Improving the student experience by Dan Sheldon

Improving the Student Experience at LSE Council Tuesday 3rd March 2009 IMPROVING THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE AT L.S.E. 1

Purpose of Paper

1.1 The following paper is presented in order to bring concerns about the ‘student experience’ to the attention of Council, and to make some recommendations for addressing these issues. 1.2 This paper incorporates the ideas and work of Student Governors, Students’ Union officials, Course and Programme Representatives in various departments, and many of the views expressed by students through UGM motions, meetings and face-to-face contact over a number of years. It should be considered in the context of the Director’s paper to the meeting of Council in February. The Director’s paper is to be welcomed and this paper should be seen as a concrete set of proposals to address the same concerns about quality raised therein. 2

Background

2.2 The term ‘student experience’ can mean many things. Ultimately, it is the sum of all the experiences students have at the university. This is very broad indeed, but can be subcategorised into the following key aspects, as it is in the School’s Strategic Plan: 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4

The academic and teaching experience; Academic support services; Administrative services; and The social experience at LSE.

2.3 The student experience at LSE has been the subject of some concern in recent times. Survey results, comments from students and observations by numerous members of academic and support staff have identified a variety of areas of concern, as well as a general perception that the quality of students’ experiences at LSE is not as high as it should, or could, be. 2.4 Particularly worrying survey results include the National Student Survey. Further surveys, such as the International Student Barometer, questionnaires about the quality of sports facilities at top institutions, and LSE’s own internal research all evidence worrying trends regarding the perception students hold of their experience at the School. This is not to say that every aspect of the student experience is rated poorly in these results – academic support services and administrative services, notably the Library and the Student Services Centre, do come out well in certain surveys. Nonetheless, academic and teaching experience results are consistently poor. 2.5 A number of students’ comments to Students’ Union Officers and others are particularly instructive (see Annex A for more examples): 2.5.1

“I have been deeply unsatisfied with my time at the LSE thus far. Every administrative office with whom I have had contact has treated me as though I am an annoyance… Teaching has been equally appalling… I have 1

Improving the Student Experience at LSE

2.5.2

2.5.3

essentially paid 5000 pounds for a reading list. I do not consider this to be a wise investment, and I am at the moment seriously considering withdrawing before I invest any further money. I feel that upon graduation, I will have at best a piece of paper and some good friends… I am very unhappy that an institution as reputable as LSE would take so much money from me and treat my education and personal development as anything short of a priority” – MSc. Health, Community and Development student 2008-9. “As a student from the United States, I find the quality of my education at my small, liberal arts college in Minnesota far surpasses the quality of an LSEbranded education. LSE will not be able to maintain its international reputation should the quality of its teaching and services to students continue to decay” – General Course student 2007-8. “Though LSE's brand value with companies is great for securing a job later on, all I want now is a good education” – BSc. Management student 2007-10.

2.6 This anecdotal evidence is too frequent to be dismissed as a minority of student vies, and the number of responses to surveys suggests that these feelings are widespread. This is not to say that everything LSE does is bad, or even that the concerns raised necessarily negate the positive experiences of some students. Nevertheless, it is clear that many LSE students have generally had their expectations disappointed, are not overly impressed with the quality of education they have received and will not go away from LSE with glowing reports of their time here. 2.7 Feelings of disengagement and disconnection are also widely felt. LSE remains a uniquely cosmopolitan environment with students from nearly every nation and culture. There is however widespread self-segregation by national and cultural groups are increasingly common problems that affect levels of satisfaction with the student experience. LSE simply fails to integrate many national and cultural groups, large and small. 2.8 This may be considered a natural phenomenon but it appears to go further than instinctive defence functions – the majority of students, who actively want to integrate and learn from students of different backgrounds, feel that there are a lack of opportunities to integrate with other national or cultural groups. One student recently described the School environment in The Beaver as “multimono-culturalism”. In some cases, students have been known to switch halls of residence to avoid feeling isolated and to be together with national or cultural groupings. 2.9 Although issues of isolation and segregation are being tackled through the School’s Good Campus Relations initiatives, these problems are symptoms of deeper problems with the student experience. Only by making significant improvements to the experiences of individual students will we be able to make strides towards resolving these issues at their root. 2.10 Crucially, many students increasingly feel undervalued at LSE. Such concerns were highlighted in the LSE Not for Profit campaign, which gathered around 500 signatures for a petition calling on LSE to refocus its direction on quality of education, against the perception that students are simply valued for their ability to pay fees and living costs to study here. 2.11 This perception comes from the feeling that senior academics care more about their research than teaching; the lack of opportunities to engage with senior academics; and the atmosphere or culture of the School in terms of the lack of a 2

Improving the Student Experience at LSE departmental ethos, collegiate feel or academic community. That is not to say that students do not feel that research is important; indeed, students will benefit from the reputation of LSE’s research through the value of their degree. However, students would find it hard to pinpoint exactly how the quality of LSE’s research affects the standard of their education. The School needs to do more to justify the assumption that high quality research has spill over effects into high quality teaching. Some might put this down to a ‘lag time’ between the release of groundbreaking research and its trickle-down into the curriculum; reviews of courses and their content do not seem to happen quickly enough to translate the benefits of research into students receiving new ideas and interacting with those conducting the research. 2.12 Together, these concerns constitute an urgent and significant problem for LSE in the following ways: 2.12.1 Poor personal development of students – employers have raised a number of concerns about the quality of LSE graduates with the Careers Service, namely that they lack communication, social and presentational skills, and exhibit inadequate personal development, despite their raw academic ability. 2.12.2 Reputational risk – negative media attention has arisen as a result of poor survey results. Perhaps more damagingly, networks of former and current students will pass information on that may affect LSE’s reputation amongst those in the outside world. LSE’s reputation is now almost entirely founded on its standard of research, rather than teaching, which will eventually lead to a fall in applications unless changes are made. This is recognised in the School’s Strategic Risk Register, which states that the risk that “teaching experience may undermine market position” is a High Likelihood and High Impact risk, as well as “poor social experience for some students” being a High Likelihood and Medium Impact risk. 2.12.3 Alumni disengagement – a number of cohorts that have graduated in the last few years will have a less positive memory of their experience at LSE. There is a strong possibility that recent student cohorts will feel less affinity to and engagement with the School into the future. This has an impact on other aspects of LSE’s work, potentially including donations. 2.13 Fundamentally, the biggest problem is that there is a perception that LSE is failing to meet the expectations of its students; that students benefit from LSE’s reputation, but gain little in terms of personal development; and that the academic experience one gains at the School is not as challenging, engaging or educative as one that might be gained at more or less reputable institutions at which the student experience is a strategic priority. 3

Academic and teaching experience

3.1 The Teaching Taskforce (TTF) represents a major step taken by the School to address concerns over quality of teaching. However, some students, decisionmakers and even Governors have expressed a desire to make some short-term, ‘quick wins’ on teaching that can, and should be, implemented quickly. This was a particular concern raised by Course/Programme Representatives in recent meetings. 3.2 There is also a perception that the TTF is a long-term project that will only reap benefits to future students, and many current students feel that they are effectively financing benefits that they will never see. 3

Improving the Student Experience at LSE

3.3 Ongoing concerns include: 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.3.7

Access to tutors; Academic and pastoral roles; Lack of contact time; Class sizes; Need for better feedback; The role of Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs); and The feeling that some departments exhibit an excessive 'find out for oneself' mentality when dealing with students’ concerns about teaching.

3.4 The following suggestions have been gathered: 3.4.1

3.4.2

3.4.3

3.4.4

3.4.5

Oversight of teaching standards – reviews by the Teaching, Learning and Assessment Committee (TLAC) every five years are not enough. They are easily discarded or forgotten in the short-term between gaps in reviews. The proposal to set up a Teaching Committee under the TTF has not been fully implemented – a subcommittee of teaching innovation has been created, but has only met once. A proper Teaching Committee with strong oversight powers should be created to consistently review teaching, and also encourage and disseminate good practice with regard to teaching, assessment and feedback. The Teaching Committee should also review the implementation of the TTF. Promoting a culture that recognises the importance of teaching – currently, there is a perception that research is considered more important than teaching. Academics are, perhaps rightly, promoted for excellent research but their standard of teaching is not included in measures of suitability for promotion. A baseline standard should be established for promotion – thus, if an academic’s research is worthy of promotion but their teaching is below the baseline standard of teaching, they will be told that they must improve their teaching in order to gain promotion. This approach is one of the ways in which the culture of the School can be changed to address perceived imbalances between research and teaching. Increase contact hours between permanent academic staff and undergraduates – currently, contact between students and senior academic staff beyond lectures is very limited, especially at the undergraduate level. There is a lack of consistency between departments in teaching contact hours. Departments that currently have low contact hours between permanent staff and students should increase the amount of contact time and, where possible, follow best practice in other departments. Create a stronger tutorial structure – tutors are often the first point of call for students with personal academic and welfare issues. Developing a good relationship with one’s tutor makes life at LSE far easier and those students with good personal tutors tend to have a more favourable view of LSE. Unfortunately, such good relationships are rare. Tutors are often difficult to get a hold of and offer little support to a students’ development. In turn, students see little benefit in meeting with their tutor, and the relationship breaks down. With a stronger tutorial structure, many of the problems which later beset students can be rectified. Ensure personal skills development is part of teaching across all departments – group discussions, presentations and effective feedback on these are an important part of teaching in many departments. However, this is not the case in all courses, especially in quantitative subjects where the focus is on staff led teaching and private study. Clearer guidance and training could 4

Improving the Student Experience at LSE provided to ensure this element of teaching is prioritised across all departments. 3.5 It is asked that Council consider these recommendations and make suggestions to appropriate areas of the School to ensure that progress can be made on them. These should be reviewed as part of the remit of the Teaching Committee. 4

Prioritising student enrichment activities

4.1 Enrichment activities and personal development issues need to be prioritised in order to affect positive change to the student experience at LSE. Student enrichment activities including sports and societies, volunteering, learning another language (outside of one’s degree) and any other activities that promote personal development. Ensuring access to student enrichment activities for all is essential, particularly important is keeping Wednesday afternoons free from timetabled teaching. 4.2 The subject of keeping Wednesday afternoons free has simmered under the surface for many years. Numerous UGM motions from students, particularly members of the Athletics Union (AU), demand a resolution; the School says it is impossible; and the issue dies down for another few months or years, before the cycle begins again. 4.3 A more constructive approach is needed from both sides to achieve a resolution that is satisfactory to students. The situation is particularly pressing for postgraduate students. 4.4 According to research by the National Union of Students (NUS), 63 of the top 100 ranked institutions in the country keep Wednesday afternoons free for student enrichment activities. The following universities in the Russell Group all offer Wednesday afternoons free for all students: 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.3 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.6 4.4.7 4.4.8 4.4.9

Imperial College London; University College London, University of London (UCL); University of Bristol; Cardiff University; University of Liverpool; University of Manchester; University of Newcastle; University of Sheffield; and University of Warwick.

4.5 As members of the Russell Group, these universities represent LSE’s immediate competitors. Some institutions, like UCL, are particularly noteworthy – while they do hold some teaching sessions on a Wednesday afternoon in certain subjects, they also offer alternative timetabling options on a Friday for those students who opt to engage in student enrichment activities. 4.6 The School currently defines “afternoon” as after 1pm. This causes a particular problem in terms of access to LSE’s sporting facilities – given that Berrylands sports ground is so far away, it is impossible for students to reach their sporting fixtures on time if they have to leave at 1pm. 4.7 There seem to be conflicting messages about exactly why freeing up Wednesday afternoons is considered so difficult. There are two main reasons given for this – 5

Improving the Student Experience at LSE availability of space, and availability of teaching staff – but no-one seems to know which is the principal obstacle. It was once suggested that the construction of the New Academic Building (NAB) would resolve some of the issues over availability of space, but no assessment has been made since its completion. Any assessment would need to take into account the impact of future projects in the Estates Strategy, which affect the availability of space for teaching. 4.8 A working group should be established to look into the issues of availability of space and availability of teaching staff, and consider solutions to both problems. 5

Improved Library opening hours

5.1 In 2006, a pilot scheme for 24 hour opening of the Library was undertaken. Over 100,000 extra hours of study were used by students during of the pilot, with an average of 85 students in the Library each hour, and over 300 being in the Library after midnight on several nights, according to the Academic Planning and Resources Committee’s (APRC) own figures. Furthermore, the APRC report concluded that “the marginal cost of opening for a few additional hours can therefore be almost as much as 24 hours”. A survey on the pilot scheme showed that 73% of students questioned said it was ‘very useful’ or ‘fairly useful’; none said it was ‘not as useful as expected’ or ‘not useful’. 5.2 Last year, the Students’ Union ran a campaign for a 24 hour Library – that is, a Library open 24 hours throughout the year. The Union gathered 1300 signatures in support of a 24 hour Library. 5.3 However, many in the School were not convinced. While the resources were available, many felt that keeping the Library open 24 hours for certain periods of the year was unnecessary, wasteful and might encourage learning habits that would be detrimental to the welfare and interests of students. 5.4 Since then, the issue of extended opening of the Library has continued to be a deep concern for many students. School officials have indicated that they are open to more specific proposals for extended Library opening hours. 5.5 A more nuanced proposal is being made by the Students’ Union this year. We are not demanding constant 24 hour opening, but think that the Library should have extended hours during term time, as well as during the Christmas and Summer vacations, and that the Library should be open 24 hours for some periods outside of Summer Term. 5.6 The issue is not just one of students with particular needs (such as parents and part-time students) working late; it is also a case that many students require the Library early on for preparation for presentations, essays, or interviews. Therefore, there is a strong case for extension of opening hours to apply to both late night and early morning. 5.7 One of the key issues for postgraduate students and part-time students is opening during the Christmas and Summer vacation periods. Shorter opening times during Christmas adversely affect many students who continue to work after the end of term and would therefore benefit from later opening; the lack of Sunday opening is also very frustrating for many students preparing for Lent Term assignments. As in many top institutions in the country, LSE should attempt to standardise term and vacation opening periods.

Improving the Student Experience at LSE 5.8 A recently convened working group of the School has made some excellent strides towards improvements in this area. This includes opening the Library 24 hours from the 23rd February (a month earlier than originally conceived). The work of this group now needs to look forward and make some holistic proposals for extending Library opening hours throughout the year. 6

The social experience at LSE

6.1 Concerns about the lack of integration in and among the School community are directly related to problems with the social experience at LSE. Some of the major issues are: 6.2 Induction 6.2.1 6.2.2

6.2.3

6.2.4

6.2.5

The induction period is extremely important to students – the first few weeks of one’s time in LSE, or in London as a whole, can set the tone for the future of their study. The School has made some very important strides this year in coordination of and improvements to the Induction period. The new Head of Student Administration, in particular, has been extremely proactive in her proposals for changes to our current programme. The School should promote the idea of ‘transition’, rather than induction, which broadens the School’s horizons to consider when information should be given to students (rather than being given in a large ‘chunk’ at the beginning of the year), how students transition from school to university, how students move from year-to-year and other wider, how postgraduate students adapt to LSE and issues regarding living and studying in London. The Students’ Union has expanded the range of activities it provides during the induction period (many of which are detailed in the Annual Report), and the School must also commit to reviewing and increasing the variety and quality of services around induction. The period requires more resources and coordination between divisions and Departments. A joint approach with the Students’ Union is critical. One illuminating example is in the first academic interaction that a student experiences – their first class or seminar. The first class or seminar is currently, in many instances, a short introduction to the other members, a brief overview of the course and the structure of classes, and very little else; they often finish early. Instead, the opening class or seminar should provide space for social interaction between the participants, so that students can get to know their fellow classmates and teacher, and create a greater connection to the group in which they are supposed to learn. By encouraging this interaction from the very first meeting, the group identity of the class can be improved. This would go some way towards overcoming the disengagement from one another and the teacher, which results in the quality and quantity of group discussion rapidly diminishing. This will overcome the perception among many students that their classes are a waste of time, which they only attend because of the disciplinary consequences for missing this compulsory component of their degree.

6.3 Halls of residence 6.3.1

Many issues of integration are aimed to be dealt with in the Induction period. However, for many first year students (both undergraduates and taught masters), the best intentions of the School centrally can become redundant if their experience in halls of residence is unsatisfactory. 7

Improving the Student Experience at LSE 6.3.2

6.3.3

6.3.4

6.3.5

6.3.6 6.3.7

6.3.8

Responsibility for induction and integration as it relates to halls currently largely resides with student Halls Committees. In some cases, committed and motivated committees deliver a fantastic programme of activities and support that fosters hall identity and social inclusion. Sadly, in many others, student committees suffer from a lack of committed members, lack of preparation over the summer, and lack of support and knowledge in terms of how to effectively represent students and organise attractive and engagement activities. This year in particular saw a huge swathe of problems, as committee members dropped out over the summer, lost interest, decided they did not want to live in halls, did not respond to queries for the Students’ Union or halls management, failed to show up on time, failed to prepare for the Welcome to London Week and Freshers’ Festival, or simply did not perform to high standards through lack of awareness or training. Part of the problems this year are believed to have been caused by the pressures of Welcome to London Week, which added another week of responsibility and activity to the role of Halls Committees. However, Welcome to London Week is only a small part of the problem, and has been changed in time for next year to reduce the burden on halls. Concerns have also been raised about the transparency of Halls Committees’ budgets. Large amounts of money are provided to the committees through common room fees which are supposed to be spent on student activities for the benefit of all members of the halls. However, there is little accountability in how this money is spent. There are few or no mechanisms in place to enforce responsible spending among committees or address poor performance. The Students’ Union would be able to provide better training and advice to hall committees. However, the relationship between the Students’ Union and the committees is informal and lacks enforcement. Annually, we offer training and advice, but this is only taken up by a few halls, and usually by those who are most active and need the least help. The School also has difficulties in ensuring that Halls Committees representatives are effective both at the halls and in terms of simply attending the relevant and important School committees on which they sit. It is recommended that the Students’ Union should take over responsibility for the Halls Committees in overseeing their budgets (in the way that we receive societies’ and sports clubs’ budgets), making their finances public and accountable to student; providing training and advice from trained Officers and staff with experience in student representation and student activities; and helping coordinate activities on campus and in halls, especially during the induction period. The Students’ Union is the primary representative for students and students will benefit from more coordinated representation. Beyond this particular issue, provision also needs to be made for those students who do not live in halls. Coupled with a lack of classroom or Departmental engagement, students living at home or outside of halls of residence can feel particularly isolated and disconnected from the School community. Opportunities for the engagement of these groups need to be considered alongside the pressing need for improvements to student experiences in halls of residences, especially but not exclusively through Departments.

6.4 Departmental ethos and identity 6.4.1

One way of fostering inclusion, integration and collegiate community comes through addressing concerns over the decline of the departmental ethos. This is manifested in the role of Course Representatives, and the provision of social space and common rooms. 8

Improving the Student Experience at LSE 6.4.2

6.4.3

6.4.4

6.4.5

Many students are concerned with the quality of representation they derive from their elected Course or Programme Representatives. Students regularly complain that they do not know who their representatives are, let alone how they are elected, or what work they do. Furthermore, the elections of Course or Programme Representatives are not standardised throughout the School. Some Departments hold fairly thorough elections using email or internet facilities; but others still conduct a brief poll in large lectures, which generates little interest in the position and means students who cannot attend are disenfranchised. Many Students’ Unions throughout the country support Course and Programme Representatives. Currently, we provide regularly training and a thorough Handbook to support representatives. However, there are many Students’ Unions who do a lot more. In many cases, Students’ Unions use their expertise and experience in student representation to run and support elections for Course and Programme Representatives alongside the other elections they hold in the first term (Michaelmas Term Elections here at LSE). The benefits to this include the following:

6.4.5.1 Elections already generate interest in the campus media and student body at large, and thus more people are likely to be engaged in who they are voting for and their Course Representatives structures in general; 6.4.5.2 With more people engaged, those elected are more likely to be known to the students on their particular course or programme. This means students are more likely to bring concerns to their Course Representatives, leading to better student representation and input, and more accountable Course Representatives; 6.4.5.3 Departments will thus get better, more reliable feedback and interest from their students; 6.4.5.4 Every student will be given a chance to vote, meaning that the system is more democratic, open and available than simply asking students to put their hands up in a lecture in which some students might not be present; 6.4.5.5 Course Representatives will have to run proper election campaigns detailing their ideas, attributes and experience, meaning that more serious applicants apply, and all candidates take their position much more seriously when elected. Better candidates are more likely to be elected, particularly as their manifestos, experience and skills are more highly scrutinised; 6.4.5.6 Course Representatives will feel more involved with the Students’ Union and communicate their concerns with officers, meaning in turn that we can more effectively voice academic concerns to the School. This means that problems can become apparent and be resolved much more quickly, to the benefit of students, their Departments and the Students’ Union; and 6.4.5.7 Students deserve to be fully involved in the issues relating to their Departments and courses. The current system works well in some places and not in others; a more standardised system will be fairer and better for students. 6.4.6 6.4.7

There are other key initiatives needed to facilitate increased links between members of the same department, particularly in the provision of common rooms and social study space. There are a number of current problems with Common Rooms. Some departments do not have one at all; some have inadequate or unattractive rooms that fail in the promotion of departmental cohesion; and some are not located at the ‘heart’ of the department, which leads to a feeling of them being unimportant to the student experience. Common Rooms should instead be at the centre of the Department, and made attractive enough to encourage 9

Improving the Student Experience at LSE

6.4.8

6.4.9

academic and social interactions between students of the same subjects and disciplines. Furthermore, it is particular concerning that the provision of Common Rooms has not been integrated into relocation or redevelopment plans for departments. For example, the Law Department has lost its Common Room in its move to the NAB. Social study spaces need to be incorporated into new projects and departmental moves. Finally, the idea of some inter-departmental competition and cooperation have been proposed to foster a greater sense of identity within departments. For example, low level sporting activity, debating and social events.

Recommendations

7.1 Council is asked: 7.1.1

Regarding the academic and teaching experience:

7.1.1.1 To recommend to the appropriate committees and areas of the School the academic and teaching experience improvements listed in 3.4.1 to 3.4.5; 7.1.1.2 To ensure that teaching remains a priority within departments, and is taken seriously by all academics. 7.1.2

Regarding student enrichment activities:

7.1.2.1 To create a working group within the School, including all major stakeholders, to review timetabling and the possibility of keeping Wednesday afternoons after 12 noon free for all students. 7.1.3

Regarding the Library:

7.1.3.1 To recommend that the working group on the 24 hour opening of the Library draws up suggestions for extended Library hours throughout the year, including further periodic 24 hour openings outside of Summer Term, and especially extending opening in Christmas and Summer vacation. 7.1.4

Regarding the social experience at LSE:

7.1.4.1 To recognise the School’s responsibility for the social as well as the academic experience at LSE, and to work with the Students’ Union and others in making sure that this too is a strategic priority for the School; 7.1.4.2 To make the induction period a priority focus for the School and to coordinate efforts between divisions and Departments; 7.1.4.3 To support the integration of Halls Committees into the Students’ Union and improvements to the coordination of Induction between campus and halls; 7.1.4.4 To endorse the integration of Course/Programme Representatives’ elections into the Students’ Union to standardise and improve student representation through departments; 7.1.4.5 To review the provision of Commons Rooms and social space, ensuring the Common Rooms is general are improved, provided where they are not provided and integrated into redevelopment and relocation plans for Departments. 7.1.5

In general:

Improving the Student Experience at LSE 7.1.5.1 To prioritise students’ concerns over their experience at LSE, and commit to a greater urgency in addressing these issues; 7.1.5.2 To suggest other committees or areas of the School who might receive areas of this paper for discussion and action. Aled Dilwyn Fisher LSE Students’ Union General Secretary and Sophie de la Hunt Student Council member

Improving the Student Experience at LSE Council Tuesday 3rd March 2009 ANNEX A: QUOTES FROM STUDENTS ON THEIR EXPERIENCE AT L.S.E. MSc. Health, Community and Development student 2008-9: “I have been deeply unsatisfied with my time at the LSE thus far. Every administrative office with whom I have had contact has treated me as though I am an annoyance. The Fees Office in particular has provided an unacceptable service. Because the office is available for student queries only one hour per day, I have been left for a month wondering when I will receive my next student loan instalment. When I am able to utilize the student drop-in hour, I must queue for the majority of that time, only to be rudely dismissed with a less than adequate answer to my question. The website is designed to cater to prospective students, from which I can assume that current students are of little importance to the school's administration. “Teaching has been equally appalling. While I have enjoyed studying my subject, I do not feel any better prepared to conduct primary research or enter the job market after my first term. In fact, I have essentially paid 5000 pounds for a reading list. I do not consider this to be a wise investment, and I am at the moment seriously considering withdrawing before I invest any further money. I feel that upon graduation, I will have at best a piece of paper and some good friends. I will not be in any better position to contribute to the literature or advance my career than I was before I undertook this program. I came to the LSE because of the opportunities I would have here to study under the world's foremost experts in my chosen field and to enjoy the school's famous opportunities to hear guest lecturers. I have yet to secure tickets to a lecture, and was dismayed to learn that important figures like Ben Bernanke have delivered speeches on campus that were only available to journalists. Our professors are hardly better at providing us with the kind of instruction and guidance we need to succeed in the program and secure a job upon graduation. In short, I am very unhappy that an institution as reputable as LSE would take so much money from me and treat my education and personal development as anything short of a priority. “I have lost sleep over the last few days because my deep dissatisfaction with the LSE has forced me to consider withdrawing. I have thus far paid about 5000 pounds for a reading list, and I imagine that after a further 10000 pounds spent I will be no better prepared to conduct primary research or enter the job market than I had been before I undertook this course. In the current economic climate, I don't know whether my job prospects would be better if I finish my master's degree, or if I would be better off saving myself another 7 months of suffering and even more debt. It is such a shame that I feel this way now. I worked very hard to get here, and I really want to see this through and reap the benefits of my efforts. I am willing to do whatever I can to ensure that this experience works out for me and for my fellow CURRENT students. I feel that it is not enough that the administration and professors make commitments to improve their services for future students. By the end of my year here, I will have paid more money than most people earn in two years. I demand something for that money, or I demand a refund. I think that students should band together and make these demands collectively. We deserve much better.” General Course student 2007-8:

Improving the Student Experience at LSE “As a student from the United States, I find the quality of my education at my small, liberal arts college in Minnesota far surpasses the quality of an LSE-branded education. LSE will not be able to maintain its international reputation should the quality of its teaching and services to students continue to decay. American students--potential 'high margin products'--expect a great deal more out of an elite world-class education.” MSc. International Relations Student 2008-9 “Certainly among my friends on the MSc. International Relations course… we just care that the £13 000 we're paying for this particular year isn't wasted. At the moment, the standard of lectures is pretty bad, the library is noisy, there aren't enough books, and not enough working computers for us to use. To go to a library and not find the book we need, or a computer when we need it, seems to me massively poor. Many of us are not looking forward to the term starting again on Monday.” BA History student 2007-10: “[I feel that LSE] increasingly subordinates the pursuit of academia and teaching to the goal of profit” BSc. Econometrics and Mathematical Economics student 2007-10: “Students are one of the most important parts of the School. It is their future work, wherever this may be, along with the research that LSE academics undertake, that lend LSE its formidable reputation. Yes, students want something from LSE, I am very proud to be here, but they also have a lot to give and thus should be treated respectfully and given as much support as possible.“ MSc. alumnus: “LSE does appear to undervalue its students. I was a Master's student, and compared to my undergraduate education at the University of Chicago, the experience I had at the LSE was disappointing. If the LSE does not do something about this, I fear that its 'brand-name' will not be valued for much longer.” BSc. International Relations and History student 2006-9: “[LSE needs to] gain back credibility as one of the leading social science institutions.” BSc. Management student 2007-10: “Though LSE's brand value with companies is great for securing a job later on, all I want now is a good education.” BA Anthropology and Law 2008-11: “It's very shocking to note that teaching quality has been in constant decline at LSE.” MSc. Organisational and Social Psychology 2008-9: “This institution is definitely having leadership problems.”