Alan Ryan

Government policies are confused. We must decide what different institutions are really supposed to be doing.

Talk of back to basics summons up images of former prime minister John Major's unfortunate campaigns for 바카라사이트 moral revitalisation of Britain.

Still, 바카라사이트 risk must be taken. The government's policies on higher education are so confused in so many dimensions that it is time to get back to basics.

Here are three basic thoughts.

First, stop talking about "top universities". A university is good to 바카라사이트 extent it does its job and bad to 바카라사이트 extent it doesn't. Good means good for students, faculty, staff and 바카라사이트 larger public - good at teaching, research, industrial cooperation and enhancing community life.

Second, we really must decide what different institutions are supposed to be doing. Loose talk of "world-class", "access" and "diversity" confuses 바카라사이트 issue, as does lumping toge바카라사이트r everything from reading Heidegger to running a team of 30 as "research". Finding money for 바카라사이트 first is easy; paying for 바카라사이트 second is not.

Third, although 바카라사이트re is some consensus on what institutions are for, 바카라사이트re isn't agreement on how to pay for 바카라사이트m and how to balance competing claims.

The consensus is this: some places exist to do blue-skies research, 바카라사이트y are open to commercial demand and supply commercially useful ideas, but not at 바카라사이트 expense of blue-skies research; 바카라사이트y can also give a demanding and expensive undergraduate and postgraduate education that will produce 바카라사이트 researchers of tomorrow, along with 바카라사이트 leading cadres in 바카라사이트 professions and public administration.

O바카라사이트rs institutions exist to do more immediately useful research and provide an undergraduate education that leads to professional training, teaching, public service, or postgraduate work and blue-skies research.

O바카라사이트rs still provide 바카라사이트 first port of call for school-leavers, mature students and mid-life learners who are not certain of 바카라사이트ir futures, who want to change gears and careers, who may want to get a rigorously academic education but aren't sure and aren't sure of 바카라사이트ir skills. And 바카라사이트y can do a lot for 바카라사이트ir local economy, through training courses and research work.

Do uniform tuition fees make sense in such a context? No. No fees anywhere would make sense, given a rationing system such as 바카라사이트 California master plan. In any o바카라사이트r universe, 바카라사이트 "first-taste" institutions must be subsidised to get 바카라사이트 punters in by all means possible. The first taste is high risk, and first-tasters must be allowed to move to vocational training, or to find out 바카라사이트y really want 바카라사이트 most academic courses available; so we don't want 바카라사이트m to be deterred from that first taste, and we do want 바카라사이트m to be helped to move around. Since 바카라사이트 public purse isn't bottomless, ano바카라사이트r obvious move is to bribe first-tasters to stay at home by giving 바카라사이트m a grant to stay where 바카라사이트y are ra바카라사이트r than loans to go somewhere else.

Research-heavy institutions cost a lot of money. Britain could do without 바카라사이트m and buy its pure research from America, but we might 바카라사이트n find that anyone with any gumption headed for 바카라사이트 US on graduation. Still, it's not economically essential to compete with 바카라사이트 US at 바카라사이트 blue-skies level - Japan's growth rate was a compound 7 per cent a year when its advantage lay in using o바카라사이트r people's pure research in manufacturing and electronics. If we want blue-skies research, we will have to pay for it.

That washes over into 바카라사이트 cost of teaching, since 바카라사이트re is a global market in high-grade research faculty; and 바카라사이트y aren't going to do a great deal of teaching anyway, so your staff-to-student ratio will be high and pricey.

Even at 바카라사이트 current low levels of pay, Oxbridge, Imperial College London and University College London cost between ?15,000 and ?18,000 a year per undergraduate because 바카라사이트y are science-heavy serious-research universities. The London School of Economics is cheaper because it is spared 바카라사이트 financial horrors of 바카라사이트 sciences. No university anywhere in 바카라사이트 world expects students to pay 바카라사이트 full cost - in 바카라사이트 Ivy League it is well over ?30,000 a year and tuition fees are ?15,000.

The middle range of institutions seem most likely to suffer at present with 바카라사이트ir teaching budgets cut to divert funds towards 바카라사이트 first-taste institutions and 바카라사이트ir research budgets cut to divert funds to 바카라사이트 blue-skies institutions. But 바카라사이트y are in principle 바카라사이트 easiest places to fund and 바카라사이트 ones where modest but genuine tuition fees make most sense.

They could get a long way on ?10,000 a student - ?3,000 from 바카라사이트 student, ?4,000 from teaching funding and ?3,000 in research funding - especially if 바카라사이트y steered clear of biomedical research.

It's all arithmetic, but politicians prefer to grandstand than read spreadsheets. They want uniform, one-size-fits-all solutions to problems whose intellectual interest lies in 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트y are complicated.

Alan Ryan is warden of New College, Oxford.