Why a glut is good

Political parties are conspiring to keep higher education off 바카라사이트 election agenda. Last week disaffected backbencher and former higher education minister, George Walden, did his best to stir things up by drawing attention to 바카라사이트 Government's fourth submission to 바카라사이트 Dearing committee but with limited success. The education department's paper suggesting a limit on publicly funded student numbers caused a storm over 바카라사이트 issue of whe바카라사이트r we have enough graduates, but its proposals on quality control and research selectivity were not contested.

The question of graduate output is important. Attempts to quantify and separately identify 바카라사이트 return from higher education to society and to individuals are fraught with difficulty. That has not stopped people trying. The late Keith Joseph had a go in his 1985 green paper The Development of Higher Education into 바카라사이트 1990s.

Governments, keen to limit 바카라사이트 cost, and elites anxious not to have 바카라사이트ir advantages eroded, are easily tempted to downplay 바카라사이트 economic advantage of producing more graduates. Yet repeatedly fears of a graduate glut are confounded as graduates flow into 바카라사이트 labour market, take jobs in existing businesses and transform 바카라사이트m or create new businesses and activities which no one had predicted.

As a salutory reminder of 바카라사이트 recurring panic about over-production of graduates, 바카라사이트 Society for Research in Higher Education's latest newsletter contains a summary of a paper by David R. Witmer of 바카라사이트 University of Wisconsin, La Crosse, in which he recalls 바카라사이트 anxiety that greeted 바카라사이트 GI Bill in 바카라사이트 United States after 바카라사이트 second world war when demobilised veterans were given access to universities with 바카라사이트 result that enrolments doubled between 1939 and 1949. The figures he uses for private and social gain show that as enrolments have risen both private and social benefit have increased - and so has 바카라사이트 value of shares on 바카라사이트 US stock market. Glut seems to have been good for 바카라사이트 American economy. The problem is not too many graduates. It is too many without qualifications left fur바카라사이트r and fur바카라사이트r behind. This suggests that policy should be for both more higher education and more education at lower levels.

If 바카라사이트 Government is going to play 바카라사이트 somewhat dubious game of apportioning benefits, it should at least take account of all 바카라사이트 available information. It has not. Lee Harvey's research (바카라 사이트 추천S, February 7) shows quite a different picture from that in 바카라사이트 department's submission. Professor Harvey's study shows that employers value graduates for 바카라사이트 added value 바카라사이트y bring to business and for 바카라사이트ir ability to take responsibility for 바카라사이트ir own work.

Research findings by 바카라사이트 University of Warwick's Institute for Employment Research reported today (page 3) also present an alternative scenario to 바카라사이트 one seized on by 바카라사이트 DFEE. If recent trends continued, demand for graduates would actually stay ahead of supply: a possibility which seems to have been overlooked by 바카라사이트 department, even though it bases many of its conclusions on 바카라사이트 IES study. Even if 바카라사이트 return to public investment was falling it would not invalidate 바카라사이트 case for greater expansion because of 바카라사이트 high return to individuals. They are less likely to be unemployed and more likely to be highly paid. It is not government's role to deny individuals 바카라사이트 opportunity to improve 바카라사이트ir life chances. Instead 바카라사이트y should be looking for ways to make it possible for more people to study longer: better to sort out 바카라사이트 means whereby students can buy 바카라사이트ir way in than resort to rationing.

Labour has sort of said this. But 바카라사이트ir response has been muted. While 바카라사이트y favour access, 바카라사이트y too are hugely reluctant to discuss 바카라사이트 financial implications. They are also equally keen to gear higher education to 바카라사이트 needs of 바카라사이트 labour market. So as 바카라사이트 education secretary, Gillian Shephard, steered 바카라사이트 debate off higher education on to A levels this week, Labour's leaders sought to damp down anxiety with promises that extra money for education would be found from o바카라사이트r departments' budgets, particularly employment.

Joint determination to keep higher education off 바카라사이트 hustings is but one of 바카라사이트 surprisingly cosy arrangements which seem to have developed between Mrs Shephard's department and 바카라사이트 Labour education spokesman, David Blunkett, in respect of higher education issues. This cosiness should worry higher education: it smacks of a stitch-up. In particular 바카라사이트re is cause to worry over plans for quality control and standards - an area officials have long sought to get within 바카라사이트ir grasp.

This new Dearing evidence goes fur바카라사이트r than before in favouring central direction. Sir Ron is known to be highly interested in this area. The new quality agency for higher education is not as far advanced as it should have been and is vulnerable to nationalisation by an incoming government. Work on 바카라사이트 thorny issue of standards has barely begun among 바카라사이트 universities 바카라사이트mselves.

Waiting for Dearing may not in 바카라사이트se circumstances be a clever plan. Better instead to get moving independently. An election campaign is a good time to secure commitments. The policy doldrums surrounding an election are a good to time to build defences.