Do human geography students get value for money?

costs and value for moneyhuman geography

Yes, but only when providers make costs predictable, reduce out-of-pocket spend on fieldwork and software, and connect these expenses directly to learning and employability. Across National Student Survey (NSS) open-text comments tagged to costs and value for money, sentiment is markedly negative (88.3% negative; sentiment index −46.7), with full-time students, who make up 78.7% of such comments, more critical (−50.4) than part-time peers. Within human geography, the costs/value theme trends even more negative (−62.7), underscoring the need to show how spend translates into outcomes and to remove avoidable costs. Human geography sits within a UK-wide subject classification used for sector benchmarking; the costs and value theme reflects how students judge what they pay against what they receive.

In the current climate of rising tuition fees and escalating living costs, the economic pressures on students embarking on higher education are increasing significantly, particularly for those studying human geography. These students often face additional expenditures, such as fieldwork and specialist software, which are integral to their courses. An essential question is whether the investment in higher education still represents good value for money. Student voice analysis of survey free text helps institutions understand how costs are perceived in terms of educational and career outcomes, so programme teams can evaluate how effectively spend translates into valuable learning and employability.

What are the course-specific financial challenges?

Human geography students encounter distinctive costs that are not always visible in other disciplines. Field trips and specialist software can be expensive, stretching budgets more than for students in less resource-intensive subjects. Field excursions are essential for applying theory in real-world contexts and highly valued by employers, yet the financial burden can deter engagement, limiting access to learning opportunities. Providers can mitigate this by expanding shared resources, piloting digital field trips where appropriate, and providing enhanced access to institutional software licences. Staff should listen actively to student feedback and adjust policies so financial strain does not overshadow learning.

How do students perceive the value of Human Geography degrees?

Students weigh the high costs of hands-on experiences against the benefits these bring to understanding geographic systems and societal impacts. They often argue that fieldwork provides distinctive skills and insights but ask that activities be maximally enriching and priced fairly. Survey responses emphasise transparent communication about what costs include and the tangible benefits gained. Institutions need to articulate how value for money is delivered, especially in terms of employability, placement quality and career-relevant skills.

How do costs affect academic performance?

Financial strain increases stress and can reduce participation in key learning activities, particularly fieldwork and access to specialised tools. Reduced participation risks weaker attainment and lower confidence. While some students thrive despite financial hurdles, others struggle. Providers should offer targeted financial support, redesign requirements that create unnecessary costs, and use technology to simulate expensive activities where learning outcomes permit. Addressing these barriers helps ensure economic constraints do not hinder academic potential.

Are student support services and financial aid fit for purpose?

Support must match the curriculum’s real costs. Scholarships, grants and bursaries can alleviate burdens if they are accessible and mapped to known pressure points such as fieldwork, travel and software. Where aid proves insufficient or slow to reach students, stress and disengagement rise. Providers should standardise cost guidance in handbooks and the VLE, publish a single source of truth for inclusions and exclusions, and set service targets for reimbursements with visible turnaround times. Engagement with students about eligibility and timing improves uptake and impact.

How do costs compare with other disciplines?

Human geography typically incurs higher outlays than subjects that rely mainly on libraries and online databases. GIS licences, equipment and travel for field studies increase personal expenditure but underpin applied learning and skills for environmental and urban planning careers. Providers can preserve these strengths by facilitating access to institutional licences, scheduling group field projects that share costs, and designing inclusive alternatives that maintain learning outcomes.

What does student feedback on human geography say?

Students consistently value the core academic experience—especially fieldwork—while expressing frustration when costs feel unpredictable or poorly explained. They ask for clarity about what the fee covers, which costs are optional or reimbursable, and when expenses will fall in the year. They also want providers to connect spend to explicit learning outcomes, graduate attributes and placement readiness.

What should providers do to improve value for money?

• Make costs visible and predictable. Publish a total cost of study per programme with timing, whether costs are optional, and what fees cover. Adopt a no-surprises policy for additional spend.
• Reduce out-of-pocket spend at known pressure points. Expand equipment loans, print/material allowances and software access; pre-book group travel and negotiate institutional licences.
• Target the cohorts most likely to feel poor value. Front-load information and reimbursements for full-time cohorts before cost-heavy weeks; schedule pulse checks after high-cost activities and close the loop quickly.
• Tighten support operations. Standardise cost guidance in module handbooks, set reimbursement service levels, and track turnaround times.
• Double down on what works. Preserve the structure around fieldwork that students rate highly, and ensure equitable access so finances do not dictate participation.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

Student Voice Analytics pinpoints where value-for-money concerns are sharpest by mode, subject and cohort, and tracks movement over time. You can drill from institution to programme, generate concise anonymised summaries for programme teams and finance leads, and compare like-for-like against relevant peer groups. Export-ready tables and narratives support swift briefing and action tracking, so teams can prioritise cost mitigations that most improve perceived value in human geography.

Request a walkthrough

Book a Student Voice Analytics demo

See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.

• All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
• Versioned outputs with TEF-ready governance packs.
• Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.

Book a demo Prefer email? [email protected]

More posts on costs and value for money:

• Do design studies students get value for money?
• Are UK art students getting value for money?
• Is biomedical sciences good value for money?
• Do psychology students feel their UK degree offers value for money?

More posts on human geography student views:

• Do human geography students find marking criteria usable?
• How do human geography students rate their teaching staff?
• Does module choice variety in human geography improve careers and learning?
• What does student feedback say about the delivery of human geography teaching?