cantbuymysilence – View From A Bridge – management, education and personal thoughts

University League Table – No Sympathy, No Spite

The cosy conspiracy that has created the current rankings merry go round is built on handing out kudos and credibility while launching new iterations and self-congratulatory events at as many exotic venues as possible. There’s no reason for anyone to bite the hand that feeds them or jeopardize cooperation on the monetization of student interest. Many institutions and academics collaborate with the rankers in public while griping privately about the unwelcome outcomes of higher education marketization.

It leaves a gap in the market for a rankings table that highlights decisions institutions make which seem against the spirit of being focused on academic values, student interest and fairness. Borrowing from Prof Scott Galloway’s thinking of “No Mercy, No Malice” such a table should not be perverse or spiteful in favouring one institution over another but equally should not shirk or be sympathetic when reflecting facts. It needs to be based on public information that is difficult to manipulate or massage and to highlight decision making in areas where students have every right to think that there might be some consistency.

Decision Making Made Easy

It is in this spirit that the first “No Sympathy, No Spite” rankings below focus on English universities to make use of recently and currently available data. The marking criteria allocates a score which penalises universities for not taking action where it would seem to be in the interests of students or where the data provided by an external body suggests it may have questions to answer. Each score reflects the university’s relative position against listed peers but scores are also totalled, with higher scores generally indicating universities that might wish to consider their decision making.

The table highlights which universities have signed or not signed on to the Can’t By My Silence pledge to stop using NDAs to stop students speaking out and also their decisions about involvement with the Universities UK Fair Admissions Code of Practice. While the sector is fond of praising those who do the right thing it seems shy about naming those that will not agree to basic standards which means students struggle to find out which universities are gaming the system or simply refusing to play at all. This ranking makes it clear who has chosen not to support specified courses of action.

Readers will determine for themselves if they agree that institutions should be signing up to fair admissions criteria or agreeing to stop using NDAs to gag students who are subject to sexual harassment and worse. More controversial may be the use of “unexplained” firsts data but the Office for Students is the designated regulating body and their chief executive said, “This spiralling grade inflation risks undermining public confidence in our higher education system.”. The People and Planets data reflects student activism and the voice of an important constituency on a vital issue.

The Office for Students data is only applicable to universities in England and universities that did not have degree awarding powers in 2020/11 have been excluded leaving 107. Further analysis may result in tables for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland where, for example, only Cardiff Metropolitan University has signed onto the Pledge to stop using NDAs for complaints about sexual harassment, bullying and other forms of misconduct. The information is provided in good faith based on the sources quoted and any authoritative amendments will be considered with amendments being made and flagged.

For the avoidance of doubt, a high score in the NDA Pledge and UUK Fair Admissions Code categories means the university has not signed up to either. A high score in the People and Planet category means the university is ranked poorly for environmental and ethical performance. The score in the Unexplained first-class degree is simply a function of the number of graduates and percentage of unexplained first-class degrees in 2020-21.

Provider name	Unexplained first-class degrees*	NDA Pledge**	UUK Fair Admissions Code***	People and Planet****	Total
Coventry University	12.2	7	5	1	25.2
University of Birmingham	11.2	7	*	5	23.2
Liverpool John Moores Uni	8.6	7	5	2	22.6
University of Leeds	13.2	7	*	2	22.2
Staffordshire University	6.1	7	5	4	22.1
Birmingham City University	7.4	7	5	2	21.4
University of Portsmouth	11.3	7	*	3	21.3
University of East London	5.3	7	5	4	21.3
Manchester Metropolitan Uni	20.1	*	*	1	21.1
Kingston University	5.7	7	5	3	20.7
University of Salford	12.3	7	*	1	20.3
Leeds Beckett University	10.2	7	*	3	20.2
Roehampton University	3.0	7	5	5	20.0
Queen Mary University of London	11.0	7	*	2	20.0
Goldsmiths’ College	3.6	7	5	4	19.6
University of Northampton	4.0	7	5	3	19.0
University of Wolverhampton	7.7	7	*	4	18.7
Anglia Ruskin Uni HE Corp	9.7	7	*	2	18.7
De Montfort University	10.7	7	*	1	18.7
University of St Mark & St John	1.2	7	5	5	18.2
Norwich University of the Arts	1.0	7	5	5	18.0
University College Birmingham	0.9	7	5	5	17.9
Liverpool Hope University	1.9	7	5	4	17.9
The University of Huddersfield	8.1	7	*	2	17.1
University of Sussex	6.1	7	*	4	17.1
The University of Essex	7.0	7	*	3	17.0
Royal Central School of Speech and Drama	0.5	7	5	4	16.5
University of Lincoln	6.5	7	*	3	16.5
Sheffield Hallam University	14.3	*	*	2	16.3
University of Brighton	7.2	7	*	2	16.2
University of Central Lancashire	7.2	7	*	2	16.2
University of Chester	5.2	7	*	4	16.2
University of Sunderland	4.0	7	*	5	16.0
University of Derby	6.7	7	*	2	15.7
The University of Buckingham	0.6	7	5	3	15.6
The University of Bradford	6.1	7	*	2	15.1
University of Hertfordshire	11.0	*	*	4	15.0
The University of Hull	5.9	7	*	2	14.9
University for the Creative Arts	3.9	7	*	4	14.9
The University of West London	5.8	7	*	2	14.8
University of Oxford	1.7	7	5	1	14.7
London School of Economics and Political Science	1.7	7	5	1	14.7
The University of Surrey	4.6	7	*	3	14.6
King’s College London	6.4	7	*	1	14.4
The University of Bolton	2.4	7	*	5	14.4
York St John University	3.3	7	*	4	14.3
Oxford Brookes University	4.0	7	*	3	14.0
Brunel University London	3.8	7	*	3	13.8
St Mary’s University, Twickenham	1.8	7	*	5	13.8
The University of Cumbria	2.3	7	*	4	13.3
St. George’s Hospital Med School	1.1	7	*	5	13.1
The University of Manchester	10.0	*	*	3	13.0
University of the Arts, London	5.0	7	*	1	13.0
University of Gloucestershire	2.9	7	*	3	12.9
University of Cambridge	2.9	7	*	3	12.9
Bishop Grosseteste University	0.8	7	*	5	12.8
University of Durham	5.7	*	5	2	12.7
Imperial College	2.7	7	*	3	12.7
Falmouth University	1.6	7	*	4	12.6
Nottingham Trent University	4.6	7	*	1	12.6
City, University of London	4.5	7	*	1	12.5
The University of Bath	2.4	7	*	3	12.4
The Royal Agricultural University	0.2	7	*	5	12.2
The University of Westminster	4.1	*	5	3	12.1
Bournemouth University	4.0	7	*	1	12.0
Newman University	0.5	7	*	4	11.5
Uni of Northumbria at Newcastle	10.4	*	*	1	11.4
University of Nottingham	9.4	*	*	2	11.4
Harper Adams University	0.2	7	*	4	11.2
The Royal Veterinary College	0.1	7	*	4	11.1
Arts University Bournemouth	1.0	7	*	3	11.0
London Metropolitan University	3.5	*	5	2	10.5
Royal Northern College of Music	0.3	*	5	5	10.3
London South Bank University	5.1	*	*	5	10.1
University of Bedfordshire	1.9	7	*	1	9.9
Uni of the West of England, Bristol	8.7	*	*	1	9.7
University of Southampton	5.6	*	*	4	9.6
Royal Holloway	5.4	*	*	4	9.4
The University of Kent	7.4	*	*	2	9.4
The University of Liverpool	7.3	*	*	2	9.3
The University of East Anglia	7.1	*	*	2	9.1
Edge Hill University	6.1	*	*	3	9.1
University College London	8.0	*	*	1	9.0
Middlesex University	7.8	*	*	1	8.8
Teesside University	5.6	*	*	3	8.6
The University of Sheffield	5.5	*	*	3	8.5
University of Greenwich	7.2	*	*	1	8.2
University of Exeter	7.2	*	*	1	8.2
University of Plymouth	7.0	*	*	1	8.0
The University of Leicester	5.9	*	*	2	7.9
Canterbury Christ Church Uni	4.6	*	*	3	7.6
The University of Lancaster	4.4	*	*	3	7.4
Solent University, Southampton	4.4	*	*	3	7.4
University of Newcastle upon Tyne	6.1	*	*	1	7.1
The University of Warwick	4.3	*	*	2	6.3
University of York	3.3	*	*	3	6.3
University of Bristol	5.2	*	*	1	6.2
Aston University	5.2	*	*	1	6.2
Loughborough University	2.6	*	*	3	5.6
The University of Chichester	1.6	*	*	4	5.6
The University of Reading	4.6	*	*	1	5.6
Leeds Trinity University	1.4	*	*	4	5.4
University of Keele	4.2	*	*	1	5.2
Buckinghamshire New University	1.6	*	*	3	4.6
Bath Spa University	2.3	*	*	2	4.3
University of Worcester	2.1	*	*	1	3.1
University of Winchester	1.0	*	*	1	2.0

Scoring Criteria/Method

Unexplained First Class Degrees
- This issue affects more students in larger universities so the number of graduates in 2020-21 is multiplied by the percentage of “unexplained first class degrees” in that year to show the number potentially affected. That sum is then divided by 100 to ensure the overall score is not wholly distorted by this category. The full analysis by the Office for Students is available.
Not Signed NDA Pledge
- The list of English university signatories on the Can’t Buy My Silence site was reviewed over the weekend of 14/15 May 2022. Universities that have signed the pledge score 0 (signified by an asterisk) while universities that have not signed receive 7 points.
UUK Fair Admissions Code
- The list of signatories shown on the Universities UK Fair Admissions Code of Practice site was reviewed over the weekend of 14/15 May 2022. Universities that have signed the pledge score 0 (signified by an asterisk) while universities that have not signed receive 5 points.
People and Planet
- The People and Planet University League ranks institutions in one of five classes – from First Class for the best, via 2:1, 2:2 and 3rd, to Failed. First class universities score one point with each succeeding category scoring one more through to Failed universities scoring 5. The People and Planet website gives extensive information on the methodology used.

Any comments, corrections or thoughts for development are welcome.

Image by Peggy und Marco Lachmann-Anke from Pixabay

More unity, less inaction needed from UK higher education

By Alan Preece published in University World News on 18 March 2022

United Kingdom higher education responses to the Russian invasion of Ukraine reflect the inability of the community to respond collectively, promptly or effectively to issues of importance. Umbrella groups and individual institutions stalled and prevaricated as they lagged behind other countries in responding to demands for concerted action.

It may have been a failure of planning, but other recent sector-wide issues suggest it may be a systemic point of failure in a sector where self-regulation and self-interest encourage inaction and obfuscation.

Fail to plan, plan to fail

The invasion started on 24 February, but the first statement by Universities UK was not until 28 February, which was an age given the potential to plan ahead and consider how to respond.

Even slower was the Russell Group, which did not manage a public response until 7 March, after the media had featured their lack of even the most basic of statements. Two weeks after the invasion there was still no statement on the Russell Group website.

By contrast, on the day after the invasion, the German Ministry of Education and Research said: “All current and planned activities with Russia are being frozen and subjected to critical review. There will be no new activities until further notice.”

By 4 March, the European Union had “decided to halt cooperation with Russian entities in research, science and innovation”, which included halting payments under existing contracts as well as making no new agreements. The Netherlands, Slovenia, Denmark and Lithuania had all reached the same position.

Universities UK was obliged to update its position when the Russian Union of Rectors (RUR) issued a statement on 4 March supporting “the Russian army and President Vladimir Putin’s decision to take military action in Ukraine”.

The response was to suspend a memorandum of understanding between Universities UK and the RUR, which coincided with the decision of the European University Association (of which Universities UK is a member) to suspend membership of 12 Russian university signatories. The sense of being bounced into defensive action rather than anticipating and leading continued to prevail.

Waiting is the hardest part

Perhaps UK higher education took its slow-walk lead from the glacial response of elements of the UK government.

On 27 February George Freeman MP, parliamentary under-secretary of state for science, research and innovation, tweeted that he had instigated a “rapid … review of all Russian beneficiaries (whether academic collaborators, companies or directors) of UK science, research, technology and innovation funding”.

By 7 March UK Research and Innovation was “pausing all payments to grants with potential Russian partners”, but saying, “we await further [British] government advice”.

More than two weeks later neither Freeman, UK Research and Innovation, nor the Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy had deigned to update their websites on the progress of the “rapid” review or its consequences.

Secretary of State for Education Nadhim Zahawi appears to have been sidelined from this issue, but recently promised to “crack down hard” on academics referred to by party colleague Robert Halfon MP as “useful idiots” for Putin. This looks like pandering to media attention rather than taking meaningful decisions about whether UK university links with Russian institutions are appropriate.

This may be another factor behind the delays by some UK universities in taking decisive action. Professor Colin Riordan, vice-chancellor of Cardiff University, a member of the Russell Group, told The Guardian on 4 March that “if the government were to tell his university to cut ties with Russia, it would do so because of the ‘bigger things at stake’.”

Professor Steve West, the president of the vice-chancellors’ group Universities UK, said: “I think we have to expect science sanctions … what is happening is a challenge on democracy and the safety and stability of the free world.”

At face value we appear to have institutions that are proud to promote their status as self-governing and autonomous, delaying taking decisive action until the government tells them what to do. Even when they acknowledge the threat to “the safety and stability of the free world” and the “bigger things at stake”, they seem unable to make a decision.

Governments in other countries may have recognised the capacity of universities to prevaricate and been wise to simply take the decision out of their hands.

At the individual university level, a number of institutions have demonstrated it is entirely possible to act promptly and with vigour. On 28 February the University of Warwick was reviewing all Russian links with a view to “terminating contracts where possible”. As early as 4 March the universities of Aberdeen, St Andrews and Dundee confirmed they had already cut ties with Russia and Edinburgh University was reviewing its investment stake in Sberbank.

By contrast, some universities have made no public statement, even of support for Ukraine, or have relied on the backstop position provided by Universities UK.

Keele University says: “We are working closely with other institutions in the UK higher education sector to coordinate our response.” This implies a joined-up response that is not evident in reality and exposes the tensions inherent in the sector.

A pattern of behaviour

For those who think this failure to unify is only a feature of a crisis, it is worth considering two other recent and important issues.

On 16 January 2022, six universities signed a pledge agreeing that victims of sexual harassment in universities should no longer be silenced by non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). It was wholeheartedly supported by Higher Education Minister Michelle Donelan, the National Union of Students and Universities UK, who claim to be the “collective voice” of 140 universities.

By 16 March, two months later, only 42 universities had signed the pledge which is held on the Can’t Buy My Silence website. It is difficult to think of anything simpler than committing to collective action on an issue of this type. Perhaps the reasons lie in the self-interest of a sector where a BBC News investigation in 2020 found nearly a third of universities had used NDAs for student grievances in a four-year period.

Back in 2020 there was pressure to stop the use of ‘conditional unconditional’ offers, with the higher education minister, the Office for Students and the National Union of Students agreeing they put students under undue pressure.

The practice was banned by the Office for Students from July 2020 to September 2021 and, following a Universities UK review, a new Fair Admissions Code of Practice was launched in March 2022. Despite the fanfare, the code is not compulsory and at the present time there is no indication on the websites of either Universities UK or co-developers GuildHE of who has signed up.

As recently as February 2022, the higher education minister had written to the University of Portsmouth, which continues to defend the use of such offers.

It is difficult to see that a code of conduct demonstrating the “higher education sector’s commitment to fair and transparent admissions practices” should be a matter of debate or contention. However, some in the sector stand by their option to secure competitive or other advantages by resisting uniform regulation or action in the interests of students.

Suspending links with universities significantly controlled by the Russian government, eradicating NDAs that silence victims of sexual harassment, and not agreeing to stop using conditional unconditional offers are obviously quite different examples. However, it is difficult to resist the argument that, even under situations where the free world’s “safety and stability” is at stake, the UK higher education sector needs to be told what to do.

It would seem better if they worked out how to act as a collective before they find patience wearing thin and face a more direct approach to their decision-making.

Alan Preece is an expert in global education, business transformation and operational management and runs the blogging site View from a Bridge.