(Image: Supplied)
Edinburgh University managers have been warned that plans to close 90 programmes risk causing serious damage to the institution's standing.
A motion submitted ahead of next week’s staff and student Senate meeting calls on university leadership to "reconsider" the decision, which has sparked five weeks of strike action from the University and College Union (UCU).
The paper contends that the cuts have negatively impacted the university’s reputation and "academic mission".
“Senate considers the process that is being followed to effect the current schedule of programme closures across the university to be inadequate and does not endorse this process or the resulting programme closures,” the motion, which is likely to pass at next Wednesday’s meeting, states.
“Senate notes the impacts on students and on the university’s academic mission caused by these measures and the nature of the economic case provided, and asks university management to reconsider its approach of using programme and course closures to achieve budget savings.”
Members of the University and College Union (UCU) have gone on strike for five weeks. (Image: Jane Barlow/PA Wire)
On September 17, The Herald broke the news that 90 programmes in the university’s College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (CAHSS) would be ‘taught out’ over the next several years, with no new students being enrolled after 2027.
The sweeping changes come as university managers seek to cut £140 million from the institution’s annual budget, including £90m in staff salaries.
The motion alleges that proposals were only subject to “limited academic scrutiny” by staff and “no consultation with students”.
It adds: “It is unclear whether there has been adequate oversight and scrutiny of the academic impacts of closures within and across schools, in particular of the cross-school implications of the closure of joint degrees.
“There has been no opportunity to discuss the closure of programmes in school or college committees.”
One senator told The Herald that the morale among their colleagues over the last month had been “bleak”.
“I and other senators have been really troubled by the process of programme closures, including a lack of transparency on decisions,” they said.
“The involvement of external consultants, the lack of involvement of boards of studies, and the scale of closures show this is far from routine, but it has been done without Senate's involvement or approval.”
“To make matters worse, senior management are seeking to cut School Boards of Studies out of future decisions.
“It flies in the face of principles of academic freedom and university governance, and I fear that they aim to break the governance model in favour of something completely top-down.”
Several other items of business appear to reveal the extent of the dysfunction between Senate and the university's governing body, Court.
One draft resolution presented for comment aims to replace a resolution from 2019 which outlines the Boards of Studies’ role in determining curriculum and degree programmes.
Another motion questions the role of Court in ensuring that decisions taken at Senate are implemented.
The Herald has previously reported how Senate has routinely clashed with senior management over the last several years.
In May 2026, managers declined to share agendas, papers and minutes relating to the ‘Academic Size and Shape’ restructure with senators, despite being asked to do so five months prior.
University principal Sir Peter Mathieson has been criticised by the Senate, who passed a vote of no confidence in his leadership in May 2025. (Image: Paul Dodds)
At the time, managers claimed that the restructuring work was administrative and financial in nature, and as such, Senate, whose remit focuses on academic and research issues, had “no responsibility or remit to approve the work”.
“The mood among senators is bleak,” the senator added. “The feeling is that Senate does all they can to exercise their legal duty of oversight, but see this obstructed or bypassed by senior management at every step.”
A second senator told The Herald: “The Academic Senate is the university's supreme academic body, and members stand for election and serve in Senate because of our deep commitment to upholding and sustaining the values and conditions for academic inquiry that have made Edinburgh a special university.
“It has been immensely frustrating to feel that Senate has been sidelined and disregarded during change processes that everyone can see have enormous consequences for the university's academic mission.
Read more:
- Is the worst still to come for Edinburgh University in wake of 90 programme closures?
- Should MSPs call Edinburgh University chiefs to testify about programme cuts?
- Scottish Jewish body urges Edinburgh University to retain antisemitism definition
“Beyond our frustration at being prevented from fulfilling our responsibilities as Senate members, I think we share a deep concern for the future of the institution and the academic values it has represented.”
Asked to respond, a University of Edinburgh spokesperson said:
“The university undertakes regular evidence-based reviews of its academic portfolio to make sure it is aligned with student demand, a constantly evolving job market and other external needs. As a large and complex institution, we have clear decision-making processes supported by well-established governance structures with representation from across our community.
“Decisions regarding our future academic offering have been led by school-level and college analysis, with in-depth consideration of data and disciplinary insights from academics and experts in their field.
"Proposals have then followed our robust governance processes. We remain fully committed to engaging constructively with Senate throughout the process.”