just get on with writing and edit later.

Writing and editing are two different things.

Writing should be practice, all the time.

Okay, it’s more difficult in an exam. But even exams are best handled with plans. Before you write your answer, it’s handy to make a few notes for preparation and getting an order.

Outside the exam setting, the writing is the practice. The editing is the crafting. The re-writing is a combination of practice and crafting.

Telling you to ‘just do it’ is useful and misleading in equal doses. Useful because you’re getting words out and the practice has started. Misleading because writing isn’t just about random words on a page.

As you practice (i.e. as you write), you should still attempt to be clear. If you don’t know what you’re talking about, you’ll only confuse yourself later.

James Hayton of 3 Month Thesis says “you aren’t doing it wrong if you’re producing work you’re happy with! You are doing it wrong if you end up with a scrambled mess of half-baked chapters to sort out later”.

The take home point is this: Just getting the words on the page is not enough. It needs to be part of your bigger picture plan. Writing is practice, and so is editing. Everything is practice until you’ve finished.

Remember, ‘finished’ doesn’t mean ‘perfect’. Simply writing words doesn’t help you improve. Making use of those words and achieving clarity as you move along does.

Just write, so long as you understand why you’re writing and what you’re trying to achieve. Your inner editor will wince and scream at you, while you tell it to calm down as you’ll deal with that at a more convenient moment. That moment isn’t in a month or two, when you’ve forgotten what you were doing. However, that moment is at a different point to the writing.

Hayton calls advice to ‘just get words on the page’ as “the worst thesis writing advice ever“. That might sound harsh, but he’s right. Without context, the advice stinks. Give it context and know *why* you’re writing like that.

NOTE: I wrote this post without editing. I wanted to get the words on the page.

But…I had an idea of what I wanted to write. There was context. It may not be an academic text, but the same should apply for many types of writing. So long as there’s context!

For this post, the idea originated from reading Pat Thomson’s piece that I mentioned at the start. I considered what I wanted to talk about for a minute or two. In the process, I remembered my 750words post and looked for James Hayton’s piece on writing advice, because I thought it would fit. Thankfully, it did.

Armed with this, I started writing. It didn’t matter what words came out, because I had a purpose and I’d found enough context. The only editing was on the fly, when there was an obvious change in my head, moments after I’d typed the initial words.

I’m sure this post could be re-written and better crafted. But it took very little time and it still makes sense. That’s what I wanted to get across.

I don’t always write in this way, but it’s another way to practice. There is no single way to write and there is no perfect sentence. With that in mind, you should cut yourself some slack and enjoy the writing process. A new sense of calm may well help your writing improve. Win-win!

Universities Going Private: Should We Ask ‘If’ or ‘When’?

Will any of the ‘big player’ universities attempt to go private any time soon?

With the news that Pearson is introducing for-profit private HE, “the first time a FTSE 100 company has directly delivered a degree course”, I wondered what other changes might be on the horizon for current universities.

In 2010, the Telegraph reported that an unnamed source from the University of Cambridge had suggested the university may have to go private in order to compete better and raise enough funds.

Which way to go? (photo by Lori Greig)

Which way to go? (photo by Lori Greig)

Labour MP Barry Sheerman was also quoted, saying “I was told by Cambridge they may privatise themselves because they are so aggrieved by the cuts and by Lord Browne’s proposals”.

While the Telegraph piece went on to say that a Cambridge spokesman dismissed the idea of going private, they were also vague enough to explain that “The university has reached no official position on these matters”.

Add the fact that Cambridge also had “a funding gap of some £9,000 for each of its 12,000 undergraduates in 2010/11”, the new level of tuition fees isn’t going to bridge that gap. While fees may be higher for students, those fees are effectively a change to where the funding was already coming from. Some institutions may improve their income slightly depending on the fees they set, but in most cases there won’t be much extra cash flowing in.

Cambridge is one of the few UK universities that is graced with consistently large alumni donations. But that doesn’t mean the university can rely on that to make up for any shortfalls. Cambridge has other income streams too, but I’m sure it doesn’t wish to use these as a backstop either. That wouldn’t make sense. And no matter how strong the future appears, that won’t stop further considerations over the way the university is funded.

Oxford and Cambridge have just come under fire over special funding for their tutorial and interview process. Criticism like this hasn’t stopped the funding yet, but it puts further pressure on policy makers to remove the funding, and further pressure on Oxbridge to find alternatives.

Pearson’s move into degrees is of the for-profit type. Perhaps Cambridge, or another established university, would consider going private under a ‘not-for-profit’ banner.

When Universities UK reported on private provision of HE, it said “The for-profit/not-for-profit distinction is important, but even within the not-for-profit sector there is a wide range of provider”.

UUK go on to explain that many not-for-profit outfits tend to operate very commercially and are businesslike in their dealings, looking to make ‘profits’ of a kind. However:

“…their key motive is to promote public good. This is a key distinction between them and the private for-profit providers which, although they may be working in the same arena and providing a public good, do so in the expectation that they can earn surpluses which flow into the private hands of shareholders. An essential distinction therefore relates to the distribution and uses to which surpluses are put.” (2.8, p.14)

Current universities may not consider making a complete push to become for-profit entities, but what about not-for-profit possibilities? I wouldn’t rule it out.

The government’s HE White Paper goes as far as saying that not-for-profit providers would be able to apply for HEFCE grants in the same way as HE and FE institutions. (6.29, p.73) Is there enough scope for universities to change their outlook and manage a win-win?

My guess is that should any institution find a suitable way to go down this path, they would opt for not-for-profit billing.

However, a HEPI report on private providers questions whether the difference between for-profit and not-for-profit really matters. It first suggests that the distinction isn’t automatically necessary, because “the public interest lies in education of high quality being provided and consumer interests being protected – whatever the status of provider”.

HEPI does goes on to say that careful scrutiny would be required to ensure this quality and that impact can be assessed. It concludes:

“Care will also be needed in shaping a new and comprehensive regulatory framework.  If an equitable and broadly comparable regulatory framework is developed for all institutions in the sector, it may need some mechanisms for monitoring surpluses and alerting a regulator where the amount given to shareholders might be considered excessive.”

Distinctions probably do matter and are likely to do so for now, which is why not-for-profit seems most likely.

How viable is it for universities to smoothly transition into private entities? I’m sure other commentators may have a better view on these matters than I do. Whatever the case is, you can be sure that a lot of consideration has been going on for quite some time now.

While the Telegraph’s suggestion of Cambridge going private was ultimately dismissed by the university, it was clear that the situation was under continued assessment. In addition, Wendy Piatt of the Russell Group (which includes Cambridge in its membership) said that going private may be a necessity in the future. Reported in the same Telegraph piece, Piatt explained, “That would require a lot of consideration and we would hope not to have to go there, but we would certainly have to consider more radical options”.

As things stand now, those radical options may be looking sensible to some institutions. Not just Cambridge. Therefore, of universities going private, which is the most important question to ask: ‘if’ or ‘when’?