Play all audios:
The commercialisation of higher education in Britain is, in part, a by-product of its success. “The proportion of young people in England going to university has passed the symbolic 50% mark
for the first time”, the BBC reported in September 2019. “It comes almost exactly 20 years after then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, called for half of young people to go into higher
education”. This week he called for the level to be pushed up to 70%. In 1959, less than 4% of university age youth received a university education. In 1963, the Robbins Report on Higher
Education recommended that university places should be available to all who were qualified by ability and attainment. During the 1960s the number of UK universities doubled, from 22 to 45.
Today 130 are receiving funding from government – plus a few private universities — each competing to attract the brightest students. The cost to the taxpayer has risen proportionately. The
introduction of tuition fees in 1998, £1,000 then but £9,250 now, to help with funding, was a crucial stage in attaching monetary value to a university education. British universities are
now large institutions, serving on average 18 thousand students each. But Government does not give them enough money. UK students’ tuition fees do not cover the cost of their education. For
the last two years, as they switched on lap-tops in their rooms for the day’s lectures, students themselves have been clocking up debt. Students from abroad, paying £31,000 per annum,
thereby barely keeping the good ship academia afloat, are sought out by academic marketing departments. Universities little by little are turning into businesses to survive, a few of them
tottering on the brink. Universities, of course, differ in campus position — the “old civic red brick” and Oxbridge versus those situated outside or on the edge of towns — in endowments, in
ethos and reputation for a particular academic expertise, as well as their entry standards and research quality. In addition “student satisfaction” is measured along with graduate prospects;
both feature in their — much criticised – annually published rankings. Many universities are facing significant deficits in pension funds and offering salaries that academic staff do not
see as commensurate with their training and workload. Lecturers chafe at demands to shine both in teaching, in student satisfaction ratings, and research increasingly for the income it
brings. Asking what universities are for is an interesting question and the answer has changed over time. By the end of the 19th century the idea that moral and religious education should be
an inseparable part of university teaching had weakened. By the end of the 20th century “cultivation of the intellect” as the prime purpose of universities was also eclipsed. Far too “ivory
tower”. Encouraged by government, the main purpose of the British university now is to meet the needs of an advanced economy. Universities cultivate “graduate prospects”, meaning the
promise, or at least the expectation, of a good job after graduation — defined as a starting salary of at least £30,000-£35,000 — so easy for students to measure the return on their
investment . Even the subjects taught in universities are evaluated by students and university management alike as developing, or not, future useful and lucrative professional skills. The
mind-set and language of economics has infiltrated many aspects of life and the universities weren’t spared. During and since the pandemic, much attention has rightly been given to the
disruption of school life, the impact on school and pre-school children. Much less attention is given to the current state of Britain’s universities, their staff and their students. The
pandemic deprived all students, whatever their age, of the social experience which being in higher education traditionally gives. But this impact on university life came on top of changes
transforming the size, ethos and very idea of a university. Size seems to matter. St. Andrew’s in Scotland and Aberystwyth in Wales have around 10,000 students each. They top the student
satisfaction league. Manchester with over 40,000 and University College London (UCL) with over 45,000 – half from overseas – have opted for gigantism in response to demand and in the hope of
economies of scale. Both come 104th out of 128 (no figures for Oxbridge) in student satisfaction ranking, despite getting good results. Both have experienced strikes by university about
pay, pay gaps, pensions, workload and casualisation. But so have many others. The University and College Union (UCU) negotiate staff pay. This year they have been campaigning against
zero-hours contracts. According to UCU research, an astonishing 6,500 lecturers working in 46% of universities and 60% of colleges are on zero hours contracts. A further 68,845, many working
in research programmes, are on fixed term contracts. Graduation ceremonies have always been rites of passage. A symbolic event closing ceremonially three years of new – and lasting –
friendships and rewarding study, marking entry into the adult world. This year the pandemic back-log meant that double the numbers graduated. At UCL, with its huge numbers, this meant a week
of three sets of students a day graduating, conveyor belt style, in the drab barn-like ExCel Exhibition Centre in London’s Docklands. Tickets sold at £35 each and gown hire was £47 — if you
got the discounted price. A pre-recorded message from UCL’s Provost appeared on a large screen. At the same time the Excel Centre was hosting a business conference and a marine biology
conference. A less than grand finale for students who missed a great deal over two years working their passage through a university system that is increasingly commercialised — and all at
sea. John Henry Newman, the Anglican theologian who became a Catholic Cardinal, published his _The Idea of a University_ in 1858, a compilation of nine lectures based upon his experience and
thinking as Rector of a new Catholic University in Dublin. The book is, frankly, hard-going. He wanted the university to be a place where “intellect [was] disciplined for its own sake”
where “inutility”, as he called it, was to be cherished. But he did concede that if the utility of university education was to be considered, it should be to prepare students “to fill their
respective posts in life better… making them more intelligent, capable, active members of society”. Newman also had a prescient word on the dangers of demanding both good teaching and
research from lecturers. “He, too, who spends his day in dispensing his existing knowledge to all comers is unlikely to have either leisure or energy to acquire new”. Many of today’s
lecturers would agree. Learning is not a commercial transaction. Education should not embody the ethics of a business enterprise. The task of universities in national life should not be
promoting only the kind of research that makes money, nor make filling the top end of the labour market their limited vision. They are being driven in this direction. I like to think of the
small university I am associated with, St. Mary’s Twickenham, 30th in the student satisfaction tables and with distinctive Catholic values, as part of the resistance. A MESSAGE FROM
THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to
continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation._