Should we reduce the number of universities? And shut down crappy courses?
At first glance, the number of universities is 131, which doesn't seem too much. However, so many of these universities, like University of Bedfordshire, University of Cumbria etc. almost always provide Mickey Mouse degrees, to the point I wonder if they should be demolished.
Additionally, these degrees aren't rigorous (I mean, if someone achieves C/D in A-levels how the hell can it be rigorous? Their foundation is not solid) and oftentimes is even harmful to earnings.
What do you think? How many universities should we remove? Personally I think 6, to bring the number down to 125.
Additionally, these degrees aren't rigorous (I mean, if someone achieves C/D in A-levels how the hell can it be rigorous? Their foundation is not solid) and oftentimes is even harmful to earnings.
What do you think? How many universities should we remove? Personally I think 6, to bring the number down to 125.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by justlearning1469
At first glance, the number of universities is 131, which doesn't seem too much. However, so many of these universities, like University of Bedfordshire, University of Cumbria etc. almost always provide Mickey Mouse degrees, to the point I wonder if they should be demolished.
Additionally, these degrees aren't rigorous (I mean, if someone achieves C/D in A-levels how the hell can it be rigorous? Their foundation is not solid) and oftentimes is even harmful to earnings.
What do you think? How many universities should we remove? Personally I think 6, to bring the number down to 125.
Additionally, these degrees aren't rigorous (I mean, if someone achieves C/D in A-levels how the hell can it be rigorous? Their foundation is not solid) and oftentimes is even harmful to earnings.
What do you think? How many universities should we remove? Personally I think 6, to bring the number down to 125.
Well, at least you've got more generous. The last time you made this thread, you wanted to reduce the number down to 100.
Are your standards slipping?
Original post by Reality Check
Well, at least you've got more generous. The last time you made this thread, you wanted to reduce the number down to 100.
Are your standards slipping?
Are your standards slipping?
Not necessarily standards slipping, I got more practical. It's not practical to shut down 31 universities, imagine the fallout that would cause. Plus there needs to be universities close to areas for those students who don't want to go far for university.
Perhaps shut down 6 first. If necessary, shut down a few more. 100 is probably too far unless there are more and more Mickey Mouse degrees. Plus, some of these universities are good at one/two subjects, it may not be worth it to shut down these specialist universities.
As I said, I used to be a huge elitist, now... I think somewhat differently.
(edited 1 year ago)
Original post by gjd800
I thought we were all about letting the market decide, these days?
I'm a capitalist, but not that extreme.
Meh doesn't really concern me one way or the other. If nothing else, they should look at rjigging the funding for them, dont let kids sign up for expensive courses theyll never be able to repay.
Ditching some 'degrees' for vocational makes sense as well. After all, a BSc in 'nail tech' (or whatever) is patently absurd compared to simply getting the on the job training.
If you play with those enough you wont need to touch the unis, the scam ones will fail on their own.
Ditching some 'degrees' for vocational makes sense as well. After all, a BSc in 'nail tech' (or whatever) is patently absurd compared to simply getting the on the job training.
If you play with those enough you wont need to touch the unis, the scam ones will fail on their own.
I don’t really care whether grads pay back their loan or not.
Agree with the above, let the market decide if there’s enough demand for golf management courses or whatever you want to label as less credible.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a few unis went under over the next decade in any case.
Agree with the above, let the market decide if there’s enough demand for golf management courses or whatever you want to label as less credible.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a few unis went under over the next decade in any case.
A friend of mine, who is an Assistant Director of Education for a local authority, once commented, "We have too many universities and not enough higher education." That captures the essence of the current state of play.
It is dysfunctional to have a mass participation HE system grafted onto an institutional structure created to cater for an academic elite. Many young people go to university in the mistaken belief that a degree is a passport to higher earnings and upward social mobility. As the same friend put it, "They're dammed if they do, and dammed if they don't."
What is needed, medium term, is the wholesale rationalisation of higher education to meet the needs of the 21st century student. This means fully embracing the concept of lifelong learning, defined in one source as," the ongoing, voluntary, and self-motivated pursuit of knowledge for either personal or professional reasons. It is important for an individual's competitiveness and employability, but also enhances social inclusion, active citizenship, and personal development."
As well as the current proposal for a lifelong learning loan of £37,000 there needs to be a move away from the traditional 3 year degree towards high quality modular awards that enable students to move more easily between education and employment. This would imply that some universities would need to close certain courses and merge with other institutions. My own view is that at least a part of the £37,000 fund should be a grant, payable when a student has demonstrated commitment to study at post-secondary school level.
All this does not imply the end of the university experience that so many of us cherish. When you're 18 you often can't wait to get away from mum and dad and explore life in a different part of the country. But is three years of study on the trot the best way for everyone? Many would love to intersperse periods of study and employment - knowing that the entitlement to funding was securely in place.
It is dysfunctional to have a mass participation HE system grafted onto an institutional structure created to cater for an academic elite. Many young people go to university in the mistaken belief that a degree is a passport to higher earnings and upward social mobility. As the same friend put it, "They're dammed if they do, and dammed if they don't."
What is needed, medium term, is the wholesale rationalisation of higher education to meet the needs of the 21st century student. This means fully embracing the concept of lifelong learning, defined in one source as," the ongoing, voluntary, and self-motivated pursuit of knowledge for either personal or professional reasons. It is important for an individual's competitiveness and employability, but also enhances social inclusion, active citizenship, and personal development."
As well as the current proposal for a lifelong learning loan of £37,000 there needs to be a move away from the traditional 3 year degree towards high quality modular awards that enable students to move more easily between education and employment. This would imply that some universities would need to close certain courses and merge with other institutions. My own view is that at least a part of the £37,000 fund should be a grant, payable when a student has demonstrated commitment to study at post-secondary school level.
All this does not imply the end of the university experience that so many of us cherish. When you're 18 you often can't wait to get away from mum and dad and explore life in a different part of the country. But is three years of study on the trot the best way for everyone? Many would love to intersperse periods of study and employment - knowing that the entitlement to funding was securely in place.
Surprised that you're going after Bedfordshire and Cumbria when "universities" (private providers) like https://globalbanking.ac.uk/courses/ are taking 5,000+ students a year plus an extra 5,000 franchised entrants onto their degrees with foundation years (so no entry requirements at all) with only 75% of entrants progressing past the first year and only 30% of the 280 students who've completed a degree with them in "professional" jobs https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/data-and-analysis/tef-data-dashboard/data-dashboard/
Profit for the year 2021 = £12m with the director taking £3m in dividends (on top of his £250k salary) https://globalbanking.ac.uk/media/5qvl1l5v/2-10-global-banking-school-limited-financial-statements-ye-28-feb-2022.pdf - although to be fair it looks like "only" £10m of the income was from student loans with the remaining £71m from non-regulated fees (that could be fees passed to them by their franchised partners though)
Profit for the year 2021 = £12m with the director taking £3m in dividends (on top of his £250k salary) https://globalbanking.ac.uk/media/5qvl1l5v/2-10-global-banking-school-limited-financial-statements-ye-28-feb-2022.pdf - although to be fair it looks like "only" £10m of the income was from student loans with the remaining £71m from non-regulated fees (that could be fees passed to them by their franchised partners though)
(edited 1 year ago)
Original post by Supermature
A friend of mine, who is an Assistant Director of Education for a local authority, once commented, "We have too many universities and not enough higher education." That captures the essence of the current state of play.
It is dysfunctional to have a mass participation HE system grafted onto an institutional structure created to cater for an academic elite. Many young people go to university in the mistaken belief that a degree is a passport to higher earnings and upward social mobility. As the same friend put it, "They're dammed if they do, and dammed if they don't."
What is needed, medium term, is the wholesale rationalisation of higher education to meet the needs of the 21st century student. This means fully embracing the concept of lifelong learning, defined in one source as," the ongoing, voluntary, and self-motivated pursuit of knowledge for either personal or professional reasons. It is important for an individual's competitiveness and employability, but also enhances social inclusion, active citizenship, and personal development."
As well as the current proposal for a lifelong learning loan of £37,000 there needs to be a move away from the traditional 3 year degree towards high quality modular awards that enable students to move more easily between education and employment. This would imply that some universities would need to close certain courses and merge with other institutions. My own view is that at least a part of the £37,000 fund should be a grant, payable when a student has demonstrated commitment to study at post-secondary school level.
All this does not imply the end of the university experience that so many of us cherish. When you're 18 you often can't wait to get away from mum and dad and explore life in a different part of the country. But is three years of study on the trot the best way for everyone? Many would love to intersperse periods of study and employment - knowing that the entitlement to funding was securely in place.
It is dysfunctional to have a mass participation HE system grafted onto an institutional structure created to cater for an academic elite. Many young people go to university in the mistaken belief that a degree is a passport to higher earnings and upward social mobility. As the same friend put it, "They're dammed if they do, and dammed if they don't."
What is needed, medium term, is the wholesale rationalisation of higher education to meet the needs of the 21st century student. This means fully embracing the concept of lifelong learning, defined in one source as," the ongoing, voluntary, and self-motivated pursuit of knowledge for either personal or professional reasons. It is important for an individual's competitiveness and employability, but also enhances social inclusion, active citizenship, and personal development."
As well as the current proposal for a lifelong learning loan of £37,000 there needs to be a move away from the traditional 3 year degree towards high quality modular awards that enable students to move more easily between education and employment. This would imply that some universities would need to close certain courses and merge with other institutions. My own view is that at least a part of the £37,000 fund should be a grant, payable when a student has demonstrated commitment to study at post-secondary school level.
All this does not imply the end of the university experience that so many of us cherish. When you're 18 you often can't wait to get away from mum and dad and explore life in a different part of the country. But is three years of study on the trot the best way for everyone? Many would love to intersperse periods of study and employment - knowing that the entitlement to funding was securely in place.
I agree. We need to move away from the traditional 3 year degree, close some degrees, even some universities.
We could make things even more flexible. Maybe there could be early university programs specifically for those going to university early (like under 16). Also, perhaps 4-year degree with majors and whatnot, American style.
University is supposed to be for the academically and intellectually bright, not mass participation.
(edited 1 year ago)
How would you even go about picking which 6 to 'demolish'? Also, Cumbria is apparently working on a new medical school with Imperial, which I'm sure you'd agree is not a 'Mickey Mouse' field of study
Original post by justlearning1469
University is supposed to be for the academically and intellectually bright, not mass participation.
True. And herein lies the crux of the matter. Too many universities, not enough higher education.
Like it or not we now do have mass participation, with around 50% of school leavers opting for university. Go back to the mid 20th century, when new universities were created and existing institutions began to expand, it was well under 10% and the great majority of students were the very brightest (or in some instances, wealthiest) of their generation. Most of what we now think of as graduate jobs were open to school leavers with any two A-levels.
When participation rates reached around the 20% mark the three year honours degree took over from two A-levels as the new filter. At the current near 50% rate there are simply far more graduates than graduate jobs and so the filter has become a 2:1 from a "prestigious" University. Hence the obsession with league tables. This wouldn't matter so much were it not for the fact that so many young people have imposed upon themselves what is effectively a higher rate of income tax (student loan repayment ) in the expectation of higher earnings that will never materialise.
The only way out of this is to completely reconstruct our approach to higher education. It would be politically impossible (and in my view wrong) to try and put the genie back in the bottle and return to only offering higher education to the "academically and intellectually bright" 20%. But what we now have is a con trick: a relatively small number of degree courses that are valuable in terms of employment, concentrated mainly (though not exclusively) in around 40 universities and catering disproportionately for middle class students, with the remainder just soaking up the numbers.
The great university con: how the British degree lost its value:
Never before has Britain had so many qualified graduates. And never before have their qualifications amounted to so little
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2019/08/the-great-university-con-how-the-british-degree-lost-its-value
(edited 1 year ago)
Original post by justlearning1469
At first glance, the number of universities is 131, which doesn't seem too much. However, so many of these universities, like University of Bedfordshire, University of Cumbria etc. almost always provide Mickey Mouse degrees, to the point I wonder if they should be demolished.
Additionally, these degrees aren't rigorous (I mean, if someone achieves C/D in A-levels how the hell can it be rigorous? Their foundation is not solid) and oftentimes is even harmful to earnings.
What do you think? How many universities should we remove? Personally I think 6, to bring the number down to 125.
Additionally, these degrees aren't rigorous (I mean, if someone achieves C/D in A-levels how the hell can it be rigorous? Their foundation is not solid) and oftentimes is even harmful to earnings.
What do you think? How many universities should we remove? Personally I think 6, to bring the number down to 125.
I can assimilate the crap into the collective if you want.
How many you like to get rid of?
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
Generally people who make these threads are sixth formers who have no idea how hard a degree actually is. I know this because I did this when I was in sixth form like 8 years ago.
Original post by Thisismyunitsr
Generally people who make these threads are sixth formers who have no idea how hard a degree actually is. I know this because I did this when I was in sixth form like 8 years ago.
But if crap unis exist offering mickey mouse courses why not assimilate them into the collective.
I think closing down 6 universities is very arbitrary.
I think the government should look at which universities and courses are serving students in terms of employment and or pay rises. If they are not serving in.this way then the government should cut funding, and the market should decide if such courses should stay open.
I think the government should look at which universities and courses are serving students in terms of employment and or pay rises. If they are not serving in.this way then the government should cut funding, and the market should decide if such courses should stay open.
The concern that lies beneath the question "Should we reduce the number of universities?" that has been posed here by @justlearning1469 is entirely valid. But I think we need to be careful about condemning particular universities that might find themselves at the bottom of the league tables simply because they are former polytechnics located in unfashionable areas and/or cater for students who wish to study in their own home area or who, for whatever reason, have struggled at school, often in very challenging circumstances.
There is a strong case for some of these institutions to become part of a federation on the lines of the University of London, which has 17 very diverse member institutions with the only the strongest ones awarding their own degrees.
What if, for example, the University of Bedfordshire joined the University of London and its degrees were London degrees? Or perhaps it might become the University of Cambridge, Bedfordshire College? By becoming associated with, and under the supervision of, the leading institutions in a given area these less established institutions would gain greater recognition in their own right. The courses they offered might be different to those at the senior institutions but would need to be rigorous yet structured in a different way and perhaps more vocationally oriented.
There is a strong case for some of these institutions to become part of a federation on the lines of the University of London, which has 17 very diverse member institutions with the only the strongest ones awarding their own degrees.
What if, for example, the University of Bedfordshire joined the University of London and its degrees were London degrees? Or perhaps it might become the University of Cambridge, Bedfordshire College? By becoming associated with, and under the supervision of, the leading institutions in a given area these less established institutions would gain greater recognition in their own right. The courses they offered might be different to those at the senior institutions but would need to be rigorous yet structured in a different way and perhaps more vocationally oriented.
Original post by Dnsnnssn
I think closing down 6 universities is very arbitrary.
I think the government should look at which universities and courses are serving students in terms of employment and or pay rises. If they are not serving in.this way then the government should cut funding, and the market should decide if such courses should stay open.
I think the government should look at which universities and courses are serving students in terms of employment and or pay rises. If they are not serving in.this way then the government should cut funding, and the market should decide if such courses should stay open.
I agree that it's extremely arbitrary, how would you even pick which 6?
Original post by justlearning1469
So when i rank universities, it goes like Top 2, Top 6, Top 20, Top 30, Top 50, Top 100, Top 125, the rest.
How do you even decide on these rankings? You can't seriously tell me you've considered every university in the country in that much depth. Even if you did, it differs massively by course and by different factors involved, so it's pretty much useless tbh
Original post by Labradoodle1
I agree that it's extremely arbitrary, how would you even pick which 6?
Well 5 of them are probably the UCAS choices which rejected him before entering Clearing.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Can I get into oxford medicine with all 7s?
- Holding a firm conditional offer but looking to change course
- Judicial Review Problem Question
- Judicial Review Problem Question
- why are some clearing spots only available to international students and not home?
- My daughter has anxiety and OCD.
- Loughborough- russell groups
- Bad pupil support?
- Have you been given an offer reduction?
- Medicine clearing, who do I call?
- MEDICINE 2023 entry-waiting list
- Major brands, including Heinz, reject 'shrinkflation'
- LSE International Social and Public Policy and Economics (LLK1) 2024 Thread
- University Tuition Fees and Employment Prospects
- 1 grade lower on my predicted grades.
- Guaranteed University Managed Accommodation at Winchester - Clearing 2023
- IB students with UCAS offers waiting for confirmation(narrowly missed conditions)
- Do I have chance to get her back?
- The Great Big "I'm worried I won't get my grades" thread
- Budgeting for university
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
