Senate House at the height of the protests against tuition fees in December 2010R. Wendland

A third of undergraduates in England believe that their university course, for which they pay up to £9000 in fees, offers poor value for money, according to a new report. 

The report, which was carried out by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) and the Higher Education Academy (HEA), questioned 15,046 students about their university experience. The students found that, despite the fee increase, they had just 10 minutes more with university lecturers than students in previous years.

The findings indicated that 33 per cent of the undergraduates questioned felt that their degree offered poor value for money, compared with 18 per cent of survey participants in 2012. Only 36 per cent of students said their degree was good value for money, in comparison with 52 per cent two years ago. 31 per cent of undergraduates interviewed confirmed they would have chosen another course if they were given the option to reapply to university.

The survey revealed that first and second year students have a weekly average of 14.2 hours of contact time, made up of time spent in lectures and seminars. They also typically spend 14.3 hours every week on private study. This total falls short of the recommended 40 hours recommended by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), as mentioned in the survey.

At Cambridge, weekly contact hours can vary from ten hours for second year arts students to an average of seventeen or eighteen hours for second year medics. Another key feature that makes the teaching system at Cambridge stand out from other universities is the provision of supervisions, where students discuss essays and ideas with teaching staff individually or in small groups on a weekly basis.

Jenni Caisley, a second year linguist, said: “In a busy week I have about ten to twelve contact hours, and this term, with it being exam term, that's cut massively to a maximum of five hours a week. So the £9,000 fee essentially applies to two terms, rather than three. I definitely don't think this is an acceptable cost-gain ratio, and there are clear areas where more teaching could be provided, like having more language classes, rather than just one a fortnight, which is basically useless.”

She added: “During the majority of contact hours, I'm really happy with the standard and quality of teaching, but there are some cases where the time could be used more effectively, like classes where we just do group work that we could do in our own time, [but] I definitely wouldn't change degree. Languages are something I've always loved, and even though I think I'm not getting a fair deal in terms of tuition fees, I'd rather pay more for a course I'm generally happy doing.”

Jack Lewis, a second year linguist at Peterhouse, said: “If I am paying £9,000 a year I would like to see contact time in Part I as a whole increase. This may not have to be centralised, but some form of minimum required number of contact hours would be a step in the right direction to ensure that everyone, regardless of their college, receives the best quality teaching they can to ensure the best possible outcome.

Approached by Varsity, the University declined to comment on the survey.