Letter: Competition is to blame for alleged bad blood at Oxford
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The alleged bad blood in this university - 'alleged' because the congregation to whose debate you give space today (report and leading article, 19 May) was attended by well under 10 per cent of the dons - was predictable, and indeed predicted. The bone of contention, 'promotions' ad hominem, did not exist five years ago. They were foisted on the university by government, not to fulfil any definite function (like heading a faculty), but to create competition, in the belief that it would improve dons' 'performance'. In the view of most of us, this belief was mistaken, and unnecessarily hurt feelings, of which the present instance is not the first, was just one distortion we predicted.
'Most of us' may need explaining, but I must first correct Judith Judd. She describes lecturers as 'the lowest form of don'. At Oxford the lecturer tout court is already most of the way to a readership. The 'lowest' category is actually the 'CUF lecturer' ('Common University Fund', a typically Oxford term in that it hides a history). The CUF lecturers are the ordinary college tutorial fellows, who also give 16 lectures a year for the university.
This category is by far the most numerous and is the standard 'Oxford don'. Many, if not most, of its members of any seniority will have turned down opportunities to be professors elsewhere, or even in Oxford itself. On the whole, they regard themselves as equals and pursue the aims of scholarship in co-operation, a profoundly productive and satisfying relationship good both for students, with their various needs, and for scholarship. It is a relationship marred, as you can see, if not (I hope) finally threatened, by these politically imposed novelties.
Yours faithfully,
ALEXANDER MURRAY
Fellow and Tutor
University College Oxford
19 May
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments