Letter: Short and shallow

Mr Stephen Everson
Wednesday 30 September 1992 18:02 EDT
Comments

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.

Sir: It may just be that those who favour the shortening of the time spent reading for a degree from three years to two genuinely believe that this can be done without a significant reduction in student academic achievement - but, if so, their view rests on a deeply impoverished notion of what is involved in reading for a degree (report, 24 September).

Of course, if all that were needed were to attend a certain number of lectures or tutorials, then undergraduate education would not be compromised if this number were to be squashed into two years rather than stretched over three. What is missing from this picture is the recognition that much of the work for a degree needs to be done in addition to formal tuition - and, in particular, during the vacations. University vacations are not holidays, either for students or their tutors.

The effect of shortening courses would be that students would have only two years rather than three to think about their subject. It would be fatuous to imagine that this would not result in graduates whose understanding of their subject was shallower than it now is and whose intellectual development was much less extended.

At a time when undergraduates are coming up from school less well trained than they used to be (a problem that is by no means restricted to those from state schools), the shortening of degree courses could only result in a withering of academic standards. Given that it would also interfere with the ability of academics to conduct research, the universities have a duty to fight any such proposals tooth and nail.

Yours faithfully,

STEPHEN EVERSON

Tutor in Philosophy

Balliol College

Oxford

28 September

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in