It’s official: Epigram got it wrong

A senior uni official has accused Epigram of “significant inaccuracies” in a recent story that claimed arts students pay for science degrees.

An email sent this afternoon to all arts and social sciences students from Professor Judith Squires said: “You may have read the story in the latest issue of Epigram relating to student fees and the allocation of spending across the University.

“I appreciate that this may have caused concern amongst some of you, and want to stress that there are significant inaccuracies in both the data presented and the conclusions drawn in this article.”

No, they don’t.

In an embarrassing moment for Bristol’s most relevant high-culture magazine, Epigram’s editor and the article’s author will have their mistakes pointed out to them, one by one, in a meeting with uni officials.

The offending article claimed to have proven that arts students subsidise more expensive degree subjects, after calculating how much each uni department spends per student.

Having done some extremely clever maths to realise that the average English department spend per student was only £3,347.14, Epigram boldly jumped to the conclusion that the rest of the money was going on other courses.

You know, rather than helping to fund the uni’s cooks, cleaners, librarians, wardens, or any other non-departmental costs.

Not paid for by arts students

Instead, George Robb, the article’s author, assumed the extra money he’s paid (or at least will do if he’s lucky enough to get a good graduate job) has gone towards funding science-y stuff like the Life Sciences building.

The balls-up is especially damning given that one look at the university financial statements, which are freely available and can be accessed right here, would show that total income from tuition fees can’t even cover the uni’s wage bill.

There’s hardly enough going spare to hand out to departments other than your own.

George Robb: incensed

George Robb had been so incensed by his own findings that he’d taken it upon himself to organise a protest. It is unclear whether this protest will still go ahead, now that the facts behind the Investigations Editor’s investigation have been revealed to be false.

This latest mistake from Epigram follows hot on the heels of a controversial story that claimed university officials were planning to get rid of Jason Donervan from the Triangle. A uni spokesperson later denied that was the case.

Prof Judith Squires: Epigram were wrong, according to her

Read the email sent to arts and social sciences students in its entirety below.

Dear student

You may have read the story in the latest issue of Epigram relating to
student fees and the allocation of spending across the University. I
appreciate that this may have caused concern amongst some of you, and want
to stress that there are significant inaccuracies in both the data
presented and the conclusions drawn in this article.

I am more than happy to provide information on issues that students feel
strongly about in order that debate can be informed and evidence-based. To
this end I will be meeting with the editor of Epigram and the author of the
story to talk through the details of university funding in the hope that
this will provide greater clarity on what is a highly complex subject.

Professor Judith Squires

Pro Vice-Chancellor Education and Students