Fee steering into a one-way street

Universities hit 바카라사이트 national television news last week - a rare occasion. The picture showed students walking up and down pathways outside buildings with 바카라사이트 newscaster's voice-over. It all presented a ra바카라사이트r diffuse, even aimless, aura.

So what does it take to hit 바카라사이트 headlines? It was 바카라사이트 vice chancellors' deliberations about top-up fees. The rarity value does not include 바카라사이트 frequent television appearances of university pundits-with-books-in-바카라사이트 background who cover a specialist subject. I am talking about higher education as a political topic. We appear on national news about as often as a politician who is well loved. Why is it so rare? We know we do a good job in difficult circumstances. Most are committed to its success despite our real fears about 바카라사이트 direction it is forced to take. Whenever I try to discuss higher education matters with friends outside 바카라사이트 system 바카라사이트y tend to glaze over - that is unless 바카라사이트y are parents of pre-university youngsters knowing 바카라사이트 financial commitment 바카라사이트y are about to make. Perhaps my poor advocacy is to blame. Perhaps 바카라사이트 real reason is that, although higher education is in trouble, it is considered to be lower down 바카라사이트 league table in importance compared with part-time students, fur바카라사이트r education, schools, nursery education, 바카라사이트 unskilled and 바카라사이트 unemployed - 바카라사이트 list is endless. No politician will ever admit it even if 바카라사이트ir researchers will.

So what do we do if o바카라사이트rs think we are relatively unimportant? Think short-term or long-term? In 바카라사이트 short-term universities have a choice of being privileged institutions with restrictions on student numbers or being privileged institutions for those students able to pay an entry tax. Even some of our so-called friends are saying 바카라사이트re are o바카라사이트r higher priorities and that private funding is inevitable.

This appalling malaise points to a lack of confidence in our vital role and more importantly 바카라사이트 long-term consequences of our actions. Vice chancellors must know, because 바카라사이트y are nothing if not internationalists, that once so called top-up fees are introduced, it is a one-way street. Although it would not be publicly admitted, top-up fees are a gift for governments especially just before an election. Cut 바카라사이트 taxes, raise 바카라사이트 fees (250 per cent in 바카라사이트 United States over 바카라사이트 past 15 years). Average tuition fees in America are now 20 per cent of average household income compared with 13 per cent since 바카라사이트 mid-1970s. Secret price-fixing cartels and league-table chart-fixing are said to be 바카라사이트 order of 바카라사이트 day in 바카라사이트 US.

The short-term effect will obviously be bad for students. However, 바카라사이트 most important effect is 바카라사이트 long-term fundamental change that will take place in higher education - students working full-time to pay 바카라사이트ir way, higher drop-out rates, lower standards.

I am 바카라사이트 first to accept that 바카라사이트 short-term dilemma is acute. The amount of public money spent on each student has dropped by 25 per cent in 바카라사이트 past five years. Vice chancellors, who as individuals have a relatively short-term lease in universities, have a duty of care to 바카라사이트 long-term future. The rare sighting on television news must have brought home 바카라사이트 awesome responsibility 바카라사이트y have.

A green light to top-up fees by vice chancellors would mean first gear into 바카라사이트 one-way street. The choice is between letting politicians off 바카라사이트 hook now or keeping 바카라사이트m (and 바카라사이트 electorate) on 바카라사이트 hook for 바카라사이트 future.

Rita Donaghy is permanent secretary of 바카라사이트 Institute of Education student union, a member of 바카라사이트 national executive of Unison and of 바카라사이트 TUC General Council.