If distinguished academics were “incentivised” to move between universities - similar to a Teach First scheme - other places could be new Oxbridge's.
By James Easy
A couple of years ago I wrote an article for my university newspaper which decried the further marketisation of higher education. It was in response to the opening of a new legal institution called “Kaplan”, which was another in the morass of “specialist” legal schools charging the earth.
There has been much consternation about the exorbitant pricing of legal professional education, especially since the majority of people who pay for it will never become lawyers, and of those lucky few that do, even fewer of them will become high-earning ones.
At the time, one wondered when this sort of thing would filter through to undergraduate education, whilst simultaneously hoping it wouldn’t.
Alas, this was wishful thinking, in the past day or so we’ve seen the proposal of the New College of the Humanities, a high fee-paying, for-profit, private, elite college based in London, headed by 14 eminent professors including Richard Dawkins and Niall Ferguson (both of whom, incidentally, are products of the famous fee-paying public school to Oxbridge production line).
Fees at this new college will be around £18,000 per year, and it aims to train its students to become a ‘new British elite’ with science, literacy, critical thinking, ethics and professional skills on top of degree subjects taught in one-to-one tutorials.
It is easy to understand the motivation behind the creation of the New College. With present fears abound that “there are too many universities” and “too many people are going to university”, it’s little surprise that a group of extremely able and conservative minded Professors would want to create their own little army of philosopher kings to ensure that the great British tradition of academic brilliance continues, even if it does serve to widen the already gaping educational chasm between the rich and the poor.
The primary reason Oxbridge maintains its, arguably overrated, prestige in the UK is because it has the money to attract the best academics. The reception to the New College from the likes of Boris Johnson, who calls it “a new Oxbridge for those who can’t get into Oxbridge”, is evidence of this. Indeed, if the hype is to be believed it may as well already be ranked as the number three university in the country.
If enough of our distinguished academics were “incentivised” to move between our universities, those places would too, in time, become as highly respected as Oxbridge. It could be similar to a higher education version of the exceptional Teach First scheme, which is gradually changing our primary and secondary education for the better.
Former Regius professor Quentin Skinner’s 2008 move from Cambridge to the much less respected Queen Mary, University of London, immediately made that place a far more attractive proposition to people who wanted to study history.
If this practice became more widespread and our best academics did indeed join and help to build the reputations of lesser respected universities up and down the country, then I have no doubt that over time, our best young talent wouldn’t feel the need to be so Oxbridge/London-centric and perhaps start more readily spreading their wings to the forgotten parts of our country (like the North) without feeling as though they were abject failures because they didn’t impress two Oxbridge dons in a 15 minute interview.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
13 Responses to “Time for a re-distribution of academic wealth”
Dave Citizen
I think it is an over simplification to suggest that the universities with the best reputations have the best academics working at them. Institutional reputations are built on a lot more than the academic talent of current staff members – let’s face it, when half the cabinet went to Oxbridge it’s got to open up some reputation enhancing doors hasn’t it!
Unfortunately, Britain’s best academic institutions are clearly failing us – their existence is ensured on the grounds that they are supposed to play an important role in improving society. Funny how those reputations just keep on growing!
mr. Sensible
What’s happened here is another indictment of the government’s record on higher education.
Oxbridge Education
Oxbridge News: Time for a re-distribution of academic wealth | Left Foot Forward: The primary reason Oxbridge ma… http://bit.ly/kYnLTx
The Cappa Don
Absurd idea which will do little or nothing to add to the ‘quality’ end of HE in England and is irrelevant to the rest of the sector. The fact that the celebrity academics involved won’t actually be teaching on these degree programmes any more regularly than they do at their current institutions means that students will feel (and be) shortchanged. If you could get into Oxbridge or one of the Russell Group would you really pass that up for this vanity project, for an institution that might not last the course and will have zero credibility? Quality at the elite end of the HE market translates as prestige and you can’t invent that overnight, it is built on the future career impact of your graduates not the transitory nature of celebrity TV fame. If I had Niall Ferguson teaching me economic history I would be falling about laughing if his insights from the recent TV series are anything to go by. Neo-con rubbish wrapped up in plumb-voiced arrogance!
American-Style College Comes to Britain – Boston Globe | eduJunction
[…] in …Talk point: Is the New College the way forward or a threat to access?The Guardian (blog)Time for a re-distribution of academic wealthLeft Foot ForwardFD's former CEO Charles Watson to chair controversial university collegePRWeek […]