Degrees of failure: why it’s time to reconsider how we run our universities

They have grown vast—and vastly expensive. Time to stop and ask whether something's gone wrong

by Alison Wolf / July 14, 2017 / Leave a comment

Published in August 2017 issue of Prospect Magazine

No austerity here: The extension of the Jubilee Campus at the University of Nottingham. Photo: Arcaid/UIG Via Getty Images

Among the world’s major institutions, only the Catholic Church has operated, uninterrupted, for longer than the universities. They are the source of how we think and what we know, and have formed western elites for centuries. They still do, but in the last half-century they have been transformed—in size, but also in their social impact and political importance. In England most universities have been enjoying a glorious 21st century. But the sector now looks politically isolated and unstable, with Brexit simply adding to a set of deeprooted problems.

Early medieval Oxford, England’s oldest university, had a few hundred students: rising to 4,500 on the eve of the Second World War. Today it has 25,000, and that makes it one of our smaller elite research institutions. University College London now has 38,000 students, twice as many as a decade ago. Manchester pips this at 39,000; Edinburgh and Sheffield are close behind. Other European countries are the same: the original University of Paris, centred in the Sorbonne since the 13th century, is now just “Paris IV”: one of thirteen large campuses spread across the city.. Bologna, the oldest university of all, enrols 82,000. Over the last half-century, the growth of universities has been, quite simply, staggering. This isn’t just a first-world phenomenon. Emerging economies are stacking up far more students at a given national income than developed economies ever did.

This means, of course, student votes can shift elections—witness Jeremy Corbyn’s surprise success in June in seats such as Canterbury (home of the University of Ke…

YOU’VE HIT THE LIMIT

You have now reached your limit of 3 free articles in the last 30 days.
But don’t worry! You can get another 7 articles absolutely free, simply by entering your email address in the box below.

When you register we’ll also send you a free e-book—Writing with punch—which includes some of the finest writing from our archive of 22 years. And we’ll also send you a weekly newsletter with the best new ideas in politics and philosophy of culture, which you can of course unsubscribe from at any time

Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with our newsletter, subscription offers and other relevant information.

Click to learn more about these interests and how we use your data. You will be able to object to this processing on the next page and in all our communications.

9159552745bf4bf4cf0bdf3.18440633

Go to comments

The expansion of higher education: have students and taxpayers had a raw deal?

Michael Forsyth / June 26, 2018

Twenty-first century study has been a story of unfair treatment and accountancy tricks

We need a new economics with the Earth at its core

Kate Raworth / July 13, 2018

Even reformist economists too often forget the lesson of nature—growth cannot go on...

Share with friends

Comments

Alice M
July 15, 2017 at 17:38
Brilliant piece, beautifully written and thank you. I'm 55 and have four degrees - two taken along the way when my career hit bumps. Do I regret taking any degrees ?- No. I love the focus that a degree brings ( and they are much easier to get than in the past when memory mattered more than critical thinking or maybe not?) but I'm never going to be a massive earner - I like ideas and self fulfillment more than money. I'd be extraordinarily uncomfortable earning 120k a year. I am economically relatively well off though - being lucky, born in the 1960's, resilient and thrifty. I'm very ambivalent about university. I'm not sure that a degree is worth 9k a year plus and there are so many ways to learn now. A good apprenticeship is probably a better bet combined with distance learning. I also know of one university running at a financial loss and I believe there are high levels of indebtedness in the sector - pension bills are a big worry too. I wonder if many universities will end up selling their buildings and leasing them back?. That is not a sustainable strategy - more like a 'jam today, and tomorrow who knows?...but whatever happens I won't be around to pick up the pieces' strategy. Maybe that is how businesses are run but it would be a shame to see universities going 'bust'..seven years or so from now - who knows? Thanks again for such a thoughtful piece
jimmymack
July 16, 2017 at 23:31
Very good, thoughtful, and thought-provoking piece. I belong to the the '60s era of the ten per cent of school leavers who got the chance lose our virginity, dodge work, listen to prog rock and feel all Byronic and superior and entitled - all courtesy of the state. I studied English literature and got a good degree, despite the fact that on rereading books I read then - I've just reread Middlemarch - I realise I barely scratched the surface of any of them. I struck the correct political tone, however, and that got me a long way, particularly given I was working class. Now, coming to end of my working life in the public sector as an employer and manager of graduates, I realise that my paltry 'higher' education was in fact a post-war high water mark, at least as far as an education in the humanities is concerned: I can think critically and can spell. My era's ten per cent of school leavers not getting a job until our mid-20s is too large a proportion. Today's half of school leavers is madness. Give science and technology students a university place on a grant. Make those wanting to study arts and humanities pay more. Offer the rest training at a technical college in a trade, craft or practical skill or on-the-job instruction. Bring 'non academic' young men back into society by providing the apprenticeships we're having to import young east Europeans to fill the lack of.
Graham Towl
July 17, 2017 at 12:14
Yes, an interesting article. The genie is out of the bottle. I see two key post election changes. First, a loss of confidence in the psychological contract between universities and students. Second, largely political expediency driving a wider rethink on funding in view of the unsurprising electoral popularity of Labour proposals amongst young voters to dispense with tuition fees. The psychological contract means, for example, that universities get able students and students get a great education. The percentage of students receiving 'good degrees' i.e. 1st and 2.1s has been on the increase - reasonably predictable in view of the link with home league tables - that is the nature perhaps of introducing such perverse incentives. Students are content with their awards of good degrees, at least individually. However, this sits uneasily with the increased levels of participation in that it is highly unlikely that teaching standards improvements and brighter students across the piece have accounted for the increased proportion and absolute number of such 'good degree grades'. Students, not unreasonably want value from their degree studies, yet many appear to end up in what have traditionally been seen as non-graduate roles. Part of the psychological contract involves the student attitude to what is badged as 'debt', maybe 50k or thereabouts is a psychological tipping point for many and not just those from backgrounds less associated with university attendance. Universities have enjoyed a golden age in terms of revenues and expansion.Although tuition fees do have a progressive element to them the debate has moved on. The principle of 'free at the point of service delivery' is a powerful narrative in views on public services e.g. the NHS, and it is such underlying principles that are manifest in new debates on tuition fees and university funding. In other words there is a return to fundamental debates about whether or not a university education is a public or private good or elements of both. The answer to that question may well inform progress, that is if it is not trumped by what is politically expedient. There are some challenging times ahead, for sure.
Jenny N.
July 21, 2017 at 03:50
With a few minor variations, this article could be about what has happened to Australia's higher education system. Presumably we copied it from Britain. Institutes of Technology, Colleges of Advanced Education, all now universities. And Australia also experiences skills shortages. I thought the 'Dawkins' reforms' (named for the Australian Government's Higher Ed Minister who introduced them in the late 1980s), rolling almost all tertiary sectors into one, was a bad idea and so it has proved.
John Doez
July 29, 2017 at 08:52
A timely, prophetic article. There was talk of a higher education bubble in 2011, but with the increase in tuition fees, universities have chosen to ramp up the expansion rather than cool things down. The main culprit is government policy. Universities have responded accordingly, but it will be the universities who go out of business (unlike the banks, they will not be bailed out). Grade inflation over the last five years is another telling indication this bubble is about to burst. The questions to ask going forward include, how big will be the contraction (how many universities will go out of business or have to merge), how long it will take, and what will replace the current model of tertiary education going forward.
Donald Harley
July 30, 2017 at 18:04
I have been saying this for more than 30 years. Sadly your conclusions don't give us much hope that we will spend our money wisely, or that we will develop the skills we need for a successful economy. Valuing and incentivising technical qualifications may be part of the answer. Conversely, increasing university fees may be important in getting potential students to more critically assess the value of their chosen course/university. This could be offset by a more flexible bursary scheme to offset fees for those who achieved results at entrance level exams in particular for this courses deemed in the national economic interest.
David B.
August 6, 2017 at 11:53
Some key points missed here. The objective was to raise the overall educational level - to raise skills but also citizenship and personal intellectual challenge at all levels. The role of a 'University' is now much broader with many offering graduate apprenticeships. A look at OECD website shows we are in the middle of the pack for participation rates. The article missed a key driver that was encouraged - student choice. No amount of market information (which says nothing about broader educational objectives) will give a clear picture so we will never match skill needs given fast changing patterns. The system covers a similar wide spectrum to Germany and Netherlands without a sharp binary divide which is dissolving in those countries too. It was Major who oversaw the significant expansion. The percentage was already well into the 40s by the time Blair came in.
Alyson
August 9, 2017 at 10:03
The importance of Literature,the Arts, Philosophy, and History, is missing from this article. Using intelligence is about much more than just productivity, and understanding precedent and antecedent is part and parcel of a good grounding in intellectual study. Many professions now call their training degrees, and this has broadened the scope of university teaching, bringing what were the vocational polytechnic a into the fold. Pure science and mathematics inform applied science and technology. There is still a need for good quality higher education that is not just geared towards producing employment fodder. Intelligence needs exercise, and young adults with aptitude should have the opportunity to improve the gene pool by developing contextual knowledge and discrimination of quality based in study and research. Leaving with a £60,000 debt is a handicap however