There is an announcement today that universities will be allowed to raise fees if they improve teaching. What a surprise. What does that mean? Improve teaching? I would suggest more contact hours with the students might help?

My daughter goes to an excellent university and is paying 9K a year like everyone else, but for only FIVE HOURS a week in lectures and an additional tutorial every six weeks with four people in. She has 22 weeks of the year at university (not including reading weeks) which she has worked out means that she is paying £82 an hour for being taught by one lecturer in a room of 200. Which means that each lecture (assuming everyone is paying the same £9K) pulls in £16,363 per session.


The new fee structure will be set at four levels, with universities having to demonstrate evidence of excellent teaching in order to be allowed to charge the most, while universities whose standards have dropped could be forced to cut fees. There is to be a new regulator, the Office for Students, who would oversee teaching quality assessments and have the authority to open new private universities and close down failing ones.

With the money they are receiving at the moment you would expect that they would have already been upping their game considerably. I am all for university life and the time and space it gives you to learn, but don’t take the piss. I assume it’s the pure science students that will benefit with more expensive equipment being invested in – but I do think it needs to be shared equally across all the mediums.

  1. Hmmm. Students might be attracted to the cheaper (ie. not so good) universities. Then what happens? Mind you, it’s like that over here. The Ivy Leagues are often considerably more expensive than the second and third tier universities but it doesn’t seem to impact application numbers. Slippery slope UK. I’m telling ya.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.