Talk:University of Bedfordshire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bedfordshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Bedfordshire. If you would like to participate visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Complete | This page has a complete infobox. |
|
Collaboration of the week: South Bedfordshire |
|
Please add new remarks to the end, not at the beginning. Please sign and date your remarks with four tildes (like this ~~~~ )
This article replaced an earlier one on the University of Luton. The discussion on that article is archived at Talk:University of Luton.
 Archives |
|
/Archive 1 – July to December 2006, including reputation and controversy debates Older discussions relating to material in this article can be found at Talk:University of Luton |
Contents |
[edit] A Waste of Time
Can't you guys see the personal sour-graping of Mr. Vella against UBed? He has gone nuts and used Wiki for his own personal purpose. What a loser who needs professional help. Obviously, there is no logic on his concerns with UBed. And indeed, there is a thin line between being a genius and being insane. One can easily identify who from who. This topic is a waste of time. Lucky I don't have to read all this because I already smelled the rubbish at the start.Ferrari2006extreme 11:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC) Ferr
It’s a shame that you, unlike me, hide behind anonymity. Its probably you more than I that needs professional help – get yourself a permanent mate and a proper education, it may help! Also (probably) unlike you, I have had intimate knowledge of the workings of Bedfordshire’s previous existence as Luton and many of those with questionable ethics remain in positions of influence. I have also had much experience in many other universities and know that Luton at least was far from a good university. Trying to change it from the inside made no impact, I continue therefore to make changes from the outside! If staff need to be bullied in order to toe the party line, if documents need to be fabricated in order to convince tribunals and the quality watchdogs – and I know they have been – then there IS something very worrying, that’s what Luton was like. I have yet to be convinced that Bedfordshire is any different. Of course I am happy to communicate with ANYBODY about these issues. My email address is Alfred_vella@hotmail.com.
Alfred, surely your time there was quite some time ago, so your intimate knowledge is rather dated? It is clear to anyonw who reads this that you have a grievance with the uni and do not have a neutral POV which is a strict Wiki policy. Wiki is supposed to have balanced articles, not reviews of universities or your opinion.GazMan7 09:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
And of course you do not have a NPV, choosing to reply to me and not to the previous post by Ferrari2006extreme. Sorry you failed the test! Alfred Vella 13:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Its not a test dear, i try and keep my posting neautral and sensible. Something which you are obviously not able to do. Your lack of interest in anything but a single page demonstrates the obssessive nature of your campaign. I understand you 'parted ways' with Luton Uni, so the phrase 'axe to grind' jumps to mind. I did not attend Luton, and being honest i would not have wanted to, however Wikipedia is not a review site, such sites do exist so surely your campaign would be better off there....?GazMan7 17:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Funny but you sound far from 'neautral and sensible' maybe you have a degree from a Luton type university! Statements with '... and being honest ...' suggest that this may not be your normal behaviour - a pity. Alfred Vella 22:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Alfred, a single page of interest upon which you only post one view is not neutral. There is no way to defend this, so you try and make personal attacks. Wiki is not a review site, and using it for your own agenda is a pity, you appear to try to justify your 'rants' by validating them with comments about working at Luton. This was 5/6 years ago? so really not very relavant any more. It really appears to me, and any rational person that you are rather bitter at being sacked, did you win your tribunal...
Anyway these issues have been discussed before - see the archive. You need to accept that Wiki is not the place for your 'campaign'GazMan7 09:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I hope that the "small number of" staff are thankful that you put their allegations of racism in context, clearly you feel that it makes a difference! I have been contacted in 2007 by ex-staff and students of the 'university' so it is not just me that intend to keep campaigning for the truth. However we need apologists for dishonest behaviour, so keep it up! Alfred Vella 10:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Alfred, whether you have been contacted or not, this is not the place, it would be considered personal or original research, which i'm sure you are aware is not acceptable on Wiki. The issues you raise and are fighting for may or may not be valid or reasonable, but there is a time and place for everything. As you repeatedly fail to recognise Wiki is not a review site or a place to fight a campaign.
As to the racism claims, although they are on the article page, i'm not really sure these are even worth mentioning in an encylopodia. And that is not to belittle anyones valid problems or concerns, but it should be remembered what Wiki is for, and not turn it into a soapbox. If the university really had as many of this kind of problem then I would have expected this to have more local and even national news coverage, especially given the local media in Lutons love of bashing the university. These issues are not regularly covered, now unless you are claiming the press is all part of some huge conspiracy maybe the issues of which you allege are not as serious as you suggest?
This is fast becoming a circular argument, i have no agenda to push the university - why would I? but you have an agenda to critise it. I would suggest you have a read through the Wiki policies etc GazMan7 10:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think that the article should mainly focus on the QAA review (even though it is a 2005 review so older than the UoB after the merger. You can find loads of positive feedback as well, not only "areas for improvement". For instance, this uni is rated excellent when in comes to relationships with employers who would employ graduates. Article is highly POV, should be rewritten completely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.86.48.2 (talk) 18:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC).
i think the new guardian 2007 ranking is interesting for wiki and for Beds, too. it shows that beds raised by few points. next to this, their media (3rd in the UK) and sports department (12th in the UK) seem to be very very good. at least worth checking out.
Especially if you have money and time to waste;) Alfred Vella (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Not a complete waste of time
Luton/Bedfordshire caught the brunt of anti-new university sentiments as it was both last one in in the big creation of universities in 1992/93, and is sited in a town often treated as having a particularly low reputation. Being stuck at the bottom of league tables, it has acted fairly agressively to combat its bad press - but naturally that just makes things worse. The UK HE sector suspects that it has cut corners - something its QAA Audit report shows, as well as its regular citations in the Times Higher. Naturally, if you read their web site, or their prefered version of this article, all is perfectly ok. Corporate PR might not like balance - but it should be aimed for here.
The reference at the top of the article to the cost of buying the Bedford campus of De Montfort university might not be far wrong - De Montfort report that the site had a value of £20.8 million and that it made a historical loss of £4.5 milion on the transfer. Bedfordshire appear not to have published their annual accounts on line (not a crime, but unusual).
--Registrarmike 15:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
The reputation of the University of Luton was nothing to do with its last entry into the system. It had more to do with the fact that staff and students often saw much unethical behaviour of its senior staff. Bullying and fabrication of documents are facts, not just prejudices of those observing! Or has the Orwellian nightmare happened? Alfred Vella 08:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Just to confirm the price of Bedford - The 2005/06 accounts say that the University paid De Montford £15M on 1 August 2006. --Registrarmike 10:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Photos of the university
I think that the photo gallery that is present in the article should be revised. The photoes of the Luton and Bedford campus are done in such an angle that the buildings are almost entirely covered behind the trees. A photo of the Business School and Luton SU should also be included here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.86.48.2 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 26 March 2007
[edit] Current Ranking
According to the article's ref 4 ^ The Times Good University Guide 2007 Top Universities 2007 League Table [1] 108 Luton 14.1 1.8 185.7 23.2 606 229 48.4 41.7 74.8 302 and there is no item under 'Bedfordshire'. Can the appologists for Bedfordshire either give the correct reference or the correct position?
Alfred Vella 06:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Afred, rather than insult people, how about just correct it. The table quoted shows the 108th position, which i have updated. If anyone has the correct reference for the 84/113 figue quoted then update the ranking and use the correct reference in the article.GazMan7 11:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
I have reversed the edit removing rankings in subjects. The Nursing ranking is referenced. I have added reference tags to sport and media. Whilst theses are currently requiring a reference, i suspect they have been added in good faith. The uni is heavily involved in media so it sounds reasonable. It is good practice to add the fact tag where approriate, without of course over-doing it.--GazMan7 09:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
The reference to Nursing ranking does not lead (at least directly) to confirmation - yet another biased post by GazMan
Alfred Vella 11:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
How is it Biased? this is a 3rd party stating the ranking. Therefore verifyable. Everything you post Alfred is biased. If you check the history i reversed the ranking for 84th as the reference was incorrect, (although it has now correctly been referenced) Im sure it upsets you that the Uni is ranked 84th. I think the NHS in Bedford can be used as a reliable source for the nursing rank or do you think they are part of the consipracy as well?GazMan7 11:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Have you looked at the source? On what line does it make the claim? I am not at all upset by its position - though universities lower down might well be! I would certainly, and have advise anyone contemplating going to Bedfordshire, to avoide it like the plague until it acknowledges its doddgy past. I am sure that you went to a reasonable university - or did you? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alfred Vella (talk • contribs) 11:21, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
Alfred Vella 11:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I have checked the references for media etc, its on the guardians current listings. The 4th place on Nursing is quoted by Bedford hospital as well as the uni itself, so is enough to quote on wiki. 84th isnt an impressive score, but the uni should be quoted accurately and fairly.
I didnt go to Luton, so have no reason to appologise for it. The Uni i did go to, which im not sure the relavance of but as you ask, was Leicester which consitently is around position 20 on most of the rankings I have seen. As i have stated before i have no connection with Luton Uni, or Media/Sports science etc, but i feel that the uni should be portrayed fairly. Anyoe who has read through this talk page will know you have an axe to grind. I dont doubt you feel strongly about the subject, yet the university has not (correct me please if i am wrong) been subject to significant adverse findings, it has probably over-egged its acheivements, but that is simply advertising - and not somehting that Luton/Bedfordshire is alone in doing.
Wiki isnt the place to have a personal campaign against the Uni. If i understand correctly you lost your various tribunals etc against Luton. Which to any third party would suggest your cliams were of limited merit. To complain of bias against anyone else strikes me as being rather ironic, does it not? GazMan7 11:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
To give the fuller picture and in line with many other university pages on here i have added the Guardian rankings. This shows position 95 out of 150 institutions listed. Not all of these appear to be universities as such but other higher eductaion institues. GazMan7 13:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I guess that fits in with your wish to promote that second rate university.
Alfred Vella (talk) 16:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Times Education Supplement - University of the year Shortlist
Along with University of Derby, Edge Hill University, Essex University, Exeter University and University of Glamorgan the University of Bedforshire has been nominated for the Times University of the year 2007.
The entry in the shortlist document [1] reads as follows.
BEDFORDSHIRE UNIVERSITY Just over a year ago, the former Luton University and De Montfort University’s Bedford campus combined forces to create Bedfordshire University. It has enjoyed a 41.2 per cent increase in applications for 2007. In its first year, the university also achieved a top score (grade 1) from Ofsted for Initial Teacher Training. Both the Bedford and Luton campuses are undergoing redevelopment, at £34 million and £50 million respectively. Bedford has built an £8 million physical education and sport science centre, a 280-seat theatre, a new meeting and dining area for staff and students and ensuite accommodation for 500 students. The university’s Business School is launching a new suite of “business pods” — small areas designed to allow lecturers to deliver the curriculum to team-based groups of students. Some 79 per cent of the additional income generated from fees in 2006 is currently going back to students in the form of bursaries.
The uni responded on this page on their website http://www.beds.ac.uk/aboutus/thes
--GazMan7 (talk) 09:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
As an unbiased observer I am sure that you would want to update this statement - they did not win!
Alfred Vella (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Redundancies
Alfred, please quote a source before adding in unsubstantiated comments to the University of Bedfordshire entry. The text regarding redundancies has been quoted directly from the THES website, no mention of 'forced' redundancy has been made. 194.80.219.38 (talk) 11:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
How about asking Ebdon - I am told that he might tell the truth. Or ask your boss - less likely of the truth there I guess! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfred Vella (talk • contribs) 12:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Nice to see that the University of Bedfordshire is following on the less than completely honest practices of its predecessor - Luton! Its staff and/or students editing Wikipedia but I guess that is a price that has to be paid! Alfred Vella (talk) 11:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I fail to see how 30 redundancies is encyclopedic? Unless it was part of a major restructuring, in which case its a footnote to the restructuring. I will not remove it as I'm sure you would feel it was in some way biased. What do other editors think? relavant, notable, encyclopdic or not?GazMan7 (talk) 15:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
At best it could be classed as a footnote however, previous redundancies have no mention on the page... 194.80.219.38 (talk) 08:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] PoV issues here Alfred - should your sacking for gross misconduct be included ?
A quick search online reveals the following:
Dr Vella made complaints about reorganisation and cuts in his department throughout the late 1990s. In October 1997, he complained to his faculty dean about a reduction in staff and the withdrawal of technical support. In September 1998, Dr Vella signed off with a stress-related illness. He was on sick leave for more than a year. During this time, he alleges, the university removed him as head of department and bullied him. The university counter-accused Dr Vella of damaging its reputation with public attacks. In May 2000, the university's appeal body rejected Dr Vella's claims that he had been bullied, unfairly removed from his post and that the university had failed to support him. In June, the university's disciplinary committee found Dr Vella guilty of gross misconduct and of not performing his duties properly since his return from sick leave.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=154908§ioncode=26
The entry also notes that the university dropped from 74th place in 2004-05 in The Times Good University Guide to 118th in 2006-07, cites its low ratings for student satisfaction and includes negative comments from Alfred Vella, Luton's former associate dean for computing research and development. This week, the university said some of the comments were libellous. Dr Vella told The Times Higher that he had contributed to the Bedfordshire entry. "I have been contributing to the article on the University of Bedfordshire (and Luton before that) to redress its balance," he said. "Wikipedia is not an advertising medium, and Bedfordshire is still the Luton of old. My motivation is simply the truth." But a Bedfordshire spokeswoman said: "This case is in the hands of our lawyers. The gentleman concerned was sacked from the university for gross misconduct more than six years ago. "He subsequently lost his case at a tribunal and at an appeals tribunal. We find his behaviour and his ongoing campaign against the university and individual members of staff most worrying. He continues to be banned from university premises." Other entries highlight positive quality inspection results and praise Luton's "reputation for excellent teaching".
18 August 2006 http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=204850
The one-man campaign by Bedfordshire University's former associate dean, Alfred Vella, against his former employer shows no sign of letting up. A few months after The Times Higher reported on his less than flattering contributions to the university's entry on online encyclopaedia Wikipedia , it has emerged that Dr Vella has set up a petition on the Downing Street website calling for a public inquiry into the institution, citing unspecified "complaints" about the university. But while a similar petition against road charging on the site prompted almost 2 million signatures, Dr Vella's, at the time of going to press, had attracted nine.
(to be fair i think it is now up to 34) 20 April 2007 Times Higher Education http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=208654
So, made complaints, sacked for gross misconduct, complained some more, unfair dismisal claim, lost claim, feel upset, 8 years on still moaning. Get over it.--GazMan7 (talk) 15:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Do hide behind your anonymity! I am proud that I was sacked by Luton for blowing the whistle! It’s a shame that you are not honest enough to admit your bias! The Bedfordshire page has had lots of editing by people at Bedfordshire but of course your too biased (or maybe just too thick) to be even handed.
The bully who went on to bully people in New Zealand and insiders tell me that the bullying at Bedfordshire is still going on – but what would you care?
Alfred Vella (talk) 21:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Alfred, as has been mentioned many times previously this is not the place to wage your war against the university. Wikipedia is supposed to be a reliable online encyclopedia not a place for biased, and from the sounds of things, third party facts. It has been almost 8 years since you were asked to leave the university surely you will admit that things can't be the same as your perception after that amount of time? Kriscollins (talk) 08:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Of course I am happy to let the world know what happened at Luton. I was offered money to go quietly but chose instead to decline and to continue the battle against the corruption and bullying that was their and I am told still continues to this day. It is a shame that there are so many dishonest people around to lend their backing to what is going on there. Of course as one church minister once told me 'it will all come out in the wash'. That Bedfordshire relies on its staff or students to edit Wikipedia anonymously indicates just how honest they are!
Kriscollins how much are they paying you? Is it worth it? Alfred Vella (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
ps Does Ebdon approve of your editing this page - or is he happy as long as he does not know? Why not ask Maple and Keech how they got their headships at Luton?
Alfred Vella (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Alfred, I fear we may be straying into familiar ground again, speculation, un-substantiated claims, 8 year old views, etc... This is an encyclopedic entry regarding the University of Bedfordshire, as such your personal views are not required.
Kriscollins (talk) 11:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
and lots of advertising hype put up by employees who are too dishonest ! to admit it Alfred Vella (talk) 08:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Alfred, there's nothing to admit, there is no conspiracy and like many other people who have tried to reason with you, and have realised you can't be reasoned with, I am also getting bored of repeating the same points over and over again... You have already had 4 Vandalism warnings as well as a 24 hour block on editing for persistent revertion of legitimate edits. This is an encyclopedic entry regarding the University of Bedfordshire, please do not treat it as a soap box for your personal views. Kriscollins (talk) 08:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
- Alfred, please read the following
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOAP#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox
- GazMan7 (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
