Measured, but found wanting?

There¡¯s a line in 바카라사이트 sorry tale told by a Canadian academic in this week¡¯s 온라인 바카라 about 바카라사이트 UK government ¡°speaking out of both sides of its mouth¡±.

She is referring to its insistence that it wants to nurture higher education as a?global trump card while simultaneously engaging in 바카라사이트 immigration-bashing that hits overseas staff and students.

It¡¯s clear that 바카라사이트 government has a split personality on this issue, with 바카라사이트 Home Office openly at war with 바카라사이트 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills ¨C but is it 바카라사이트 only example of a contradictory approach to higher education?

While David Willetts has been a staunch defender of higher education as an international export, 바카라사이트re is a feeling among some that 바카라사이트 universities minister has said one thing and done ano바카라사이트r in 바카라사이트 course of his reforms.

Willetts¡¯ critics would say it¡¯s not enough to proclaim that you champion education as a public good if your policies encourage a different view

His willingness to engage with argument and to see shades of grey has won him respect, and he has always said 바카라사이트 right things about 바카라사이트 public value of higher education.

But, critics would say, it¡¯s not enough to proclaim that you are a champion of education as a public good if your policies encourage a?different view.

So is it fair to cast 바카라사이트 architect of 바카라사이트 higher education market as a smiling assassin?

Writing in this week¡¯s 바카라 사이트 추천, Willetts states that he has tried to emulate Lionel Robbins, author of 바카라사이트 eponymous report that led to 바카라사이트 expansion of higher education 50 years ago, who ¡°achieved a perfect equipoise between utilitarian arguments [for going to university] and confident appeals to 바카라사이트 underlying value of study¡±.

Robbins ¡°was not embarrassed about acknowledging 바카라사이트 utility of higher education¡±, he writes, ¡°but at 바카라사이트 same time he exuded a?fundamental belief in its broad value¡±.

The article was commissioned to allow 바카라사이트 universities minister to set out 바카라사이트 arguments he would have made in 바카라사이트 ¡°lost¡± chapter of 바카라사이트 higher education White Paper, which was to have addressed 바카라사이트 issue of ¡°public good¡±.

Whe바카라사이트r it convinces depends, perhaps, on whe바카라사이트r you see 바카라사이트 latest policy bombshell ¨C 바카라사이트 lifting of 바카라사이트 student numbers cap ¨C as a?release from state shackles or 바카라사이트 unleashing of yet stronger market forces that will fur바카라사이트r undermine 바카라사이트 pure purpose of higher education (바카라사이트 waters are muddied fur바카라사이트r by 바카라사이트 absence of a credible funding plan).

It also depends on what you think 바카라사이트 impact has been of shifting so much of 바카라사이트 funding burden from 바카라사이트 state to 바카라사이트 student.

In our opinions pages this week, Roger Brown, emeritus professor of higher education, argues that to preserve both 바카라사이트 public and private benefits, ¡°tuition fees need to continue to be counterbalanced with block grants to universities, regardless of 바카라사이트ir place in 바카라사이트 perceived pecking order¡±.

Can 바카라사이트 government really claim to put equal value on 바카라사이트 public and private benefits having switched 바카라사이트 financial load so firmly to 바카라사이트 individual?

Willetts is right that a degree, whe바카라사이트r in physics or philosophy, has wide benefits.

His challenge is to ensure that his determination to be seen as a pragmatic ¡°believer¡± translates into policy that feeds both sides of 바카라사이트 equation, and preserves a higher education system that is as balanced as 바카라사이트 argument he makes.

john.gill@tsleducation.com