Leading article: The value of higher education
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Much of what the Business Secretary, Lord Mandelson, had to say on higher education policy yesterday is the logical and direct consequence of allowing universities to levy fees and then not excluding the possibility that they would rise. This was bound to change the relationship between university and student, and it has. But the students (and the Government) have been rather swifter to recognise the change than most of the universities.
Quite reasonably, the students are demanding better value for their money. So far, however, they have mostly defined value in terms of contact time with teachers and the expectation that lecturers will turn up and grade their work. They have also complained about being fobbed off with inexperienced tutors when the department has promised a "star" professor.
Lord Mandelson went further, in his "framework document", saying that students – as "customers" – were entitled to more information before applying, not just about the quality of teaching, but also about their likely future earnings. He also calls for stronger links between universities and industry, while insisting that there is "public value in every subject and academic discipline".
This caveat was a wise inclusion, but perhaps deserved to be spelt out more forcefully. Studying and research have a value in themselves, and by no means everything can, or should, be reduced to its monetary value. There are also areas of study which might have few obvious applications at the time, but subsequently come into their own – or vice versa.
In truth, though, many universities have been too content in recent years to sit back as the applications flood in. They should undoubtedly provide better information about their courses, including a guarantee of teaching time and quality, and data about the jobs and pay graduates can expect. There will be those who find it deeply distasteful to accept that universities, too, must now compete in a modern market. But whether it is the ivory tower or an immediately saleable skill they are offering, the onus has to be on them, as the providers, to convince potential students of their value.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments