Predicting the Browne Review Mr. Willetts?

Well, none of us were that surprised when Willetts suggested that Universities were about to go through some tough times.  And raised (and variable) fees have been on the agenda for about 2 years now and the (fairly common) rumours are that we will have a two tier fees structure suggested over the summer. 

Not a surprise but there has been some fairly interesting comment out there including the call that education should be a meritocracy and not about the bank balance.  Absolutely but hopefully a little premature ... if the government were to raise support for those in need then the impact could be lessened on those with low or modest incomes. 

That said, it does still leave me questioning if we are correctly educating the right people and in the right things.  Watched as part of this week's lectures a tremendous (and funny) video by Sir Ken Robinson on education in which he argues that not only are we cramping creativity but by allowing more students to go to university then we are stifling creativity in the style of our education which is worsened by forcing more into HE (and devaluing the end product). 



This reminded me of the BBC article this week saying that 'more people than ever before will miss out'; whilst I am not arguing for the good old days which my parents went through when only 1 or 2% went to university but perhaps we should re-consider the fact that not everyone should go to university or is suited.  Does a diverse (and deserving) higher education system really mean universal?  Perhaps Willetts would have been better questioning what role of universities should actually have in society. 

Ask most people what a university is for and they would say educating (and particularly 18 year olds). Ask many academics and the picture becomes more complex.  Research many might say.  During a presentation I gave to the English Department today, the Head said something positive needed to be said.  Too true, as research (and particularly that in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences) is endangered and cuts will follow but can the country which inspired Shakespeare really not fund research into plays?  The increases in student fees will not mean more money for research; rather a decrease in the net grant from universities.  This will research more poorly funded and, possibly, less rich.  Now much of this I predicted in me pre-election blogs but none of the parties committed to helping universities. 

By cutting university funding, it's not just about not allowing those into education who should be, it endangers the knowledge basis that this country is renowned for.  It damages the teaching students who do get through the door receive.  It damages our culture and our economy. 

Perhaps there is another way.  Now the issue of whether universities should be engaging in BOTH teaching AND research is a question I have raised elsewhere, including examples of where teaching and research take place in separate foundations.  I have no answers.  But perhaps instead of predicting the outcome of the Browne Review, Mr. Willetts should have started a fundamental debate on universities, their actions and their structures rather than presuming that the current structure is fit for purpose.