Dear Professor Julie Hall,

Subject: Urgent Concerns Regarding Proposed Reductions in Sociology Provision

We are writing to express our profound concern regarding the proposed redundancies and restructuring at London Metropolitan University, particularly the plans affecting sociology. We understand that 9.2 FTE sociology staff may be made redundant and that only one sociologist has been confirmed within the proposed new School structure. Such a reduction would not merely reshape the discipline – it would effectively dismantle sociology as a viable and coherent academic presence within the University.

We are further concerned that the redesigned BSc Sociology degree will include only 25% explicitly sociological modules delivered by retained sociology staff. This represents a fundamental weakening of disciplinary provision and raises serious questions about the future integrity and credibility of the programme.

These proposals appear misaligned with national trends, sustained student demand, and the long-term strategic interests of the University.

1. Sociology remains one of the UK’s most popular A-level subjects

Sociology continues to attract very large numbers of A-level students. In 2025, the combined total of sociology exam entries across Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland was 44,805, making sociology the eighth most popular subject (out of 41), according to the Joint Qualifications Council. It sits alongside maths, psychology, biology, chemistry, business studies, physics and history as one of the principal feeder subjects into higher education.

This scale represents a substantial and reliable recruitment pool. Given London Met’s historic commitment to widening participation and recruitment from local comprehensive schools, this socially diverse A-level cohort constitutes a particularly important pipeline of prospective applicants. Weakening sociology provision risks severing the University from one of the largest and most established routes into higher education.

2. Sociology is a cost-effective discipline that supports financial sustainability

Sociology is widely recognised as a comparatively low-cost subject to deliver. It does not require expensive laboratories, specialist equipment, or high technical overheads. Across the sector, social-science provision has often provided stable income that helps sustain broader institutional portfolios.

Reducing staffing to the point where disciplinary coherence is compromised risks undermining precisely the form of provision that is structurally cost-effective. It is difficult to reconcile the proposed cuts with a strategy aimed at financial resilience, particularly where the discipline concerned combines relatively low delivery costs with demonstrable student demand.

3. Sustained student demand for sociology degrees

Sociology degrees continue to attract students seeking pathways into public services, policy, NGOs, education, criminal justice, housing, health, and community-based professions. These are areas central both to London’s labour market and to London Met’s civic mission.

In a city characterised by profound inequality, diversity, migration, housing pressures, and rapid social change, the need for graduates with strong sociological training remains acute. Maintaining a robust, clearly defined sociology programme is essential if the University is to meet this ongoing demand effectively.

4. A 25% sociological core risks academic dilution and reputational damage

We are particularly concerned by the proposal that only 25% of the BSc Sociology programme will consist of explicitly sociological modules delivered by retained sociology staff. A degree structured in this way risks becoming sociology in name rather than substance.

This raises serious concerns about academic coherence, disciplinary integrity, and student expectations. Students who choose sociology at A-level do so because they seek sustained engagement with sociological theory, research methods, and substantive areas such as inequality, identity, power, and social change. A curriculum in which sociological content is marginal may be perceived as diluted, potentially weakening recruitment, student satisfaction and the programme’s credibility in a competitive London higher-education environment.

In a densely populated and highly competitive city, disciplinary clarity is crucial. A visibly diminished sociology presence may weaken London Met’s ability to compete with neighbouring institutions that continue to invest in clearly defined social-science provision.

5. Sociology is central – not peripheral – to London Met’s strategic vision

Sociology equips students with future-focused, transferable skills that align directly with London Met’s strategic commitments to social justice, community engagement, and employability. Its emphasis on critical analysis, evidence-based reasoning, cultural awareness, and structural understanding of inequality is integral to the University’s mission to transform lives and communities.

In the context of London specifically, sociology provides essential analytical tools for understanding urban transformation, racial and ethnic diversity, gendered inequalities, labour markets, housing crises, and migration. To reduce sociology at such a moment risks signalling a retreat from precisely the civic and social commitments the University publicly affirms.

6. Strategic strengthening – not reduction – would better serve the University

We therefore urge you to reconsider the proposed reductions. Strengthening rather than diminishing sociology provision would:

• Align the programme with sustained national student interest
• Enhance the clarity and market appeal of the degree
• Protect recruitment from one of the UK’s largest A-level subject cohorts
• Preserve a cost-effective and financially sustainable area of provision
• Safeguard the academic integrity and reputation of the University

By contrast, proceeding with the proposed reductions risks diminished recruitment, reputational weakening, and the effective loss of a discipline that has long contributed to the University’s identity, civic engagement, and academic standing.

A strong sociology programme is not optional to London Met’s mission – it is integral to it.

We urge careful reconsideration of these proposals and would welcome further dialogue on how sociology can be sustained and strengthened within the University’s future plans.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Les Back, BSA President
Professor Chris Yuill, BSA Chair
Dr Jen Remnant, BSA Vice Chair

Letter sent via email to:
Professor Julie Hall, Vice Chancellor, London Metropolitan University
cc. Professor Nona McDuff, Deputy Vice Chancellor
Kelly Cooper, Dean of the School of Social Sciences and Professions