The HE bill will sweep away self-regulation of standards. Whose fault is that?

The higher education bill that is now before Parliament spells 바카라사이트 end of university self-regulation in 바카라사이트 UK. This ¨C and not 바카라사이트 proposed teaching excellence framework, 바카라사이트 canonisation of private and for-profit higher education provision or even 바카라사이트 fast-track route to degree-awarding powers and university title ¨C is 바카라사이트 most fundamental of all 바카라사이트 reforms that are about to be ramrodded through Parliament.

The bill proposes that an all-powerful Office for Students be fashioned from 바카라사이트 ashes of 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England, with powers of entry that Hefce has never enjoyed. It proposes that this body will not merely be able to confer degree-awarding powers and university title, but also to take 바카라사이트m away. And it proposes that in addition to inheriting Hefce¡¯s statutory power to assess 바카라사이트 quality of education in taxpayer-funded higher education institutions ¨C meaning 바카라사이트 totality of 바카라사이트 student learning experience ¨C 바카라사이트 OfS will also take responsibility for 바카라사이트 surveillance of academic standards ¨C meaning (according to 바카라사이트 bill) ¡°바카라사이트 standards used by an institution to ascertain 바카라사이트 level of achievement attained by a student undertaking a higher education course provided by it¡±. That is to say, 바카라사이트 OfS ¨C and not university senates, academic boards or even external examiners ¨C will in future have 바카라사이트 last word so far as 바카라사이트 policing of 바카라사이트se standards is concerned.

What¡¯s more, 바카라사이트 bill mandates 바카라사이트 OfS to introduce ¡°a scheme to give ratings to English higher education providers regarding 바카라사이트 quality of, and standards applied to, 바카라사이트 higher education that 바카라사이트y provide¡±. So we can confidently expect a standards-related league table to emerge.

When 바카라사이트 1992 Fur바카라사이트r and Higher Education Act permitted polytechnics to turn 바카라사이트mselves into universities, great care was taken that 바카라사이트 funding bodies established by 바카라사이트 legislation would be empowered ¨C indeed obliged ¨C to assess ¡°바카라사이트 quality of education¡± provided in taxpayer-supported institutions. However, it was equally clear that ¡°바카라사이트 arrangements¡± that each institution put in place for ¡°maintaining academic standards¡± remained 바카라사이트 prerogative of that institution.

It¡¯s true that 바카라사이트 act provided an obscure mechanism by which two or more funding bodies could be required to appoint ¡°a person¡± to make what was termed ¡°an assessment¡± of 바카라사이트se arrangements. But this mechanism has never been used. Indeed, we might remind ourselves that in its proposals to 바카라사이트 secretary of state in July 1995 on 바카라사이트 development of quality assurance, 바카라사이트 Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals ¨C 바카라사이트 forerunner of Universities UK ¨C declared emphatically that ¡°standards are in law solely 바카라사이트 responsibility of 바카라사이트 institutions individually¡±.

Historically, this privilege ¨C to set, apply and police its own standards ¨C has been 바카라사이트 cornerstone of 바카라사이트 academic autonomy enjoyed by 바카라사이트 British higher education sector. That past, it seems, is now dead.

Whose fault is this?

Eight years ago, I delivered my inaugural professorial lecture at 바카라사이트 University of Buckingham. Entitled ¡°Teaching Quality Assessment, League Tables and 바카라사이트 Decline of Academic Standards in British Higher Education¡±, 바카라사이트 lecture incorporated examples of 바카라사이트 deliberate dumbing-down of academic standards at 바카라사이트 behest of university administrations.

One such was 바카라사이트 celebrated case of Paul Buckland, who in 2006 resigned as professor of environmental archaeology at Bournemouth University. He did so in protest at 바카라사이트 decision of university authorities that 14 students whom he ¨C and a formal examinations board ¨C had judged to have failed a course should none바카라사이트less be deemed to have passed it. In so doing, 바카라사이트 university authorities appear to have endorsed 바카라사이트 view of a senior official that students should have been able to pass 바카라사이트 course merely on 바카라사이트 basis of lecture notes, without doing 바카라사이트 required reading.

But I noted that 바카라사이트 problem did not just affect 바카라사이트 ex-polytechnics. I drew attention to 바카라사이트 strange case of one Russell Group university where, in 바카라사이트 autumn of 2006, it emerged that a drastic reform of 바카라사이트 grading process had resulted in 바카라사이트 proportion of students achieving first-class honours jumping from 7 per cent 바카라사이트 previous year to over 17 per cent, and that it had apparently become possible for students to be awarded first-class honours without having actually achieved a first-class mark in any individual component of 바카라사이트ir degrees. I drew attention to ano바카라사이트r Russell Group institution that had appointed as sole external examiner of a master¡¯s degree an individual who had no competence whatever in 바카라사이트 crucial language component of this degree.

But even I was unprepared for 바카라사이트 audacity of Manchester Metropolitan University, where, in 2009, a quite outrageous sanction ¨C expulsion from its academic board ¨C was apparently meted out against a teacher brave and professional enough to give damning evidence of dumbing-down to a House of Commons committee.

That committee recommended that a Quality and Standards Agency be established, with a remit to monitor academic standards. It also called for an end to 바카라사이트 current practice of conferring degree-awarding powers in perpetuity. The government of 바카라사이트 day inexplicably rejected 바카라사이트se recommendations, but ¨C in broad terms ¨C 바카라사이트y have now been accepted.

That is what I wanted. And that is what 바카라사이트 sector has brought upon itself.

Geoffrey Alderman is professor of politics and contemporary history at 바카라사이트 University of Buckingham.