To be devastated they've withdrawn the course

[LaPetite]

This is all a bit first world problem I know but I feel like crying but don't want to cry with dc in the house so whinging on Mumsnet instead.

I was offered a place on a masters degree at my local uni. I had everything planned out. Enough savings to see us through and beyond even if I couldn't get a part time job. It was the perfect course for me on a lovely campus just up the road. I've been counting down the weeks till I can leave my job (luckily have not handed in notice as I only need to give a month).

And I've just got an email from the university saying they're withdrawing the course. The whole future I was envisioning has disappeared.

I could try applying to universities in commuting distance, but travel would be expensive and tiring and I wouldn't be able to just pop into the library.

Moving house to be closer to another uni isn't an option when dc is halfway through A levels.

There are universities offering this subject online but I don't think I would get as much out of it as I would from actually being there in person. And I would hate spending my days alone staring at a screen.

I know there are worse things in the world than not being able to do a masters degree but my future's just gone from looking bright and exciting to just being stuck in the same rut.

It's not "completely incorrect" and workload models vary across institutions. Say my salary is £50,000, it's going to be that for the next academic year, nobody knows what hours that will be, or on what courses/modules or in which areas yet. It could be 100 credits worth, or it could be 120.

That salary is already accounted for, which dept budget it comes from maybe not. If I worked the 100 credits on teaching/admin/union work then took on a 2hr lecture one evening a week that would be half a Masters worth of teaching, for no additional cost. 3 Chinese students and that's my entire salary for a year covered plus a few guest lecturers and party.

Cutting arts subjects is often an ideological decision rather than a financially sensible one.

3 Chinese students and that's my entire salary for a year covered plus a few guest lecturers and party.

That's really not how costings work. Those fees certainly don't cover that. Nowhere near. Just to start with, your £50k salary costs your employer £65k factoring in NI and USS contributions. That's before we get on to space costings and central service charges. I wish that universities bothered to show academics how budgets work because how people think they work and how they actually work are very different.

The other thing is that those Chinese students aren't coming now. That is the main problem.

@TheWombatleague
It does not work in the way you describe at all. Certainly not in any of the universities I've worked in.
I'm a Head of Division and we know what courses and modules are running next academic year. Any course that hasn't recruited sufficient numbers has been closed and staff have either been made redundant or contracts haven't been renewed.
We are in the process of finalising staff workloads and that includes the teaching of MA courses. They are not 'free' to run. They are fully costed and staffed at the start of the academic year.

I've never cut a course for ideological reasons either.... it's always due to low student numbers or cost effectiveness.

Space costings, yeah. What a joke that is. So a space the University owns then has to be rented by the dept teaching in that space, or as in the case of the £94 million cost of purchasing the former tax offices, just left empty because someone didn't check the planning regulations.

Those students not coming aren't the main problem, the main problem is grossly incompetent management, followed by cuts in direct funding, International Students & International research grants (post Brexit & post Trump)

As I said, poor management. A year of low student recruitment and you close a course that's been running successfully for decades , ignoring its ranking, the expertise of the staff & the reasons for that drop in recruitment.

Then, in a year or two, you get new management who have yet another new vision, they decide to go back to the model that was there before but don't have the staff to teach on it. Meanwhile, the University has spent millions on consultancy, buying material assets and gaming the ranking systems.

As I said, poor management. A year of low student recruitment and you close a course that's been running successfully for decades , ignoring its ranking, the expertise of the staff & the reasons for that drop in recruitment.

You sound very bitter.

I've never closed a course due to one year of poor recruitment. I've always looked at the context , the market and the reputational impact.

I've worked with course teams to turn courses around and sometimes we've been successful. However, if there no market for a course and numbers drop consistently then tough decisions need to be made.

Unfortunately, the current system doesn't allow for much slack in the system and we can't continue to run courses at a loss.

What that means is work loading is being scrutinised more than ever. I know exactly what my staff will be teaching next year and how much it costs to run all of our programmes.

Echoing @GCAcademic and @SerenityNowSerenityNow in their knowledge of how university budgets actually work. As an HoD, and a major grant holder, I've seen this all up close, as they have.

Upper management at universities are very rarely interested in ideological decisions. They are driven by finances.

If they were interested in ideological matters, they'd be allowing all sorts of wonderful Masters programmes, in which my colleagues could teach 2 students for a year, and count that as a decent workload. We could explore Basket Weaving in Ancient Mesopotamia to our heat's content, and not worry about the finances.

Of course I'm bitter. The sector has been exploiting academics for years, casual and part-time staff work twice their paid hours and most full-time academics are not far off that.

I appreciate that much of the financial pressure is from mismanagement at a governmental level, costing Universities and the economy billions. But there's also countless, and repeated, examples of mismanagement at our Univerities.

You say cuts to the arts aren't ideological, but cuts to the arts in Higher Education make no sense economically, so why have successive governments allowed it to happen?

I suspect the plan is to reduce the number of Universities to just the Russell Group and it has been since at least 2012. If it wasn't they could solve much of the financial crisis with two simple and cost free changes.

Restoring individual university student number caps but allowing each university to admit widening participation students without a cap would manage enrolment more fairly. Restoring the cap on admission numbers could increase demand for struggling universities.

Exclude international students from immigration statistics, which is in line with the practice in the rest of Europe.

Labour were going to do the second, but because of fears about Reform, have chickened out. According to our MP.

I would definitely look at online, part time with a different university. I have done two masters degrees this way, whilst also working full time. I didn't set foot in a library for either of them.

That is gutting, I really feel for you 😞 lots of good suggestions here, all is not lost, your brighter future is still there, good luck 😊

I understand the points you're making @TheWombatleague I've worked in HE for over 20 years and it's truly devastating what is happening to the sector.

None of that makes the points you've made earlier true though.
MA's are not run by academics 'voluntarily' teaching on them and departments are not closing courses for ideological reasons.
While the government may make some subjects more challenging to run, if they make money they'll survive! And I say that as an academic in niche area that is subject to unfavourable government policy!

Well, I teach on a Masters for no extra renumeration as do my colleagues, if that's not on a voluntary basis then I don't know what is.

Well, I teach on a Masters for no extra renumeration as do my colleagues, if that's not on a voluntary basis then I don't know what is.

Presumably you're being paid a salary to work as an academic by your university?

If so, it's part of your job.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Are you salaried? Is the MA teaching not calculated in your workload?

It's added to a nebulous workload, but I don't get extra for any additional hours worked. On average it's something like a third of academics' time spent on University related work is given for free.

As for the way workloads are calculated and weighted, that's a whole other debate.

Given that declared level of overwork (which your local UCU should be all over, btw, and demanding a workload model that doesn't assume an extra 500 hours a year from academic staff), I don't understand how you think low-recruiting MA programmes are viable or sustainable. You can't complain that you're overworked and simultaneously complain when unacknowledged labour is removed.

After the debacle of the UCU's Four Fights campaign, there's no fight left in Union members.

I'll tell you why some low recruiting courses are viable. The current landscape isn't fixed, there is scope for changing the way we treat International students for example, they're cheap as chips to run as an Mres, the value of a course really shouldn't just be about the revenue it brings to the University. Even if it were, it's shortsighted not to look at the longer picture.

The University of Nottingham for example, recorded only it's 2nd annual loss in the past ten years, blaming it on interest rates and International student numbers. That loss was £17 million. They failed to blame it on the £80 million consultancy fees or the £36 million acquisition of a building they spent millions more on that they can't use.