Students in Oxford have argued against the increase in tuition fees

Academic staff at Oxford University have rejected a resolution calling on the university to oppose an increase in student top-up fees.

But the argument to scrap top-up fees, put forward at a meeting of an important university body, was defeated by a margin of more than two to one votes.

The resolution had been presented to the university's "congregation" on Tuesday by Dr Mike Woodin, a Balliol College psychology tutor, and received the votes of more than 40 academics.

Dr Woodin argued that introducing �3,000 per year top-up fees would deter students from poorer backgrounds from applying to university.

And he suggested that students might not choose to apply to universities charging the higher level of fees.

The motion against fees also argued that increased levels of debt would reduce the number of students entering the public sector after they graduate - with young people preferring the higher pay of the private sector.

Dr Woodin said he would prefer student funding to be drawn from general taxation - opposing the government's argument that individual students should make repayments towards the cost of their higher education.

Poorer students

The anti-fees academics wanted to influence the university's response to the government's White Paper on higher education funding.

And Dr Patrick McGuinness of St Anne's College pointed to the link between the abolition of grants and decline in young people from poorer families entering university.

"Research shows that the number of students from poorer background attending university has gone down from 13% to just 7% in the last 10 years as a direct result of the abolition of grants and the introduction of fees.

"Most of my students are already leaving university with debts higher than an academic starting salary. Top-up fees can only worsen these trends," said Dr McGuinness.

The resolution was also supported by Will Straw, president of the Oxford University Student Union.

"This resolution is extremely significant, since it will give this prestigious and highly influential body a chance to express its dissatisfaction with government policy," he said.

But the vote within this university body was against the proposal - and the resolution was not adopted.