Morecambe’s seafront: unfashionable coastal towns are ideal settings for new universities
British universities are poor value for money. A typical institution provides about 12 hours of teaching a week for fewer than 26 weeks a year. For this they receive between £6,290 and £9,290 a year per student, from tuition fees and the government. Meanwhile, secondary schools in England get £4,800 per pupil, and teach 30 hours a week, 39 weeks a year. In effect, secondary schools cost about £4 per hour for each pupil, while universities cost £24.
Universities, then, are needlessly expensive—which is why we must create a new generation of private colleges. These would offer a single degree, taught to all undergraduates over two 40-week years. The course would contain elements that other British universities are beginning to lose: intellectual robustness, depth and breath of reading and excellence in teaching.
The course would have six components.The first, quite simply, is writing and reading. Many employers complain that undergraduates cannot write clearly or read complex documents—and my own postgraduate education at Harvard contained such a mandatory module.
There would also be “Mathematics and economics for life,” because the presentation and use of numbers and the interpretation of statistics are crucial to modern life. Third: “Great books”—a background to the ideas that have shaped western culture, which might include works by Adam Smith, Beckett or Ovid.
Fourth comes “History and politics from a non-English perspective.” Britons tend to be parochial in their interpretation and knowledge of world affairs. A course using material developed for students in Asia or Latin America might rectify this cultural bias. Related to this would be a mandatory foreign language module, because even the best-educated Britons are often poor at speaking anything other than English.
And finally, there would be “Science for citizenship.” How many people, for example, understand the scientific arguments for and against vital issues like GM food, human cloning or nuclear power?
These new universities would be focused on teaching, not research: academics would be chosen solely on the basis of their ability to teach. Not having to do research would free them up to provide tutorials, such as those offered in Oxbridge, which force students to prepare properly. Books and other teaching materials could be provided cheaply online—lectures via iTunes, for example.
Plus, to really save money, these new universities could be located in unfashionable seaside towns, where hotels would accommodate students cheaply in term-time. Administration and social facilities would be leased. Many large public buildings, like churches and town halls, stand empty during the week and could be used for this purpose. As in the US, undergraduates could earn money by working in the hotels, perhaps cleaning or serving food—experience of real work is, after all, a vital part of preparation for life.
Institutions like these, I calculate, would offer the highest-quality education for fees of £5,000 a year—a much lower price than state universities will be charging after the next review. And people would learn more, too.
British universities are poor value for money. A typical institution provides about 12 hours of teaching a week for fewer than 26 weeks a year. For this they receive between £6,290 and £9,290 a year per student, from tuition fees and the government. Meanwhile, secondary schools in England get £4,800 per pupil, and teach 30 hours a week, 39 weeks a year. In effect, secondary schools cost about £4 per hour for each pupil, while universities cost £24.
Universities, then, are needlessly expensive—which is why we must create a new generation of private colleges. These would offer a single degree, taught to all undergraduates over two 40-week years. The course would contain elements that other British universities are beginning to lose: intellectual robustness, depth and breath of reading and excellence in teaching.
The course would have six components.The first, quite simply, is writing and reading. Many employers complain that undergraduates cannot write clearly or read complex documents—and my own postgraduate education at Harvard contained such a mandatory module.
There would also be “Mathematics and economics for life,” because the presentation and use of numbers and the interpretation of statistics are crucial to modern life. Third: “Great books”—a background to the ideas that have shaped western culture, which might include works by Adam Smith, Beckett or Ovid.
Fourth comes “History and politics from a non-English perspective.” Britons tend to be parochial in their interpretation and knowledge of world affairs. A course using material developed for students in Asia or Latin America might rectify this cultural bias. Related to this would be a mandatory foreign language module, because even the best-educated Britons are often poor at speaking anything other than English.
And finally, there would be “Science for citizenship.” How many people, for example, understand the scientific arguments for and against vital issues like GM food, human cloning or nuclear power?
These new universities would be focused on teaching, not research: academics would be chosen solely on the basis of their ability to teach. Not having to do research would free them up to provide tutorials, such as those offered in Oxbridge, which force students to prepare properly. Books and other teaching materials could be provided cheaply online—lectures via iTunes, for example.
Plus, to really save money, these new universities could be located in unfashionable seaside towns, where hotels would accommodate students cheaply in term-time. Administration and social facilities would be leased. Many large public buildings, like churches and town halls, stand empty during the week and could be used for this purpose. As in the US, undergraduates could earn money by working in the hotels, perhaps cleaning or serving food—experience of real work is, after all, a vital part of preparation for life.
Institutions like these, I calculate, would offer the highest-quality education for fees of £5,000 a year—a much lower price than state universities will be charging after the next review. And people would learn more, too.
