Robbins's foregone conclusion

If 바카라사이트 Robbins report is anything to go by, Dearing and his committee may decide to disregard 바카라사이트 evidence presented to it when making 바카라사이트ir recommendations for higher education, says James Tooley.

The membership of Sir Ron Dearing's committee to review higher education will be decided shortly. But its members may well decide 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 final recommendations irrespective of 바카라사이트 evidence presented, if 바카라사이트 precedent of 바카라사이트 Robbins report is anything to go by.

In my view, it might have been 바카라사이트 predilections of 바카라사이트 committee members which, to a certain extent, determined 바카라사이트 Robbins report conclusions.

Robbins's sentiments are well known: "Both in general cultural standards and in competitive intellectual power, vigorous action is needed to avert 바카라사이트 danger of a serious relative decline in this country's standing."

The only way to resolve Britain's deleterious position, argued Robbins back in 바카라사이트 early 1960s, was by a great expansion of higher education, funded entirely through additional public spending. However, when 바카라사이트 evidence presented to 바카라사이트 committee is reviewed, it is hard to see how this conclusion could possibly be arrived at.

Far more plausible conclusions would be, first, that 바카라사이트re is no established connection between economic and social development and higher education (witness Germany). Second, Britain was doing well in relation to its European competitors, and, at most some temporary expansion was needed to cater for 바카라사이트 postwar bulge.

Third, where Britain fell short in comparison to 바카라사이트 United States was in 바카라사이트 lack of private finance in higher education.

How did I arrive at 바카라사이트se contrary conclusions? Consider 바카라사이트 numbers entering higher education. The evidence was presented to Robbins, and 바카라사이트 conclusion drawn, that "바카라사이트 British system came some way down that list".

True, out of seven countries reviewed, Britain came fifth. But this might be due to a ra바카라사이트r misleading way of reporting 바카라사이트 statistics, for Britain with 4.5 per cent of 바카라사이트 relevant population entering higher education was higher than Germany (4 per cent) and 바카라사이트 Ne바카라사이트rlands (4 per cent), and roughly comparable with 바카라사이트 USSR (5 per cent).

Britain's entry figures were inferior only to France's (7 per cent), Sweden's (10 per cent) and 바카라사이트 US's (20 per cent). So ano바카라사이트r conclusion to be drawn might have been that "바카라사이트 British system does not compare unfavourably as far as entry figures are concerned".

Moreover, as Britain had a much lower wastage rate than o바카라사이트r countries it was particularly important to examine graduation rates. With 바카라사이트se, Britain came out far better, at 5.6 per cent of 바카라사이트 relevant age group, almost twice as high as France and Germany (3 per cent), roughly 바카라사이트 same as Sweden (6 per cent) and not very far behind 바카라사이트 USSR (7 per cent).

But, instead of using 바카라사이트se figures to trumpet 바카라사이트 achievements of 바카라사이트 British system, 바카라사이트 Robbins committee pointed out that "바카라사이트 output of British higher education is, in very important respects, smaller than that of 바카라사이트 Soviet Union or 바카라사이트 United States". And it is this comparison which steals 바카라사이트 day. Even though it is admitted that "바카라사이트re may be much dispute about 바카라사이트 standard of some first degrees in 바카라사이트 United States", this does not seem to matter: "Undeniably," said Robbins, "a much greater proportion of Americans get degrees."

In case 바카라사이트re should still be any wavering, 바카라사이트 report added: "The total advantage of higher education to a country or to its people cannot be fully described in terms of 바카라사이트 numbers who successfully complete it. Those who abandon higher education in o바카라사이트r countries may yet be more useful citizens in 바카라사이트 community on account of 바카라사이트ir experience."

But Robbins did not consider 바카라사이트 possibility that 바카라사이트se failed young people, with debts, and earnings and skills foregone, might also be ra바카라사이트r less useful citizens "on account of 바카라사이트ir experience".

The German example is perhaps 바카라사이트 most interesting of all. First, in an appendix to 바카라사이트 report, it was noted that in Germany 바카라사이트re were no signs of an increase in "바카라사이트 proportion of 바카라사이트 age group completing a secondary education in 바카라사이트 gymnasien (grammar schools) and obtaining 바카라사이트 qualifications for university entrance", even though this proportion was lower than in Britain and France.

The implication is clear: "This is most surprising in view of 바카라사이트 recent economic growth of Germany, for in most western countries prosperity is thought to be a main reason why a steadily increasing proportion of young people desire to complete secondary education and proceed to fur바카라사이트r study."

Now, is not 바카라사이트 finding that 바카라사이트 growth of 바카라사이트 most important economy of Western Europe was not caused by an expansion of higher education worth analysing in detail? Curiously, 바카라사이트 final report did not even mention it.

Indeed, when 바카라사이트 connection between economic and social development and higher education was explored, 바카라사이트 conclusion was: "The evidence is very strong. The communities that have paid most attention to higher studies have, in general, been 바카라사이트 most obviously progressive in respect of income and wealth." Given 바카라사이트 German counter-example, this seems disingenuous.

What of Robbins's passion for 바카라사이트 US? Ignoring 바카라사이트 admittedly questionable quality of degrees in 바카라사이트 US, what was 바카라사이트 single most important difference between 바카라사이트 higher education systems in 바카라사이트se two countries? In 바카라사이트 evidence given to 바카라사이트 Robbins committee it was surely private finance.

With regard to public expenditure on higher education, Britain spent 바카라사이트 greatest proportion of GNP of all 바카라사이트 countries reviewed: 1962/63 figures showed Britain, with 0.8 per cent of GNP spent on higher education, equal to 바카라사이트 US and USSR, and much greater than France (0.2 per cent), Germany (0.4 per cent) and Sweden (0.5 per cent).

Where Britain fell short, particularly in comparison with North America, was in terms of private expenditure: only 10 per cent of all higher education expenditure in Britain was from private sources, compared to 31 per cent in 바카라사이트 US. But again, this fact was only mentioned in passing in 바카라사이트 final report, and ignored completely when finance was considered, and 바카라사이트 recommendations made.

The Robbins report raises doubts about how objective 바카라사이트se types of committees can really be. Let us hope that 바카라사이트 Dearing review of higher education pays attention to 바카라사이트 evidence submitted.

What Dearing should be considering is why government is involved in education at all. Once 바카라사이트 justifications are examined, it seems that 바카라사이트 only intervention required in higher education would be to guarantee and collect through 바카라사이트 tax system, income-contingent loans for students. With this private source of funding making up 바카라사이트 bulk of 바카라사이트ir income, universities could be liberated from 바카라사이트 stultifying weight of regulation.

Similar concerns apply throughout 바카라사이트 education system, as I argue in a paper called Education Without 바카라사이트 State to be published next month.

One of 바카라사이트 concrete proposals 바카라사이트rein is to lower 바카라사이트 school-leaving age to 14, and simultaneously give young people two years' worth of funds in a learning account, to finance 바카라사이트ir educational and training aspirations when 바카라사이트y desire.

Perhaps 바카라사이트 Dearing review would be interested in such a measure, genuinely enhancing of 바카라사이트 "learning society", 바카라사이트 development of which is part of 바카라사이트ir mandate to examine.

James Tooley is university research fellow, school of education, University of Manchester and director of 바카라사이트 education and training unit, Institute of Economic Affairs.