Final Word: Economy with the truth

It is the time when new, and returning students, make their way to the big school for another year, writes Paul Moore.

When teaching it was a time I looked forward to. It was one of the few times – perhaps the only time – when the lecturer had the upper hand. The lecturer knew what the timetable looked like and the students did not, the lecturer knew the trepidation of the student, especially first and last years, and the lecturer also had a small window to try to impart some advice for the coming year. It was a window which was very small and lasted only until the students had an opportunity to put their heads together and reassure each other that the lecturer was, in fact, a prat.

A student actually needs only one piece of advice. Avoid at all costs the single untruth which can scupper a university career. Students appear unaware that staff might speak to each other, particularly in this era of digital communication, even if the student has opted for two seemingly unconnected subjects.

It seems to surprise students that a lecturer in economics might speak to another lecturer in Chinese language about the progress of said student. This can cause interesting situations. I do not mean the usual, ‘My granny died’ excuses for not having work completed on time. Every lecturer knows that every student has at least six grandmothers at any given point in a degree career. I am referring to the really bad untruths.

One example from my teaching will suffice. We were informed by a student that her mother had sadly passed away. She was studying languages but taking a module in my subject area.

It was agreed that given this circumstance she should be awarded what is known as an aegrotat (a special circumstance award based on her year’s work) and all was well. I met her at the start of the new year accompanied by an adult and as I went to offer my condolences she immediately introduced me to the accompanying adult: “This is my mother.” I suggested to said mother that I needed a quiet word in private and, sadly, never saw either of them again.

All of which makes the Kemi Badenoch university story even more bizarre. She claims, and has done so in numerous occasions on public forums, that she was, based on her SAT scores, accepted as a 16-year-old to study pre-med at Stanford University.

Any individual who has had any contact with a university knows that such a claim immediately sets off alarm bells. No offers are made to students based solely on their SAT scores, particularly if they have not applied, if only because a lack of an application would mean the university did not know you existed.

Stanford recruitment officers confirmed they had no record of any such application. They also confirmed they do not in fact offer a pre-med degree, only a full medical degree. It would seem to me that the Conservative leader has been confronted while in the company of her metaphorical dead mother.

The Conservative Party has served up a plethora of reasons why this is all a major misunderstanding and a corruption of what their leader did actually say which is again merely another version of the metaphorical dead grannies.

The astonishing thing is that Conservative leaders seem to consistently get away with such stunts as though they are made of teflon and allowed to play with different rules than the rest of us. It must be a source of constant irritation to other politicians who seem to be judged by a different, more ethical set of rules. Ask Angela Rayner.