University pays less than £4.50 per student for ELE service

Image credit: Niklas Rahmel

The University of Exeter currently pays less than £4.50 per student for ELE (Exeter Learning Environment), the portal via which its students access their coursework.

Exeposé has been told by the University that it pays “slightly under £80k per annum” for the portal hosted by the University of London Computer Centre (ULCC). Most students at the University currently pay at least £9,000 in tuition fees each academic year.

ELE costs have increased slightly in recent years following investment in additional file storage to support the growth in online courses. This combined with the acquisition of 24/7 support from The University of London Computer Centre has led to the current yearly costs of around £75,000 per annum. The University has stated that: “this is one of the student systems we make the most significant investment in annually”.

The University of London Computer Centre currently holds among its clients the University of York and the Royal Veterinary College of London, providing higher education support for both institutions. One senior developer supports ELE, with others providing cover, while a team from Education and Quality Enhancement also support it, instructing learning technologists in the Colleges.

Following investment in April 2012, ELE is available at all hours for students, with help from the Exeter IT Out of Hours 24/7 support service. The University has stated that since making these investments “the impact (in terms of time lost when ELE has been down) has been drastically reduced”.

The University also employ the MyExeter portal for students. The project started in 2006 with delivery in 2007, with the primary setup cost for the portal being staff costs. Existing continued costs are the maintenance of the IT infrastructure that sustains it and the cost of staff, which comprises of two senior developers who are supported by other colleagues. According to the University, during the last two years substantial investment has revised and upgraded the portal improving its reliability and resilience.

The University of Exeter’s expenditure on online learning for students can be said to be comparably lower than its rival universities. The University of Bath, for example, spends £126,000 per annum on staffing costs and technical support, as well as £10,000 per annum on servers for hosting the service. Bath has employed three full time staff to support the Moodle platform. Although the exact costs of hosting were unavailable, Durham University revealed in an FOI request that they had spent between £100,000-£200,000 on license renewal alone for its ‘Blackboard’ student service in 2010. Brunel University also estimates their costs for their own VLE, ‘Blackboard Learn’, to be £300,000, in a contract that expires in August 2015.

The University are currently in the process of completing a new MyExeter project, due for completion by September 2014. Another longer term ELE project is also underway. The Guild has been heavily involved in consultation on the new projects, with Guild President Hannah Barton recently visiting developers in London.

The Guild is always consulted on projects of this nature, with attendance of key project board meetings and one to one meetings with key staff. The MyExeter project is designed as a shift towards students being a central part of the project development, in an IT development that has not been seen previously.

A University spokesman said: “The University’s IT vision, and IT investment programme running over the current five years has a multi-million pound budget, including a £0.31 million investment in the student portal, to enable more people-to-people interaction and seamless access to services.

At Exeter the VLE is based on Moodle which is very different to Blackboard and is more cost-effective for us, representing better value for money and greater flexibility which is a good thing for our students. Many universities are now moving to Moodle”.

Alex Louch, VP Academic Affairs, said: “I’m very excited that students are co-leading on a project of such importance to the future of IT at the University, and I think this reflects the strong partnership that exists between the Students’ Guild and the University”.

Clara Plackett, a third year English student, said: “I’m glad that there is a new MyExeter project in the pipeline. MyExeter and ELE are currently generally consistent in themselves, but any improvements are always welcome”.

Louis Dore, News Editor

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

National student news: Call for higher tuition fees for elite universities and decline in language degrees

Nick Clegg pledges to vote against any tuition increase fee increase during the last election. Image credit: Labour

Oxford University’s vice-chancellor has called for a new system allowing top universities to charge higher tuition fees than those providing an inferior education.

Professor Andrew Hamilton claimed in an annual speech that each university should be able to charge fees “aligned with what it offers”, in order to reflect the variation in standards of education among British universities.

Hamilton stated: “Given the great diversity of the institutions in our higher education system, the notion of different universities charging significantly different amounts doesn’t feel inherently unnatural. It is the current situation that seems out of kilter”.

He also claimed that such increases in fees should not prevent students accessing top universities, providing the correct financial support is available.

Hamilton called for a new system that would help ease the £70m annual shortfall which, he said, could potentially threaten Oxford’s world-class education.

Defending the proposal, and the financial burden increased student loans would place on the public, Hamilton argued it would be a sound investment, stating: “so far as Oxford is concerned, all the evidence indicates that the quality of the education a student receives here is overwhelmingly his or her best investment for their future.”

***

The number of universities offering specialist modern language degrees has decreased rapidly in recent years, according to analysis conducted by Guardian Education.

Despite the Confederation of British Industry branding lack of linguistic ability a “tax on UK trade”, 24 universities have removed specialist modern language degrees (single honours, or joint honours with another language) from their programmes over the past six years. Anglia Ruskin and Wolverhampton are amongst 11 universities to have stopped offering language courses completely, whilst 13 others, including Goldsmiths and Sheffield Hallam, now only offer modern languages when combined with another subject.

Declining student numbers are regarded as a main reason for the extensive closures of language departments, which due to relatively high staffing levels are often more expensive to run when compared with other subjects. The Higher Education Funding Council for England recently pledged an extra £3.1m in funding to aid struggling language departments.

Hannah Butler, News Team

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

Ben Bradshaw: Popular, not Populist

President of Exeter Labour Students Daniel Richards responds to Chris Carter’s article in Exeposé Comment which condemned Ben Bradshaw MP as “unrealistic and populist”.

I’m afraid I have to disagree with the recent article on Ben Bradshaw which criticised him for being populist and unrealistic and I must also disagree with the implicit elitism that appeared to be inherent in the argument made and his glorification of Conservative ‘youth’ policy.

“Ben is a committed politician, who works tirelessly for Exeter and his constituents and to simply attack his arguments as empty words undermines the great deal of good he has done for this city.”
Image credits: Niklas Rahmel.

Firstly it is claimed that no realistic solutions are offered by the Labour party who he states ‘created the recession’ and ‘made ridiculous promises to the electorate’ regarding education.

Labour’s higher education policy is clear. We would reduce fees to £6000 and we would do so for one reason. Stephen Twigg, the now ex-shadow education secretary points out correctly that education was one of the areas with the biggest “indefensible inequalities”. £9000 tuition does not only deter those who  think of university as 3 years of drinking and partying, as the article would have you believe, but actually makes university education financially elitist and increasingly difficult for poorer students to enter into.

Universities should be about academic excellence and not the size of your wallet and Labour realises this. The other claims about the Labour party, that they were ‘responsible for the recession,’ are simply factually untrue.

Secondly, increasing the number of students with university education would not devalue your degree. It will give more students and young people greater opportunities and make them more competitive in the global employment market.

Higher education spending has been increasing in recent years in order to keep UK universities competitive on a global scale and provide qualifications for as many young people as possible. It is simply unfair to demonise them for being out of work if there is an active push to discourage them from doing anything about it due to fears of ‘over-education.’

When the author discusses the necessity of a ‘carrot and stick’ approach to open up opportunities for young people and simultaneously force them into work, he is making rash assumptions about the unemployed which simply do not match up with the realities of the situation. I have done unpaid internships, as have many of my friends, in a desperate bid to make myself as employable as physically possible and it is a myth that most young people will not take jobs that are ‘beneath them.’

It is this point that fundamentally highlights the hypocrisy of the argument made. The article adamantly rejects the need to increase the number of people within higher education and further qualify our workforce whilst simultaneously attacking them for being unqualified and unable to find work. His argument is also the argument of the Conservative Party at this time, which has pledged to remove benefits from under 25’s to force them into work.

The statement by David Cameron in recent months that attacked the 1 million young people who were ‘not in education, employment or training’ and his attempts to tackle the issue perfectly summarise what is wrong with his party. They have closed off education to those who cannot afford high tuition fees, they have failed to properly invest in apprenticeships and paid internships and they demonise the unemployed youth, you are forced either into unpaid work, hoping eventually for a paycheck or to remain unemployed. They haven’t the money for training or experience needed to get that elusive paid job and are endlessly attacked for their laziness and vilified as scroungers.

I cannot see where the carrot in this carrot and stick method really is, as the red tape referred to in the article defends the rights of young people to be paid properly for the work they do and taking this away is surely not an incentive to get young people into work.

Finally, I feel it is necessary to defend Ben Bradshaw. Ben is a committed politician, who works tirelessly for Exeter and his constituents and to simply attack his arguments as empty words undermines the great deal of good he has done for this city. The claims that he is populist fail to see the whole picture. Ben Bradshaw is very popular in this constituency because his approach has had such a positive impact in this community. I fail to see why a man who supports his convictions, fights for a fairer education system and wishes to raise up young peoples aspirations rather that shutting the door on them has any reason to apologise for this.

Daniel Richards

Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

EXCLUSIVE: Average contact hour worth nearly £40 at Exeter

Students will “lose an average of £860 per year in tuition, if they miss one lecture every week.” Image credit: maclufus

The average Exeter student pays £37.40 for one hour of tuition, a Freedom of Information request submitted by Exeposé has revealed.

But whilst 60 minutes of education costs £18.29 for medical students, some are paying over £55 for the same privilege, in other disciplines.

Philosophy, Politics and Theology & Religious studies are the most expensive courses, with History, English, Psychology and Classics also breaking the £50 an hour mark.

The figures will raise further questions about the value for money in a degree and the University’s efforts to provide an education worth £9,000 a year.

Second year Geography student James Beaney is sceptical about the recent tripling of tuition fees, arguing that University should be free and “not reserved for the alumnus of select public schools.”

“These statistics just highlight how students’ primary role at University is not to learn but to provide money for the overall running of the system.”

“I don’t think ‘cheaper’ BSC courses are a problem though – it’s important not to put students off studying science degrees,” he added.

That disparity between what students in some disciplines pay compared to others is cause for frustration amongst some undergraduates though, with BA subjects heading the list of most expensive courses per hour, despite the fact that on average BSC graduates go on to earn more.

History and Politics student Lauren Parrott said: “When you consider that BA students require less lab time and equipment, but are still expected to pay the same – or even more – for degrees that generally provide less opportunities in the jobs market, it does seem very unfair.”

A University spokesman attacked the statistics, arguing that “the figures are flawed, because they ignore the other costs of education: libraries, careers service, IT etc.”

He added: “Contact hours vary because teaching methods vary between different subject areas. What is right for one subject isn’t necessarily right for others.”

University representatives have been conscious of providing greater value for money since tuition fees rose, with minimum contact hours for first year students now being enforced, alongside heavy investment in facilities and the introduction of Opportunities Week last year.

But many will feel this has little impact on the value of their degree, which currently stands at a level that sees students lose an average of £860 per year in tuition, if they miss one lecture every week.

The statistics were calculated by dividing the number of contact hours per subject by the £9,000 tuition fees. This takes into account “the average proportion of time spent in scheduled learning and teaching,” with third years having less contact time than second years and significantly less than first years.

A detailed list of the cost of contact hours per subject is available below.

Harrison Jones, Online News Editor

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

Click to enlarge

Universities competing for the best students with incentives

Image credit: vFrosteryd

In an attempt to fill university places this term, institutions across the country are offering cash incentives, laptops and iPads to attract prospective students.

University admission rules across the country have been affected by government reforms, which scrap the limit on how many students with AAB grades and above that each university can accept. As a result, it is possible for institutions to recruit unrestricted numbers of students.

The reform particularly effects lower-ranking institutions, due to leading universities obtaining higher quantities of students. Reportedly, at least sixty middle and lower ranking universities in England (according to The Sunday Times league table) have started to work on attracting students through more innovative initiatives.

Goldsmiths College has one of the more generous incentives, offering course fee waivers to the ten highest-scoring students from Lewisham, saving each student £27,000 in tuition fees. Incentives are also being offered to students with lower grades; the Newman University of Birmingham is offering a £10,000 grant to students with a minimum of BBB on some courses.

Many of the offered packages include additional non-cash incentives. Surrey University will give a free membership to Surrey Sports Park health centre alongside £3,000 to successful applicants with A level grades of A*AA or higher. Newcastle offer to all AAB students £2,000 per year and a laptop.

But despite The University of Exeter recruiting 600 extra students this year, a University spokesperson revealed that no such offers were made to prospective students. “Applications are at a record level and no incentives were needed for 2013 entrees,” they said.

Dannee McGuire, News Team

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

What is a degree worth?

Image credits: bobaliciouslondon

Fran Lowe discusses the increase in tuition fees to £9,000 a year, analysing whether it was necessary and the position it places students in today.

In December 2010, the government famously made the decision to increase university tuition fees to £9,000 a year. With effect from September 2012, the first batch of Freshers paying the trebled rate has now completed its first year.

At the time, it was one of the most headline-grabbing and controversial issues of British politics: 50,000 students, including myself, took to the streets of London in November of that year to protest. What’s more, the issue caused disputes within the House of Commons itself, with 21 Liberal Democrats and 6 Conservatives rebelling and voting against the motion while others abstained, meaning that the Tory majority was reduced from 83 to a measly 21.

Back then the tuition fee raise was highly contentious, and huge numbers of voters still have not forgiven the Liberal Democrats for failing to fulfil their election promise to vote against it. The issue is still hotly debated and controversial three years on, especially now we are in a position to look back on the last year’s tuition and ask the question: was it really worth nine grand?

At the time, the increase of fees to £9,000 was justified as necessary to help universities sustain their finances, and this does seem reasonable: the price of everything is, as we all know, constantly increasing, and if British universities are to remain competitive on the world stage, they need the money to continue their ground-breaking research and teaching. What is debatable is how much of this funding should come from the government, and how much of it we should provide ourselves.

The way the loans are paid back was also changed: for Freshers paying £9,000, you don’t start repaying until you are earning £21,000 a year, and even then it’s such a small amount that you really won’t miss it from your pay-packet. What this means is that in reality, the chances of ever actually paying off our debts are depressingly slender. However, never actually seeing the money makes the whole thing a lot easier to handle: it is not as though we could have spent it on anything else.

But even that could be subject to yet more change: there is talk of moving the pay-back threshold to as low as £18,000 a year. The government’s reason for this suggestion is that, unsurprisingly, under the current system an estimated forty per cent of the money lent to students will never be paid back. So, by getting graduates paying earlier, hundreds of millions can be saved. Bad news for us students?

There is still hope, as the chances of this making it through Parliament aren’t great: the Liberal Democrats are determined to reject it, largely due to still having egg on their faces from the tuition fee raise. With new policies every year and u-turns to be seen everywhere it begs the question –does anyone really know what they are doing?

The rise to £9,000 was also meant to strike a balance between the need for extra funding and allowing poorer students to still be able to go to university, and indeed universities were only allowed to charge the top price if they made a huge effort to be more inclusive and accessible. A year in, we can now see how this has worked in practice: looking at Exeter University, has there really been a noticeable change in the student demographic? It seems that in reality, universities are charging the full price without too much effort to be more inclusive or make themselves more appealing to those who at present might feel alienated by the sky-high fees.

It remains true, however, that something did have to be done about tuition fees, as they couldn’t remain so low forever. Ed Miliband admits that a return to lower fees would be unlikely should Labour take office at the next election. Maybe it was the way the government went about it, by trebling the fees in one hit rather than gradually increasing them over a number of years that makes nine thousand pounds such a difficult pill to swallow. There is clearly no denying that this is a seriously difficult topic for any government to handle, and whatever they do there will always be opposition.

Perhaps, then, we ought to look to other nations for inspiration. In the US, fees are unashamedly high. The University of Princeton website admits that it is ‘costly’, an understatement when you learn that a year’s tuition will cost just over $40,000 (that’s about £26,000). Suddenly £9,000 a year seems reasonable, and I am left wondering what I spend so much of my time complaining about.

But in Germany, you will find fees much cheaper. Although the prices vary between states, they are significantly lower than ours, ranging from 100 to 2000 Euros a year. A year at Universität Heidelberg will cost €126.50, which is currently about £108. German fees make £9,000 seem unnecessarily expensive, although it does seem too good to be true that you can buy a year at university for little more than the price of a Jack Wills gilet.

What is perhaps most interesting is the Australian model: the University of Melbourne, for example, has a three-tiered charging system, depending on your subject. This basically means that humanities and arts students pay the least, with medics and lawyers paying almost twice more. Although most students study a combination of different subjects under the Australian system, this does seem to mean that you really are getting what you pay for in terms of contact time and equipment.

Perhaps this subject tiered system is something we could introduce in the UK? As an English student myself, I get roughly ten hours contact time a week, which works out at over £60 an hour. As far as equipment goes, we are lucky to see a free lecture hand-out. Contrast that to, say, the Engineers: with about three times the contact time and more fancy equipment than you can shake a stick at, it becomes fairly clear that who is getting value for money, and who is subsidising someone else.

However, introducing such a system would come with the huge risk of discouraging students from taking on the more expensive courses. It may mean that we could find ourselves, in ten years’ time, in a country overrun with linguists and literature boffs, but crying out for doctors.

Arguably this comes down to a question of how much you love your subject. If you have had a burning desire to be a doctor all your life, then no matter what the fees, you will likely pay to do a medicine degree. Personally, the idea of spending three years of my life chatting about literature makes me very happy, so I don’t mind too much that I’m in about £14,000 of debt before I’ve even turned nineteen. Essentially, if your subject is right for you, it is worth whatever they want from you.

Fran Lowe

Why can’t students be bothered to vote?

After a staggeringly low voter turnout in the recent county council elections, Comment editor Dave Reynolds wonders why it is that students consistently waive their right to have their voices heard, even at the expense of their own welfare.

With voter turnout in the recent county council elections in the heavily student populated area of St David’s and St James down at an appalling 22.5%, young people only have themselves to blame when they find themselves on the wrong end of political decisions. Young people not voting is a trend, not solely in Exeter, but nationwide. In the 2010 General Election, turnout among 18-24 year olds was just 44%, well below the average of 65%.

“In the 2010 General Election, turnout among 18-24 year olds was just 44%, well below the average of 65%.”
Photo Credit: Alan Cleaver via Compfight cc

While the coalition government looks to cut public spending, targeting young people seems to be the easy option, as you won’t be punished at the ballot box because students can’t be bothered to take 10 minutes out of their day and take part in a democracy that many people have died in the name of. In November 2010, we saw tuition fees almost trebling from £3,290 year to £9,000. With more and more people being priced out of higher education, applications have dropped nationally by 8% in the last two years (although the University of Exeter has seen applications rise by 25% this year). Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) has also been scrapped, leaving many 16-19 year olds students undecided on whether they should carry on their education or find a low skilled job and lower their career prospects in the long run. On the other hand, pensioners, who turn up to vote en masse (76% at the last general election) get to keep their winter fuel payments, free bus passes and TV licenses and a whole host of other perks.

Some say that because students move so frequently between different areas of the county, the decisions they make at the ballot box don’t really affect them in years to come. While this is no doubt true, it only goes some way to answering why students can’t be bothered to vote. Is it because they don’t know enough about politics? I find this unlikely. With students spending most of their time trying to avoid doing any work and rolling news on the TV, most young people should have a fair idea of what is going on in the world.

It seems that the only way for students to get a better deal from the political parties is to go out and vote more. If they see turnout among people of student age at 70%+, politicians may be more inclined to try to incentivise young people.  If more students voted in the 2010 election, Nick Clegg may have been more likely to keep his promise and not put up tuition fees. Similarly, if young people voted more, politicians may even attempt to deal with the current youth unemployment crisis. 993,000 people under 25 are currently out of work, yet nothing is being done about it. We can’t be treated like this by our politicians. Go out and vote and maybe they’ll do something for us! At the very least, can we please get the wealthier pensioners to give back their free bus passes and TV license fees?

Dave Reynolds, Comment Editor

Is poor young voter turnout at least partly to blame for the government’s decisions regarding tuition fees and youth unemployment? Do students leave themselves poorly represented by choosing not to vote?  Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Modest increase in university applications still falls short of pre-tuition fee hike levels

Image credit: The Daily Telegraph

University applications for September 2013 have shown some improvement since this time last year, but have failed to match the levels reached before the tripling of tuition fees.

Demand for places at Exeter has however soared, with 36% more applicants than last year.

The figures for April show that applications have increased by 2.5% in comparison with April 2012, totalling around 602,000.

A further analysis of the figures shows that applications have increased in England, Northern Ireland and Scotland. A similar rise has also occurred from students inside and outside of the EU applying to UK universities.

Similarly, those applications that were sent in January 2013, the main deadline for UCAS for study beginning in September 2013, rose by 3.5% against the same time in 2012.

However, applications are still lower than the figures of 2010 and 2011, before higher university fees were introduced.

Professor Michael Gunn, the vice-chancellor of Staffordshire University and chairman of the higher education Million+ group recognises this year’s current improvement from 2012: “The small increase in the number of applications from those wishing to study full time in 2013 is very welcome given the significance of graduates to our economic and social future and the benefits of a degree to an individual.”

But he still seems to be concerned: “However, there is a 7% decline in applications when compared with 2010, the last year when the recent funding changes did not impact upon recruitment.

I am sure that this will be as concerning for ministers, who have always said that they wanted more people to be participating in higher education because of the lifelong benefits it provides, as it is for vice-chancellors.”

However, applications rates for 2013 are higher than those of 2009, also before the introduction of higher fees. Furthermore, when analysing the figures for Scotland, where there are no tuitions fees for students, they have a pattern of rising and falling which may or may not bode well for universities across the UK.

Dr Wendy Piatt, the director general of the Russell Group, argued that: “More than half a million potential students have rightly recognised the benefits of going to university. This is the third highest number of applications of all time and there are still many more students applying for university than there are places available.”

Universities remain unsure about how this trend will continue, whether optimism is unfounded or if applications will simply plateau at a later date.

Complete figures will be released after the application deadline of 30 June 2013 passes.

Amy Young, News Team

Follow @Exepose News on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

Being a student: is it still worth it?

With a healthy dose of humour, Dominic Madar extols the benefits of being a student.

Student life – is it worth it? Picture credits: Jeremy Wilburn

In recent years the price of food, accommodation, train tickets and, most regrettably, alcohol has risen rapidly above the rate of inflation. Add in the new £9,000 a year tuition fees and university life costs a hell of a lot more than it did even a decade back, but this wouldn’t be such a problem if graduate job prospects weren’t so bleak. It does make you wonder whether it is all really worth it?

Putting aside the awkward £50,000 current first years are projected to rack up in debt and a few reasons to opt for higher education do remain. Firstly anyone slightly nocturnal and with a phobia of hard work (a lot of teenagers, by my reckoning) would fit into this cocoon of youth far better than the harsh climate of the real world – a few missed lectures every now and again and a couple of half-baked essays won’t get you fired here.

The coming together of thousands of (supposedly) intelligent adolescents really is what makes the whole thing worth doing: whether your passion is drinking yourself into oblivion, immersing yourself within societies, sharking for freshers in Arena or dressing up as Jedis, the possibilities are plentiful. Even the strangest amongst us stand a good chance of meeting like-minded weirdos within such a large group.

£50000 worth of debt: a small price to pay? Picture credits: maclufus

Rumour has it some even choose this path for the university course itself. There are those of us who apparently enjoy learning – which is rather handy if you’ve signed up for three years of it. Of course the theory is to leave with some form of hard currency in the increasingly-competitive job market. One of the biggest assets of this being that over those three years you may actually have some idea of what it is you want to pursue in later life. University is the ultimate stall for time. Admittedly with degrees becoming ever more commonplace, the emphasis is significantly shifting from merely acquiring one to where it was obtained and what subject it’s in – good luck to anyone graduating from Southampton Solent in media studies.

Exeter, fortunately, has a rather more solid reputation. Being chosen as The Times University of the year and finally joining the Russell Group should do the institution no end of good, enhancing and extending its profile across the country; although lustful acts of passion in the Ram may not be the best way to gain attention.

University essentially elevates the teenage lifestyle to greater and more independent heights without the judgemental gaze of protective parents. Many things previously unattainable can be achieved here (a personal highlight is spending the majority of my time wearing pyjamas) and superbly lengthy summers are ideal for a host of opportunities. The increased costs of further education will make people think twice –and they should – it’s not for everyone. However I would like to think that for many of us university remains undisputably the best route to take.

Oliver Cary: Has the coalition achieved its aims for education?

In the first of his column posts, Oliver Cary reviews the coalition’s progress on its aims of 2010.

The recent Mid-term review represents a chance to evaluate how far the coalition government has come to achieving its aims of 2010, and Michael Gove’s significant changes in Education have been hounded by criticism. Although much of this has centred on his proposed ideas to improve our system, there is understandable criticism of his policy that had already seen tangible changes.

Attempts to make more university places available may be possible, but raising fees to £9,000 has caused public protest and there are still vacancies at a quarter of Russell Group universities this academic year. The government’s aim for prospective students to have access to data of student satisfaction, costs and graduate salaries appears promising, but success for the institutions is measured by league tables.

Increasing university contact time, a common occurrence for students this academic year, is supposed to justify the increasing fees. How useful is this extra contact time? Many university standings come from postgraduate research results, as each institution has to meet its quota of outputs. David Priestland suggests that universities attempt in ‘gaming’ the system gain better standing in league tables, rather than giving more constructive contact time.

Photo credits to Babro Uppsala

Various changes to schools have also taken place, and the introduction of free schools and academies since September 2011 has also been criticised. Taxpayers have been sceptical of funding new Maharishi schools that teach transcendental meditation as part of their curriculum. New academy parents appear to appreciate their 5 year old children learning basic Mandarin, but there are still places not being filled at these schools.

Although many would argue that Mandarin in primary schools, and meditation that keeps students balanced through secondary education are unnecessary, Gove, however, seems to be too radical in his efforts to maintained a tight curriculum. His proposed Ebacc, an English Baccalaureate to start in 2015, has already been petitioned against. Those from the National Union of Teachers and the National Association of Head Teachers petitioned against marginalising subjects which do not form part of the Ebacc, and the petition gained 20,000 signatures in its first two weeks. Stephen Fry, who gave his support to the petition, stated via Twitter that the Ebacc would ‘pose a real threat to the status of creative subjects and vocational education.’

Michael Gove’s policy may cause our next generation to become more disenfranchised from education than our own, and his policy has extended to teachers as well. Plans to introduce ‘performance-related pay’ schemes are intended to raise the quality of teaching, and whilst this is hugely desired, it puts further pressure on teachers. Additionally George Osborne’s plans to give head teachers full responsibility for distributing pay amongst staff have created controversy. Head teachers, with this increased responsibility, and little experience with finance, could lead to chaotic administration in schools.

The intentions of educational policy are always to raise standards of education, enthuse and re-engage society’s youth and justify government spending. Gove’s intentions are no different, but he has undoubtedly made himself unpopular. In recent polls by YouGov for the National Union of teachers, only 13% thought the Government were taking education in the right direction. Teacher morale has decreased over the last year and Christine Blower, chair of the NUT, believes this is the result of ‘continual criticisms and undermining of pay and conditions’.

Michael Gove’s plans and policy for changes in education are perhaps too radical, and attempting to achieve quick changes without proper consideration and review of results. In attempting make improvements at university, school and teaching levels he has created three separate avenues of criticism, and has lost considerable support for his policies in the process.