Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

LSE £8,500 fee buys breathing space for Willetts

If the LSE asks for £8,500, how can lesser universities justify charging the full £9,000?

The decision by the London School of Economics to charge less than £9,000 for normal undergraduate tuition fees will give a boost to the coalition's beleaguered higher education policy. Although the LSE will still charge £8,500, it ruptures the notion that top universities can only offer a quality education for £9,000. It also creates vital breathing space for the universities minister, David Willetts.

Whenever Willetts is rightly criticised for his failure to foresee that every half-decent university would rush to charge the maximum amount, Willetts can now point to a top-class university and say: "They can do it for less than £9,000, so why can't other elite universities?" He can also legitimately ask: "If the LSE is charging £8,500, why is somewhere like Bradford* charging £9,000?"

The LSE has the highest average starting salary for graduates and a reputation for being one of the best universities on the planet. Bradford, for all its merits, has neither – yet each of its students is forking out £500 more a year for his or her degrees.

It is true that the LSE has been able to charge less for two exceptional reasons. First, it does not produce expensive scientific research, concentrating instead on relatively cheap areas of study such as the humanities. Second, the university generates much of its income from overseas students, whom it charges eye-wateringly high fees.

A full-time Master's degree from the university will set you back close to £20,000 a year if you are an overseas student. At the same time, however, cuts to the university teaching budget have hit the LSE particularly hard. Reductions to the teaching grant for the humanities and the arts have left the LSE with practically no direct government funding.

Five hundred pounds a year is a very small saving. It reduces the cost of tuition fees for a three-year undergraduate from £27,000, to £25,500 – both very large figures. But while £500 is insignificant in financial terms, politically it is priceless for the coalition.

It may not be much, but it's all there is for the government to cling to as it tries to swim through the choppy waters of British university funding.

*NB: I don't mean to pick on Bradford alone. It is in a similar position to dozens of other universities in the UK which are planning to charge £9,000 a year, despite having less-than-stellar reputations.

6 comments

mcquade's picture

"If the LSE asks for £8,500, how can lesser universities justify charging the full £9,000?"

Why bother asking the question when the answer was so obvious?

Chris's picture

I honestly don't understand the headline:
"LSE £8,500 fee buys breathing space for Willetts"

because the article explains why they can do it when other instiutions can't:

"It is true that the LSE has been able to charge less for two exceptional reasons. First, it does not produce expensive scientific research, concentrating instead on relatively cheap areas of study such as the humanities. Second, the university generates much of its income from overseas students, whom it charges eye-wateringly high fees."

Are the headline writers now not reading the copy :-0

Lou's picture

It's still a lot nearer to 9 than it is to the 6 though. I can't see that failing to charge the top fee by a mere £500 pounds will really be politically priceless for the coalition. Whilst it might be a good one liner in PMQs or in the odd media interview, one which can easily be ripped apart, it's going to make no difference whatsoever to the student, other than an extra tenner a week in their pocket, or how the electorate feel on the policy.

So the Govt can cling to is a sliver of driftwood from the Titanic that is their tuition fees policy, Michele Obama can talk of aspiring to and achieving 'this'(a place at Oxbridge) whilst living in la la land on UK university demographics and policy; the rest of us can see it for what it is, a pig in a poke is the expression I think.

Lou's picture

Just as one swallow does not make a summer, one university coming in just under the top figure does not make a good policy or benefit the majority of students going to university.

Fred's picture

It does make a difference, especially when you add it to the generous bursaries which the School can offer to students, in addition to what amounts to a £1500 price differential over 3 years.

Of course there will be even more griping and jealousy form other parts of the UK system. LSE already has the highest application rate in the UK and this will incentivise yet more people to apply.

Hova's picture

How disingenuous. LSE may knock off the £500 for undergrads (oh thank you, kind masters) but the cost of their graduate courses are more than enough to cover that loss.

PR stunt of the worst kind.

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets