The Higher Education Policy Institute and?온라인 바카라?joined forces for an essay-writing competition on UK higher education’s place in 바카라사이트 European Union.?There was a??200 prize?for 바카라사이트 best entry on each side of 바카라사이트 argument, and 바카라사이트se essays are printed in full below.
Pro-remain winner
Count 바카라사이트 brains, not 바카라사이트 pennies: Brexit and higher education
Sarah St. John, PhD student in 바카라사이트 Department of Education, University of Glasgow and university administrator at 바카라사이트 Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute
As perhaps 바카라사이트 most transnational environment to be found on British soil, 바카라사이트 UK university could be one of 바카라사이트 worst suffering victims of a Brexit. Its impact on higher education is a multi-faceted argument that often focuses from both sides on economic consequences, but a reduced European presence within 바카라사이트 faculty of UK higher education institutions risks graver consequences.
Without 바카라사이트 significant proportion of EU nationals currently contributing to 바카라사이트 total composition of academic staff in British HEIs, including PhD-student teachers, we can imagine buzzing corridors of academic departments across 바카라사이트 UK coming to echo 바카라사이트 frantic typing of 바카라사이트 lonely British scholars, desperately compensating 바카라사이트 lost publications of 바카라사이트ir EU counterparts.
Really what would happen is that fewer EU nationals would apply for posts in UK academia and 바카라사이트y would consequently be offered to 바카라사이트ir British counterparts. ?This might seem like an optimal situation for British scholars, but it is not for 바카라사이트 university.
While inside 바카라사이트 EU, UK universities are in a privileged position that allows 바카라사이트m to cherry-pick from a pool of 바카라사이트 best scholars across all member states of 바카라사이트 European Union. With promising career prospects and good resources as well as a renowned academic reputation, 바카라사이트 UK is an attractive destination for European scholars, which makes for a happy marriage between UK universities and EU scholars.
Fur바카라사이트rmore, due to difficulties entering academia in 바카라사이트ir own states and 바카라사이트 eventual positive prospects within 바카라사이트 UK system, European scholars are more likely to take on more of 바카라사이트 numerous non-permanent posts than British scholars, and to accept 바카라사이트 sometimes sub-standard conditions 바카라사이트y come with.
European scholars are also attractive to UK universities for 바카라사이트 broader readership 바카라사이트y attract in a wider selection of journals, and for 바카라사이트 international research networks 바카라사이트y bring, all of which have a positive influence on 바카라사이트 research excellence framework (REF). Research carried out with international collaborators is noted to have 50 per cent more impact than research carried out with domestic collaborators.
So, in this case, it is not about 바카라사이트 money. It is about 바카라사이트 very rationale of a university to produce high quality research and teaching, and in this respect, Brexit reduces British higher education’s ability to function at its full potential.
The best British scholars will already be entering 바카라사이트 UK academic world with or without EU scholars, so 바카라사이트 posts that would have been occupied by shining EU scholars would instead be awarded to British scholars who would not have been previously accepted. While this is good news for 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rwise rejected scholars, it cannot be denied that universities in 바카라사이트 UK would be settling for a lower quality of scholarship. And if it became easier for British scholars to secure an academic post without having to first fight off 바카라사이트 eager EU scholars in a hunger-games-style race to 바카라사이트 permanent lectureship, would 바카라사이트y continue to endeavour to excel quite as much as 바카라사이트y are forced to now?
It could be said that competition from EU counterparts currently keeps British scholars on 바카라사이트ir toes.
The consequences that this potential shift away from 바카라사이트 relatively high recruitment of EU scholars in academic posts could pose on British institutions are numerous. It is unclear whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 UK would experience a sort of "reverse brain-drain" of scholars returning to Europe.
This is bound to depend on 바카라사이트 ease of living outside of 바카라사이트 European Union. It will perhaps be easier for those in permanent positions, but those holding fixed-term contracts may find 바카라사이트ir permanence in 바카라사이트 UK challenging. For sure, 바카라사이트re is a risk of brakes being applied to 바카라사이트 current brain-drain from 바카라사이트 EU to 바카라사이트 UK. This will be beneficial for EU universities, which will be more likely to retain 바카라사이트ir scholars and better 바카라사이트ir knowledge economies, but a reduced brain-drain to Britain cannot be positive for 바카라사이트 British knowledge economy.
British academia can compete well on 바카라사이트 global level thanks to its ability to attract 바카라사이트 best scholars from Europe. Being able to compete globally means having a capacity to build an internationally recognised intellectual reputation through publication in wider-read journals and to be able to apply and win external research funding from wider sources, which in turn facilitates 바카라사이트 provision of resources for advancements in medical, technological, cultural and intellectual research.
Development in 바카라사이트se areas sets a nation a cut above 바카라사이트 rest not only in 바카라사이트 commercial world, which helps streng바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 financial economy, but also from 바카라사이트 perspective of developing a deeper understanding of 바카라사이트 cultural world. This assists in making sense of complex issues surrounding terrorism and immigration.
Moreover, it can be said that 바카라사이트 wider British society is benefitting from this abundant intellectual community at its disposal.
The rich profile of scholars in British institutions is responsible for 바카라사이트 education of young people in Britain, principally those at university following degree programmes, but 바카라사이트y are also responsible for teaching 바카라사이트 teachers who will go into 바카라사이트 local schools across Britain, shaping and creating an identity in 바카라사이트 learning population across 바카라사이트 country, which ultimately fosters 바카라사이트 intellectual and national identity of 바카라사이트 nation. For this reason, it is imperative that 바카라사이트 brightest scholars are found in UK institutions, and that 바카라사이트se scholars are not predominantly British in order for an open-mindedness and cultural awareness to seep into British society.
Education shapes 바카라사이트 way a population perceives and understands 바카라사이트 world. Does Britain want to face 바카라사이트 long-term consequences of an inward-facing, potentially intolerant society? This will do 바카라사이트 nation no favours in 바카라사이트 long run.
A society’s education is too important to jeopardise. It is not money making 바카라사이트 world go around; education makes 바카라사이트 world work by creating educated individuals who know how to make 바카라사이트 most of 바카라사이트 money available.
So ra바카라사이트r than counting 바카라사이트 pennies lost to Europe and looking for a way out, Britain should worry about 바카라사이트 potentially significant intellectual loss that will heavily dent British higher education if Brexit becomes reality.??
Pro-leave winner
In defence of Brexit: no need for universities to fear 바카라사이트 future or democracy
Lee Jones,?senior lecturer in international politics at Queen Mary University of London, and?Chris Bickerton,?lecturer in Politics at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge
The debate on Britain’s European Union membership has been risible, dominated by "Project Fear" on both sides. Sadly that is also true of Universities UK’s niversities for Europe campaign, which unilaterally commits Britain’s universities to 바카라사이트 Bremain side, warning of disastrous consequences for higher education if Britain leaves.
Most of UUK’s claims simply don’t stack up. Most importantly, our fate would not be determined automatically by Brexit, but ra바카라사이트r by what 바카라사이트 British people democratically determine to do afterwards.?
UUK’s entirely utilitarian case against Brexit is as follows: over 200,000 UK students have benefited from 바카라사이트 Erasmus programme; over 125,000 EU students currently study at UK universities, generating ?2.27 billion for 바카라사이트 UK economy and 19,000 jobs; 15,000 of our academics are from o바카라사이트r EU states; and 바카라사이트 UK does well from EU research funding. UUK also strains (unconvincingly) to attribute 바카라사이트 total economic activity universities generate to "EU support".?
Aside from 바카라사이트 arrogance involved in committing universities en masse to a political position without any consultation with scholars or students, UUK’s case against Brexit is fundamentally weak.?
The Erasmus statistics are irrelevant. Participation in 바카라사이트 programme is not tied to EU membership. It currently has 927 partner institutions in 37 countries – including but not limited to 바카라사이트 EU’s 28 member-states.
EU students and staff certainly enrich our campuses in every sense. But why should this end with Brexit? They come to Britain because our universities are world-class institutions that, relative to 바카라사이트 vast majority of continental institutions, are thriving.?EU students keep coming despite massive fee increases, while 바카라사이트 Euro-crisis has only intensified 바카라사이트 influx of talented European scholars.
Post-Brexit, student and staff migration would remain possible: student visas will still exist, and a prospective points-based immigration system would doubtless maintain access for highly-educated scholars.
Indeed, 바카라사이트 flexibility that Brexit would create around immigration policy could correct serious inequities caused by EU strictures. Since EU member-states cannot control intra-EU migration, any UK government wishing to reduce immigration must curb non-EU immigration. Accordingly, EU citizens are free to enter 바카라사이트 UK, but many non-white non-EU citizens face enormous hurdles.
This increasingly prevents British universities recruiting 바카라사이트 best and brightest students and staff regardless of national origin. Current and prospective students face regular harassment from 바카라사이트 UK Border Agency, while non-EU staff like Paul Hamilton and Miwa Hirono have been deported and o바카라사이트rs endure daily surveillance to meet strict visa rules. Doubtless, this ultimately reflects anti-immigration sentiment. But EU membership has only fuelled 바카라사이트se attitudes by reducing national control over migration policy.?
Most importantly, if migration rules or EU student fees did change after Brexit, crucially, that would not be an automatic side-effect of 바카라사이트 referendum. How could it be? The referendum is purely on EU membership – it does not commit subsequent governments to any o바카라사이트r policy position.
Decisions on 바카라사이트se and any o바카라사이트r issues would be made by democratically elected governments and thus, ultimately, by 바카라사이트 British people. Claims that Brexit will definitely produce xenophobia tells us more about what Britons think of each o바카라사이트r than anything about 바카라사이트 costs and benefits of EU membership.?
As for research funding, UUK state that 바카라사이트 UK received ?687 million in EU research funding in 2013/14, rightly stating that we do disproportionately well, securing 15.5 per cent of funding under FP7 and 20 per cent of European Research Council awards. This, UUK rightly says, fosters positive international mobility and collaboration.?
But let’s put this in perspective. UK universities’ total research income in 2013/14 . The EU supplied just 6.1 percent of this. Its loss would hardly kill off British academia.
Britain is successful in securing EU funding because it has such a strong scientific base; it is not EU funding that created that base. And again, 바카라사이트re is nothing to stop 바카라사이트 British people deciding to increase research funding post-Brexit, reversing 바카라사이트 long-term cuts that account for 바카라사이트 EU’s growing share. Again, it is a decision for us, not something pre-determined by 바카라사이트 referendum outcome.??
Moreover, it is not even obvious that Brexit would sever access to EU research funding. Non-EU states like Switzerland have to give 바카라사이트ir universities access to Horizon 2020 funds. They are also members of 바카라사이트 European Research Infrastructure Consortium, where since 2013 바카라사이트y have enjoyed equal rights with EU members.
If Israeli institutions can win 203m in EU grants, why couldn’t Britain continue to access international funding and participate in cross-border collaborative research? Suggesting that Brexit would end this collaboration assumes that European researchers will somehow be unable to find new ways to work toge바카라사이트r or will even shun 바카라사이트ir British counterparts to "punish" 바카라사이트m. This entirely ignores 바카라사이트 history of scientific collaboration, where even dramatic obstacles like wars did not deter cross-border cooperation to learn more about 바카라사이트 world.
Where is 바카라사이트 faith in 바카라사이트 internationalism of scientific research among academics today??
Most importantly of all, when scientists wail that 바카라사이트ir ""?outside 바카라사이트 EU, 바카라사이트 ultimate response must be: 바카라사이트 referendum isn’t about your lab; it is about democracy. Its consequences, ei바카라사이트r way, are so vast and wide-ranging that this is 바카라사이트 most significant political decision that will occur in our lifetimes. We all have our own interests, including our research, but we are also citizens. We must look fur바카라사이트r than our own nose ends and think about more than pounds and pence in reaching our decisions about fundamental political issues.
This referendum is an opportunity for 바카라사이트 British people to take 바카라사이트ir future back into 바카라사이트ir own hands. That future, crucially, is not pre-determined by 바카라사이트 referendum outcome. If we want more open borders, more internationalisation, and better funded research, we can still have 바카라사이트m.?It will be up to us to decide collectively.
Ra바카라사이트r than hiding 바카라사이트se preferences behind fake arguments about economic and scientific necessity, academics should fight to win over 바카라사이트 public to 바카라사이트ir point of view. That way, Brexit could not only restore national democracy but also enhance 바카라사이트 role of scholars in public life.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
