Benjamin Hourigan

In response to the email I sent to Postgraduate Review (posted yesterday), Michelle Smith sent me some detailed and thoughtful responses. Michelle has kindly given me permission to reproduce her words (unedited) here, so that her point of view can be represented. Please note that these are Michelle’s words, and they do not represent the position of UMPA as a whole. Tomorrow: More from me…

Michelle Smith responds

I am the UMPA Publications Officer and am responsible for the content of Postgraduate Review, as directed by the Publications Committee of the Association (made up of a number of postgraduates inside and outside UMPA who give suggestions and directions for content). Vyvyan Cayley is a staff member who copy edits the publication for accuracy, hence why I am responding to you instead of her.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to our edition. Ultimately UMPA’s existence and the future of the publications we produce is under threat as a result of proposed VSU legislation. While I understand that some students hold the view that they do not support compulsory student unionism (although no one is forced to be a member of UMPA under Victorian law), UMPA Council (made up of 17 students elected freely and fairly by over 1000 postgraduates via the Victorian Electoral Commission) has decided that we will seek to fight VSU because it will jeopardise the existence of the Association which we represent. It is just not logical that we would support the decimation of the services that we believe and know to be helping many postgraduates in need.

I am following the direction set out by UMPA’s Council, Research and Campaigns Committee and Publications Committee in reminding students that this publication will be very difficult to fund next year. If you believe that editions such as this one which included a number of articles on women’s issues are a misdirection of student funds, then you are entirely entitled to feel justified that VSU will ensure your money is not used for publications/events you do not support. Please note, though, that yours is the only such complaint we have received from the over 10 000 postgraduate students who receive this mail out.

I have looked after PGR for the past two and a half years and have really tried to focus the magazine on practical helpful advice for postgraduates rather than focusing on generalist articles that may simply be written by postgraduates. In response to feedback received, it seems most postgraduates are happy with this more practical focus of PGR. The fact that we have devoted one edition to women’s issues (as well as providing regular content such as higher education news, book reviews, relevant concerns such as plagiarism) in ten years of this publication hardly seems like a scourge of rampant Leftism.

Our Council, in fact, could not be described in this way at all, and is primarily (or almost exclusively) made up of students who have had no previous association with student politics, and who are not members of a political parties. We actually have a very large proportion of international students on our Council who are there simply because they want to contribute to bettering services and support for themselves and their fellow international students. They are consequently very worried about what will happen to the support they rely on from UMPA should VSU come in, and are not interested in advocating a left or right standpoint.

In this year of impending VSU legislation UMPA has a line item of a mere $2000 of its budget of over $1 million set aside for the campaign against VSU. Our focus has been upon delivering support, services and representation that is of direct benefit to students. The addition of the banner on the edition of Postgraduate Review you refer to did not cost any extra money, and a similar slogan has been used on a back cover of PGR in 2003.

It seems then that your primary concern is with the theming of the edition on women’s issues. We have had previous editions that have focused on international student issues, mature age students, coursework students and the upcoming edition is on “getting by” regarding employment and managing your degree psychologically. We try to cover in each edition issues as they relate to all students and also focus on issues that groups of students may face. We unfortunately do not have a women’s officer this year and I received many suggestions that including a number of articles on this subject in PGR may do well to redress the situation for the year. The article on the Women’s March Meet is always included each year, so really there were only three other additional articles included on mature age women postgrads, feminism today (at the request of the Publications Committee who were by no means Leftist, but interested to know what the state of feminism was today) and a profile of a woman studying in an area without many other women (we would normally run a profile of a student anyway). The article on parenting written by the Language and Learning Skills Unit was not specifically targeted at women, but intended as a help to all postgraduates managing work, study and raising their families- not all postgraduates are full-time research students in their twenties.

UMPA is an open and accountable organisation and you are entirely welcome to contribute to the direction of PGR via joining the Publications Committee or running for UMPA Council (you will find the election materials in the July edition of PGR). I believe if you were to participate in the running of UMPA you would see that there is no Leftist drum beating just people trying to work to make life easier for postgraduates. That said, it is not going to be possible to create a publication that is perfect for every postgraduate given they range from 23 years old to 80 years old, can be rich or poor, full-time research students or professionals doing an MBA at night, but we do try to meet the needs of as many of them as possible.

As for the existence of a letters page, because of the relatively non-contentious nature of our publications we have barely received any letters in my term running PGR - in fact, we received just one email concerning an election article that gave the policies of every political party in relation to higher education issues. After letting us know his concerns, I believe the student was happy just to have spoken with us rather than seeking publication of the letter.

Having worked at UMPA for over two years now and knowing what the organisation faces I am personally very upset and worried about the support and services postgraduates will lose next year. Nevertheless, I respect your position on VSU and will not argue with you on that matter. I am, however, certain that this edition of PGR reflects what students and UMPA’s committee structure directed me to do. Like our political leaders’ decisions, they may not please all of the people all of the time.

Please do suggest any articles that you would like to see in future editions and I will be most willing to bring them to the Publications Committee.

Best wishes,

Michelle