Why University Cuts Could Destroy History’s Future

-

 In January I wrote a blog post titled The Value of Studying History: A Subject at Risk. Over the last few months, my Google algorithm has pushed a series of news articles to me highlighting the funding issues for universities. The problem of academic support, as such, continues to plague the profession. As it will become apparent in this post, the subject’s position may be affected by challenges faced at a broader level across UK academic institutions today.


Funding Crisis Continues

For Edinburgh University, funding is still an issue. In a Times Higher Education article, Juliette Roswell highlights the fears of staff in a ‘manufactured crisis’ at the news of cuts. It announced to its staff that £140 million in cuts would occur, despite capital expenditure growth reaching £186 million in 2024.[1] Staffing costs also declined from 58.8% three years ago to 53.7% recently. As such, it is unclear why the university would wish to reduce staffing despite its seemingly positive growth. Yes, the argument of a deficit stands, but there is—at the moment—no reason to take such drastic measures. By doing so, Edinburgh fails to support its staff at a time when academia itself faces necessary cuts. 

Unlike in England, Scottish students don’t pay tuition fees. Instead, the Student Awards Agency Scotland (SAAS) – the equivalent to Student Finance England – pays £1,820 on their behalf to their university.[2] This small contribution to the university is unlikely to cover the associated fees to the teaching and other materials for the course. Scottish universities, as such, may look to other English and international students to help fund their courses. With English students receiving a loan of £9,250*, no wonder Scottish universities may be more inclined to look to a broader student body. And, despite Scotland’s higher education sector receiving roughly 5 times as much aid as England's, the lack of fees may impact it in the long-run.[3] This may become a significant issue in the future for places like Edinburgh.

The case of Edinburgh shows that universities' desires for financial growth often clash with the research and teaching they provide. Academic employees wish to further their research, and one way they achieve this is through posts of teaching and research. Most likely, they have a mixed contract of teaching and researching. This most likely produces a positive outcome for both the researcher and the student. 

Whilst universities must be accountable for their finances, is it too much to ask to rely on the government? William Peck, the new chair of Office for Students (OfS) argues that universities should manage their financial positions to avoid the ‘moral hazard’ of relying on government funding.[4] I find this claim to be absurd, and frankly elitist. The idea of universities being able to fund themselves is not laughable, but it depends on the institution. For Oxford University, attracting many applicants is not an issue. Its history and world-recognition heighten its allure. However, for smaller institutions this may not be the same. They may face problems attracting the same number of potential students due to resources. Oxford has the advantage of being medieval, it has a long history, many endowments, and world-class research. This is not the case everywhere, and to expect a smaller university to compete with this is bizarre. Students of all backgrounds should be able to study in higher education. They should not face barriers just because they achieved lower results than the A*AA required for most courses at Oxford or Cambridge. These smaller universities are not facing ‘moral hazards’; they empower their students to push for knowledge invaluable in the modern world. Universities should, therefore, be secure in their funding from the government to support students of all backgrounds in achieving their goals.

Long-term financial planning is necessary, but at what cost? Institutional issues shouldn’t burden lecturers as they currently appear to. If we continue to axe funding in key universities—e.g., Edinburgh—we may see a downward trend amongst other similarly sized institutions. This potential for a ripple effect should be addressed, and unnecessary cuts avoided. To keep academia relevant, we need to ensure it has the funding required and not prematurely cut it.

 

Tutors – A Pay Deal Far From Ideal

At the time of writing this, the staff of Newcastle University have begun their strike for job security. This plagues the industry, with lecturers often being part-time or on fixed-term contracts. The issues of funding keep growing. One of the main issues cited is the fall in international student numbers. As we have already established, these international students often pay significantly higher fees than home students. They help offset some costs that the current UK tuition fee system does not. However, between 2023 and 2024, Home Office statistics showed that international student numbers dropped 31%.[5] This is a staggering loss of income for UK universities. Without this, they face hard decisions about hiring more staff due to the uncertainty of the future of international studentship. It is clear that in the case of Newcastle, fears surrounding this decline can be seen. Staff’s uncertainties, coupled with potential funding issues – like in Scotland – may all contribute to a desire to push for this security, and by striking, they do precisely that.

A similar stability issue can be seen regarding payment and contracts. Last year, the student newspaper Cherwell highlighted the disparity in payment for full-time lecturers between Oxford and the rest of the Russell Group. Out of the 24 universities in the group, Oxford ranks 6th for the percentage of these full-time academics being paid in the highest category of over £65,578 a year – 30% of Oxford’s full-time scholars. [6] In addition, no academic on a full-time contract is paid less than £27,131 a year.[7] The pay of lecturers at Oxford appears to be above the average of other UK institutions, yet it is clear that it is insufficient. In 2023, there were marking-boycotts and strikes at the conditions where the staff worked. Staff payment is a hot topic in securing the future of academia. Staff need to be able to afford accommodation to continue their jobs; by extension, this continues to research. Without this, there is a clear danger to its future.

Oxford's payment of staff is not always positive. For part-time staff, payment varies significantly. A Guardian investigation found that 61% of tutorials are conducted by academics on these fixed-term contracts or in hourly-paid roles.[8] Whilst there is nothing wrong with this – as the person delivering the teaching is often qualified, they are more likely to work as hard as their full-time colleagues but with less pay. In the case of DPhil students, as one of them told me at church last week, they get paid around £20 for the tutorial hour. This doesn’t include the emailing of resources, printing, marking, and the reading they need to do to teach the class properly. In essence, they are doing a massive amount of unpaid work. It is unfair to expect tutors to produce high-quality work if they are not given the funding. Part-time lecturers and tutors may find employment in multiple avenues and may not dedicate as great a length of time to prepare if they are not adequately funded. This can hurt both students and their academic institutions. The future of academia as such faces funding issues to secure academic provisions.

Instability also threatens academia’s future. In 2023 when interviewed by Oxford Mail, researcher Alexis McGivern highlighted the cost-of-living crisis as a primary source of concern for her future in academia. She claimed that 67% of staff had “casual contracts which makes it hard to want to stay in academia.”[9] This uncertainty can be difficult for early career researchers. They lack stability for applying for a mortgage, making life decisions such as where to put down roots for a family, and planning for the long term. There are clear limitations to the current approach to part-time funding and its impact on researchers' and academics' careers.

 

How could this impact History?

Having assessed the issues presented to academic institutions above, let us discuss how these issues could impact the study of history.

A lack of financial security could lead to history courses and staff cuts. As seen in the Royal Historical Society’s survey of 66 universities, 39 history departments had reported cuts, while 32 departments have lost their courses since the pandemic.[10] These reduced incomes to universities may reduce the funds available for their courses. This could lead to their executive teams making difficult decisions surrounding departmental closures. Several universities face the challenge of creating new schools, and/or departments to meet these financial pressures. This is interesting given that History is consistently in the top 10 of popular course studied at A Level, suggesting there is interest and by extension a potential demand for more places to study it.[11] Courses with fewer enrolled students may also become the new normal if funding cannot be sustained. This is likely due to the lack of financing for lecturers, which determines the number of universities that can place students onto courses. These minor cuts can have a detrimental and wide-ranging impact on history.

Reduced funding for undergraduate education may impact the number of students progressing to postgraduate studies. With AHRC and ESRC grants becoming more competitive, fewer students will be able to fund postgraduate research, further limiting the field. If we allow the ideas of William Peck to become the new normal, smaller universities may have to close. This could damage the accessibility of these students to courses like history – making it elitist.  Reducing the number of students taking classes at the undergraduate level is likely to reduce the number of students going on to post-graduate studies, too. They are less inclined to study it if there is little to no funding. With job insecurity for post-doctoral students, there is a clear issue with attracting future historians to the field. If we don’t challenge this, we may see repercussions in the numbers undertaking studies – detrimental to expanding knowledge.

 

To conclude, it is clear that academia is facing a multitude of problems. From funding to staff attraction, there is much to be corrected. These current issues make the field unattractive and may put future researchers off pursuing it, with subjects like History facing the prospect of becoming elitist if this is not corrected. This is not just a crisis for academics but a problem for our future understanding of the past.

 

*Tuition fees in England are set to increase to £9,550 this summer.


Comments

  1. Anonymous11 March 2025 at 11:10

    What an interesting read, well done & hopefully it won't happen.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

“Tradition!” amongst Trauma: Fiddler on the Roof as Memory of Jewish Life in Tsarist Russia

-
Fiddler on the Roof is a 1964 musical that tells the story of Tevye and his family in the shtetl of Anatevka. Although the story is based loosely on Sholem Aleichem's stories, the themes of Fiddler illustrate the importance of tradition, trauma, and nostalgia within the Jewish community of Tsarist Russia. This week, I reflect on my recent experience watching a production at Queen’s College Oxford and ask how far this reflects life for those in the shtetl?   The Jews in Russia Jewish communities had long been a part of Russia following the first partition of Poland in 1792. Here they lived in designated spaces within a space termed The Pale of Settlement . They were integral as farmers and many served in key roles in judicial bodies. Whilst there were times the Jews were treated as equals – such as under Tsar Nicolas I’s inclusion of them for military service with Russians of similar social status – they also faced periods of uncertainty. Klier has argued that the Jews of Ru...
Read more

Starmer’s Immigration Policies – The Crumbling State of English Universities and the Growing Need for Reassessment

-
Starmer’s Immigration Policies – The Crumbling State of English Universities and the Growing Need for Reassessment By Freya Cushman Across England, universities are facing the same perfect storm: financial pressures, cuts to staff and courses, and now looming changes to immigration policy. A recent Office for Student s  report found that 4 out of 10 universities are headed for a deficit. Can Starmer’s Labour deliver a viable future for English universities amid economic strain and immigration reform? It was Monday, the 5 th of May, when I was sitting in the former JCR of Somerville College discussing the recent report on university deficits with my tutor from last term and fellow coursemates. ‘Oxford and Cambridge will be the last bastions standing,’ my former tutor claimed. The prestige of the Oxford and Cambridge names will, it seems, undoubtedly continue to gather international interest and preserve  the status of these great institutions for many years to come. However, t...
Read more

The Value of Studying History: A Subject at Risk

-
“So, you’re going to be a history teacher?” This is the most common question I hear as an undergraduate History student. While teaching is certainly an option for some, it is not for me and is far from the only career path available to history graduates. Yet, the assumption that history is only valid for teaching or academia is a concerning factor in its under appreciation. Whether openly stated or implied, history as a subject is increasingly undervalued by our society. I’ll admit my bias—I chose to study history. But why? My path to this degree wasn’t straightforward. Initially, I intended to pursue a science-based degree, selecting A Levels in Biology, Chemistry, History, and English Literature. However, after the immense stress of Chemistry led me to drop it, I was drawn more toward History and Biology. The UK education system tends to push students toward the sciences or the humanities, making it difficult to pursue both. By dropping an additional science, my university options be...
Read more