Amelia Cropley, Caitlin Morrell & Nura Bentata
On Monday 24th November, students were invited to a ‘Question and Answer’ forum with the President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Nottingham, Jane Norman, to discuss student concerns around the ‘Future Nottingham’ Proposal. A closed event for students only, the one-hour talk led to abrupt questioning from attendees and ended with chanting after an early departure, leaving questions unanswered. These are the highlights, with countless notes, external research and quotes collected by multiple attendees from the event.
This question-and-answer forum, titled ‘Shaping a Future UON’, seemed to ignite disapproval from the title alone across attendees, as many view these decisions to be limiting the future of the University of Nottingham and its students.
They refer to the ‘Future Nottingham’ proposal, where, in a statement released Thursday, 6th November 2025, the University of Nottingham proposed that a ‘small-scale’ suspension of courses would take place in order to address the financial position the university is currently in. These suspensions affect 48 different courses across the university in arts, humanities, languages and STEM subjects.
“We have tried to get it right”
Whilst predominantly led by Vice Chancellor, Jane Norman, this Q&A was attended by a panel of various members of the University Executive Board. Assisting Norman were the Pro-Vice-Chancellor of Education and Student Experience, Professor Katherine Linehan, and the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for the Faculty of Arts, Professor Jeremy Gregory, among others.
“I’m aware many of you feel angry and upset”, Jane Norman began, acknowledging both students’ concerns not only in the suspensions taking place but on how they have been communicated since its initial release. Norman insists in the forum, “We have tried to get it right.”
Many aspects of this Question-and-Answer session were particularly head-turning for students. Beginning with a short presentation, the Vice-Chancellor spoke about how they assessed each course following a particular criterion: the current and projected demand from students studying the course; entry requirements and tariffs; comparisons with other Russell group universities; and finally, the costs and contributions of these courses to the university.
“We are a high tariff university and we best support high tariff students”
Norman did not shy away from the economic instability the university is currently facing, stating the University of Nottingham “spent more than it has earned for the past three years”. She explained that to “reinvest in areas of excellence”, the university needs a 5-6% surplus and have a buffer for cases of crisis.
She goes on to say the courses suspended are based on changing demands in courses, such as a demand for Computer Sciences over the arts. In their slide on ‘principles of academic portfolio reshaping’, they discuss their obligation to provide “sustainable academic excellence” through a criterion including but not limited to an excellent curriculum that students want to study and excellent student experience for all students. To achieve their contractual obligations, they regularly review the course portfolio, hence the suspension of 48 courses.
Norman also made the assertion that “We looked at entry requirements… We are a high-tariff university and we best support high-tariff students. I think we do not provide brilliant support for students who are lower tariff, and some of the courses we are suspending recruit lower tariff students.”
“We need to start new subjects to meet demand, for instance, artificial intelligence,” continues Jane Norman at the forum. “And we need to stop other subjects where demand is low.”
At the forum, Jane Norman reassured students that the affected courses will be able to continue their courses until all on those courses have finished and/or graduated. Since the Q&A, their proposal, voted on by the University Council on Tuesday (25th November), was approved, meaning the executive board will formally open engagement on course closures. They stated that the final decisions on course closures will be made at the end of the academic year.
When the time came to open the floor for questions, this is where the emotions, anger and upset of students became apparent, clapping and cheering after each question. Before you knew it, the Q&A slowly, but surely, descended into chaos.
Below are some of the highlights from the Q&A.
How does removing modern foreign languages maintain your status as a global university?
Norman emphasised that the university would remain a global university that offers languages in other ways. Whilst languages will not be offered as single or joint honours degrees, languages can be studied in specific modules through the Nottingham Advantage Award or the language centre. Statistics were shown on slides looking at applicants as well as those accepting a place. However, these were shown very briefly,and also many of the courses had rows left blank. In the forum, they stated these figures are similar to figures across the board nationally. Despite them having other data, the staff did not present other data included within their slides, nor did they make this data public after the forum.
The removal of arts and humanity courses is not only a regional trend, but a national one
Following this question, the audience expressed concern about how the reduction of languages would affect the international diversity of the university population. The University also have stated on their website that they are ‘proud of the diversity of [their] student population’. As the University of Nottingham has campuses in both China and Malaysia, many expected that this would be a priority to maintain. This concern later arose that the level of international students would decline as a result. But again, Norman insisted this would not be an issue.
It was later pointed out that the removal of arts and humanities courses is not only a regional trend, but a national one, and whether the executive board has considered that removing these courses means eliminating the opportunity to study languages in the East Midlands.
Again, there was an emphasis on financial pressures, and that they “ran out of options”. They are now keeping the option of taking modern foreign languages alongside degrees, but not offering them as single or joint honours. Once more, Norman stated these course suspensions “does not mean languages are not important.”
If teaching staff are made redundant, or move away, how can you ensure the quality of education for affected students?
Another question proposed by a PhD music student to exemplify student concerns not only for themselves but their teaching staff. Ensuring no staff would be made redundant immediately does not mean staff will not leave the university on their own accord, which would naturally affect the quality of education the executive board propose to maintain.
Again, the attention was drawn to the fact that all current students in the affected courses would be able to complete their studies. This means that PhD students will be able to continue their studies with suitable supervision is available. Professor Katherine Linehan stated that she is working with the Student Union to reflect on this, whilst wanting to be “sensitive and mindful” of career and academic support and therefore needs “a period of time to reflect on that”.
What does “no” from the Council mean?
“Then there is no point talking about it.” Norman simply stated.
They must consider the course cuts
Stating to “focus on areas of academic excellence”, this implies you are undermining these courses by suggesting they are not ‘excellent’ to the University. Is this the case?
The question attracted applause once again from students, as many feel their courses are deemed unimportant. Jane Norman proceeds to elaborate that they are focusing on “sustainable academic excellence”. This means that the university plans to cut courses that have low intake or “are not sustainable in our current climate”.
Norman referred to how the university must remain a high-tariff university and focus on the research, which shall maintain their reputation.
Norman made it clear that they value the courses under suspension and are aware of the achievements of their departments — “such as the guy who wrote The Traitors theme”, corrected by the audience as former student, Sam Watts. However, financial issues mean that to preserve the education of students, they must consider the course cuts.
Infrastructure is crumbling, especially for the NNT building and other parts of campus like the Psychology building. Investments have gone into wider ventures such as a new campus (Castle Meadow Campus) and a new medicine building. Why is growth focused on external ventures rather than internal existing concerns?
“We either stop medicine courses or create a new building”
Backed by the large applause from the attendees, the speaker referred to external ventures that the university seemingly focused on more, rather than repairing infrastructure such as the Psychology Building or Nottingham New Theatre. The speaker pointed to the university’s choice of investing in ventures such as the Castle Meadow Campus, located in Nottingham City Centre, and a new medical school.
Norman acknowledges the need to fix general infrastructure issues such as leaks and heating. However, in order to do so, a surplus needs to be generated. In defence of the new medical building, Norman says, “We either stop medicine courses or create a new building.”
They must grow commercially to gain diversified income
However, on the topic of Castle Meadow Campus, Norman and her team stated several times that “[they] would not buy that now.” An attendee then questioned her spending, citing 100 million was spent on the new campus and 30 million on consulting fees. Norman stated that the 30 million figure was incorrect but did not comment on the actual figure which was then clarified by the attendee as “up to 18 [million] purely on Future Nottingham contracts per the UCU council.”
When Norman attempts to respond, she is refuted by the attendee, who proceeded to talk about the poor financial decisions from the Executive Board: “It’s not about low numbers [of applicants in the suspended courses], it’s about you spending up to 100 million pounds on [a building] you don’t need… You don’t know what you’re doing, don’t you?” the student boldly stated.
Multiple attendees spoke up after this, asking for confirmation of the actual amount that was spent. It was here that all attendees were reminded to be respectful.
Chris Hunt, COO, proceeded to talk about finances again. They are “learning the lessons of the past” and understand they must grow commercially to gain diversified income. This income would create “a buffer for the challenging times”. He reminds the attendees that the Executive Board does not create money out of the university; they are reinvesting back into it.
The Nottingham New Theatre (NNT) building is currently closed due to structural issues and has been for years. What plans does the University of Nottingham have for NNT?
Multiple students pre-submitted this question. The building has not been cared for in the last ten years, despite a large, active theatre community that would use this. Students feel as though the theatre is not appreciated, despite NNT being the only student-run theatre in the country. Some of its alumni include award-winning actors such as Ruth Wilson and Theo James.
The Chief Operating Officer, Chris Hunt, said he “emphasises the sadness of NNT’s case” which is “a symptom or example of what is happening all across the estate.” However, emphasis on the “difficult decisions” made were for the sake of regenerating a surplus through the proposal. However, Hunt further stated that “short-term things can be done to help”. This could include the usage of the Lakeside Arts building close to the University Park campus, as well as fundraising support to get the theatre back open.
How can you promise quality of student experience persists not only in courses but in infrastructure and student experiences?
The executive board discussed some of the extra costs that come with running the university other than education itself. This includes university sports, accommodations and mental health support for students. Through the ‘Future Nottingham’ proposal, they said that they have been more thoughtful on how to support students across the university, even if it means making decisions students do not like.
Universities are not-for-profit organisations. Are there potential growth opportunities that the university can do so they are not spending more than earning?
This question was a follow-up to the last. Norman has been more optimistic about budgeting, finding opportunities to promote commercial growth rather than fully rely on cost-cutting measures. However, they have not grown as much as expected in student numbers, which they were planning around originally.
The marketing for ‘low-demand courses’, such as the music courses, is minimal if not non-existent. Are you not marketing these courses because they are “low-tariff” courses?
“Marketing could be better”
The speaker discussed her experiences applying onto the music course. In her cohort, all three music courses consisted of 25 students. She highlighted the way that the UoN Music course, despite its historical significance and external connections to local communities, had subpar marketing that does not reflect these achievements.
While Norman does admit that “marketing could be better”, something which has also been acknowledged by the UCU. She stands with her previous point that the suspended courses are closing due to low demand. Stating once more: “we do not provide brilliant support for students who are lower tariff”, explaining that “some of the courses we are suspending recruit lower tariff students”. To meet expected demands, the university is recruiting students with a lower tariff than usual to these lower demand courses.
Naturally, this caused emotions to surge in the student body, referring back to the earlier question of art and humanities students feeling undermined academically. In this answer, Norman insisted on the status and standard of university tariffs and the need for these to be portrayed university-wide.
It is safe to conclude this hour was heated, never quiet and only offered answers to a small proportion of questions the student body wanted clarified. Whilst absolutely necessary, providing this Q&A forum was a brave act, especially considering the consensus of opposition across the student body.
However, Norman insisted on last questions perhaps too soon. When one student asked why the arts were being disproportionately affected, Norman answered very briefly, and when a follow-up was asked regarding the percentage of the arts impacted, she quickly closed the forum, stating no further questions with two minutes still remaining.
As hands went up and queries were thrown into the room, Jane Norman and her administrative staff packed up to leave the room. But not before multiple attendees in the lecture theatre chanted in solidarity.
“No ifs, no buts, no education cuts!”?
A spokesperson for the University of Nottingham said: “It is important to remember that nothing has been decided yet. Council has approved the university’s plans to continue engaging with students, staff, trade unions and relevant stakeholders on proposals to reshape the university. Final decisions on the plans, including course closures, will not be made until the end of the academic year 25/26. We will do everything we can to minimise the impact on students to ensure they are supported to complete their current course.”
“We are committed to working with our university community to gather feedback, hear concerns and consider counter proposals as we work through the next steps.”
“Vice-Chancellor Jane Norman met with students at a Q&A event this week to discuss proposals and to listen to concerns and challenges. These are difficult decisions and many members of our community feel passionately. This is not a reflection on the quality of these courses, our students or our staff, but there is not the demand to make these courses sustainable.”
“The government has been very clear it expects universities to manage their own finances and to focus on areas of strength. We are responding to this to ensure the University of Nottingham remains a world-leading institution long into the future.”
Amelia Cropley, Caitlin Morrell & Nura Bentata
Featured image courtesy of Korng Sok via Unsplash. Image use license found here. No changes were made to this image.
For more content including uni news, reviews, entertainment, lifestyle, features and so much more, follow us on Twitter and Instagram, and like our Facebook page for more articles and information on how to get involved.
