> On 25 August 2019 at 11:27 Steve Cottrell <co...@seeingeye.tv> wrote: > > > On 25/8/19, mike wilson, discombobulated, unleashed: > > >No subscription - no read. Very liberal. > > Strange, I had no problem reading it. > > Reproduced below... > > The UK's reputedly world-class higher education sector has long been a source > of pride and consolation for a diminished power. At first glance, > universities have relentlessly expanded without any reduction in standards. > Since 1990, the number of undergraduate degrees awarded has increased > fivefold, while the proportion of Firsts granted has quadrupled. But this > facade of success masks profound and long-standing problems. In this week's > cover story, Harry Lambert exposes what we call "the great university con". > For decades, successive governments have systematically undermined the value > and prestige of a British degree as education has been forced to operate > under market conditions. > > In a 2016 OECD study, which assessed basic skill levels among recent > graduates from 23 countries, England ranked in the bottom third. In spite of > spending about £21,000 per student (more than any country except the United > States), England's skill levels are around three times worse than the top > eight countries (which spend around £15,000 per student). One in two recent > British graduates is not in graduate work, a rate that has consistently risen > since 2001. > > > The purpose of university expansion, pursued by both Conservative and Labour > governments, was once a noble one. Lionel Robbins, a professor at the London > School of Economics, and the author of the 1963 report on higher education, > emphasised that "the standard traditionally attached to the term 'degree' in > this country will be fully maintained". > > But it has not been. On 12 July, faced with the number of students achieving > "good honours" - a First or 2:1 - rising from 47 per cent in 1994 to 79 per > cent, Damian Hinds, the former education secretary, emphasised that > "artificial grade inflation is not in anyone's interests". And yet, as Harry > Lambert writes, the "perverse incentives" imposed by the state have made this > a logical outcome. > > In common with so many current issues, the origins of today's problems go > back to the market turn of the 1980s. The 1985 Jarratt Report declared that > "universities are first and foremost corporate enterprises" and inaugurated a > trend of continual marketisation. As students were rebranded as "customers", > institutions sought less to test them than to appease them. Grade inflation - > designed to boost universities' league table standing - has followed. > > Subsequent reforms have merely compounded the problem. The decision by the > 2010-15 coalition government largely to abolish direct state funding for > university teaching (replaced by tuition fees of £9,000) introduced a system > in which money "followed the student", creating an additional incentive to > manipulate standards and results. > > The British higher education system retains some formidable strengths and the > benefits of a university experience extend far beyond the awarding of a > degree. The stereotype of students as indolent hedonists is undeserved > (indeed, data suggests they have seldom been more abstemious). But grade > inflation and the unqualified expansion of universities should end. For too > long, the higher education sector has allowed its reputation to obscure a > mediocre reality. British students - who now pay the developed world's > highest public university fees - deserve much better. >
Nothing to argue with there. In fact, it sums up British education from nursery upwards. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
