Black Christmas for the academy

I just wonder why, given that we've all been good girls and boys (taught more, researched more, earned more money for the sector) we now just get a bag of rocks.

This is a sad day for the already strugling higher education sector. Lord Mandelson's announcement will lead to thousands of lecturers being on the dole and quality of University Education suffering. The call for focus on research is not a bad idea per se but should be put into context of whether an institution is among the Russel group or among the new universities. The latter cannot compete with the former. It could also be prudent for Lord Mandelson to indicate which courses he thinks should be done in two years or which should not amit students at all.
The government cannot have it both ways. On the one hand advocating entry to higher education and on the other making huge cuts.

Well Happy Christmas everyone! Was this timed on a day when most university staff (or at least most academic staff) will be on leave?

Well Dan Gliebitz, there are some of us academic staff who definitely *aren't* on leave, and will be taking only Christmas Day off (again). If you take more, you clearly don't have enough to do...

Can someone explain to me why it should be that those academics in non-Russell (or 1994) Group universities who have worked incredibly hard at their research, despite heavy teaching loads and an absence of research grant money, and who have improved their department's standing immeasurably in the most recent RAE, are now to be informed that their efforts were an absolute waste of time because the Russell Group institutions (some of whose departments produced very mediocre research indeed if the RAE is to be believed) are simply going to commandeer the lion's share on the basis of reputation alone? We might as well not bother assessing research outputs.

"Wendy Piatt, director-general of the Russell Group, welcomed the Government’s attempt to make the cuts in a way that “minimises any financial impact on front-line teaching”."

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Or, more festively,
hohohohohohohohohohohohohohohohoho.

Of course it impacts on front-line teaching, since many research academics will see this as yet another excuse to disengage from teaching. Why not just ban undergraduates from universities altogether? It's what academic staff in "research-intensive" universities want, anyway.

In America, the UK three-year honours bachelors is only regarded as equivalent to an American bachelor's degree when it includes a final year project. Reducing the UK degree course to two years will devalue it internationally. It also appears to violate the Bologna Accords.

To pick up a discussion elsewhere (The insecure scholar): it is already the case that the UK degree is (or was until recently) perceived as too short in European terms. If we chop it still further, would-be academics from the UK system will have still less chance of getting into academic posts. Or is the plan to allow the so-called research intensives to keep the real degrees and push out two-year degrees elsewhere?

@Willow. I too welcome the research intensive universities protecting their research. Some of these post-92/new outfits which call themselves universities are too many and they need to be trimmed in size and numbers. As for 2 years, HND was that long and the government should strongly suggest that these post-92.new universities should revert back to poly status offering HNDs and HNCs or face cuts and mergers.

Everything this government has done recently points towards a return to the 1950s as far as higher education in the UK is concerned: fewer universities admitting fewer students; an elite (and elitist) system that will systematically disadvantage those outside it and reinforce class distinctions that for decades haven't operated in quite the way they did in the past. Can't imagine the tories making much of a better job of it either, in fact it will probably suit them quite well. Worse than this, however, is the damage it will do to UK universities overseas. It takes 4 years to get a degree in Poland, and as they get better at exploiting their educational advantage over us (due in large part to our miserable two year degrees) Poland will undoubtedly start to see an influx of UK plumbers and cleaners in a few years. It will be the only thing left that we'll be qualified for.

This must be prevented before it's too late.

So few contact hours already...I doubt I'll feel much difference...

@Mike Chopra-Gant I was from a poor family and my father was a factory worker working on lathes. I was the only member in the three generations of our family to step inside a university for studies. I wom a scholarship and that made me to work hard. Academic courses should be for those with the ability abd the background which means fulfilling entry requirements. The French have no problem with elitism neither are the Germans. We have a twisted mind in this country and equate elitism with money and rich. It is good to have 1950s polytechnics and universities. The former trained students for vocational jobs in engineering and many I know did university courses after spending a few years in industry. The industry had the benefit of well-trained technically competent work force. What was wrong with HNDs? I too like these new universities to go back to their poltechnic status when they were recruiting locally and doing fine. My relatiive who served in the army and when he was discharged went back to do HND part-time while holding a civilian job in army. He progressed to become a technical officer in civilian wing of the army.

No point worrying about Poles, latvinian and Lithuanians and their university courses. The 1950 style UK universities were excellent and had international reputation. !950 Grammar schools too were very good. They taught the basics well and we leant out science and maths really well. What should decide university entry is entry qualification and only entry qualification. That should be the definition of elitism. We are generating from universities-particularly the recent ones students who have degrees in subject areas which do no good for them and for the country.

@Mike Chopra-Gant I was from a poor family and my father was a factory worker working on lathes. I was the only member in the three generations of our family to step inside a university for studies. I wom a scholarship and that made me to work hard. Academic courses should be for those with the ability abd the background which means fulfilling entry requirements. The French have no problem with elitism neither are the Germans. We have a twisted mind in this country and equate elitism with money and rich. It is good to have 1950s polytechnics and universities. The former trained students for vocational jobs in engineering and many I know did university courses after spending a few years in industry. The industry had the benefit of well-trained technically competent work force. What was wrong with HNDs? I too like these new universities to go back to their poltechnic status when they were recruiting locally and doing fine. My relatiive who served in the army and when he was discharged went back to do HND part-time while holding a civilian job in army. He progressed to become a technical officer in civilian wing of the army.

No point worrying about Poles, latvinian and Lithuanians and their university courses. The 1950 style UK universities were excellent and had international reputation. !950 Grammar schools too were very good. They taught the basics well and we leant out science and maths really well. What should decide university entry is entry qualification and only entry qualification. That should be the definition of elitism. We are generating from universities-particularly the recent ones students who have degrees in subject areas which do no good for them and for the country.

I teach in a socalled elite university, consistently in the top 3 of the university ranking. I come from a working class background. In my first year degree class, over 60% of the students come from comprehensive schools, for the rest , the highest percentage is students from from EU and overseas and students from independent schools forms a smaller percentage. You are stoking the prejudice of class. The peddling of the proverbial myth. Our university and similar others have done a great deal in attracting students from poor background and inner city comprehensives.

Of course Mike Chopra-Gant is right to draw attention to the class system. Who would be daft enough to doubt that it still exists, or perhaps go as far as calling it a 'myth'? A small percentage of working class/low income offspring managing to get into the so-called elite institutions does not mean that opportunites are equal for all social classes (comprehensives do not just service the working classes, incidentally). I should use this site to teach my (new university) students about the workings of ideology...

I agree with John Gibson that some of the research coming out of the research-intensive institutions is decidedly mediocre, especially in the context of the money spent on it. For example, I have seen PhD theses coming out of the top old unis which were in no way superior to (often self-funded) new uni doctoral theses (in the Humanties at least). This can be extended to some of the research published by established academics. In fact, some of the best research comes out of new unversities.

And judging by the above, the French obviously do have a problem, as do the Germans, incidentally - unless you are inside the 'closed system' that exists there. It is extremely difficult to get an academic post in Germany unless one has been part of 'the network' for a long time. It has very little to do with merit and fairness.

The sector should pull together in the face of governmental attacks on it. The Russell group's response is shameful, but, perhaps, understandable: expensive mediocrity requires protection, inexpensive excellence doesn't so much.

@Andy. Even if you have not said it, I will have no problems in identifying you as a class warrior in a new university. Any chance you are from the Met where the VC cooked the drop out numbers? You recruit students with any A levels at all or apply Tony Blair's dictum of 50% should go to university and hence push them in willy nilly? I am another working class person who went to elite Oxford on a scholarship and I am not ashamed of it.
Finally how many of your colleagues send their sons/daughters to your university? That is the litmus test for all class warriors in new universities.

Yes, indeed, this individual levels the same accusations at anybody who makes a reasoned comment on the subject of class and the continual division between 'elite' institutions and the others. His 'litmus test' demonstrates how he not only concedes that the system is class-ridden but apparently also thinks that the situation is justified. The problem is staring us all in the face, day in day out - the accident of your birth is the major factor determining your life chances - and this is more true in the U.K. than any other country in Europe and is a national disgrace. 'I am a working class person who went to elite Oxford on a scholarship and I am not ashamed of it' (And was thereby happily co-opted as a servant of the elite as many working class people have been throughout history adopting the manner and custom of the gentlemanly amateur, content in their servitude).

Disgraceful

May Mandelson’s turkey rot and his sprouts go black and slimy.

My new years resolution is getting on my bike and work overseas as Peter has sown the seeds of the UK’s HEI destruction.

to 'To Mike Chopra-Gant' I hope to God you don't teach a numerical subject at your 'elite' university. If 40% of your class are from Private schools, you are MASSIVELY biased. Private schools educate around 5% of the country's university intake. You utter fool

@ Hero . You are the fool. You showed again you can't read and understand. This is what " To Mike Chopra-grant posted:

" In my first year degree class, over 60% of the students come from comprehensive schools, for the rest , the highest percentage is students from from EU and overseas and students from independent schools forms a smaller percentage.

Where does it says 40% come from private schools? Read again you idiot: He/She says "students from independent schools forms a smaller percentage".

Still if you cannot understand , I will explain:

His class = 60%comprehensive+ X% EU and Non EU +Y % ( small) from Independent schools.

Everyday you are making an ass of yourself. If ignorant best to shut and not call others as fools. If you cannot read and understand, go back to a good school.

Oh, it is Hero again. or are you by any chance one Gordon Brown from Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath who "fixed boom and bust" and "saved the universe".?

Never mind how our wealth was squandered; the cupboard is bare and cuts must be made. The country cannot afford to have so many of the population studying to degree level.

Wouldn't it be better if, instead of pretending we are able to teach our students to the same high standard for less money each, we taught fewer students to that same high standard for the same money each. As well as being more honest, it would also raise the average quality of the students we accept onto our courses.

'I am a working class person who went to elite Oxford on a scholarship and I am not ashamed of it' (And was thereby happily co-opted as a servant of the elite as many working class people have been throughout history adopting the manner and custom of the gentlemanly amateur, content in their servitude). " writes 'Hi Andy' repeats same allegations ad infinitum>>>>>>> Indeed, it is a strange place for the working class student. I went to one of those places as a research student, and would regard it as a pretty unpleasant experience. I didn't have the gloss to be able to assimilate into the social hegemony, and found myself accidentally frustrating people's expectations and just not fitting in. It would have been a lot easier if there had been no arcane system of social mores, but there was: a miasma of privilege and 'enititlement' permeated all strata of experience.

I see no need for the class prejudice in this thread. Clearly the universities with the cleverest students are the ‘best’ universities. Equally clearly, the cleverest students are the easiest to teach, so the teachers at the ‘worst’ universities have to work rather harder and more resourcefully than their more privileged peers. Strange that there are those in HE who conclude that the less-clever students shouldn’t be taught at all.

The RAE should have reduced prejudice about research. The most striking thing about the more detailed results given in 2008 was that the highest levels of excellence were so evenly spread, not just found in elite institutions. But our Labour government is so obsessed with elitism that it tells HEFCE to fly in the face of the RAE evidence and fiddle the funding formula so as to concentrate funding regardless.

The Tories must be laughing. Mandelson is proof that there’s no need for the electorate to worry about things getting worse under a conservative government – they’ve already got one.

Not all UK undergraduate degrees are 3 -year degrees, in Scotland the standard undergraduate degree takes 4 years

@Petey the jaundice eyed person. You forget that going to universities itself is elitism and a privilege. As for your unpleasant experience why did you not leave? It appears that you could not make it in'one of those places' and hence you blame the class system, the Sun , the Moon or whoever. You too are repeating the same allegations and what a cynic you are. The RAE 2008 if anything is Brown's social engineering. Privatise the HE sector and let the fittest survive. Before you start accusing me of anything, I work in a new university and I know what I can and cannot do, and the limits of my institution. I do not want to dumb down every institution to the level of mediocrity. If I do not like my work and the cuts coming I will leave. I have other skills and I will survive.

The Scottish Highers are equivalent to As level in England. Hence the 4 year

I always thought that the reason UK degrees were 'short' was because UK A Levels were more intensive, in effect replacing the foundation year of a degree.

Quite, Nick Jackson. The UK is one of the few countries in which students spend 13 years at school pre-HE. In the majority of developed nations, it is 12 years.

I agree with Nick and John. There is an anomaly here. A Scottish student can join an English university and complete 3 years of a degree even through he /she has As level background. The Freshman year in the US is similarly a foundation year.

10 years Tony Blair announced the expansion of HE to enable 50% of young people to enter HE by 2010, although it only reached 44%. The new universities did their bit to follow Labour Party policy. Now it's a U turn and the working class can stay in their place.

In 2009 whoever works for aliving and does not live on land or property is a working class ( leave the bankers out although a few at the lower tier who face customers do work hard) that includes GPs, pharmacists, dentists etc.. as well as plumbers, sheetmetal workers etc.. even though my GP says that his plumber charges £60 for a visit and demands 1 hour service ( at £150) eventhough the work may take a fraction of that time. Derek Simpson the union supreme has all the trappings of a superior class as he often stays in a 5*hotel near his workplace and has a driver for his shiny car. He often bleats about 'working class'

<<<As for your unpleasant experience why did you not leave? It appears that you could not make it in'one of those places' and hence you blame the class system, the Sun , the Moon or whoever.>>> Hello, Going to University is a privilege>>>>> I didn't leave because it had great libraries, and was excellent academically so I concentrated on that. I went there more for the academic experience than to become middle class. I just didn't adapt to the posh environent too well. As you say, one has to evaluate a system realistically and I realised my critique was on a rather narrow aspect of the place. It had good sports clubs too, come to think of it.

@petey Education indeed narrowed your outlook. You have retreated back into your prejudicial class shell.

For some education.. 24 December, 2009
@petey Education indeed narrowed your outlook. You have retreated back into your prejudicial class shell. >>>

Sorry! That was meant to be a retraction of my previous post but I think I must have done it inelegantly. I don't usually me across as a class-prejudiced person, and perhaps it was unnecessary to write the initial post. Put it down to the fact my boiler broke down and the plumber can't make it until early in the new year!

Arrrgh! This thread is jinxed for me. Typo:
For some education.. 24 December, 2009

"I don't usually me across as " = " I don't usually come across as"

It wasn't obsessive self-reference.

@ Petey: good luck with the boiler anyway.

Thanks, David Trotter!

Why is concentrating research funding in a few universities a good thing??? There are excellent researchers in a variety of institutions across the UK who should also be rewarded and recognised. There should be efforts made to link competent researchers together but in today's digital age they do not need to be in the same location. Concentrating resources in the hands of a few leads to the same problems one gets with pedigrees and Machiavellian organisation - inbreeding and nepotism.

"There are excellent researchers in a variety of institutions ". How do you know? Through RAE 2008, the social engineering exercise of Gordon Brown? Or Are you reading the websites of the universities ranked above 50 in The Times League Table which claim they perform world class research?

@To Magnus Johnson: It may not be universal across all disciplines, but in mine the distribution of excellence is fairly general across a wide range of institutions (ex-polys to Russell Group). I don't need the RAE or anyone's websites to tell me that, any more than I need the (non-existent) RAE in other countries, or websites (rarely as developed or as promotional as here) to tell me who is doing what across the rest of Europe. If you don't have that sort of knowledge, I'm not sure why you would presume to comment.

In my discipline it is clear that only Russell Group has that kind of concentration of expertise. We can't find that even in your Aberstwyth. Hence I asked, if you care to read what I posted (" ranked above 50")

@ David Trotter. This break must be doing a world of good for your blogging. No use of university's computing facilities and no complaints!

@ Oh, David Trotter; Strewth, this line about the use of university computer facilities doesn't half get boring. @ To David Trotter: Who is the "we" you have become? As to concentration of expertise: it's not essential in all disciplines, you know. Very few humanities disciplines can or will be able to have concentrations of expertise in sub-disciplines, simply because the appointments process is substantially driven by teaching needs.

Please remember thatAberystwyth is a remote place in wales and can be lonely. Many said so and from my own visit. David Trotter is doing the right thing by blogging-keeping in touch with the outside world. Can't imagine that place in this weather.

@To Oh, David Trotter: Pretty much idyllic in this weather, and the distance keeps the unimaginative safely tucked up in their bigotry elsewhere.

David Trotter is quite right in saying that there is no real need for research concentration in some disciplines. It is certainly not necessary to be in a large, highly-rated Humanities department to make an important contribution to one's particular field (although it does help in a number of ways). Humanities scholars also tend to have access to the same resources (various research libraries). In my experience, academics in this area of enquiry - including those at Oxbridge, etc. - know and respect this. And while the RAE was flawed, it did flag this up quite clearly.

PS. I know a couple of excellent, highly respected researchers at Aber!

David Trotter is quite right in saying that there is no real need for research concentration in some disciplines. It is certainly not necessary to be in a large, highly-rated Humanities department to make an important contribution to one's particular field (although it does help in a number of ways). Humanities scholars also tend to have access to the same resources (various research libraries). In my experience, academics in this area of enquiry - including those at Oxbridge, etc. - know and respect this. And while the RAE was flawed, it did flag this up quite clearly.

PS. I know a couple of excellent, highly respected researchers at Aber!

"I know a couple of excellent, highly respected researchers at Aber" Are you by any chance David Trotter?!!

No, he isn't.

neither am I

Will the real David Trotter stand up?

I think I might go and lie down until my doppelgaenger have gone.

@David Trotter :"I think I might go and lie down.." Good idea after swallowing a couple of tablets. No light at any time.

No light: wasn't expecting any from you, certainly.

Wait a minute, I am the "real real David Trotter, trotting up and down and side ways in the cyberspace at office times and 24/7 really.. I agree that @David Trotter the "doppelgaenger" should take his medication immediately and spend a couple of days in a dark room.

Naughty, naughty, someone! "You agree to not use the Service to: ... impersonate any person or entity ... or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity".

These are David Trotters ( thanks to google) with the first 4 hits:
1 David Trotter is a professor of English at Cambridge
2 David Trotter is a photographer, communicator
3 David Trotter is an Australian rules footballer
4 David Trotter European Languages Aber

Any one of the can claim as David Trotter or David Trotter can be the nom de Plume from Brian Roper the fallen VC at London Met to Barak Obama blogging from his blackberry!

To Puzzled: Still puzzled. Looks to me like a strategy I've seen elsewhere: shut off opponents by claiming to be them. It's asymmetric because anyone who mistakenly uses their name is at the mercy of the anon. blog-yobs, who never say who they are or what their competence is/isn't. Presumably there is a real David Trotter somewhere here. Looks rather like your no. 4.

@puzzled. Looks like you are the David Trotter who claims to be the real one- no 4. Easy, as you straight went for no.4. It is mostly the colleagues who do this.

My name is somewhat similar to David Trotter's and I have been mistaken for him by various other people both in the U.K. and abroad. I must admit I have occasionally taken advantage of these occurences and accepted free lunch, drinks, and on one occasion a ride in a vintage 1920s MG through the Dorset countryside. I usually prefer to be David Trotter version 1, but version 4 is also helpful on the continent, although my command of the romance languages is rather limited.

@Puzzled. I read all posts by David Trotter before some one assumed the names. He did not post anything substantial, there was no weighty arguments by him, often one liners... What arguments you are talking about? there were none substantial by " David Trotter".

@" David Trotter" Look closer to home. Your colleague/s might not like some one overbearing and call themselves various versions of " David Trotter".

Having taught for years in the UK - at so-called Russell group Institutions and 'New Universities' - there are still things that surprise me. The announced cuts are, without any doubt, atrocious (and one wonders why failing banks were bailed out and the only sector that invests in our future suffers as a result) but why is there no united front against the plans? What puzzles me is that 'research intense' institutions attacking former Polytechnics as well as sciences attacking the humanities and vice versa. It seems Westminster's strategy of divide et impera succeeds. What is more, the notion that academia is another branch of the economy rather than a prerequisite of an enlightened culture - an axiom that seems to be supported by the responsible minister at least - is simply wrong. What a sad Christmas message for higher education in the UK!

If in fact (and it's hard to reach any other conclusion) the grand Mandelsonian game-plan is effectively to go back to pre-1992, except with more students and massively hiked fees, is anyone in HMG or elsewhere actually going to apologize for messing things up so badly with the experiment of the last twenty-odd years?

"What is more, the notion that academia is another branch of the economy rather than a prerequisite of an enlightened culture" delusional indeed, very hard to swallow in 2009. When the pot of funds becomes smaller and smaller, the notion of pure enlightened culture may sound nice if those seeking it in puritanical terms do not need institutional support, do not moan about getting jobs or in other words have plenty of dosh at their disposal. These are the very people who detest engineering and their solution is ever dependence on imported skills in these areas while thy happily research in 'medieval siege warfare'. Move with times I will say, otherwise you deserve what the Lord dishes out.

"one wonders why failing banks were bailed out ". God knows what you were (are) teaching if you cannot figure out this. I wouldn't say you were hiding in an ivory tower more like concrete bunker by the way you express surprise about bank bailing out just like a Japanese soldier hiding in a jungle refuse to believ that war ended and it is a new world.

The Lord's cuts are minimal. I would also take a look at the way academics are appointed and force part-time appointments and less of permanent positions, privatise the bulk of universities so that the fittest survive. The 24/7 work bandied about by cosily permanent academics need some rude awakening. Go and fight against bankers. You will realise that delinquent bankers often have comeuppance than a Brian Roper.

"except with more students and massively hiked fees, is anyone in HMG or elsewhere actually going to apologize for messing things up so badly with the experiment of the last twenty-odd years?"

This is a bit rich coming from an academic in languages who blogs 24/7 and God knows when he does his valuable research work to promote "enlihghtened culture". Get these people out if we have to survive in this century.

The HE has failed the country thanks to people like Swallow and the "doppelgaenger" like David Trotter. They behave like champagne socialists who live in big mansions in Hampstead Heath in London, frequenting £50 per lunch Italian restaurants there. Why do we need these people and their universities when there is desperate need for people withb practical technical skills. They are like BBC jounalists ever doing pontification, living in the Heath and tavelling to work and fro from work in black taxis billing BBC nay us the licence payers-the pensioners for the lexury of listening to their enlightened cultural prattle. The next govt of whichever party will slash HE funds. If Swallow, Trotter et al do not like I suggest they take up cookery lessons become TV Chefs!!

Rant, rant, rant, but nothing constructive to say. If you lot had a university education, then the system has indeed failed.

Isn't the whole point of any civilisation that it fosters diverse disciplines?

@David Trotter. Despite blogging during office hours and 24/7 I have not read anything you posted which is called 'constructive way' . Always a couple of sentences not worth anything, born out of blog addiction. I like the suggestion of David Trotter as TV Chef! He has to then deliver and his appearance will continue or the plug is pulled depending on his delivery, so different from receiving cosy grants from tax payers.

I'm puzzled as to why Petey the Anchorite thinks many of these guys care about civilisation. There's lots of red-faced jabbering about cosy grants and random accusations about others who detest engineering, though with no evidence for that claim at all. What is a bit worrying is how many anti-education posts are cropping up here: not anti any particular education, anti all of it. You wonder whether they'd say the same thing about NHS (privatise it all and let the weaker patients die off in case they survive to become champagne socialists in BBC-funded cabs in north London). It's not exactly edifying or intelligent.

I await the day when all these academics will give up their cushy jobs for the dole-queue; they should be able to live on all that enlightenment. The rest of us, i.e. those of us who live in the real world, go to university in the hope that it will lead to jobs that will allow us to uplift ourselves and live decently. Once we are nicely settled, we may consider enlightenment.

To Puzzled: Times are hard, and we cannot all have all the dosh we wish. So, then, why not spend the little we have on things like STEM subjects instead of "enlightened" mumbo-jumbo, i.e. most of the humanities, social sciences, etc. After all, we can easily live without the former but not without the latter---better a doctor than a professor in Dead Europear Field. Don't get me wrong: I am not a philistine. All I am saying is that we need to get our priorities right; once we are in the money again, by all means throw a bit on "enlightenment". In the meantime, let us give Lord Mandelson all the support he needs in the good work he is doing to see us through these unhappy times.

@Puzzled What is very worrying is that if you are an academic the capability of your understanding. Let the Force be with your poor students.

Dr Truth: I can see that enlightehment (indeed, education, but less us allow that they are different) costs money, which may or not be raised by the STEM subjects you prefer and which you think Lord Mandelson wishes to support (though I suspect this may be short-lived if they too fail to deliver the dosh). I suspect too that you have your formers and latters back to front but no matter. You would not wish me to nit-pick on that front and only Dead European Professors would stoop to that -- and we know what you think of them. But perhaps you can explain why universities are somehow always placed in opposition to the "real world" -- and what, pray, is that world, and how is it defined? Does your "real world" include hospitals? And if so, are these hospitals allowed to use universities' research from the unreal world these latter inhabit? Do you have engineering firms in your real world? Publishers? Newspapers? Airlines? Trains? Transport systems? Can they too make use of the unreal work of the unreal university world? I only ask because I feel you above all can enlighten me.

"why not spend the little we have on things like STEM subjects instead of "enlightened" mumbo-jumbo, i.e. most of the humanities, social sciences, etc. After all, we can easily live without the former but not without the latter"

I agree with you 95%, the 5% because of what you say about "social sciences". We could jettison both humanities and social sciences for a decade or more until we get the funds when and if the economy improves. It means downsizing and merging departments like European languages ( whose academics hardly achieve anything) with English, drama etc.. Use the money saved to improve STEM departments. There is a secondary benefit here. STEM academics do not indulge in union politics and likely to knuckle down doing real work.

Asking for a definition of the real world is like asking for a definition of an elephant: serious people simply know what is what---without definitions; jokers want taxpayer-funds to first develop a Theory of Elephants.

You disappoint me, Dr Truth. I thought you were capable of better than that.

You disappoint me too. Best thinking about changing jobs. Try plumbing.

"I await the day when all these academics will give up their cushy jobs for the dole-queue"... "those of us who live in the real world, go to university in the hope that it will lead to jobs that will ... nicely settled". So Dr Truth says that the point of going to university is to be "nicely settled", but expects academics to go on the dole. Intriguing...

Why can't an academic join the dole queue? I know 3 friends in my street who were in manufacturing companies until parts of their companies were literally shipped to China, and these were good engineers who went to good universities got good grades in their engineering degrees. Grow up KD, academics have no birthright to cling on to jobs. .

Did I say that academics have a birthright to cling on jobs? I think not.

While I believe it is wholly wrong to jettison humanities and social sciences, I believe that if Universities take the right measures they can finally replace the culture of chronyism and nepotism that is rife in these disciplines with a new meritocracy. Despite having two well-reviewed scholarly monographs with a good press under my belt and a slew of articles and chapters in prestigious places, I do not have a job in a university. On the other hand, I constantly see the children, wives, husbands and partners of people high up in the system given positions despite having virtually no publications. The AHRC and British Academy is similarly cronyistic these days. Hopefully the cuts will force administrations to end this appallingly irresponsible culture and put real academics in jobs.

Cronyism is rife in humanities and social sciences. You only have to see examples of few academics posting here who are in these departments. In my experience academics are the worst culprits.

Arizona State university claims to have saved 400000 USDs per year by going Google by using Cloud services. They have 65000 student. That's Qtr mil pounds for 65K student saved every year.
see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x2fJRW_vvQ&feature=player_embedded

All schools in Singapore are now on a Govt. funded Cloud - a public cloud.

http://www.futuregov.net/articles/2009/dec/22/why-singapore-schools-chose-public-cloud/

How many students HEFCE funds each year again? How much your institution spends on IT /VLE other ICT initiatives/maintainance?

We have several HE/FE and School and all the institutions get funding for IT related expenses each year. Going to the cloud will certainly prove economical over time.

A public cloud will definately be a safe and secure option as opposed to private cloud run by big names like MS and Google.

What do others think?

Wonder you know all the implications of Cloud. Nerdies cannot be good educationists. Technology is not solution, even idiots like you propose it

Keep only the STEM subjects?????? The great pity is that the customers will not always pay for the "hard" stuff. Three years of "difficult" training and education to end up renumerated at current rates, in a society that is so anti-STEM?

Kev: A good point and one which gets forgotten by proponent of the "STEM only" case. Add to that the problem that the "difficult subject" problem starts earlier, in schools. There's of course no reason why variable fees shouldn't be variable by subject as well as by institution, but the problem there is that the STEM students cost a lot more to teach than the subjects which some (above) would prefer to chop. So if (hypothetically) all the students in a given university are doing STEM subjects at (in effect) discounted rates, the books will be even more out of balance than now.

There you go again. Do you know, you are the talking point in the watering holes of Aberystwyth?

Hello, To. What a cheery chappie you are.

"Nerdies cannot be good educationists. ", "Technology is not solution".

Its so called "Educationists" like this reader/poster who wants to hide their lack of understanding about technology that need to join the dole-queue.

Days of IT cottage industry are over.

@GS. You are stupid. @ To Manish Malik is both an academic and a practioner in computing and has set up a computer software company. . You are so so stupid that you do not understand why throwing technolgy like Cloud Computing and GRID is going to help the basic learning process.. The basic learning process has not changed. In case you are more ignorant than I thought, 'educationanists' use more IT and not less. Balckboards and WebCT can only do so much.

To 'TO GS', hiding behind anaonymity dosenot make you more clever than you really are.

You say it, blackboard and WebCT can only do so much, then why the hell should we spend so much money on it in every institution?

Cut IT out.

PS:Editor, its all nice to put a message in a reb box - act on it. Press Del now.

So you are not hiding behind anonymity? That is laughable. The response came because of your style of reply. The Institutions spend money on WebCT and Blackboard for reasons unconnected with pedagogy. WebCT is free in case you do not understand. Does WebCT work well in all versions of LINUX? Can you use Firefox successfully with blackboard? Let us know your expertise in using these portals beyond posting messages and annoucements. Why Web CT users have swirched to Moodle? What are again its drawbacks? These portals never improved learning processes significantly.

Againwhat does GS stand for? If you are a nerdie, tell us what a Cloud Computing can do and how it helps in the learning process?

I have taught computing in old and new universities at all levels , from 1st year to MSc courses in . There is nothing like old fashioned way of working on a problem, setting up algorithms,refining it before translating the algorithm into programming language sytax using editors, compiling and rinning anf fixing bugs. Those who mastered Knuth's books were able to design programs well. You do not need any potrtal for these. My view of Blackboard, WebCT, Moddle etc.. is that they are portals and have some value but not much . Yes, some have set up learning environments , but they are not as useful as the old fashioned face-to-face tutorials. Universities spend money on these ( except blackboard, the other two are open software and should not cost much) as they help a paperless process and help communication. I have seen some bespoke Web sites doing similar work. Universities use them because the other universities are using them,. Even in open University situation their value is modest and OU students learn more during day classess and tutorials. Even their First class conferences generate more heat than light. These are mature students and motivated and learn. The keyword is motivation

There is over-reliance on IT ( panacea for all pedgogic issues they say and those who not agree are branded as fossils), software packages, portals etc.. I have used both -extensive IT environment and no IT environment with traditioal lectures, minimal handouts, textbooks and selected journal paper usage ( hard copies), no mulitple choice questions , but short and long questions, hardcopy submissions etc.. in medium class sizes. The students in the latter approach came out better.

James, To GS and Gordon,

If there is over reliance on IT then why cant we reduce this?
If the IT related spending is not connected to pedagogy then why do it?

WebCT is very old and Blackboard costs money. Just because other universities use these platforms is not a good enough reason for all universities to use it. They are in it and they need to get out and stop spending money on sustaining useless stuff like that. As for "Going paperless" - as Gordon says there are other solutions for that. Moodle is free too. Why not use that instead? Saving some money in IT would not do any harm.

I did not mean to upset the regulars here. All I was saying was a public cloud will save the sector some money. Instead of all universities buying licences for blackboard etc, they can all use Google App or MS or another service that is from the Cloud and that is for free.

I did post some links to support what I was saying.

As it turns out from the discussions here that IT is not core to education, so why not outsource it and save the taxpayer some money? Whats wrong in that?