Leading article: The value of higher education

Wednesday 04 November 2009 01:00 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.

The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.

Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.

Much of what the Business Secretary, Lord Mandelson, had to say on higher education policy yesterday is the logical and direct consequence of allowing universities to levy fees and then not excluding the possibility that they would rise. This was bound to change the relationship between university and student, and it has. But the students (and the Government) have been rather swifter to recognise the change than most of the universities.

Quite reasonably, the students are demanding better value for their money. So far, however, they have mostly defined value in terms of contact time with teachers and the expectation that lecturers will turn up and grade their work. They have also complained about being fobbed off with inexperienced tutors when the department has promised a "star" professor.

Lord Mandelson went further, in his "framework document", saying that students – as "customers" – were entitled to more information before applying, not just about the quality of teaching, but also about their likely future earnings. He also calls for stronger links between universities and industry, while insisting that there is "public value in every subject and academic discipline".

This caveat was a wise inclusion, but perhaps deserved to be spelt out more forcefully. Studying and research have a value in themselves, and by no means everything can, or should, be reduced to its monetary value. There are also areas of study which might have few obvious applications at the time, but subsequently come into their own – or vice versa.

In truth, though, many universities have been too content in recent years to sit back as the applications flood in. They should undoubtedly provide better information about their courses, including a guarantee of teaching time and quality, and data about the jobs and pay graduates can expect. There will be those who find it deeply distasteful to accept that universities, too, must now compete in a modern market. But whether it is the ivory tower or an immediately saleable skill they are offering, the onus has to be on them, as the providers, to convince potential students of their value.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in