Current Proposed Policies

What are the current proposed policies?

This page lists the Policy Proposals going forward to the next Student Panel (Thursday 14th of November 2024). Please note that we undergo a review process with the proposers before the panels and so these are liable to change:

1. Should the LSESU enable students to review their marked exam papers? 

ISSUE:
Currently, students are not able to review their marked exam papers and can only gauge their performance based on a numerical score. Without a way to see where we went wrong in an exam, we miss out on important learning opportunities and cannot truly improve. Therefore, this Policy Proposal advocates for the LSE SU to lobby the school to allow students to review their marked exam papers.  

The lack of access to graded exam papers concerns all students at the LSE, as it is universal practice at the school. This limits students’ ability to understand their mistakes and grow academically. Without seeing our marked papers, we are often left in the dark about how our work was evaluated, making it difficult to refine exam techniques and address knowledge gaps. If students feel their grade does not represent their performance accurately, such lack of transparency in the exam feedback system can reduce students’ confidence and contribute to increased anxiety about assessments. 

Allowing access to marked exam papers would also benefit students facing resits, as they would be able to see exactly where they lost points and hence know how to prepare better for the second attempt at the exam. When it comes to students facing deferred studies, it would also positively affect them if they were able to review their marked papers. In this way, they could also benefit from learning opportunities and improve in subsequent years of study.

Solution:

The LSE SU should lobby the school to implement a policy that allows students to view their marked exam papers. The LSE SU could engage with various academic departments and the university’s senior leadership to highlight the benefits of transparency in assessment.  

One potential solution is to provide timely access to graded papers upon a student’s request. In this way, access would be given in a controlled and structured way, making it easier for the school to navigate the process. 

2. Should the LSESU advocate for LSE to track diversity criteria related to socio-economic and non-academic backgrounds?

Issue:

Incomplete Diversity Tracking: LSE’s commitment to diversity and inclusion is currently limited by its focus on nationality, without systematic tracking of socio-economic status or educational background. The university tracks and publishes student data on nationality, age, ethnicity, disability, gender identity (same as birth), religion, sex, and sexual orientation. This data is made available through its annual report on Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). During discussions with the administration, it was confirmed that LSE does not collect data on socio-economic status or educational background, which are crucial for a full picture of student diversity.  

Underrepresentation and Lack of Support: Students from low-income or non-academic backgrounds face distinct challenges, such as social isolation or financial strain, yet LSE’s policies are not tailored to address these barriers and overlook the needs of these students. The data gap limits LSE’s ability to provide targeted resources or support systems for students from these backgrounds.  

Transparency and Accountability: LSE cannot fully assess its diversity goals or develop inclusive policies if it lacks critical information on the socio-economic diversity of its community.  

Solution:

1. Lobby for Expanded Data Collection: LSESU should lobby the university to expand optional data collection on students’ socio-economic status, including factors like household income and first-generation university status. The SU should also advocate for tracking non-traditional educational backgrounds, such as vocational training or community college transfers. This expanded data collection would help ensure that the LSE has a more comprehensive understanding of its diverse student body. 

2. Advocate for Increased Transparency: LSESU should push for the publication of an annual diversity report for the LSE community, which includes anonymized, aggregated data on socio-economic and educational backgrounds. The SU should encourage the LSE to use the findings to inform new policies and targeted support - such as mentoring and university guidance programs, or additional mental health resources - for students from diverse backgrounds. 

3. Lobby for Regular Review and Improvement: LSESU should advocate for an annual review of the data collection process to refine the criteria and respond to the evolving needs of students. The SU should call for student and staff feedback to be solicited during the review process to ensure that the data is used effectively in closing gaps in support and fostering a truly inclusive community at the LSE. 

3. Should the LSESU install a centre feed tissue dispenser and bin in the men’s Islamic washroom (ablution room) in the Faith Centre, SU 2? 

Issue: 

 In accordance with the Islamic faith, men and women must pray five times a day. They are required to perform ablution (i.e rinsing themselves with water) in order to purify themselves and their intentions, in preparation to pray.  

This is done in the washrooms installed in the Faith Centre, SU 2, which the ISoc and wider community is extremely grateful for having  

Although men and women are able to wash themselves, there are no facilities installed for them to dry themselves after washing, which is a big issue  

This can lead to people having wet feet or limbs, which can cause health issues for people and hygiene issues for the wider community, leading to damp floors and areas in and around the prayer rooms.  

Solution:

1. LSESU to lobby the Faith Centre to install a centre feed tissue dispenser in the men’s and women’s ablution rooms in SU 2. 

2. LSESU to lobby the Faith Centre to install bins to dispose of tissues after they are used  

3. LSESU to lobby the Faith Centre to provide a supply of tissues that can be used in the dispenser (can be purchased in bulk for a relatively low cost, given the problem that it offsets). 

 

 

If you would like to oppose any of the above proposals, or you would like to speak (or recommend someone to speak) at the Student Panel as an expert or person with lived experience, please get in touch at su.democracy@lse.ac.uk

If you would like to hear the discussions surrounding whether the above policies are approved, please come along to our next Student Panels as an observer!

Find out more about the Policy Proposal and Student Panel process here.