The Alternate Prospectus


The Alternative Durham Open Days will run alongside the official Durham University Summer Open Days, on 27th June and 2nd July. They are being organised by a coalition of student groups, associations and societies, alongside TU branch Durham Unite Community and other local grassroots activists. The demands of this action are that both college accommodation fees and international fees be fixed at the level of this year (2015/16), followed by a two year freeze on each.

  • An online Alternative Durham Prospectus has been launched, including endorsements from notable Durham alumni. It highlights issues such as:
  • High college accommodation fees and international fees and their detrimental effects on accessibility, diversity and local communities
  • Issues of student safety
  • The University’s poor sexual assault policy
  • The University’s refusal to pay all its staff a living wage
  • The University’s investment in fossil fuel companies and arms manufacturers

This action builds on years of escalating student protest at Durham, including opposition to the fee hikes from the Student Union and college representatives. Durham students’ ‘Funeral for Accessible Education’ in November gained national media attention, and involved over 300 students.

Organisers have been clear that this action is a last resort. Should the University meet these demands, the Alternative Open Days will not go ahead. They are also keen to emphasise that their goal is not to actively discourage potential students from applying.

You can read the prospectus here:


Stockton Campus, from Giving New Leaf to Post-Industrial Teeside to What?  

Queen’s Campus, Stockton, is where Durham University’s Medicine programme, among other things, is based. This year, the University announced that the operation would be shut down, with most courses relocating to Durham and the site being turned into an International Foundation centre.

The first intake of students Stockton-on-Tees campus ever had was in 1992. Since then, as a working paper from UCL shows, the campus in itself has developed impressive strengths in Medical science, Business and Environmental Sciences altogether. The idea that led the campus to be built was, in an age where education became a necessity for working conditions, to accept over-25 students that were suddenly cut off from the job market by the forced deindustrialisation of the Thatcher government. At that time, to increase student numbers was a necessity for management to shelter itself from redundancies. The site itself was inaugurated by the Queen in 1993 as University Campus Stockton (UCS). It was realised in collaboration between the University, the local authority and a development corporation. After an initial period of uncertainty (it is reported that of the first intake of students, less than 85% continued in Stockton Campus), further funding from the EU and private investors, majorly the Wolfson Fund, have made it possible for the campus to flourish. As many of the spaces aimed at the campus redevelopment are empty and as the NHS has agreed a £5 million grant in 2014 to expand the research facilities, the University has recently unveiled plans to move the two colleges, Stephenson and Snow, to the central campus in Durham.

This risks to end the story of an attempt by previous University administrations to engage purposefully with an area that in the 1990s was blighted by a 20% higher than national average mortality rate, high crime rate and low tertiary education attainment. Those goals were largely unattained by 2014, but at the time, acting Vice Chancellor Ray Hudson believed that it was worth it to keep trying and to invest in partnerships with major industries to achieve those objectives and to fulfil the vision of a campus that would act as a kick-starter for a variety of degrees not necessarily fitting the university Curriculum stereotype. Recent plans unveiled as moving the two colleges to Durham and transforming the entire campus into an International Foundation college seem, in my opinion, to go far from the original intent. But a stable 2000 graduates, of whom 45% from the local area (a percentage that is indeed higher than in any single Durham college), is an achievement that cannot be ignored. Engaging non-traditional groups, such as former workers and people that come from a problematic background, is something that would indeed be more difficult when the entire campus is due to be refashioned as an international foundation college.

In this regard, I can weight two different assessments coming from local politicians. Stockton Council Leader Bob Cook (Labour) claimed in the Northern Echo that “the university has put significant investment into creating superb facilities here and its commitment to maintaining a strong international presence in Stockton is clear recognition of their quality” (10/5/2016). However, in a personal email exchange I had with Stockton North MP Alex Cunningham, he said, and I quote “I share your [Durham University Students’] concerns but sadly the ship has left port and the final decision has been taken with the colleges moving to Durham and a new international foundation college established on the site – well that’s the plan”. He also added “I did meet with the VC but it’s clear there is no retreat from the decision.  A sad business all round – and a blow for Stockton as a whole”.

As students that are approaching a big event, the Alternative Open Days, I think we should reckon the disappointment many of us would have that the University has so little faith in the local area and its inhabitants. As a European Student that will be graduating in two days in BA Philosophy and Politics, I am ashamed. In the turn of a month, not only has the north east lost Europe as a source of redevelopment and funding, but it also has seen one of its major powerhouses probably shutting its doors to local development.


I want to thank Alex Cunningham MP for sharing his concerns with me

Graheme Hetherington, Plans revealed for Future of Durham University’s Queen’s campus in Stockton

Dr. Clare Melhuish, “CASE STUDY 1: Queen’s Campus: Durham University in Stockton, widening access to higher education on a brownfield site”, University College London Working Paper, September 2015

Students Protest College Fees – Again!

On Monday in the early afternoon, a collection of undergrad and postgrad students assembled outside the Bill Bryson Library to continue their campaign for accessible education.

Fronted by Durham Left Activists, the protest took place after Durham University’s continued refusal to fully address the concerns of escalating accommodation and international fees. Armed with banners and a trusty megaphone, the students made their voices heard through a series of chants, proceeding through the Palatine Centre to directly engage the attention of the university staff.

Perhaps the most impressive part of the action came not from the chorus of angry voices, however, but rather the power and passion of the isolated few. Delivered both outside the Bill Bryson and inside the Palatine Centre, members of the protest and the Student Union gave speeches which hammered home the true injustices of the university’s actions.

They touched on the university’s 20% rise in accommodation fees over the past three years – seeing the average college room rise over £7000, potentially barring students from lower income backgrounds – but also other effects and issues of equal importance. The soaring college prices go hand in hand with the private rent sector, meaning the local residents of Durham are increasingly pushed out of their own town centre and surrounding areas due to extortionately high housing prices. The university fails to pay all their staff a living wage, yet continually invests in artwork and fossil fuel companies. In many cases college rooms are simply just substandard, with infestations, collapsing ceilings and as many as twelve people to one shower.

As the protest drew to a close, it was clear that the students of Durham were not content to settle for the condescension and mediocrity of the university’s prior responses. They did not call for compromise, but instead would accept nothing less than their goal of a more equality-driven and fairer institution. Looking on to the Alternative Open Days, the protest served as a not-so-quiet reminder that students were not only still furious, but planned to do something about it.

Financial Accounts and College Fees

Durham University’s latest financial accounts leave the University with serious questions to answer on the spending of college fees.

They reveal that, thanks to large rises in college fees over recent years, the University received an income of over £40m from what it terms ‘residences, catering and conferences’.

However, the accounts also reveal that the University spent only £24.6m on the staff and other costs of the services in colleges, despite an email sent to all students which explained rises in college fees for the year 2016/17 suggesting that operational costs were around £28m just for colleges and catering.

Overall, the University posted a surplus of over £20m. Turnover reached £320m, a £70m rise on just four years ago.

The university therefore has questions to answer:

  • Why, when it has the information, is this buried opaquely on the financial statements rather than being out in the open?
  • Why is there the discrepancy between the figure published in the accounts and that which was sent to students?
  • Why does the University see fit to levy such a large amount to stay in College when it spends so much less than what it earns from colleges?
  • Why, when the University posts such a significant surplus, does it see fit to dramatically raise accommodation fees?
  • Will the University commit to releasing a detailed breakdown of College costs, with exact costs made clear in understandable language? If not, why not?

In the foreword to the financial statements, the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Stuart Corbridge, trumpets Durham’s accessibility. He suggests that “We also continue to… enhance access to Durham for the most able and motivated students from all backgrounds.” These increasingly feel like empty words. How can a University which chooses to charge residence fees above the reach of so many students despite making a £20m surplus in just one year claim to be accessible or ethical?



Racial Microagressions at Durham

Scenario 1: my flatmates and I chat about relationships over the dinner table, and the subject turns to interracial dating.

“I don’t think I could date a fully Asian guy because I just don’t find them attractive,” one flatmate chirps, “but when they’re half Asian and half white I think they’re gorgeous.”

I stop smiling and focus on the plate of food in front of me. To my surprise, the rest of my flat responds with enthusiastic affirmations of her statement.

“And I always wanted a mixed-race baby,” another one chimes in, “they’re just so much cuter!”

More excited agreement follows and the conversation continues. I, the only mixed-race member of an otherwise all-white flat, squirm uncomfortably and retreat further into my pasta.


Scenario 2: my college mentor gives me a bemused look over his cup of coffee. He’s just made a joke about having ‘the most exotic mentor group in Durham’ due to his abnormally large number of black and Asian mentees. I have asked him to refrain from using the term.

“But why?” he laughs. I laugh too.

“Because pets are exotic. Plants are exotic. People are not exotic.”

“If you say so, but I always thought exotic was a rather lovely term.”

I remain smiling, but wince internally as he continues its use for the rest of our conversation.


Scenario 3: I’m sat in my English Lecture on Jean Rhys’ Wide Sargasso Sea, attempting to repress an encroaching sense of anger. My lecturer has, and is continuing to, explicitly state that Rhys’ novel is pro-black and calls for the complete equality of all ethnicities.

As he resumes his spiel on the ‘danger of racial labels,’ I wonder whether he remembers the frequency with which Rhys refers to black features as ugly, or the mob of black people who burn down the heroine’s home, killing her disabled brother. I am almost impressed at his ability to evade the presentation of mixed-race characters as figures of both pagan and biblical betrayal, of almost supernatural malice, cruelty and apathy. I would perhaps be more generous towards the ideas of my lecturer if he had not earlier this month asserted that, in the Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad regards the African Tribesmen as his social equals.

Later that day, I redraft my essay on Wide Sargasso Sea and delete its relevant sections on racism. I know that if I include them, I run the risk of damaging my grade.


As an expectant Fresher back in October, if someone had informed me that I would encounter situations similar to that of the first scenario, I would hardly have been surprised. The warning may have been met with a sigh or small groan of some form, but I was perfectly aware that- whether in Durham, Edinburgh, or probably even Denmark- I would encounter unintentional micro-aggressions from my peers that would be directed towards myself or other people of colour. What I did not expect, however, was the alarming number of problems with how, not students, but qualified academics and other university employees have handled the topic of race.

Don’t get me wrong, a fair few student encounters leave a lot to be desired: I’ve had people approach me on nights out purely because they have a ‘thing for brown girls;’ strangers plunge their hands into my natural hair without even so much as asking permission to do so; one fully black friend was told that black people were indistinguishable from one another. But somehow, the dismissive attitude that Durham University’s English department often adopts towards racial issues smacks of a disappointment no casual exchange could ever rival. These professors are brilliant intellectuals, often leaders in their field: I’ve had lectures on how language implicitly upholds patriarchal structures, and how one might go about deconstructing them. In tutorials, I’ve had lengthy discussions about internalised classism and its consequences. Yet where the department seems to be so beautifully synched with the intricacies of feminist and socialist thought, it often falls flat with the anti-racism movement. It could be that, as a first year, my perceptions stem from limited experience and misfortune. However, to me it appears that the racial standpoint of literary texts is denied the acknowledged complexity of other themes, reduced merely to pro-colonial = prejudice, anti-colonial = total equalitarian view.

I’m not asking my lecturers to do a full Achebe and brand authors as ‘bloody racists.’ I’m not asking them to spurn specific texts due to less-than-savoury representations of people of colour. What I’m asking is for them to appreciate that racial prejudices aren’t obliterated in one radical motion, but rather dismantled bit by bit: in the cases of Conrad or Rhys, a person can have sympathy towards a marginalised group whilst still thinking themselves superior. These problematic viewpoints don’t make the text any less brilliant in its literary craft, but on the contrary enhance it all the more: they can offer insight into the cultural context of the time, mapping the process and progress of thought throughout English Literature.

Since coming to Durham, the quality of education I’ve received from the English department has been for the most part spectacular. All I request is that the incredible insight into texts extends past a predominantly white perspective, into the multicultural analysis that modern day academia demands. Until then, you’ll find me at the back of my lectures, simmering with a quiet disappointment.

University Responses to Consultation: Statement

The team behind the Alternative Durham Open Days strongly condemns the University’s responses to a student survey conducted by Durham Students’ Union. The responses can be found here.

Despite concerted student pressure led by Durham Left Activists and the dialogue undertaken by the DSU, the University still refuses to respond to concerns surrounding the upcoming 3.5% rise in College fees for the next academic year. The rise will mean that most students will pay around or above £7,000 a year to live in College. We demand that College fees are frozen at their present level for the next two academic years.

As well as being disappointed at the University refusing to consider the prospect of freezing College fees for the next two years, we also have a number of concerns about the details of the responses.

Firstly, the university suggests it is looking to increase the amount of financial support available to disadvantaged students. Whilst any increase in financial support is welcome, the Vice-Chancellor, in response to the Funeral For Accessible Education in December, suggested that any increase would only apply to students with a household income of below £26,500. However, this is less than the national average income for one person, so significant numbers of students facing difficulties in paying College accommodation charges will not be helped by the extra funding. We believe a freeze in accommodation cost for all students at 2015/16 prices for two years is the only way of ensuring that all students can afford to live in College.

Additionally, in a response to a suggestion that the University’s pricing strategy is putting up rents in Durham City, the University asserts that ‘supply and demand in the private sector will play a role in determining rent levels in Durham City’. However, the University is the largest landlord in Durham, and so plays a significant role in determining the price levels of private rented accommodation in Durham City. The University’s refusal to admit to its role in pushing up the cost of housing for all students is highly unsatisfactory.

The University goes on to argue that ‘We think the model of consultation trialed this year is a step in the right direction.’ However, we query this. How can a consultation that shows the deep-seated anger of students, both in elected and non-elected roles, which fails to see anything be done about the spiraling cost of College accommodation be ‘a step in the right direction’?

The document shows in full the University’s attitude to its student body. Rather than listen to their legitimate concerns, it ignores them, and leaves hundreds of current and prospective students facing the prospect of being unable to live in College.

This is unacceptable. The Alternative Durham Open Days are a response to the unwillingness of the University to listen to its students. They are an action of last resort, not designed to discourage potential students from applying, but to show the depth of feeling on this issue and on the other issues at this university, which you can read in our Alternative Prospectus.

If you’d like to help us in doing this, please sign up to be an Alternative Open Day Ambassador  or contact us here.

Durham University: A Fantastic Record of Access – Soon To Be Made Even Better

Durham University. An institution renowned for its inclusivity. I am sure you are aware of the reputation we pride ourselves on. And just look around you. You’ll see students from all walks of life – households earning £100,000, households earning £90,000, sometimes households earning even £80,000! Yes, we here at Durham pride ourselves on our incredible access record. With over 40% of our population coming from just private school, and fifth in the country for such, we think we are exceeding the conditions to improve access put to us when we raised our tuition fees to £9000 in 2010.
And things are about to get a whole lot better!
The University has just held a full consultation(!) with its student body, and after much deliberation, have decided to raise accommodation fees to just £7000. How generous are we? This should be fine for students on the low-incomes of £80,000!
And just look at our decimation of the Durham Grant! It used to be £3000, with £2000 for the next tier income; now that latter tier is completely gone, and we’ve decreased the £30000 grant by a £1000! This shouldn’t have any mitigating problems in the future, especially not with the government completely abolishing the maintenance grant that was the bloodline of the poorest students in Britain. And fear not! We were going to decrease it even more! But, at the last minute, our generosity kicked in. Your £2000 is safe, Oliver Twist!
We’ve also made it clear that we would happily exploit the uncapping of fees in the last Budget, meaning we can raise even more in tuition fees. And this time, there’s not even any conditions on improving access to do so.
And what will all this extra revenue go to? Sorry, what was that, grants? No, silly. It will go to that immaculate art exhibition in the Palatine Centre. Shiny, huh? Our students love it!
With all these great reforms, we sure look forward to more participation from the poorest in society! So come along to Durham. The 125th most inclusive University in the country!

Unfortunately, almost an entire page could be made into a parody, trying to laugh off this University’s woeful record with disadvantaged students, and its continued support for policies that will only further shame it – and it believes it will never have to be held accountable. Not anymore. The great people behind this prospectus, and the various groups working with them, are demanding change. If you read this and feel yourself seething with the same anger we do, question it, and question them. Question if this is the inclusive learning environment it is painted to be. Question what they are selling you.

Durham University Labour Club are working alongside others to do just that, and we are demanding change with a plan for action.
We are demanding, among other things:
• A target for a 70:30 ratio of state/private school students
• Demanding transparency over accommodation fees
• The full restoration of the Durham Grant
• Rejecting future tuition fee increases
• Regular consultations with low-income students

None of these things should be hard. This University continues to wield plenty of cash, certainly enough to pay the Vice Chancellor the third highest wage in the country.

The situation in Durham is no joke. We have to demand they take this seriously.

Sexual Assault in Durham: It Happens Here

We’re at a tipping point. UK university culture and society in general is seeing a growing awareness of sexual violence that simply did not exist a few years ago. At Durham University, the introduction of It Happens Here in 2012 was the first time the student body had really tried to talk about sexual violence. We emerged as a campaign to raise awareness, and four years later, we think we’re getting somewhere.

You’ve probably heard the statistics before, but they’re worth repeating. One in seven female students is a victim of serious sexual or physical assault. One in four is a victim of sexual violence in general. Ten percent of these students have reported the assault to the police, and only four percent to their university. In addition to this, 20% of UK women over the age of 16 have experienced sexual violence. Three out of every twenty men have been victims, too.

So, what’s the University currently doing about this? Well, some colleges, like Van Mildert, have been incredibly receptive to our consent workshops. Their president of last year even wrote a blog post on our website about them. Last year, the Castle Lecture Series hosted Annie E. Clark and Andrea L. Pino, cofounders of End Rape on Campus, for one of their events. And most importantly, the University recently launched its Sexual Violence Task Force, a move that instilled a new level of hope in all of us that something was finally being done on an institutional level. Well, almost. Since its introduction, at the time of writing, we haven’t heard very much from the Task Force. Its webpage is tucked away in the corner of the University’s website, and is the only mention of sexual violence on there. We like to think that the Task Force will engage in some more self-promotion next year, potentially asking It Happens Here to weigh in on its ideas and policies, and generally engage with the student body more to get things done.

It Happens Here is a relatively new group in Durham. Nevertheless, we have huge aims. Our first goal is for a transparent sexual violence policy. A clear policy is something that should interest the University and its students alike. As well as providing a better procedure for dealing with victims of sexual violence, it might too offer ways of dealing with the perpetrators. Our second aim is for better signposting for those seeking support, and our third is for mandatory training for members of staff, particularly those whose jobs require a degree of pastoral care. We believe that staff and administrators have a responsibility to promote a safe environment. They must ensure survivors feel supported in coming forward; have clean, streamlined policies that are easily accessible; offer mental health and psychiatric services; and engage in an active, on-going conversation with students.

That we still have these goals is a reflection of how much the University still needs to do. Durham might market itself as a ‘safe place’, but only without taking into account the significant rates of sexual violence that it experiences. Universities all around the country suffer with this problem, which is why the statistics are nationwide. But Durham could be doing so much more. It should be able to offer its prospective students safety, education and support. It should be holding consent workshops at least as regularly as it holds fire safety talks. We hope that our student campaign, however small it may be, can continue to work with the University and the Sexual Violence Task Force to provide a safer and more reliable space in which to study and live.

For more information on It Happens Here and what we do, please find us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter or visit our website.