University of Leicester Lecturer Reviews

Cons

Being constrained by, mostly necessary, university regulations

Cons

Inefficient administration. And they pay like a Uni.

Cons

This review is to flag up that Leicester were recently told by the ASA that they were not allowed to claim they were in the top 1% worldwide. However, they are still using this on their advertising header on this site.

Also, please note that many of the reviews are written by students, about their student jobs (student ambassador; football activator whatever that means; etc.). The reviews from academics are rather less positive to say the least.

The main problem is that the management are very poor. Their recent attempts to fire whole departments has backfired and now they are picking off people individually. However, they have unfortunately selected the hardest working people (who have not had time to work on their grants and research) to subject to "performance management". Oh dear. These hard working individuals will likely leave, and the University will be very much the worse off.

Cons

There is a push to increase student numbers to help the financial situation. The negative impact on staff is:
   - An ever-reducing quality of student. To increase numbers the entry requirements are lowered meaning we have to teach degree-level content to students that struggle to cope with it.
  - The Larger workload for marking, supervising etc.

There is a large disparity in the pay and position of staff between departments and within departments. There are staff that have been around for a long time and were promoted during periods when promotions were easy. They clutter up the place on high salaries that block others. Teaching or Admin staff are treated like 2nd class citizens with no pretence that things should be any different. Leicester considers itself a research-led university and won't recognise that it's teaching and students support services that keep everyone in a job.

Cons

I feel compelled to write this review because of the five star reviews that have been posted recently. Although some may be genuine, my suspicion is that at least some are fabricated. Let me explain.

As a non-academic, the university is probably a good place to work.

As an academic: Almost all departments are currently undergoing brutal "transformation" which is mainly about sacking staff. For example, the mathematics department were told to reapply for their jobs (after which 6 or so would be let go - approx 20 - 25% of the workforce). And similar approaches have been taken with other departments.

Hopefully this review will serve to inform job seekers of the current situation.

Cons

increasing emphasis on funding capture and student satisfaction

Cons

Very little (compared to other university) paid leave - 25 days p/a. Unrealistically tough promotion policy (requirements are higher than those in Oxbridge); promotion is not based on skills but on political policies within the university. Faculty carry too many administrative responsibilities; very little time for research; teaching load is too high and actual interaction with students is very much time consuming without any significant benefit (for the students and for the results); unrealistic attention to individual students complaints (instead of looking at statistics).