UK 25 June 2013 The New College of the Humanities: Would you pay double university fees for a better education? Tabatha Leggett visits A C Grayling's elite start-up, where the first intake of students are getting to grips with life at a private university. Print HTML With most of the country still complaining about university fees being raised to £9,000 a year, it’s easy to forget that a small group of teenagers chose to pay double that by enrolling at A C Grayling’s elite start up, the New College of the Humanities (NCH), last October. Launched as a protest against government cuts to humanities funding, NCH is the UK’s second private university, after the University of Buckingham. In attempting to combine the best aspects of the American liberal arts model with an Oxbridge-style education, NCH offers degrees in English, History, Philosophy, Politics, International Relations, Economics and Law. On top of that, students are required to "minor" in another subject, study modules in ethics, critical thinking and logic and enroll in a professional skills course. As I arrived at 19 Bedford Square, the Georgian townhouse in which the NCH is based, I was struck by how tiny it is. With fewer than 60 students currently enrolled, and only 100 expected to arrive next year, the NCH is smaller than most sixth forms. This is its main draw, since it is able to offer the same contact hours as Oxbridge. Every week, students sit through 10 hours of lecturers, four hours of small group discussions and an hour’s one-on-one supervision, for which they must write a 2,000 word essay – which is significantly more than most universities offer. Bedford Square in London, where the NCH is based. Photograph: Tabatha Leggett The argument against NCH is simple: if the education it offers is not at least twice as good what other UK universities offer, it’s a blatant con. And if it is, then it allows wealth to dictate the quality of higher education you’re entitled to. “There’s an awful lot of slack in the university system,” says Jane Phelps, who is in charge of NCH’s admissions system. “I met a boy studying Economics at Cardiff last week. He has 400 people in his lecturers and his smallest supervision is shared with 40. There’s no way that’s a worthwhile experience.” It’s this, Jane claims, which has caused students to leave LSE, Bristol, York, Exeter, Sussex and Trinity College Dublin and enroll at NCH, which had no dropouts in its first year. Still, attempting to resolve the failings of UK universities via a privatised system is more contentious than Jane will admit. The NCH’s application process is modeled on Oxbridge, but students don’t need three As. “They need the potential to achieve three As,” Jane tells me. “The exam system is a bit variable and sometimes examiners don’t understand answers because the kids are more clever than them.” To me, that sounds like an excuse for offering places to students who miss their predicted grades. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I wish Jane would acknowledge it. Students at the NCH. Photograph: Tabatha Leggett Jane explains that 16 NCH students receive full scholarships, and they’re hoping to increase this proportion. Jamie, a Philosophy student from Bristol, is one of the lucky few. Jamie receives a full, means-tested scholarship, which means his education and living expenses are paid for by the College. Francesca, a Politics student from Chiswick, receives an exhibition on academic merit, which means she only pays £7,200. “No one is here because they have lots of money,” says Francesca. “They’re here because they’re investing in an education.” But is it a worthwhile investment? I can’t help but think that although these students’ future employers will respect the workload they’ve had, they won’t look favourably upon a bunch of teenagers who have invested in an education without any proof that it’ll get them anywhere. NCH is, after all, a start up. It has no alumni, which means there’s no way of knowing whether they’re likely to get jobs at the end of it. And £54,000 is a lot of money to spend on a gamble. The New College of the Humanities has a "Thinkery" room. Photograph: Tabatha Leggett The best counter argument Jane offers is that NCH’s Personal Development Counsellor establishes a personal relationship with each student and uses her own contacts to help them to secure internships and jobs. Granted, that sounds better than most universities, but a good careers service hardly makes up for the extra curricular activities on offer at established universities. Because the NCH has such a small student body, it doesn’t have big enough sports teams, drama societies or student newspapers. Jane insists that students can just join local clubs, but I can’t help but think she’s missing the point. I’m pretty sure playing university sport is totally different to playing for a local club, and I certainly learnt more writing for my student rag than I ever did attending lectures. It’s obvious that the UK’s university system is flawed, but setting up a for-profit, private institution at the very time the public voice is finally clamouring for education reform and wider access doesn’t seem like the right answer. Until the NCH’s class of 2015 graduates, though, we’ll have to sit tight and hope that most universities won’t follow suit. If they do, humanities subjects are going to suffer a major blow. After all, I don’t know many people who would pay £54,000 for a degree in thinking. › After the new Lawrence scandal, the Met can't afford to come up empty this time The New College of the Humanities launched in October 2012. Photograph: Tabatha Leggett Tabatha Leggett is a freelance journalist who has been published in GQ and VICE and on the London Review of Books blog and Buzzfeed.com. More Related articles Ken Clarke: Angela Merkel is western democracy’s last hope French voters face a choice: Thatcherism or fascism I’m in Bangladesh as I needed to put a few thousand miles between myself and the Hovel Subscription offer 12 issues for £12 + FREE book LEARN MORE Close This week’s magazine
Show Hide image The Staggers 29 November 2016 "Have cake and eat it": Voters deserve a better Brexit strategy than an accidentally-snapped note The Brexit narrative is being told scrap by scrap of paper. Print HTML Political hacks have always been interested in what politicians carry in their briefcases. Any scribbled note caught on a long lens camera is a tantalising glimpse into the reality behind the carefully-organised press briefings or photo shoots. But 2016 has upped the stakes. Now, the scribbles are read like tea leaves. Is a mention of the single market proof we’re ripping out the economic furniture of the past 40 years? Or is this the writing on the wall for hard Brexit? The latest focus of attention is a notebook carried under the arm of aide to Mark Field, the vice-chairman of the Conservative party, captured by the photographer Steve Back. It states, in cursive, a series of observations on Brexit. is this the first insight into Brexit seen going into No10 from the Brexit/cabinet office women holding was with Mark Field MP ? pic.twitter.com/XXeFGFQIa0 — Political Pictures (@PoliticalPics) November 28, 2016 “Problematic for EU if we move decisively with no transition. Difficult on Article 50 interpretation – Barnier wants to see what deal looks like first. Got to be done in parallel…” And then the clincher: “We think it’s unlikely we’ll be offered single market.” And then some more Brexistential questions and phrases. “What’s the model? Have cake and eat it.” “Very French negotiating team.” One option – “Canada plus”. The government has shot down the note, with the business secretary Greg Clark telling the BBC “it doesn’t reflect any of the conversations I’ve been part of in Downing Street”. But while this might be the most outspoken note to make headlines so far, it comes just two weeks after a leaked “Brexit memo” suggesting the government had no plan. This was traced back to an outside consultancy, Deloitte. The government has kept almost entirely schtum on Brexit. Nearly six months on from the EU referendum, we still have no official confirmation of how immigration controls will be weighed against access to the single market. We still know very little about how the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland would be policed. David Davis, the Brexit minister, doesn't even give a straight answer to his Conservative parliamentary colleagues. Remain voters fear they are going to be ignored in favour of a hard Brexit. Leave voters (and some MPs representing Leave constituencies) fear Brexit will never happen. The fact an entire nation is hanging onto scraps of paper for a clue is damning. The government argues that, as a negotiator, it needs to hold its cards close to its chest. On this basis, it is attempting to block parliamentary involvement in triggering Article 50, and has shut out the devolved nations. But the whole principle of voting Leave was – apparently – to return sovereignty to a more accountable, directly-elected body. Leaving the flow of information open to those who are least discreet, or who deliberately blab, or try to obstruct the whole process, seems a strange way to control the narrative on Brexit. Julia Rampen is the editor of The Staggers, The New Statesman's online rolling politics blog. She was previously deputy editor at Mirror Money Online and has worked as a financial journalist for several trade magazines. More Related articles Workers on boards or shareholder revolts? 13 ideas for holding bosses to account Theresa May is making the same mistake that Syriza did Kate Bush thinks Theresa May is "wonderful" - and it's not the first time she's turned political