New statistics have revealed that houses in Oxford are increasingly being sold to foreign investors.International buyers have purchased 40% of the city’s best properties. 

Damian Gray, from estate agents Knight Frank, told Cherwell, “Over the last twelve months we have sold property in Oxford to over 13 different nationalities, with a marked increase of buyer interest from Russia and Asia.”

He suggested that this surge could be due to Oxford’s international reputation as a cultural hub of the United Kingdom, although the economic stability of the city’s property market is also an attraction. 

Gray commented that buyers are also often drawn by the “knowledge that their investment in Oxford would appear to be extremely resilient to any downturn in market conditions.”

Mark Crampton Smith, a partner of College and County agreed, stating that the property market here is “perceived as a safe place both physically and economically.”

Local authorities expressed concerns that the increase in foreign homeowners will have a negative effect on the city. Many of the purchases will be used as second homes, leaving the properties largely uninhabited. 

Councillor Edward Turner told Cherwell that this is “not a new situation,” but “if homes are being bought by foreign purchasers that means there are fewer available for others who need to live in Oxford, be they local families, students or those who are here to work.”

He linked this to the issue of the lack of capacity in the city and an unwillingness to expand, arguing that this was the “real problem, since the coalition government caved into those opposed to new housing to the south east of the city.”

One student shared his grieviances with Cherwell, commenting, “It is frustrating to know that whilst we spend hours searching for affordable housing properties are lying empty.”

Oxford University is introducing a new course this year, designed to prepare students considering undertaking a degree.

The Certificate of Higher Education has been described as a ‘stepping stone’ to university and acts as a preparatory course that brings students closer to university standard.

It is aimed at those who are unsure about ‘which students they wish to specialise in, or may lack formal academic qualifications, or may simply need to be able to study part-time and flexibly.’

This is the latest in a series of steps the university has taken to make Oxford education more accessible to students from all backgrounds. Courses will be modular with no written exams; lasting between two to four years. Students would take one predominant subject to combine with a series of modules from other subjects.

The certificate will act as an equivalent to one year of university study, although it does not guarantee a place on a university course.

Nine ‘main’ subjects are to be made available, including History, Literature and Philosophy. Students will also be able to choose modules from a wider variety of subject areas, combining both specific and general interests.

Natalie Tate, who left Oxford midway through a Computer Science degree at St Anne’s college last term commented, ‘I think it sounds like a really good idea, it’ll help people with their confidence and showing that they’re able to get back into education even if they don’t think they possess the skills.’

Ruth Eve, a first year languages student agreed, commenting, ‘I would definitely advocate such courses. The transition between school and university is a challenging leap of independence, and gaining skills such as time management and note-taking can ease the potential pressure and stress in an environment where it is all too easy to feel out of your depth.’

However some students have expressed concerns. One said that the introduction of an Oxford ‘foundation course’ was ‘just another way for the University to gather money to compensate for their loss of government funding.’

A University spokesperson commented that those applying via the CertHE were ‘not necessarily at an advantage’ when applying for a standard degree course. The course will charge a basic registration fee of at least £750 and then will charge per module.

It has been revealed that the Oxford University Vice Chancellor receives the highest salary of anyone with an equivalent position in the UK. 

Andrew Hamilton receives £424,000 in salary, benefits, and pension contributions. His Cambridge counterpart receives £258,000, while the typical teaching academic can expect to be paid £42,263 on average.

The benefits that the Vice-Chancellor is able to claim follow the university guidelines for all staff, although part of his total remuneration includes travel expenses to return to the US a certain number of times a year. He is also given health insurance and access to a driver “for work transport only”, although this staff member is not solely for Hamilton’s use.

The Vice-Chancellor is required to live in a University-owned residence due to his position. The University gave some justification, commenting that the residence was used professionally, allowing Hamilton to entertain guests. They added that the property was fully owned by the university, so they incurred no costs from this arrangement other than for the property’s general upkeep.

The university stated there are no additional benefits other than these for the Vice-Chancellor, who does not receive bonuses. Cherwell last year reported that the Director of Oxford University Endowment Management Ltd received a salary of £600,000 in 2010, making her the highest paid university administrator in the country. However in 2011 no member of university staff received a pay packet that exceeded £520,000.

65 members of staff are on a salary that exceeds that of the Prime Minister whereas last year more than 70 University officials earned more than Cameron’s £142,500.

Vice Chancellors of the elite Russell Group universities saw their pay packets increase by 0.4% last year, although Oxford University said that this rise was reflected in the salary of all staff and was well below the rate of inflation. The rate of inflation was 4.8% in November 2011.

A statement from the Russell Group also gave a defence, stating, “In view of the ongoing financial challenges that universities are facing, many Vice-Chancellors agreed to only very modest increases, pay freezes, or even pay cuts in recent years. The average Russell Group Vice-Chancellor’s pay increase was lower than both UK inflation and the country’s average pay rise of 1.8%.”

However many feel that for the Vice-Chancellor’s salary to have increased in light of the imminent rise in tuition fees and budget cuts across the education sector is an insensitive misjudgement. The average pay of a UK CEO amounts to just over £122,000, less than a third of the Vice-Chancellor’s salary. A third year student regarded this situation as “ridiculous.”

However a university spokesperson responded, “According to most national league tables Oxford is the number one university in the UK. It makes a major contribution to the economic prosperity of the UK and the UK’s position in the world, as well as to tackling global challenges through its research.” He added, “Its research output is vast, it has an almost billion-pound-a-year turnover not including the colleges and OUP, and it has great institutional complexity. Its Vice-Chancellor’s salary reflects that.”

Dr Wendy Piatt, Director General of the Russell Group, also defended the pay of Vice-Chancellors, commenting, “Russell Group Vice-Chancellors lead complex multi-million pound organisations that succeed on a global stage. First-rate leadership is crucial if our universities are to continue to excel in such a challenging economic climate.” She added, “That Russell Group universities still punch well above their weight on the international stage despite being under-resourced in comparison with their international competitors is in large part testimony to the quality of their leadership.”

Comparisons have been made to the pay of the international counterparts of the Vice-Chancellor, since in the U.S. heads of institutions are frequently paid salaries that pass the $1 million (£650,000) mark. This has fuelled concerns that the rising pay-packets of university heads are an indication of the increasing commercialisation of the university sector.

Meanwhile Sally Hunt, the General Secretary of the University and College Trade Union said that the findings meant the government’s crackdown on excessive executive pay should extend to universities. She called for increased transparency and accountability for salary levels. Hunt told Cherwell, “Vice-Chancellors improved pay and perks are bound to raise eyebrows, especially when university staff have taken a real-terms pay cut of 7% since 2009. Unless there is proper scrutiny of vice chancellors’ pay and perks then stories of unaccountable increases will continue to embarrass the sector at a time when it is suffering punitive financial cuts.”

The main political parties are all vying to lead calls for a crackdown on executive pay, with David Cameron saying it made “people’s blood boil.” In light of this, many are calling for the pay of Vice Chancellors to be subject to similar scrutiny, with Ms. Hunt calling for employees and students of universities to be included on the remuneration boards that decide the pay of the Vice-Chancellor.

The Vice-Chancellor’s pay is currently decided by an Independent Remuneration Council which includes academics as well as experts from outside the sector.

The national average of students obtaining first class degrees has increased rapidly over the last decade.

A record figure of one in six obtained the top qualification last year, prompting fresh concerns about grade inflation and how the value of degrees can be compared between institutions.

According to figures released last week by the Higher Education Statistics Agency, 53,215 graduates gained firsts in 2010/11. Just 23,700 gained the equivalent degree in 2000/01.

Although these statistics also reflect the higher number of students in Higher Education, the percentage of graduates reaching the highest qualification rose to 15.5% from just 9% a decade ago.

In contrast, the percentage of students achieving firsts at Oxford has remained relatively steady. 22% of students graduated with a first in 2000/2001, while 29% achieved the qualification last year. This is an overall increase of 30% over the last ten years, significantly smaller than the 75% rise nationally.

Birmingham University’s Professor Alan Smithers commented, “The inflation in degree classes is rendering them almost meaningless. Employers have to look at A-level results and the university at which the degree is being obtained.”

A student from a Liverpool university said that the increase may indicate degrees at some institution getting easier, commenting, “I’ve got a first in all my pieces of coursework so far, without even turning up to a third of my lectures and tutorials.”

One Oxford undergraduate stated, “It’s unfair. When I look at my friends from other universities, the amount of time they spend on getting a 2.1 is disproportionately low compared how much effort a lot of Oxford undergraduates have to put in, to get the same result. I only hope employers recognise that.”

An Oxford spokesperson said they could not comment of the difficulty of other degrees, but that “a degree from Oxford is demanding, intense and in-depth, and a first class degree from Oxford is an extremely strong academic qualification.”

However John Lewis, a leading graduate employer, told Cherwell that for their graduate recruitment scheme, “a candidate with a 2.1 from Oxford University would have no advantage over someone with a 2.1 degree from Reading.”

Conversely,  a spokesperson for Teach First, a charity which aims to recruit “high-calibre graduates”, commented, “Teach First has worked closely with Oxford University since our inception in 2002, and Oxford has yielded significantly more hires than any other university including Cambridge.”

Similarly, Deloitte, which is number two on the Times ‘Top 100 Graduate Employers’ list, admitted, “We actively seek applications from Oxford students as they have a very strong track record in passing the selection process, demonstrated by the large Oxford alumni network currently working with us.”

One Oxford student agreed that an Oxford degree tended to be highly valued, saying, “At the company I worked for on my gap year, a 2.1 from any of the top universities would be considered impressive enough to merit consideration. But candidates with Oxbridge degrees, whether a 2.1 or a first, tended to have more impressive CVs, perform better at interview and ultimately be more likely to be offered the job.”

The percentage of students achieving firsts also varies across subjects within the universities. Theology degrees have consistently seen a lower percentage of firsts, with only 11% of Philosophy and Theology students gaining the top qualification in 2010, the lowest of any subject in Oxford. In the same year, only 15% of Classical Archaeology & Ancient History students received first-class honours, while over half of History of Art degrees were firsts.

Philosophy and Theology student Adam Sewell noted that “the lower percentage of firsts could suggest that the exams for Philosophy and Theology are more rigorous.” Alex Chalk, also studying the subject, commented, “For the most part Philosophy and Theology doesn’t seem like a degree that someone would pick due to the prospective employment opportunities it offers, however good or bad they might in fact be.”

Lucy Gray, a Classical Archaeology & Ancient History first-year, told Cherwell that “getting a first isn’t the be all and end all, but it would be nice to think that it was at least achievable.” She continued, “It is slightly disheartening because I know employers won’t necessarily take any of this into account. Although I really enjoy my course, I do want to get a job out of it, and if I had known about how hard it is to get a first in my course I might not have chosen it.”

Undergraduate Xin Fan was less concerned, quipping, “A third-class degree from Oxford should definitely count for more than a third-class degree from anywhere else – we flunk a lot harder. But if John Lewis turned me down, I just don’t know where I’d go. Reading, probably.”

Oxford’s bid to become UNESCO World Book Capital in 2014 has received official government support. The move was confirmed by Culture Minister, Ed Vaizey MP, who stated the government’s intention to back the bid, in the hope of promoting the benefits of books and reading throughout the country.

He talked of Oxford’s ‘contribution to world and especially English speaking culture’ in his letter to the bid committee and reaffirmed the benefits that such an honour could bring to both the city and the country as a whole. He also spoke of Oxford as a ‘world benchmark for learning…through institutions such as its premiere university.’

Councillor Bob Price, Leader of Oxford City Council, is enthusiastic about the possibility. He said, “Culturally, it will provide a backdrop to a range of exciting events involving the new Bodleian, the new Oxford Brookes Library, OUP and Blackwell’s. Oxford City Council is about to start working with Oxfordshire County Council and city schools to improve literacy attainment across the age ranges, and the WBC year will stimulate several new initiatives for young people in this respect. We hope that these events would be of great appeal to the people of Oxfordshire. World Book Capital status will shine a global spotlight on Oxford’s pre-eminence as a centre for learning and education, and give us the chance as a city to project ourselves onto a world stage.”

The title of World Book Capital is bestowed annually to a city in recognition of the quality of its programs to promote books and reading, with past winners including locations as varied as Bogota and Alexandria. The application window opened at the start of 2012 with bids having to be completed by April 2012; the winning city is due to be announced at some point over the summer. An important aspect of Oxford’s bid is the redesign of the New Bodleian Library, which will reopen as the Weston Library in 2015; work started in August 2011 and the new library will feature better storage for the library’s special collections and greater access for the general public.

Mike Heaney, Executive Secretary of Bodleian Libraries said, ‘The Bodleian Libraries enthusiastically support Oxford’s bid to be nominated as UNESCO World Book Capital. We are already committed to reaching out to people with a passion for books and our literary culture in the city and beyond. Recognition as World Book Capital will certainly enable us to do so more effectively, by shining a spotlight on all we have to offer. We hope to address our and UNESCO’s agenda to promote books and reading as means of combating deprivation, encouraging cultural diversity and championing freedom of access to information.’

However, not all students share this enthusiasm. Andrew Pickett, a second year Geography student at St Catherine’s thinks UNESCO should look elsewhere. ‘I think that Oxford is perfectly entitled to make this bid, however I would say that given UNESCO’s position, it should concentrate its efforts in countries and cities that do not already have the high profile of somewhere like Oxford. There are many parts of the world that have an equally strong cultural base, but could do with the added boost in publicity and awareness – Oxford is a famous city that already has these things.’

Many Oxford graduates are among the elite group of so-called “super-tutors”, high flying academics who charge up to £1,000 for an hour’s tuition. This rate is considerably higher than the £30 an hour charged by the average private tutor in Britain. 

Many Oxford graduates are among the elite group of so-called “super-tutors”, high flying academics who charge up to £1,000 for an hour’s tuition. This rate is considerably higher than the £30 an hour charged by the average private tutor in Britain. 

Twenty-seven year old Oxford History graduate apparently Topes Calland charges £400 an hour and successfully taught the son of a British rock star who had seen off nine of his previous tutors. In October, Calland was offered £10,000 for ten hours’ worth of tuition time with an Asian royal family member wanting to get in to Oxford. He said, “they made me an offer I couldn’t refuse.”

The agency representing Calland, Bright Young Things, was started by Oxford graduate Malachy Guiness, who tutored full-time before interest in his services became so high that he had to employ other equally gifted individuals to assist him.

Some believe that the hype surrounding these high profile tutors getting their clients’ children into Oxbridge will convince other parents that tutoring is a requirement. 

Helena Mills an ambassador for access at Univ told Cherwell that  to “offer a service that fundamentally suggests [prospective candidates] are not good enough without tutoring exploits students and their families, who don’t want to be disappointed but aren’t sure if they’re ‘quite right’ for Oxbridge.”

She added, “Neither Oxford or Cambridge endorse third party tuition companies – but I think they need to be a lot more vocal in denouncing them.” 

Second year lawyer Praful Nargund claimed tuition won’t do any favours to those who do get a place, saying, “If people pay thousands of pounds for some tricks to use at interview, they are likely struggle when they have to work under the intense conditions at Oxbridge”. 

One Oxford student with experience tutoring GCSE pupils doesn’t believe that tutoring will be of any use at all in the admissions process. “It helps people get their grades up, but most parents who hire tutors are just looking for exam-focused stuff. This won’t actually help them get into Oxbridge. It’s a bigger problem for other universities where they must rely on grades and personal statements.”

Ed Cooke an Oxford graduate and tutor, has a memory capacity great enough to memorise 1000 digits in an hour. He told The Sunday Times that he can help a child to learn all their times tables in two hours using a special memory technique.

He explained that not only high-profile celebrities and the rich are willing to pay for these services. “The super-wealthy approach me, but so do middle-class parents.” Cooke knows that these less wealthy parents must make sacrifices to afford his services, but he said that they are prepared to do so “because they care about their children’s education.”

Third year Chemistry student Henry Johnson  said, “The high price these Oxford graduates are charging means that only the wealthiest can benefit. The gulf separating state schooled and privately educated applicants is vast as it is. All these Oxbridge graduates are doing is increasing the chances of those whose chances are already very high.”

Mills said that having an Oxford degree “doesn’t make you an admissions expert … they can only tell you their take on, and experiences within, the system. If people wish to spend huge amounts of money on tutoring, they can – but it perpetuates the myth that you need money to get to Oxbridge.” She stressed that tutoring creates the assumption that “admissions tutors are looking for polished and perfected individuals, when in fact they are looking for a more raw talent, potential and enthusiasm that they can help to shape and refine over three years.”

OUSU’s Access VP, Hannah Cusworth, added, “No-one should think they have to have private tuition to get a place.”

It has come to light this week, that two researchers from Oxford have discovered a new gene in Maize plants which could help increase crop yields, lessening the global food crisis. Professor Hugh Dickinson and Dr Liliana Costa, both from the Department of Plant Sciences, came to their conclusions by working for ten years alongside scientists at Warwick University.

The gene, known as MEG1, occurs on the maternal chromosome, and according to Professor Dickinson, controls the “transfer of resources into the seed,” letting us know how the grain fills with nutrients. He added that the discovery of the gene was “important both academically as it supports at least one evolutionary theory… and commercially because it controls grain filling.”

The discovery could have a significant impact on increasing yields of the crop. Dickinson noted that “an ability to improve grain yield and character by ‘reprogramming’ MEG1 activity would have immediate application to food production… an ability to ‘tune’ the performance of a gene such as MEG1 should enable us to maximize the yield extracted from a particular plant, and – very important commercially.”

His research partner Dr Costa, added, “Maize is an important staple food crop, feeding millions of people all over the world. The global population is set to rise to over 9 billion by 2050 (according to UN predictions), and together with the likelihood of increasing climate instability, severe food shortages are foreseen.” She went to note that “The discovery that this single gene can regulate the amount of plant nutrients entering the seed, and thus affect seed traits, such as nutritional content and seed size, is a highly important discovery.”

According to Dr Costa, people have generally been “supportive” of the research carried out. Nonetheless, Professor Dickinson commented that although the scientists did not face any direct opposition, GM plants were used for much of the experimentation, and hence “there was always a danger that… experimental crops plots could have been damaged by ‘environmental activists’. The ‘Frankenstein Foods’ climate has had a serious impact on the government’s commitment to crop improvement – and thus on the public funding available for this sort of work.”

He added “Hopefully the situation is now improving – and a degree of common sense is starting to prevail!” Professor Dickinson noted that if we were to meet the needs of a growing population, “militant action against GM research and technology on the basis of no clear evidence” would have to stop.

Second year student, Ryan Kahn commented, “The discovery will do a huge amount of good by bringing done food prices and solve a growing world hunger crisis. That is only set to get worse as populations increase and incomes increase. If properly tested, there can be no reasonable opposition, and that there is, is based on conservatism and illogical beliefs.”