International Institute for Strategic Leadership


Lowest-ranked Teaching Quality in the UK

After Lord Woolf’s damning inquiry established the absence of a culture of ethics at the LSE,

an open research question is whether something as fundamental and foundational as

organisational culture permeates to the core mission of the institution.

In other words,

would a culture which produced one of the largest ethics scandals in UK Higher Education history

translate into some of the lowest teaching quality in the UK?

Since the LSE’s Libya/Gaddafi ethics scandal, as widely reported in the UK media,

the LSE has plummeted approximately 100 places in the UK ‘teaching quality’ rankings

and was officially the lowest-ranked university in the entire country in 2017 (#127)

as well as  the lowest-ranked university in the entire country in 2018 (#129)

This result is even more surprising given the LSE’s large endowment of financial and social capital,

with its illustrious 120-year history, 16 Nobel Prize winners and an annual intake of £350 million.

The LSE fares worse than all other universities in the UK, the vast majority of which

possess much lower quantities of financial and social capital.

Although more research is required to isolate variables and establish causal mechanisms,

it appears that something as fundamental and foundational as organisational culture

is likely to permeate to the core mission of the institution.

One can infer that due to the systematic accumulation of micro-mechanisms like this,

failings in the core mission of an institution arise from an unethical culture that destroys excellence.

The LSE’s plummeting to the bottom of the UK ‘teaching quality’ rankings

is no longer a mystery as it appears to be a function of

its unethical culture at the top that Lord Woolf so adeptly chronicled.

To summarise this downward causal spiral:

an unethical culture at the macro-level,

which removes ethical, excellent people at the micro-level,

simultaneously reduces the excellence as well as the ethical fabric of the organisation.

[Repeat causal mechanism, again and again].

An inverted or orthogonal micro-hypothesis would be:

high-performing, award-winning lecturers, are potentially more ethical people

(i.e. ethics causes excellence).

To investigate this bottom-up hypothesis, ongoing IISL research has determined

that an award-winning LSE faculty member, who stood up for Lord Woolf and ethics at the LSE,

and who fought against unethical and illegal behaviour at the highest levels of the LSE,

was harassed and bullied into a career-ending disability

which resulted in the largest lawsuits in UK higher eduction.



22 June 2017

In 2011, Lord Woolf investigated high-level ethics failures at the LSE,

citing the lack of a culture of ethics, resulting in the resignation of the LSE Director.

In 2012, the LSE’s unethical culture was once again predictably exposed

when the LSE illegally defamed, harassed and bullied one of its top teaching faculty

into a long-term disability and loss of career, resulting in two multi-million Pound lawsuits,

the largest in the history of higher education.

In 2017, the LSE’s unethical and illegal pattern of destroying its top faculty

resulted in the LSE being ranked the worst teaching university in the UK,

and in the lowest tier of the UK Teaching Excellence Framework.

Low quality service stems from unethical leadership -

the Lord Woolf finding.

"Students’ levels of satisfaction with teaching, assessment and feedback,

and academic support, are notably below benchmark.”

(2017 Teaching Excellence Framework results for the LSE)

"Leading universities including the London School of Economics
are short-changing students with poor lectures, aloof tutors or second-rate facilities, according to the first league tables of teaching standards.

The LSE... [was] handed the lowest bronze award
in the first Teaching Excellence Framework.

[The LSE] shared the ranking with the likes of
Accrington and Rossendale College and
Grimsby Institute of Further and Higher Education.”https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/elite-universities-including-goldsmiths-soas-lse-southampton-and-liverpool-exposed-as-second-rate-pbd8m2q6t


"A breakdown of the assessment made for even grimmer reading, according to Mark Leach, director of the higher education think tank Wonkhe. 

‘The LSE falls down on pretty much every important TEF measure.
They are both objectively poor and well below their benchmark on measures like academic support, assessment and feedback,’ he said.

‘While lower awards given to other prestigious universities are more questionable,
the LSE really is a slam-dunk case of bronze,
and this appears to back up the intention of the government’s new rating process.’”https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/they-might-have-bill-gates-and-mark-carney-but-lses-absent-academics-are-failing-students-j7wb0vjkx
LSE RANKS NEAR BOTTOM (#145) IN NATIONAL STUDENT SURVEYhttps://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/news/national-student-survey-2017-overall-satisfaction-results



“The London School of Economics was one university from the elite Russell Group
that ranked relatively badly.”
(Financial Times, 9 August 2017)https://www.ft.com/content/4e8ee366-7c50-11e7-ab01-a13271d1ee9c
“The London School of Economics... scored significantly less
than the sector average for satisfaction.”
(The Telegraph, 9 August 2017)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/08/08/two-britains-leading-universities-fall-benchmark-student-satisfaction/

9 August 2017