OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING ANNOUNCES VALUE-FOR-MONEY REVIEW
Was your university degree worth £9,000 a year?
The Office of Fair Trading has announced it will examine how universities in England compete for undergraduates, whether degree courses meet students’ expectations and whether any consumer laws are currently being breached in the way that university is sold to young people today.
It is believed that that researchers are particularly interested in how English universities compete, students’ experiences of the current system – and the quality of the degree courses being sold. The intervention follows a near tripling of tuition fees in England to a maximum of £9,000 a year combined with a relaxing of controls on the number of students each university can recruit.
Ministers have repeatedly claimed that the system is designed to create more of a marketplace within the higher education system and allow institutions to compete on quality. But there are concerns that students are failing to fully understand the difference between courses — leaving some feeling “short-changed”. Earlier this year, a study by Which? and the Higher Education Policy Institute found that the average student works for just 30 hours a week — including private study — which is 25 per cent less than the recommended total. Many universities claim students should expect higher education study to be more independent than school – but if that is the case it raises the question: What are you paying for exactly?
Figures showed that physics students can receive anything between 11 and 25 hours’ tuition each week, with contact time for social studies students ranging from nine to 16 hours. The move follows claims from Bahram Bekhradnia, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, that students in Britain currently receive less teaching than those in other European countries. He said the country was “short-changing our students in this respect”.
Sonia Sodha, head of public services at Which?, said:
“Our comparisons with previous decades show that today’s students are working for fewer hours, are set less work and are receiving less detailed feedback.
“With increased tuition fees, and a greater choice of universities and courses than ever before, it’s essential that students can access better information about the academic experience on offer, so they can see whether they are getting value for money.”
The investigation could lead to the publication of new guidance to universities or warnings to individual institutions about possible breaches of consumer law. The OFT may also issue fresh advice to students about navigating the applications process. Clive Maxwell, OFT chief executive, said:
“Universities in England enjoy an enviable reputation across the world. We want to ensure that choice and competition between universities play a positive role in underpinning their success in future, and encourage students, universities, employers and others to respond to our call for information.”
Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said:
“The higher education system in England has undergone major changes over the last few years, so it is understandable that the OFT might wish to gather information on how the system is functioning and whether it is working in the interests of students, as intended.”
Graduate Fog welcomes research into this important subject as it is vital that students’ consumer rights are protected. Deciding to go to university is a major financial commitment. Young people must have total confidence that if they are paying tens of thousands of pounds to study at university, it is guaranteed to be a top-quality learning experience.
*WHAT WILL THE REVIEW FIND?
Was your degree course good value for money? What did you pay – and how many hours of teaching were you given? Should you expect lectures and tutorials – or is the whole point of university that you teach yourself? Are universities guilty of ripping off their students?
Quite a few in the first year. Hardly any in second year and all modules had ended by easter meaning a wasted term renting our student house.
NO lectures in the 3rd year other than 5 15 minute dissertation lectures as we were supposed to be building our portfolio (creative advertising course).
Value for money I think not. I just stuck it out because dropping it all and starting again half way through year 2 was unfeasible.
In my experience at least 50% of the lecturers/tutors are there primarily for their own research – regarding both teaching and students as an annoying interruption. This has always been the case but now that students are having to pay it is far less acceptable!
@Barry- I attended a Russell Group University and this was exactly my perception of the lecturers’ attitude towards students. During the final year of my course, we only received 2 hours tuition per week for much of the year! Although I do not owe £9000 a year for the ‘privilege’ of studying there (unlike today’s students) I still regard it as a bit of a con.
30 hours a week?! My course only had 8 contact hours, and in the summer term we had no lectures, just exams. Does make you wonder what all that money is paying for…
The answer to the title of this article ‘Are universities guilty of ripping off their students?’ is yes.
As a new full-time mature undergraduate in 2005, I believe £3000 was a fair price or fee. However, I don’t believe £8000 or £9000 is value for money for mature students.
There should be a separate Humanities or Science undergraduate course just for mature students, whose minds are already developed close to Masters level when they arrive at university. I do not mean that mature people are superior to younger people and there should be integration at some level, but not all the time, it’s just normal intellectual development.
There was no course deviation to take into account that about one-third of individuals on my History course were mature students of average age of about 30.
In my first lecture, the lecturer delivered the standard version on a topic. However, he left out an opposing version because it would be considered too complex for young minds to take in. I was talked down to by the lecturer because it didn’t fit into what he was trying to deliver for young minds. This was to be the pattern for the remaining three years.
In fact, I think the aim was to teach to the young students and largely ignore the mature students, especially when they wandered away from the rigid path. Yet, a mature student will not generally follow a set path. I found myself coasting along half the time and I didn’t look forward to lectures. The classes were too big with 20 or so people, which made discussion cumbersome in my opinion.
Definitely, universities are ripping off mature students, who form a significant percentage of undergraduates.
There was no reason for the government to increase the tuition fee burden on students. Universities already received £9000 per year or more from the government to cover their costs, and they are never going to recoup the money from student loans because the majority of graduates will never earn enough to make significant repayments. Graduates will be needlessly in debt.
@moloko
That is probably about right. However, they will probably privatise the debt to get some money back and outsource the unpleasant business of recovering the money to someone else. It’s happened already for pre-higher fee debt:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25084744