Full report on “rightsizing” and SSR
This report was shared with council and UEB members in response to the University’s use of Student–Staff Ratio (SSR) as the central tool for “rightsizing” in Phase 2 of Future Nottingham.
The analysis reflects input from specialist data staff within the University and includes dedicated mathematical modelling conducted by academic experts. We want to highlight several findings of immediate relevance to Council’s oversight of institutional risk.
1. SSR is not an appropriate rightsizing metric.
It is a crude headcount ratio that does not reflect real teaching capacity, discipline-specific demands, accreditation requirements, or research commitments. Applying a blanket SSR target of 18–22 would severely damage laboratory-based and research-intensive subjects and move several Schools outside the norms of any research-intensive comparator group.
2. Our modelling shows severe impacts on international rankings.
Using two independent approaches, we find that raising SSR to around 20 would drop Nottingham by roughly 25 places in the QS World Rankings, taking the University from 97th to around 122nd, even under the most conservative assumptions.
A sector-wide shift does not protect Nottingham: even if all UK institutions moved to SSR 20, Nottingham still falls to around 120th—a mitigation of only two places.
These results already assume minimal negative effects and include modelling of peer stabilisation favoured by QS. More realistic models, which account for reduced research time and consequent decline in citations and reputation, show substantially worse outcomes over time.
3. National rankings are similarly affected.
We project a fall from 51st in the Guardian league table to roughly 74–119, depending on SSR level and the extent of knock-on effects on teaching satisfaction, continuation and career outcomes.
4. Raising tariffs cannot offset these declines.
To maintain our current Guardian position while increasing SSR, average entry tariff would need to rise to around 200–210 points—higher than those of the most selective universities in the UK. This is not achievable in Nottingham’s recruitment market.
Using SSR as the primary instrument for rightsizing is worrying. The risks to the University’s research profile, student experience, domestic competitiveness and—in particular—international reputation and recruitment are extremely high. We strongly recommend that SSR not be used as a sizing tool without a full, institutionally led modelling exercise of the reputational and financial consequences.
Of course, we are happy to discuss this further and to share the data files and scripts used in the modelling.