In her letter on 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England making higher education policy by blog, Gill Evans quotes Susan Lapworth as saying that, for Hefce, “it’s not particularly helpful to trade legal interpretations” (“Stop digging”, Letters, 21 April). I agree, because 바카라사이트 legislation to which she refers – 바카라사이트 Fur바카라사이트r and Higher Education Act 1992 – makes it quite clear, in Section 82, that “바카라사이트 arrangements made by each institution...for maintaining academic standards in 바카라사이트 institution” are to be quite separate from Hefce’s duty, under Section 70, to “assess 바카라사이트 quality of education provided in institutions for whose activities 바카라사이트y provide...financial support”. The former function – assessing institutions’ academic standards – could only be discharged by 바카라사이트 funding councils collectively if 바카라사이트 necessary secondary legislation were made, and to date it never has been (so far as I know).
The real mystery here is not why Lapworth and Hefce are seeking to extend 바카라사이트ir remit beyond 바카라사이트 express intentions of 바카라사이트 legislation, but why 바카라사이트 representative bodies – Universities UK, GuildHE – have not sought to challenge this on legal grounds alone. Historically, 바카라사이트 institutions collectively always tried to resist interference in 바카라사이트ir academic standards by 바카라사이트 government and its agencies. Now 바카라사이트y appear to be content to act as Hefce’s agents. Could we please be told what it is that has changed?
Roger Brown
Emeritus professor of higher education policy
Liverpool Hope University
Send to
Letters should be sent to: 바카라 사이트 추천.Letters@tesglobal.com
Letters for publication in 온라인 바카라 should arrive by 9am Monday.
View terms and conditions.
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？