The Beaver (TB): Do you think that LSE does a good job at educating and stimulating its students?
Oliver Creed (OC): Yes. But it can always do a better job. It’s a renowned university, but there’s room to improve. The LSE shouldn’t rely on its reputation.
TB: What is the biggest blind spot in LSE’s teaching quality?
OC: I think that the single biggest problem is the lack of standardisation. For instance, if you are a joint honours student and you are balancing two departments with one being big and the other small, you can get a vastly different experience to single-honours students. I was a joint honours student in my first year and changed to a single honour in my second year, so I had both experiences enabling me to compare. My relationship with my teachers in the government department was completely different from that with my social policy teachers. The fact that teaching is not standardised is a blind spot. To fix this I would recommend having academic advisors from both departments for students so that they can get a more personal experience from both departments.
TB: How much influence do you think that your role as Education Officer can realistically expect in advocating policy changes in LSE?
OC: I think it’s very influential. Ultimately, we pay a lot of money on education. Whilst we have a marketised education system where we pay a potentially huge amount of money depending on fees. The Union becomes a mediator between the university and students as consumers. Students are consumers when they are paying this much. So the education officer is that bridge.
TB: What role do you think that the education officer will have in the LSE’s 2030 strategy?
OC: I think firstly it’s about having sustainable education, education that is going to be relevant by 2030. I think that departments are already being quite receptive to that. The world is changing very fast, and we need to be sure that the courses offered here that will remain competitive. This is happening to a certain extent, by for example adding more literature courses and in social policy adding a larger international context in the curriculum.
I want to push for a more inclusive curriculum. Whilst we consider that we have incredible academics, sometimes the global south is underrepresented. That kind of inclusivity in the curriculum will be crucial for the next ten years
TB: Liberation campaigns.
OC: I think that secure funding for things like Pride and Black History Month is crucial. Martha has done a good job getting the funding, now we need to secure it for the future, which links back to the 2030 strategy. We need to celebrate the incredibly diverse community we have at LSE.
TB: How should the SU – and the Education Officer in particular – react to academics with views that are considered controversial by students?
OC: This is an interesting thing about academia. We are here to be taught, and that’s valuable, yet professors need to be mindful of their students. So, if an academic is talking about abortion, and that is considered controversial, I would step in with management and ask an academic to consider that some students may be triggered by this sort of teaching.
