LSE Denies It Is Privatizing After U.K. Budget Cuts

[Andy Nguyen]

The London School of Economics has denied reports that the university is considering “going private” in response to the coalition government’s announced plans to cut its contribution to university teaching budgets by as much as 40 percent.

At present the University of Buckingham and BPP University, a subsidiary of the Arizona-based Apollo Group, are the only private universities in Britain.

Privatization would allow the school to charge tuition fees above the limits set by the government — currently fixed at £3,290, or about $5,250, a year.

It would also mean the school would not be bound by government guidelines encouraging the admission of more students from poorer backgrounds.

Although maximum fees are expected to rise next year, the amount is not expected to enough to make up for cuts to teaching budgets.

L.S.E. Denies It Is Privatizing After U.K. Budget Cuts - NYTimes.com

 

[DominiConnor]

This article does not have the sources that I have access to...

What they don't know is that the limit is going to be set around £12,000 (circa $20K)
On top of that English universities will be allowed to charge certain 'fees' if they choose.

So the LSE could charge a lot more.

The article also fails to grasp the politics of the LSE itself, since it has both people who are hard line conservative economists and a group who are in effect a socialist department of anti-American studies, and lots of interesting positions between.

The 'guidelines' for accepting students from poorer backgrounds are ignored by every UK university of which I am aware. Some indulge a bit of PR by occasional scholarships and 'outreach' To scale that, a major US university like Harvard has more funds for this purpose than every English university put together.

Note I say "English" here, not British, because it's a complex mess caused by pandering to Scottish nationalists.

My view is that UCL and Imperial will lead fees up.

Then places like the LSE will take whatever number UCL chooses, knock 10% off then say they are keeping true to their founders values of being open to all.

In another thread, I point out that this is of little direct relevance to non-EU students because UK universities charge them something like a "market" price anyway. The olny difference is that their may be slightly less competition from UK students who can't afford to go.

My children will of course benefit since their parents aren't poor, and you have no idea how pissed off I am about this.

 

[Barny]

To be quite frank, LSE isn't capable of becoming a private institution. It has an endowment of some £60 million, which is about the same as my Cambridge college (which is poor in Cambridge terms). They do not have the money to make the initial investment they would require to become a private university. Only Oxbridge has that ability, and it's been common knowledge for years that Oxbridge have been considering privatising because they've had enough of the restrictions the government place on them in terms of fees, intake etc.

 

[TraderJoe]

For all its funding problems, the quality of research that comes out of LSE is of amazingly high quality and this is reflected in the fact that most of their PhD grads take up faculty positions in Top 10 Business schools in USA.

 

[DominiConnor]

One path the LSE could take is to skip having an endowment, and simply charge what the market will bear.
Due to wise property purchases in a previous recession it manages to be both in an expenive area in London, but at the same time largely unaffectedf by spiralling rent or to buy new premises. Also it's property is mostly in good condition.

As a school specialising in social studies, there is little need for expensive equipment, and having a world class brtand means it can attract rich kids from practically everywhere.

So I don't yet see a reason why becoming a 'private' university is denied it.

Also, of course most British universities are to some extent 'private' in the sense that the "restrictions" placed upon them are of the form "the government will give you money if you do X"

Most could quite legally stop having any government influence whenever they like.

But it is becoming clear that the government is both reducing the control and reducing the money, so it may be that the government leaves them.

So the politically easy option for the people that run universities is to drift up fees a bit, and let the government take the flak for the issues it will cause.

Although there is no official limit on the salaries of senior staff at universities, being funded by the state limits what they get paid. Most are on surprisingly little.
That is a factor to take into account.