Is it right to reward only the few?

Charles Clarke, the Education Secretary, wants research funds concentrated on the top researchers in the best departments. That's bad news for the new universities, says Lucy Hodges

Slowly and quietly, lecturers David Webb, Doug Burnham and others have been helping to build the reputation of philosophy at the University of Staffordshire. Ten years ago their department was nowhere; today it has a 3A rating in the research assessment exercise (RAE), which means that the majority of the work is nationally excellent and some of it is internationally excellent.

In the next RAE they hope to do better still. They have developed their department into one of the centres of European thought in the United Kingdom. They should be content – but they are not. The reason is that the Education Secretary, Charles Clarke, is changing the rules of the RAE game. His White Paper on higher education, published last month, had bad news for the new universities (the former polytechnics) on research.

Money should be concentrated on the most talented researchers and the best departments, he said. That will inevitably reward the "old" universities: those in the Russell Group, which already receive the lion's share of research funding because they have been in the game a lot longer. The new universities will be expected to concentrate on teaching and applied research – solving "real-world problems" – rather than making breakthroughs themselves.

Will Webb and Burnham be forced to give up research? The academics are appalled at the thought. Like most colleagues, they see teaching and research as linked. "You keep your teaching up to scratch, new and lively, as well as technically up to date, by the research you are doing," says Webb, a senior lecturer.

Research would only cease over their dead bodies. But they are having to face the fact that research for them will probably become a voluntary activity because the prospect of government money is drying up. And that may mean that their department may not continue to improve at the same rate as it has, which could affect how it is regarded by parents and students.

Burnham, who is American, is irritated by the references to US higher education in the White Paper, because he believes they are inaccurate. The University of California is held up as a model of the way teaching is separated from research. But academics in the California State University system carry out a considerable amount of research, contrary to the impression given, he says. "Eighty per cent of institutions in the United States are not top-flight but most students are studying at places which are research-active."

Both men believe that Clarke's White Paper misrepresents the way research is carried out in humanities subjects. That's because it focuses on the idea of concentrating expensive research and equipment in a few places and encouraging collaboration between teams. That makes sense in the sciences, but research in the humanities is still often done in relatively small centres and by the lone scholar, they argue. They deserve continuing support, especially where they exist outside mainstream research funding.

Their point is endorsed by Malcolm McVicar, vice-chancellor of the University of Central Lancashire. "This big science paradigm doesn't apply to research in business studies or information technology or law, any more than it does to research in the humanities," he says. "The Government has got it wrong."

But it is not just the messages in the White Paper that are worrying the new universities. Rumours about the Government tightening up on research selectivity. Tony Blair is said to favour having six top-class research-intensive universities that can compete with the best in America. Does that explain why a new top grade – the 6* – has been introduced for the RAE league table? Probably not. Critics point out that the 6* wouldn't produce an elite of only half a dozen universities. Excellent departments are spread around the country and are not concentrated only in a few institutions.

Moreover, there is open talk about more imminent changes to the research funding processes. The expectation is that funding for departments scoring 3A and 4 will be removed as from autumn this year. That would mean that only universities gaining the top grades 5 and 5*, and the proposed 6*, would qualify for state funding. Ministers have made it clear that departments scoring less than a 5 would lose their research cash unless they could show that they were likely to become excellent over a given period. Such a change would have a serious effect on manyuniversities – the new as well as many old ones – who gain a large number of more modest scores, 3As and 4s. Greenwich is anxious that the team at its computing centre, which next week will win a Queen's Anniversary Prize, will be under threat.

These academics, who scored a 4 in the 2001 RAE, carry out the research for the software that models how people are evacuated from aircraft and buildings in emergencies. "This is high-powered computing work," says Professor Rick Trainor, Greenwich's vice-chancellor. "It has direct application to industry and it saves lives. That blend of excellent science and positive application to the real world is something that is especially characteristic of the best science in the new universities."

The hope was that this group would have got a 5 in the next RAE. What is their chance now? A university such as Greenwich is not trying to duplicate the top research elite, says Trainor. "We accept that teaching is our primary mission, but the quality and motivation of our staff are enhanced by having a carefully targeted research programme of our own."

Students also benefit from an active research environment, says Professor Michael Goldstein, the vice-chancellor of Coventry University. And the international reputation of UK universities doesn't depend on a small number of elite institutions. "The majority of institutions have to be able to establish themselves as having some world-class research activity. The Government, through the Higher Education Funding Council, has the responsibility to help that," says Goldstein.

l.hodges@independent.co.uk