One in four Leeds 2023 graduates dissatisfied with teaching quality, league tables show

The University of Leeds has slipped down The Guardian and the Complete University Guide league tables of UK universities.

Falling six and seven places, the University placed 27th and 22nd in the respective league tables.

RankUniversityOverallStudent satisfactionResearch QualityGraduate prospects
1University of Cambridge100%N/a88%91%
2University of Oxford98%N/a87%90%
3London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)96%78%88%87%
21Cardiff University75%76%84%83%
22University of Leeds75%74%84%80%
23University of East Anglia75%76%84%78%
Data: The Complete University Guide 2024

In the UK-only rankings, student satisfaction and satisfaction with feedback were two of the lowest-performing categories. 

The Complete University Guide placed Leeds 123rd for student satisfaction, with 74% of students satisfied with the quality of teaching received. Leeds Beckett University, Leeds Arts University and Leeds Trinity University all ranked higher in this category.

Both league tables are based on the results of the National Student Survey (NSS) sent out to final year students. 

Image: Office for Students

Asked about the fall in league table results, a university spokesperson said: “Leeds participates in a wide range of university league tables, and while we are naturally disappointed with any decline, we continue to perform strongly in other rankings”

They cited the international QS table, which uses different methodologies to the NSS. Leeds secured 75th place, its best position since QS began publishing rankings in 2004. Sustainability and international research quality were two areas the university excelled in. 

LUU’s student executive’s education officer Bethany Corner, spoke to The Gryphon about the downturn in NSS feedback. She said the executive team wanted to “make sure the lessons learned from the past couple of years are not forgotten”. 

Bethany said increased student ownership was central to this, 

“Rather than being consumers of a product we are seeing students become more and more active in the change making processes from the very beginning.”

Part of this is staff-student feedback, such as module evaluations which allow students to inform staff about teaching quality. However, in the NSS, less than half of Leeds students responded positively to “How clear is it that the student’s feedback on the course is acted on?”.

In terms of teaching quality a spokesperson for the university said: “We recognise that more needs to be done. We are working hard to transform the University’s learning framework”.

Similarly, Bethany said the LUU student executive were “constantly pushing and having conversations to encourage everyone to do better”. However, neither mentioned practical details for how teaching will improve this academic year. 


Considering the growing commercialisation and increased cost burden of a university degree, the idea of students as consumers who are entitled to ‘high-value’ experiences has gained salience. 

In light of this, some frustrated students have pursued legal routes, claiming that the consumer rights they are entitled to in UK law have been violated. 

This was tested between 2020 and 2023 when StudentGroupClaim.com, a campaign of University College London (UCL) students, filed a court claim against their university for inadequate teaching provision during Covid. 

They said they wanted to address a “power imbalance” between students and their university. In a partial win for the campaign in July 2023, the high court said UCL should engage in alternative dispute resolution and provide compensation out of court.

Image: Student Group Claim

Whilst acknowledging necessary improvements to be made, education officer Bethany Corner said that the University of Leeds remains a great choice for prospective students. 

She emphasised the strong student community, the empowered and engaged societies, and the opportunities presented by global connections between the university and its partners.

Politicians Are Not Celebrities: Matt Hancock’s Entrance into the Jungle 

Former Health Secretary Matt Hancock is a household name for all the wrong reasons. Firstly, known for his daily presence on our screens, he guided us through challenging lockdown restrictions, and then so aptly broke them through his attendance at the now notorious Downing Street parties. Secondly, known for the CCTV footage capturing his affair with his aide Gina Coladangelo, which, surprise, surprise, also broke the legislation he set forth. And now, his name has unfortunately resurfaced once again announcing his appearance on this year’s season of ‘I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out of Here’.

Regardless of the moral and political gripe I have with Matt Hancock, a current MP has no place on a popularised reality television show. This is especially the case for a show that sees you removed from society and plonked in a jungle approximately 10,000 miles away from your constituency. Although the line seems to be becoming increasingly blurred, the UK Parliament website defines an MP as “the person elected by all those who live in a particular area (constituency) to represent them in the House of Commons”. This means Matt Hancock is responsible for giving the concerns of his constituents a voice, yet this seems somewhat challenging to achieve while you’re earning ‘stars’ by eating a kangaroo penis in the jungle. 

It was reported in 2007, by the House of Commons Modernisation Select Committee, that MPs receive an average of 300 letters a week from constituents. This is a number that excludes the countless telephone calls, emails and in person surgery visits they are also privy too. Despite Hancock striking a deal with producers to be alerted to urgent constituency matters, I am struggling to see how his trip to the jungle falls under his job description. During such a tumultuous time both politically and economically, surely the one thing constituents need is the dependable presence of their MP.  

Of course, Matt Hancock would dispute this, arguing rather that his presence on the reality show is solely a positive force. His intention is to use this as a platform to raise awareness of dyslexia, a cause close to his heart. Despite being a matter of indisputable importance, there are other more appropriate means to draw attention to this. Especially considering that there is no guarantee that his airtime will relate to this cause. Reality TV is driven by the viewers and, to be frank, drama sells.

Just how inappropriate his decision to enter the jungle was can be accentuated by the removal of his Conservative whip, proving that there are consequences for those who fail to adhere to a party’s code of conduct. Despite this, it does not change the fact his constituents are left with an MP evading his job description and seemingly having a jolly in the jungle. Yet while my opinion on this matter extends to all MPs, we cannot ignore the Hancock specific public outrage that has ensued following the announcement. Countless people lost their loved ones to COVID-19 and Hancock’s mishandling of various aspects of the pandemic is frequently seen as causal. Revelations surrounding his disregard of the rules that he outlined sparked warranted rage, justified by the heartbreak of thousands, unable to say goodbye to their loved ones and burdened with the knowledge that many died alone. Some would say his appearance on the reality show is a kick in the teeth, seen as a blatant disregard of the suffering he caused.

Therefore, while this is not the first time an MP has entered the jungle, past precedent does not make it justifiable. Regardless of Matt Hancock’s alleged intentions, an active Member of Parliament should have nothing to do with a reality show of this sort. If he was finished with serving his constituents, with holding the title of MP, then there would be nothing stopping him partaking. Yet here we have a man with innumerable responsibilities rushing off to sing round the campfire in the jungle- make it make sense!

Image Credit: Flickr

Covid Restrictions Still Encouraged on Campus, but Why?

(Image credit: Pixabay)

‘Plan B’ covid restrictions were relaxed by the UK Government throughout the country on  Friday the 21st of January 2022. On the same day, ‘Student Communications’ sent an  email to all staff and students at The University of Leeds explaining that from Monday 24th January, covid restrictions on campus were being ‘updated’ to comply with the relaxed national covid guidelines.  

However, on campus staff and students are still expected to wear a face mask, unless  exempt, and to keep a one metre distance from one another indoors. Many students have  been asking why this is still the case if ‘Plan B’ has ended?

It appears the University is basing their guidance on a moral responsibility to ensure collective safety. They suggest  that all current campus restrictions are to make staff and students feel safe and  comfortable, as the pandemic has caused ripples of anxiety and dismay globally. A level of respect for one another is automatically expressed if face masks are worn, something the  student communications team strongly advocates in their email. Furthermore, situational  factors and disabilities are not always visible or discussed. To wear a face mask is for the safety of the collective and not just for the individual.  

Despite this, the relaxation of national restrictions means it has become a personal choice  to follow campus guidelines. Student communications expressed that there are no  academic repercussions if compliance is denied by an individual.  

Therefore, the encouraged rules on campus show that the University of Leeds is asking for  staff and students to be considerate of one another. Signage has been erected all over  campus as a gentle reminder but not as an enforcement. 

Visual encouragements such as signage, raise potent questions regarding the future on  campus. Such implementations have not been given a time limit, so speculation amongst  students has begun with reference to the return back to campus normality.  

This of course raises the question, how much longer will covid be affecting our lives at university? Some students believe it will be until the end of semester two, others believe this may go on for years. A strict time frame  cannot be given to a pandemic and its restrictions.  

Updates are to be closely monitored from the student communications team.