College Students Face Refund Difficulties for Low-Quality Courses — How to Protect Their Rights? Lawyer Explains the Legal Boundaries of University Course Quality
In recent years, "water courses" have become a high-frequency complaint among college students—outdated course content, teachers reading straight from textbooks, and perfunctory assessment methods, leaving students to invest time and effort without gaining substantive knowledge. A survey by the China Youth Daily found that over 70 percent of surveyed college students said they had encountered "water courses," with some courses even being derisively dubbed "PPT reading sessions." When educational quality degenerates into formalism, are students who pay tuition and spend their time simply expected to accept the loss? From a legal perspective, "water courses" are not merely a matter of pedagogical dispute; they implicate multiple legal issues, including the performance of education service contracts, the protection of consumer rights, and the management responsibilities of higher education institutions. This article will dissect the legal nature of "water courses" from a lawyer's practical perspective and offer actionable suggestions for rights protection.
I. Legal Characterization of "Water Courses": Breach of Service Contract or Administrative Dereliction of Duty?
From the perspective of legal relations, the relationship between students and higher education institutions is not a simple buyer-seller relationship, but rather a special educational service contract relationship formed under the Education Law and the Provisions on the Administration of Students in Regular Institutions of Higher Education. Students pay tuition fees, and higher education institutions provide teaching services that conform to the training program. The rights and obligations of both parties are indirectly agreed upon through documents such as enrollment brochures, training plans, and course syllabi.
When course content seriously deviates from training objectives and teaching input is clearly insufficient, a university may constitute defective contract performance. For example, if a public elective course at a university only plays videos throughout the entire semester without any interaction or Q&A, students may claim that the institution failed to provide "qualified teaching" as agreed, which falls under "incomplete performance" as stipulated in Article 577 of the Civil Code. However, the difficulty lies in the fact that educational services are subjective and process-oriented, and there is no objective quantitative standard for distinguishing "watered-down" courses from "substantive" ones. Courts typically do not directly rule on the quality of a course, but instead examine whether the institution has violated statutory or contractual obligations.
Additionally, as administrative public institutions, universities' teaching management activities are also subject to the Higher Education Law. If teachers are absent from their posts for extended periods or course schedules are severely reduced, this may constitute administrative inaction, and students may file complaints or reports with the competent education authorities to request administrative supervision.
II. Refund and Rights Protection: Legal Basis and Practical Obstacles
Many students attempt to demand partial tuition refunds on the grounds of "poor teaching quality," but the success rate is extremely low. The core obstacles lie in the following: first, tuition is generally charged on a whole academic year basis, making it difficult to break down to specific courses; second, educational services have actually been provided, and even if the quality is poor, it is difficult to establish that "services were not rendered"; third, although the current Consumer Protection Law includes "receiving educational services" within its scope of adjustment, in judicial practice courts tend to hold that universities are not typical business operators, and the application of this law requires caution.
However, there is still room for fee refunds under specific circumstances. If the school explicitly promises in its enrollment publicity that a course will be taught by renowned teachers or conducted in small classes, but the actual situation does not match the promise, this may constitute false advertising, and students may petition for contract rescission or claim damages in accordance with Article 148 of the Civil Code. In addition, if a substantial number of courses are cancelled due to the school's reasons, or the class hours are reduced beyond a certain proportion, students may claim that the agreed-upon services were not provided in full and request a pro-rata refund.
In practice, students should first submit a written objection to the school's academic affairs department or the student appeals committee, and retain evidence such as the course syllabus, attendance records, and teaching videos. If the school refuses, they may file a complaint with the provincial education administrative department, or initiate administrative litigation (against administrative decisions) and civil litigation (for contract disputes). However, it should be noted that litigation is costly and time-consuming, and enforcement after winning is not easy; it is recommended to prioritize seeking mediation within the school.
III. Legal Risks in Higher Education Institutions: Joint Liability Arising from "Watered-Down Courses"
The proliferation of "water courses" not only harms students' rights and interests but also brings legal risks to universities themselves. First, if course offerings seriously fail to meet standards, resulting in students lacking professional skills after graduation, students or employers may hold universities accountable on grounds of "degree fraud" or "unqualified education quality." In recent years, there have been cases where graduates sued their alma maters for compensation for "degree depreciation" losses. Although few won, it has served as a wake-up call for universities.
Secondly, teachers who are perfunctory in their teaching may violate the obligation under Article 8 of the Teachers Law to "fulfill their teaching contracts and complete educational and teaching work tasks." Higher education institutions may impose disciplinary sanctions in accordance with internal regulations, or even terminate their employment contracts. If teachers are absent from their posts for an extended period while still receiving their salaries as usual, this may also involve issues of loss of state-owned assets, triggering intervention by audit and disciplinary inspection authorities.
Furthermore, if universities neglect course quality assessment when formulating training programs, they may be determined by education authorities as "failing to meet school-running conditions," which could affect their enrollment qualifications or evaluation ratings. The "Implementation Plan for the Audit and Evaluation of Undergraduate Education and Teaching in Regular Institutions of Higher Learning" issued by the Ministry of Education in 2023 has already made course quality a core indicator. If universities receive a red flag due to "water courses," it will directly impact their reputation and funding allocation.
IV. Rights Protection Paths and Attorney Recommendations: From Individual Case Remedies to Institutional Improvement
For students encountering "water courses" (low-quality courses), lawyers advise adopting a "three-step" strategy: First, preserve evidence, including course syllabi, teaching slides, audio and video recordings of classes, and communication records with instructors, to prove insufficient teaching investment; Second, formally submit a written complaint to the university requesting rectification or a refund, while copying the school's disciplinary committee or academic committee to apply pressure; Third, if the university takes no action, file a complaint with the provincial education administrative department, or commission a lawyer to send a legal letter or initiate litigation.
But it must be clearly recognized that rights protection through individual cases is difficult to fundamentally solve the problem of "watered-down courses." The fundamental way out lies in promoting the establishment of course quality assurance mechanisms in universities, such as introducing third-party evaluations and establishing student evaluation of teaching and course elimination mechanisms. Students can participate in course governance through channels such as student unions and student congresses, and promote universities to disclose course syllabi and faculty teaching workloads.
Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has long focused on educational legal affairs and has represented multiple disputes between students and universities. We advise students to remain rational when asserting their rights, prioritizing low-cost channels such as administrative complaints and on-campus appeals. If significant interests are at stake, students may consult professional lawyers to assess the feasibility of litigation. Educational fairness is the cornerstone of social justice. Ensuring that every class can withstand legal scrutiny is not only responsible to students but also safeguards the credibility of higher education.
