Your suggestions

How can we all go forward to create a better DACE for the 21st century? You spoke out to save the department…now we want to hear your suggestions. Post here!

17 Responses to Your suggestions

  1. Rosie Ilett says:

    I did my PhD at DACE and think it is a wonderful resource for learning and for the community. A Facebook presence is very important for keeping existing, past and future students in contact, and should be run by DACE itself as part of its communications.

  2. Paula Veiga says:

    I enjoy travelling to Scotland to participate in Egyptological events, courses and lectures. The courses at DACE are of extreme quality, the lecturers are the best credentiated in their fields and the location is nice. More and more people are aware of the courses and want to attend. I hope more courses will be available next year, in ancient History and Religions, especially in ancient Egypt subjects. Forgot to say I come from Portugal…

  3. Rosemary Wilkinson says:

    With regard to the website (I don’t do facebook). Students should definitely be involved. Maybe the course descriptions should be written by the staff, as at present, but there should be space on the e-version for previous students to add comments. The website should also have somewhere for interested people to add course requests with facilities for people to add supporting votes – maybe 3 sections, would seriously consider applying, good idea but not for me at the moment, DACE shouldn’t be involved in that type of course. This might guide the development of DACE in the future.

    A similar feature could include suggestions for Day Schools and Summer/Weekend Schools which seem to find favour with the powers-that-be. This too could have a similar voting system which would give a crude indication of support.

    I don’t know if any DACE students or staff would be willing to be the webmaster or support webstaff but this might help to spread the load on the admin staff. My own webskills aren’t up to it though.

  4. Ewen Smith says:

    Big questions around the concept of independent financing; for starters, it was quite clear throughout the consultation process that the Univesity had no idea what the costs associated with DACE really were, so what confidence can we have that they’ll come up with the correct apportioning of costs now? Will they include HR support? Finance Dept. costs? Hire costs for University rooms? Rooms, incidentally, which would otherwise be empty, certainly for evening classes.
    On a similar theme, T-grant … I can understand why the University wants unfettered access to these resources, and I even understand why they appear to be provided to the University, by the Funding Council, to use together with all other T-grant as it deems fit across the University. What I cannot understand is why the Funding Council would continue to provide funds for a teaching resource which is no longer part of the institution’s portfolio. Every aspect of the financing of DACE requires the closest monitoring, by students as well as staff, but how are students to be engaged in this exercise?
    A few other points …
    a) students should have a greater involvement in the Department’s management, with full and equal representation on relevant panels and committees. In some respects, students may be better qualified than staff to address many of the issues arising, be it marketing, financial management, appointments, or whatever;
    b) the idea of YourDACE is excellent, though probably places a considerable weight on some folk’s shoulders;
    c) speaking openly, independent financing might dictate a different DACE structure, with closer alignment to other providers in the City, in a co-ordinated approach to the provision and delivery of learning opportunities. Discussions over partnership working is, in my view, long over-due (though that view extends to higher education more generally). And let’s not over-look any options that might be available through collaborating with the Open University, or indeed with other course providers.

  5. Alison Miller says:

    Keeping a facebook profile is a really good idea. Updates on courses, posts from tutors and students – if that’s technically possible – would keep it at the front of people’s minds. Agree with an earlier post saying its profile needs to be increased. It is kind of hidden away, unless you know about it.

  6. David Wardrop says:

    Not sure what to write. My honest opinion would be to keep DACE as it is maybe expand it a little. DACE might benefit by diversing a little and working solely on a volunteer basis and hold classes in churches, community halls, parks and even people’s houses. money would be raised by DACE staging large events something like the West End Festival. As stated at the start I don’t know what to write and I don’t know how DACE operates and how it is run. As long as education and classess continue then I am happy.

  7. Laura Brown says:

    I think DACE would benefit greatly from more widespread advertising – I stumbled across the department by chance a few years ago when on the Glasgow Uni website, it is totally hidden away and I’ve never seen it advertised or promoted anywhere else. Local libraries and social network sites are only two little suggestions, I’m sure there are more?

  8. Sarah Ward says:

    It’s good news that the consultation group has recommended that Dace stays but I don’t think it’s acceptable for the Uni to require the withdrawal of the T grant. If the Uni wants a strong adult ed department then it should put its money where its mouth is. No doubt Dace can raise a significant amount of cash itself, but financial support will help keep the costs down for those who need it most – and this was one of the keys points made by supporters. For example, if Dace core staff are expected to manage the Access programme, how is this going to be resourced? The Uni has been at pains to point out that the Access programme remains, but it’s very convenient that the bill for this is left at Dace’s door. My concern is that Dace’s core costs will rise if it’s to be a stand-alone organisation, and at the same time the cash that pays for these core costs will be eroded.

    I can see the benefits of Dace being an independent charitable trust. For example, it could appoint a Board of supportive and experienced people (maybe some high-profile ones in there like Tom Leonard and Liz Lochead?) and thus consolidate the strong support that’s been shown over the consultation period. This would also allow for membership by current and past students which again reinforces the support for the Dept and demonstrates Dace’s popularity to potential funders. It would also safeguard against future attempts at closure, and give staff the support they deserve.

    This would also allow Dace to evolve as an organisation which reflects the values of staff and students – rather than a business which is all about marketing rather than learning.

    If Dace is to be independently financing, then how can the Uni place restrictions on it? For example, on class sizes? Surely this is up to the new organisation to decide? Having said this, the point about integrating Dace qualifications into the rest of the Uni sounds positive.

  9. Christine Glasgow says:

    I think DACE could really take off even more if it was better marketed. I think there’s still a perception amongst the public that Glasgow University is elitist. Also, the West End location is more inconvenient for some than say, Strathclyde, whose brochures are more colourful etc. I’m not suggesting a dumbing down of course content, just to present it in a less intimidating way, so that it appeals to a wider audience. Look at the brochures from Strathclyde, Langside College etc and other successful providers and see how they market their courses. People will be willing to take the plunge to come to the West End to study but not if they feel it is too ‘snobby’! (Of course, once they’ve been once they’ll know that’s not the case, but the programme advertising should better reflect this).

  10. Matthew Lee says:

    I feel that it could be helpful if DACE had a simply expressed 10 point Charter – not a vacuous mission statement – but a clear page which enshrined DACE’s purposes, priorities, principles and high level practices. To which students, staff (salaried or contract) and University management could refer all subsequent day to day changes or initiatives. It would keep us all honest, avoid bad-faith behaviour which some clearly are concerned about, and could be part of the “welcome pack” which really ought to go out to every student electronically for every new course of 4 sessions or more. I see this Charter as a statement of principles which is quite distinct from the Panel’s 10 proposals. They appear to be about how DACE gets reorganised in the immediate term.

  11. Iain Lowson says:

    It is important that the University authorities and bean counters remain aware that, having failed to do away with DACE openly, they will not be able to more subtly destroy it – either through deliberate mismanagement or the setting of fees so high that those who currently benefit from the existing system will not be able to afford it. Any attempt to do so will be met with very public criticism of the authorities and the same strong support for DACE that they encountered before.

    It should indeed be possible for DACE to do a great deal to support itself but if, in the end, some financial backing is required from the current funding set-up then this should still be considered. DACE is too valuable to be thrown away in a doctrinal sulk

  12. Amanda McLauchlan says:

    The science courses suggested below sound interesting, I would love also to see a course in holistic nutrition, perhaps with a small research element, there seems to be none in Scotland apart from at degree or postgrad level. Perhaps looking at how nutrition affects health and focusing on aspects like coeliac disease, adhd etc to make relevant to people

  13. John matthews says:

    The only problem with “privatising” DACE is that the same morons who have run it down, will then either be in charge of it again or will take credit for the outsourced company (this was first hinted to me by a mature member of the congregation, who attended along with myself, one of the “consultations” at DACE – when one of Muscatelli’s stooges showed up to lecture us). I always thought that they wanted to get rid of it; either to an outsourced company with their cronies in charge or all together.

    I personally have no problem with that, as long as it’s done by people with experience so that it can be done correctly. Surely, some sort of educational trust or charity can be set up. Equally, as having seen my fees raise from 120 pounds to 200 pounds during the last 2 years ( a 66% increase!), I would hope that no further increases are merited.

  14. Ross Clark says:

    I think that DACE might benefit from doing science courses which are a level above the ‘general interest’ category. For instance, experimental chemistry courses, which feature a quantitative element, and the same for physics, biology, maths etc. This isn’t an area which is offered by other continuing education programs, so this might be a niche worth exploiting.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s