For more than 15 years, university students and staff have borne the brunt of a broken system. Tuition fees helped turn higher education into a quasi-market, transforming students into indebted consumers and staff into precarious workers. Lord Mandelson’s support for Britain’s universities is welcome, but it is unfortunate that he appears relaxed about making students and staff pay the price – yet again – for patching up the sector’s finances (Universities are in a hole: linking student fees to inflation is the fairest way forward, 25 September).
Not only does Mandelson suggest students are penalised with tuition fee hikes, he takes aim at the student-staff ratio, suggesting it is much too low. This is hard to interpret as anything other than a call for job cuts, which Mandelson frames in the cynical phrase of the hour as “tough choices”.
The truth is that to raise tuition fees would be to double down on the unstable market-led model that has landed universities in this mess. Massive public investment in higher education – perhaps Britain’s last world-leading sector – is the only sustainable solution. That would require real “tough choices”, such as facing down Treasury-think and taxing the rich.
Dr Jo Grady
General secretary, University and College Union
• Linking fees to inflation may assist our universities in their financial upkeep, as Peter Mandelson argues. But students are paying exorbitant interest on their loans. My daughter’s interest rate (she is in her third year at university) rocketed from 8% to 13.5% in one leap and interest is accrued from the date the loan is made, not from graduation.
Before we embark on a course of action that will see student indebtedness rocket further, it would be prudent to legislate a fairer rate of interest on the tens of thousands borrowed by so many young people embarking on adult life and struggling to make their way in a relatively low-wage, high‑cost economy.
Nicola Gabb
Antrim
• I have been a senior lecturer in law for 20 years, many of which were at Manchester Metropolitan University. Lord Mandelson’s suggestion that the tutor-student ratio is increased is sensible, as long as tutors are able to devote their time to academic work. But the reality is that drastic cuts, labelled as “centralising or reorganisation” of support systems, mean lecturers are charged with resolving administrative and systemic debacles.
The ability to prepare, teach and meaningfully engage with our students, which remains our purpose and joy, is curtailed and devalued. The financial rewards for the decision-makers in upper management, however, appear unaffected by the funding crisis that is given as the reason for increased workloads and job cuts.
Francoise Smith
Astley, Greater Manchester
• Lord Mandelson draws some curious conclusions about how teaching in universities should change. He sees higher staff-to-student ratios as a positive metric, implying larger seminars, and he recommends some universities abandon research. I would be surprised if my students would welcome less contact with lecturers, and I know I’m a better researcher and tutor for pursuing my specialism in both domains. Lower standards won’t save UK higher education.
Richard Huzzey
Durham
• Do you have a photograph you’d like to share with Guardian readers? If so, please click here to upload it. A selection will be published in our Readers’ best photographs galleries and in the print edition on Saturdays.
