#Demo2012: Demolition of University As We Know It?

Today, a third year of student protesting descended on London. However, the crucial difference is that participants will be amongst the first to actually pay the increased 9k tuition fees that came into force this academic year. Whilst the previous efforts have been dismissed in cavalier fashion, put down to rowdy or disrespectful students, here for the first time in the campaign process will the voices of those directly affected be added in force to the fight.

Westminster need face these demonstrations and their impact with an open mind, because the increase in fees may have quietly ushered in a new era in the history of the English University institution.

Now that the fees have been implemented, it would be unbelievably difficult to reduce them once more: there would be riots over those penalised, a further reorganisation of the Student Loans Company, endless paperwork for universities to reassess its student population.

Yet, the 9k barrier doesn’t even proffer the solutions that many politicians advocated it would. A report by the Higher Education Policy Institute, a highly respected think-tank, professed that the new system was actually due to cost taxpayers more money in the long run, proclaiming the possibility of a £1billion a year black hole.

Possible ‘solutions’ only sound like fuel for fire in another possible student rebellion. Besides, can youth culture stand another such mass movement without galvanising some sort of modern 21^st century revolution?

It hardly seems as though any young adult will be pleased with either the prospect of having to pay more back on their university loans (with what money you may ask in such an economic climate with rising youth unemployment?), or satisfied with the possibility of fewer university places (the UCAS system already limits universities: how can fewer places be fairly allocated? And how will this affect overall employability prospects?). It’s hardly motivating or economy-saving stuff. What austerity drive Nick Clegg?

The Hepi report describes civil servants as having made "highly uncertain and optimistic assumptions" on funding. Findings cite that the assumption of an average net fee charged by universities would be £7,500 a year, but the true figure is nearer to £8,300, thus forcing students to borrow more. Further, questions the assumption that the average male graduate will be earning £75,000 a year in 30 years, the period by which loans have to be repaid (already a 25% reduction on earlier projections).

The higher fees regime also adds 0.2 percentage points to the Consumer Price Index – thus triggering larger rises in state benefits and civil service pensions of between £420m and £1.14bn a year.

Oh and then fees are only recuperated when graduates find employment of course. Please sort out the economy in a forward thinking manner, rather than taking a backwards approach. Jobs first; less economic turmoil. Hell, I’m an English student and this makes sense.

David Cameron and co may face a heavy backlash not only in these immediate costings, but how students approach their university careers.

Picture the scene: it’s the middle of September, I’m unpacking my boxes of student life essentials, hanging up posters of some indie band and quotes from my favourite popular comedy series. Sounds like your typical moving in day.

But no: I’m unloading everything into the dorms of a prestigious American university (college, whatever). The reason? For a much similar annual cost, I can study for my degree, whilst living in a different country, experiencing their culture, seeing many of the famous sites; from New York to Washington, Florida to Vegas. I can make contacts and friends abroad; links that can prove invaluable when searching, fruitlessly, for a job in the UK.

The appeal of this is all too apparent: students, young, free and with a world to experience, are at the first point in their lives without their parents, and that can offer a whole lot of new lifestyle choices!

Perhaps the only way to counter such a move would be the rise of private universities in the UK, which would undercut the national average cost and appear much more cost effective. But then, of course, there would be the problem of whether these institutions would deliver reputable degrees to its graduates, and whether employers would believe these universities to offer any valuable qualifications.

Essentially, the system either restricts students and the taxpayer in its costs and fees, or restricts the choice of education through conventions.

But while there are students empowered by the movement to reject 9k, and if the general public were more educated on the gaping financial hole that threatens to consume their income, there stands resolute chance for a government U-Turn.

Then again, what turmoil would that entail for the economy and public faith?

Stuck On Repeat?

Recently, the BBC ran a feature, posing the question "Can You Shape your Children's Taste in Music?" It is certainly a goal that many parents aspire to achieve, even for the selfish reasons that they can continue to listen to their own favourite albums from yester year, and can have some ‘decent music’ in that traditional five hour car journey to see the family for the holidays.

Every time I return home from university, my parents comment (without fail) on how nice and quiet the house has been without me within approximately two minutes of walking through the door. Hell, I haven’t even had a cup of tea yet. Great welcome, guys.

But mainly, this is due to the instant welcome I get from my siblings, with whom there is an instant need to trade the latest gossip, jokes and musical trends.

Loading up my phone to browse YouTube, the groans of ‘Remember when we were in charge of the music in this house?’ hang heavy in the air.

Perhaps for a good reason. This summer, a Spanish headed report published its findings on modern pop music, only to conclude that, basically, everything sounds the same. Yes, punk and prog-rock happened. That was the 70s. Now, each assault on the chart is bound up in some squiffy basslines and a vapid string of lyrical spew, probably formulated by some questionable tin of value alphabet soup.

No wonder parents try to influence their children’s taste in music. The prolific back catalogue of British music has somehow become an untapped mine of musical sincerity and ingenuity in an age of increased music video circulation thanks to the internet.

You may think that the world wide web would have broadened our horizons, but simply clicking onto YouTube brings up the trending and popular videos that we all just have to watch. Few tracks from the 70s or 80s, hell even the 90s, feature in that promotion list. And thank god for the John Lewis adverts eh? If it weren’t for their constant covers, maybe half the population would never discover the old classics.

I’m not expecting teenagers to suddenly blare out Queen or Duran Duran with the same arbritrary excitement as Gangham Style (admit it, you’re dancing in your head now, aren’t you?!), but it is somewhat surprising in light of the Spanish (music) inquisition that people remain interested and invested in the charts, right?

Well, I find that these articles simplify the plethora of styles afforded by modern pop music. There has certainly been as much diversification as there has been industry monotony over the past decade. R’n’B, hip-hop, rap, dubstep have all come into the mainstream in the past ten years or so alone.

While these appear staple sounds to the modern day chart, their relative time spent being blasted from radio stations is still quite short. How long did the flavour of The Beatles last? Queen’s rock? The Clash’s punk? All these genres have proliferated the charts for short periods, around 10 years at best. Then the next musical innovation is adorned as quick as in the previous era.

Okay, I’ll admit. There’s a lot to be said in favour of the diversity of past musicians. Lyrics are so often more intuitive and reflective of society; instruments are used to convey meaning, not just drive a beat. Finding a classic Red Hot Chili Peppers album, or an Oasis gem is sometimes much more exciting than any new material on the charts.

But then, it’s popular music for a reason. It takes all the popular elements and twists them into a conformist notion of what we all like to listen to. Again and again.

Many of the iconic bands are heralded as true musicians because they allowed their audience a sense of rebellion against the mainstream, and, perhaps more importantly, against their parents.

Well, perhaps there is room for more apathy in a Western civilisation that has undergone a massive change in political and social rights since the mid-60s. But a 21^st century life culture, plagued with social media, increased peer pressure, recession, consumerism and wars is certainly the type of place for musical revolutions to continue. The assault of pop music is not something ‘throwaway’ and repetitive: it is something that in this slightly more apathetic era, the masses can utilise to forget the extent of their problems, before being galvanised into action by the next prog-rock wave.

Besides, my grandparents have expressed their like for Maroon 5, No Doubt, Calvin Harris and even Riri before now. There’s no reason that children shaping their parents taste in music is something that shouldn’t be encouraged.

The Value of Work Experience

Originally written for The Guardian Comment is Free.

Another busy week is ending at The Guardian. A busy week which I've experienced first hand, taking up a placement opportunity at the newspaper. I've covered activist Malala, sleuthed James Bond's espionage hot spots, and been deluged with storm waves following Sandy on the live blog. But I'm not about to walk up to the news desk and demand a pay cheque for the week. When I leave the office this afternoon there will be no cash in hand for my hard work, but experience, the value of which is immeasurably greater.

Experience is a compulsory element of the graduate CV, even on a tight budget. Gone are the days when fresh faced University leavers could walk into an office with a smattering of A Levels and a role of paper from a Red Brick institute: education is no longer indicative of employment.

In the wake of the indiscretions of Blair's office, my friends and I soon found ourselves discussing the inevitability of unpaid experience as the only means by which to further our career prospects in a stormy recession. Rising youth unemployment and an increase in degree holders makes it almost impossible for companies to commit to contracts and long term employment without some proof of previous relevant work.

The almost universal problem in accessing this experience though transcends from the fact that a large proportion of the most established and reputable internships will be placed in London. I, like many of my friends, do not live in the capital. (Un)surprisingly, London just so happens to be expensive and out of many budgets. This fact severely limits and disables the options of many undergraduates searching for that big break. Yet talking with a friend who just started an internship in London last month, she said that “there was no alternative” to coming to the city, “no matter the cost”.

According to Intern Aware, not only are the majority of placements in London, where the cost of living is the highest in the UK, but The IPPR estimated in 2010 that there were around 100,000 unpaid internships in the UK. Of course, the problem is that unpaid internships are corrosive to social mobility and opportunity in a number of circumstances. If you cannot afford to support yourself for the period of the placement (fortunately for myself, this was achieved cheaply by bribing my aunt with some chocolate and leaving her a bottle of wine this morning), then there is little chance of substantial opportunity to further your horizons. Perhaps one placement is justifiable, but two or three consecutive stints of unpaid work leave students add a gaping hole to their already spiralling debt.

However, for my part, work experience is something that every student needs to acquire, regardless of wage. This is probably a divisive and contentious view, but let's be clear, I'm not one of these stereotyped students that can ring up mummy and daddy and ask for some money to be transferred so as I can enjoy London. My parents can't afford that additional expense, and frankly, nor do I expect to put that burden upon them. The student loan is also not the endless pot of Irish gold it appears to be in Freshers Week.

Yet, work experience and internships completed for free say a great deal more about the competency and dedication of the young employee. In a climate where companies continually bemoan the problem of telling applicants apart, those who have volunteered themselves to complete placements with minimal monetary support display a vivacity so essential to the work place (especially in the media).

Companies provide these placements to people entirely untrained, with little experience. Despite the brevity of the work, paid staff will have to take time out of their schedule to train, advise, guide the intern and is probably under constant supervision. Not to be condescending, but it's hardly realistic to expect to walk into The Guardian and land the front page whilst on placement.

Just as you pay for the service of university, work experience is something you pay for by making sacrifices of sorts. It's a privilege, not a right. Not that this statement should detract or act as an exoneration of Tony Blair's office. It's just, from the student outrage, you'd be forgiven for thinking this was a new problem.

Working for free is inherently integrated into the system of employment. I've covered some big issues this week for The Guardian: do I feel exploited? No: I feel privileged to be given this opportunity, to have some world renowned and respected journalists that lead their field have faith in me to turn out a piece suitable for publication.

Rewriting my CV this weekend, I'll be able to send out my portfolio with a massive boost to my prospective employers. For a short term inconvenience now, I stand to benefit enormously in the future. No one had really questioned this practice until now.

Perhaps a system in which work placements offer means-tested assistance, in a similar way to the student finance service, would proffer a much more accessible work place and encourage a larger number of students who believe their backgrounds hinder their progress to look into experience. I've hardly had to pay for anything this week, but it would be nice to go up to the news desk editor, bung a load of Oyster card receipts in his hand and get £30 back. For a student, that's a two-week food shop. My train fare would feed me until New Year's.

Unpaid internships may present themselves as social engineering in another format because of their obvious limitations, but they are social characterising. Hand in hand with the experience comes invaluable training and character building by observing the tough post-university world through a different, direct lens.

The comments of my friend in a London bar earlier this week strike a chord: “no alternative, no matter the cost.” If we expect employers to take young new employees seriously, we should first demonstrate our dedication to our crafts. The school of “something for nothing” is no longer a sustainable attitude for any graduate.