糖心Vlog

Death of office hours ‘damaging student-tutor relationships’

Amid declining attendances, some scholars see merit in making one-to-one feedback sessions mandatory while others say it is time to ditch historical anomaly

Published on
September 10, 2025
Last updated
September 10, 2025
Dolly Parton acts in a scene from the movie "9 to 5" which was released on 19 December, 1980. To illustrate that the death of office hours could be ‘damaging student-tutor relationships’
Source: Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

Academics say their office hours?increasingly have no attendees amid growing class sizes, the rise of student part-time work and?widespread use of AI, with their relationships with students being damaged as a result.

While it has long been known that?lecture hall attendance has dwindled?after the pandemic, this trend has bled into other areas of academic life, with students increasingly shunning in-person interactions with staff in favour of late-night emails and?even ChatGPT and AI personal tutors.

David Hitchcock, reader in arts, humanities, media, and creative digital at Canterbury Christ Church University, said that students are attending office hours “far less than even five or six years ago”.

While he believes this is partly a product of the pandemic, he said the trend extends beyond this, adding that today’s students are more likely to email about things previous cohorts would have discussed at office hours.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

He “couldn’t remember” the last time a student independently sought him out?during?office hours to get tutorial support or feedback on work, and “even prompted versions of tutorial feedback see far fewer takers now than they used to”.

Hitchcock said that the decline of the office hour “contributes, to some extent, to the changing, or perhaps the weakening, of the academic-student pedagogical relationship”, and said that “academics are one knowledge ‘authority figure’ among several options now”.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

It was also a loss for student learning and engagement, said Hitchcock, and “sometimes I worry students don’t know what they’re missing, and that we would be better off putting that sort of interaction directly into their timetables and expecting them all to go”.

Evelyn Svingen, assistant professor in criminology at the University of Birmingham, agreed that the trend was a sign of the “fall of interpersonal relationships” between staff and students, which she linked to?growing class sizes amid the financial crisis.

“The more the classrooms grow, the less I feel that students are likely to come, just because it’s becoming less personal,” she said, adding that “it’s a bit sad when you are sat in your office for one and a half hours for no one to come”.

Svingen added that once students do attend their first office hour, they are more likely to come again, but said: “Getting students to come to the first one is quite difficult, and they tend to only come to people that they know personally. It’s quite hard when you’re teaching a big classroom, and obviously it’s really difficult to have this conversation with a student and get to know them.”

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Students are increasingly “apologising” for “taking up my time”, she explained, adding that “students somehow just feel like they’re a burden and they’re not entitled to this time”.?

The lack of office hour attendance is creating issues when it comes to referencing, Svingen?continued, adding: “It’s quite difficult to write a recommendation letter for somebody who you’ve never met.”

Rob Briner, professor of organisational psychology at Queen Mary University of London, said he believes students “don’t see the value” in office hours, and are “voting with their feet”.

“I think a lot of these structures were set up for a different historical period when university wasn’t a kind of mass education. Now it is, some of those things maybe still work a bit, but some of them don’t particularly work well. They’re like vestiges of an older system,” he said.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

The rise of student part-time work means that fixed office hours could be outdated in a system where students are more outcomes-driven and time-stretched.

Universities, instead, he said, need to question: “If only 10 per cent of people who sign up to something then show up, you could keep going with that, or you could stand back and say, ‘90 per cent of people who said that they wanted to do this aren’t turning up. Do we carry on doing this, or do we think about the way that we’re organising learning?’.”

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

juliette.rowsell@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Marketisation and the pandemic pushed student preferences to the top of every university’s teaching and learning agenda. But should those preferences be acted on even if they risk undermining educational outcomes? Juliette Rowsell reports

Reader's comments (15)

A useful piece here raising a practical issue that effects those colleagues teaching. As one recent piece pointed out, we maintain a pedagogic model nased on small group teaching gloing back to the 60s but have overkaid a mass system on top of it. Somehting has to give now.
One-on-one and small group teaching is the gold standard. However, it is not "one size fits all." The student has to choose to come in or not. I encourage my students to visit their faculty members in their offices — not just me, but anyone with whom they study. In some classes an individual conference about the student's writing needed to be substituted for a full-scale class meeting so each student could get individual attention and privacy. I've taught tutorials and made lifelong friends that way. This doesn't apply to predators, of course. They know who they are, and their students need to stay out of their offices. That's a special case.
"One-on-one and small group teaching is the gold standard." I thought we abandoned the Gold Standard long ago and that it was responsible for exacerbating the Great Depression and generally considered disastrous and only championed by fiscal primitives (like Winston Churchill among others). So yes I think you are proabably right, perhaps unintentionally?
In Felten & Lambert's "Relationship Rich Education" - one person simply tried renaming their "Office Hours" to "Student Hours" - which saw an update to attendance. Not all students realise that "Office hours" mean "I'm here for you", leading to those apologies mentioned above. Maybe it's as simple as renaming them
That would imply the other hours when you are in your room which are not your guarantee-ed office hours are not available to students. Obviously, if you are in your office and a students comes by you will see them if you are not with another persion or on the phone and such consultations maight only be a few minutes. The Office Hours are times we promise to be in our offices. Students may also complain that Dr X has more student hours than Dr Y or that because of theor tumetable they can not access any Student Hoiurs etc.
new
A good point! When I took up a senior post at a University six years ago, after being an academic in the HE sector for more than 30 years, I thought "office hours" were just that, i.e. the time I said I would be physically on campus :-)
Our university renamed office hours as academic support. Made no difference to the uptake - it remained low. We need to think what else can be done in those hours or get rid of them and offer to set up meetings with student as and when the need arises.
Very intersting, in the old days these were hours we guarante-ed to be in our office for students to "drop-by". Characteristically, they became very sparse, in many cases the basic minimum of 2 hours one each on different days (My school's policy). Students then started to try and "book" these hours for themselves and they also got a little annoyed when the hours were invonvientent for them. So most of this contact was by students arranging personal consultations. In addition we hold essay consultations meetings and feedback sessions and leave a lits of times for individual consultations c. 20 mins. Most of my students used to sign up but somne chose not to. With large class sizes and many students, trying to see all of them for all the modules one teachings was very very challenginf in tyerms of time and this will only get worse. This also impinges on anopther issue. How often should colleagues be in their offices, with WFH etc and rempte access. Many colleagues these days commute to the University of (often from substantial distances), so easier to do consultations remotely, which students often prefer. So yes it is a mess and as other articles and comments have pointed out, much of these standard practices are relics derived form the older Oxbridge model of personal tuition and left over from an older, much kinder, eben whimsical, period (the days of the gentle satires of Malcolm Bradbury and David Lodge) that have been normalised into some quasi religious teaching ritual. What we have is the worst of both worlds now, a demanding labour intensive pedagogy which we are obliged to implement and which is too intense for both staff and students in a mass HE system. It makes unreal demands on academics with students endlessly "reaching out" usually via emails at 3.00 am in the morning or requesting individual catch-up sessions for classes missed, and colleagues endlessly chasing up their students all the while trying to meet their research and admin obligations.
This is a terrible article. It makes sweeping claims based on nothing more than anecdotes from just three academics, all at very different universities. It’s scaremongering based on a completely unrepresentative sample. And just a cursory glance at David Hitchcock’s web page makes it clear that his job title is not “reader in arts, humanities, media, and creative digital” (which would be a ridiculous brief) but is instead a Reader in a section with that (albeit nonsensical) name. Is this really the best that the Times Higher can do?
Could we avoid the ad hominem comments please, so distasteful.
Reviewer 2 hangs out here?
Well do you know, I think that there is a lot of "ivory tower" mentality in this article and some of the comments here. Some people seem to be working in Oxford in the 1950s from what I can tell from the tales they are telling. I would like to inform you about the real world in which some colleagues do not have offices, let alone office hours. Office sharing is now very common. My University has multi-occupancy and four or more in an office (all full timers) is not unusual in the Arts and Humanities. This makes things very difficult indeed as you can imagine. Half the time I can't get in my office because one of my three other sharers collagues is holding their office hours. I have to book additional rooms for essay consultations etc. And I hear that some Universities also have the "hot desk" system where you turn up on the day and try and find a desk. So I say to you, get out your ivory towers you obver privileged Dons with your talk of one to one teaching and dedicated office hours and come into the real world of UKHE2025!!
I think this is an excellent example which puts the whole thing into perspective. We simply are no longer resourced to provide the support that goes with the outdated Oxbridge small group teaching model so beloved. I would also add that a great number of tutors will be on fractional contracts which makes the office hour issue even more complex to arrange. What are they supposed to provide exactly outside of their contracted teaching hours and what are they paid for? If they can't supply the office hours, are other colleagues expected to cover and take up this slack? Another complicating factor is that although we have moved ti the mass HE model our Teaching Quality protocols/NSS driven practices/admissions pitches/Mental Health and other Protocols etc etc all push in the direction of proactive additional (often unofficial) support for our students with no additional resource. Indeed, how often out of the blue do we get a student writing to us using that perniciously ambiguous phrase "I am reaching out to you in the hope ...". What does it mean? Does it imply if you do not respond immediately with additional help support etc that you arev "pushing the student away" by not reciprocally reaching back to them? Recently, in my dept our Teaching person wrote to us criticising us not for "not caring about the student" but for "not showing that we care" about the students. So we set up what we might think of as not simply a "gold standard" teaching practice but a "diamond encrusted" pedagogy that even its advocates are not able to live up to. We could learn so much from our colleagues in Europe about how to manage this, I think they do it so much better than we do. The Italian system seems to me to be especially good. So yes I agree, let's get out of the Ivory Tower mentality
I have to agree with you. The elephant in the room here is student absenteeism generally.
new
Well said. Academics pontificating if they just reorganised things absenteeism would change. No it won't, or not by much. We have more students from non-middle class backgrounds who have to work long hours because student finance just doesn't cover living costs even if at home. We have a growing number of intellectually non-curious who just want a piece of paper and have to really struggle to get it. They're often absent because every piece of work takes them ages. The small middle class and intellectually curious core still come and benefit, while the absent sloggers takes all our time, with little benefit to us and them. I don't know what the answer is.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT