i P a trick Marnham ;1 cha rd West
—ouberon Waugh
Arbehard House, Pentre Lane, ergavenny, Monmouthshire sEiltleatiOnal i StS idea Few will have been surprised that the hiea of creating a comprehensive system of thg„iLer education has been debated at last in ,„` 'louse r I part k..ommons (18 May). It is, after of a logical progression towards the _'nedlocrity so coveted by those who are tulhore int erested in promoting social change :a_ .an Preserving and encouraging quality in :cation. Universities as we know them evoithe, result of several centuries of steady the „un°n but, as always, they conform to
"xford Dictionary definition of being 'educational institutions designed for instructions or examination, or both, of students in all or many of the more important branches of learning, and conferring degrees in various faculties'. As is seen from this definition, the universities have a very definite role to play in our society, as do the technical colleges and colleges of education. However, the role of these latter two institutions, while extremely important, is nevertheless different from that of a university. Their role is to give specific vocational training and it is sad to realise that the excellent work done by many of these institutions is being downgraded—if only by implication —by those who advocate the comprehensivisation of higher education.
En view of what has already occurred at secondary level, it is entirely logical that pressure should now be put on the universities to accept a lowering of standards. For, so long as universities remain in their present form, they will be regarded as objects in the path of the progressive educator. Quality is anathema to many reformers and the most effective way to eliminate it is to change the concept of the university. This may be done by ensuring that the pool of potential entrants is of poorer quality, thereby forcing universities to accept lower standards of entry. Furthermore, by enlarging the universities, more places become available for less able students, some of whom are not adequately motivated in their field of study. Since university funds are calculated on the basis of student numbers, the universities are obliged to accept lower standards so as to boost intake.
The above, however, are not sufficient for progressive minds since, broadly speaking, the universities have tried to maintain the high standard associated with the Special honours degree. Nevertheless, even the most enthusiastic of reformers still hesitates to launch a direct assault on the concept of honours schools and classification of degrees. Hence, the attack becomes peripheral in nature and is currently centred on the creation of further degree-awarding institutions which will thereby intensify the pressure to lower standards of entry. Once students have been accepted into an institution (university or otherwise) it is difficult to fail them unless they perform disastrously. Hence academics find themselves tempted to compromise on decisions, gradually increasing the grey areas of uncertainty so that, once a student has proceeded beyond the first year, it is unlikely that he will be failed, even if he remains in the newly-expanded grey area. Education has suffered enormously at the hands of progressives in the last decade and the universities remain the last target for their misguided (though often well-meaning) half-baked theories and reforms. Many of us owe a great debt to the 'meritocracy', fought for by earlier social reformers. Without those efforts we would never have had equality of opportunity. There is, however, a vast difference between equal opportunity and equal ability. Education has been pushed to the brink of the 'egalitarian utopia'.Will thenext step be to the promised land—egalitarian mediocrity ?
In summary, what is needed in education is a great drive for quality, coupled with meaningful training for those whose skills are essentially non-academic. This will be achieved not through a process of dilution which reduces everything to the level of the lowest common denominator, but by realisation of the obvious—that people have different aptitudes and abilities! Equality of opportunity is vitally important but so is the need to accept that not all can attain the same degree of quality and excellence of achievement in a given field—whether academicor non-academic. The creation of comprehensive universities will undoubtedly move us far away from these ideals.
J. Dunning-Davies F. W. Stephenson University of Hull
Previous page
