Edmundia meets the Shinies
At the time of writing, the latest big thing to spew forth from the corridors of management is still the ‘New Service and Leadership Award’ scheme that was recently unveiled to the world, in the winter issue of College Life and to the college itself, in Headmaster’s assemblies. It has been vaguely explained to us, the manner in which we may acquire such a commendation, should we wish to do so, however what has not been fully clarified is why we would want such an award and indeed, why the scheme has been introduced in the first place. However not only have the powers that be effectively failed to fully indicate what the actual scheme is, but we haven’t actually been informed of what we’d be winning. Do we really want another piece of paper to lose down the back of a wardrobe, or indeed to frame and sell to some deluded old woman, convinced that her grand son/daughter is still thriving at school, despite being 42 with three children and a wife, on the east coast of America? On the other hand, it could be that the description given on the poster is actually true and we will indeed, be presented with a ‘gold’ medal, for looking after the previously mentioned Aunt Betty. Surely the college is able to think of better outlets for its funds, than what is essentially a trinket to replace the feeling of good will and fulfilment that has traditionally been the reward for community service?
Either way, these are both minor, if not petty issues that should be put to one side and forgotten, if the scheme itself is able to hold its ground, under examination. Like everything else at the college, this is of course, open to debate. The true question is the one written in the sub-title to this article. Whether or not the scheme as a whole should receive the plaudits that the hierarchy so desire or whether it should be pigeonholed under the same category as the decision taken change to lower school blazers not so long ago, rests solely upon its actual motives. The top of said hierarchy firmly believes in the scheme, at least superficially. Indeed, when released upon the first division, Mr Duran himself, whom I believe I’d be correct in assuming can be held responsible for the scheme, referred to his work, as ‘like all great ideas…’ Thank you very much Sir, your opinions are duly noted, if taken with a pinch of salt, for obvious reasons.
It is of course impossible for those of us who’ve been here long enough to remember Mr Richard Wilkin, not to draw comparisons between this and the legendary grade scheme still experienced by bounds, today. There are indeed, similarities which should be taken into account; For instance, the authors of both schemes. Both authors have or indeed had the position of ‘newest deputy head’; a perfect example of ‘the hot seat’, by anyone’s standards. It is most likely correct to assume that both had the intention of making a good impression on the college as a whole, with their new ways of thinking, which inevitably come with introducing a new deputy head to an establishment such as our own. Indeed, it is what deputy heads are for. At the same time, every newly introduced deputy head quite rightly seeks to make his mark on the college. This is Mr Duran’s attempt to do just that, in his capacity as ‘Head of pastoral life’; understandably a title that would take an article of equal length to this, to define. At the same time, to some of the more conservative thinkers amongst us, both schemes may seem like an unnecessary attempt to redefine a particular aspect of college life that has no need for such attention and is absolutely fine as it is. Indeed, with all due respect to Mr Wilkin, for whom I have always harboured deep respect, the L-W grade scheme was both unnecessary and as many staff agree, failed in it’s objective to provide a more rounded description and assessment of students’ work, mainly due to the obvious flaw of having fewer values than the E-A system. At the same time, it seems to me that the leadership awards only do the same as the Duke of Edinburgh awards, except with a personal meeting with the famous Mr Duran, rather than his rampant racist highness, Prince Phillip.
However one thing I would like to commend Mr Duran on is his entirely correct point on the poster, which states that this scheme is indeed, another useful sentence or two to include in our university personal statements, when the time arises to write such documents. The poster itself, deserves a degree of admiration, both for its failure to actually tell us anything particularly useful apart from the potential UCAS reference and for its blatant attempts to include all manner of contemporary marketing techniques, some of which I shall now highlight. The most obvious marketing ploy is without a doubt, the oversized image of James O’Connor apparently waiting upon a couple of elderly guests, at the college’s annual elderly Christmas party. Whilst I do not doubt for a second, either the event itself or indeed Mr O’Connor’s intentions, I do however have a slight qualm with the introduction of the man as the apparent ‘new face of community service’. This blatant attempt at the usage of a textbook example of ‘poster boy’ marketing is a little too obvious to ignore. Not only is it obvious, but as such, it is slightly disappointing. In my view, if marketing is more evident than what it seeks to sell, it has failed. However, I do not wish to remove credit from where credit is due and therefore must applaud the senior leadership team both for their progressive thinking and for their attempts to bring basic business acumen back into the college, the likes of which has not been seen, since the rampant success of the feeder schools taster days, of which I have always been in awe, since my own journey of discovery in year six. Indeed, I have always felt that such attempts at selling aspects of the college or indeed the college itself in this case, should be nurtured and built upon. This tabloid style of advertisement can only be considered a significant step in that direction, so well done to those responsible. At the same time however, as I have already stated, the description given is a little vague and could do with being far more descriptive (ironically), than commercial.
I must say however, the one thing that really does cause my blood pressure levels to rise abnormally high about this poster, are the disgracefully obvious attempts at name dropping, deployed in the final few lines of text. I mean… seriously? Is it really necessary to make a connection between a genuinely well intentioned award scheme and one of the most false people on the face of the Earth, in David Beckham? At the same time, I believe better examples could have been found, for figureheads to promote a scheme promising actual rewards, than the Dalai Lama and Mahatma Gandhi, both of whom are famous for their lack of any real ‘rewards’ for their work. Perhaps a better example for us to follow, would have been that of Gordon Brown, whom let’s face it, only really behaved well in Tony’s cabinet room, in order to receive the hideously large metaphorical medal, that is the title of ‘Prime Minister’.
Once more, I must stress however, it has not been my intention, to deplore the senior management team in any public capacity. They must always be commended for their constant hard work and continuous efforts to better the college in all ways possible. This scheme is a major step forward in both emphasizing the area of pastoral college life described in the mission statement, as well as showing great progressive thinking and well intentioned steps towards the future of the college as a whole. I merely feel the need to point out that neither David Beckham, nor the disturbingly cheerful grin of James O’Connor will help you achieve these aims, Sir’s.
