From 4th to 122nd: The Decline of SOAS
Written by Anya Shah, BA Politics and International Relations.
Once ranked as one of the best universities in the country, SOAS University of London has faced a rapid decline over the past 20 years in national league tables. Its latest results raise serious questions about where the university is headed.
In 2005, the Guardian University Guide ranked SOAS as the 4th best university in the UK, placing it ahead of institutions such as LSE, UCL, and KCL. Just over two decades later, SOAS has fallen to 122nd out of 123 universities in the Guardian’s University Guide for 2027. The contrast is extreme and makes one wonder: how can an institution that was once one of the country’s greatest have declined so much?The Guardian University Guide assesses universities using eight measures, designed primarily to evaluate the student experience rather than research prestige. These include student satisfaction with teaching and feedback, the student-to-staff ratio, spending per student, average entry tariff, value added, graduate career prospects 15 months after graduation, and continuation rates.
It is not only the Guardian that has measured this decline. The Times and The Sunday Times Good University Guide 2027 ranks SOAS 112th out of 130 universities, a fall of 37 places from the previous year. While university rankings should never be treated as a definitive measure of academic quality, the consistency and scale of SOAS’s decline cannot simply be dismissed.
Most strikingly, SOAS recorded the 3rd lowest score in the entire Guardian table for student satisfaction with feedback. Feedback is fundamental to university education, allowing students to improve their work. A university that performs so poorly in this area should assess whether students are receiving the academic guidance they need.
"In 2005, SOAS was ranked 4th in the country. 22 years later, it is ranked 122nd out of 123 in the Guardian guide".
SOAS’s student-to-staff ratio is another major concern. According to the 2015 Guardian rankings, SOAS had approximately 11.6 students per member of staff. This has since risen to 15.6 to 1, meaning that students are competing for a greater share of academic staff time. By comparison, UCL has a ratio of approximately 10.5 to 1. This difference matters. Larger student cohorts can mean less individual attention and increased pressure on staff.
SOAS’s 2023–24 financial statements show a large increase in undergraduate enrolment over recent years. Its own reporting also highlights that undergraduate numbers have continued to grow, with the majority of its student population being a part of undergraduate study.
Growth is not inherently a problem. It shows that students continue to see value in a SOAS education. However, expansion becomes problematic when staffing, teaching resources, and facilities fail to keep up.
The deterioration in the student-to-staff ratio suggests that the growth in student numbers has not translated into a proportionate improvement in academic support. This is troubling given SOAS’s distinctive academic identity. Its reputation was built on a specialist focus in the languages, histories, politics, and cultures of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.
SOAS’s financial position presents an apparent contradiction. The university reported an operational surplus of £4.5 million in 2022–23, rising to £6.3 million in 2023–24. This represents an increase of £1.8 million in a single year.
The financial statements describe improvements in areas such as campus refinements, updated IT equipment, and changes intended to enhance the student experience. It would therefore be inaccurate to suggest that SOAS has made no investment in its staff or facilities. Nevertheless, the central question remains about whether these improvements are translating into a better experience for students.
The direction in which the university is headed raises another concern. An article from The SOAS Spirit Issue 36 titled: ‘SOAS to Lose Further Specialisation,’ examines the implications of changes to the curriculum. The article highlights a fundamental point being whether SOAS can maintain its distinctive identity while still being ‘viable in the financialised structure of UK education.’
Specialisation is not simply a marketing strategy. It is central to what distinguishes SOAS from other UK universities. Its expertise in less commonly taught languages and region-specific disciplines provides a side of academia offering what larger, more Eurocentric institutions may struggle to replicate.
If specialist provision is weakened while student numbers rise, SOAS risks losing precisely the qualities that once made it exceptional. Expanding recruitment without protecting academic expertise could leave the university larger, but less distinctive.
A SOAS spokesperson told The SOAS Spirit:
‘We are proud of who we are and what we do at SOAS. That’s why some of our subjects are ranked among the best in the world. […] We are working hard with the students and the Students’ Union to ensure the [National Student Survey] results reflect the fantastic place that we know SOAS to be. Rankings are only one measure of a university and do not tell the full story. […] We are committed to a programme of continuous improvement, shaped by student feedback, to ensure SOAS is the best university it can possibly be for current and future students.’
In 2005, SOAS was among the UK’s top universities. 22 years later, it is at the bottom of the Guardian guide. The question is no longer simply how SOAS declined so rapidly, but whether the university is prepared to make the changes necessary to reverse that decline.
