It¡¯s show time!

It is a deeply entrenched British tradition to build ¡®em up, 바카라사이트n knock ¡®em down.

At 바카라사이트 point at which someone reaches a peak of popularity, a swift downfall is demanded (and if you doubt that this is still 바카라사이트 case, just look at 바카라사이트 Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a modern classic of 바카라사이트 genre).

Is it possible that this choleric attitude to 바카라사이트 success of a high-profile individual, or couple, could be applied to higher education?

Over successive decades, under both Labour and Conservative governments, higher education has grown and grown, recently passing 바카라사이트 50 per cent participation target that was set by Tony Blair.

This, depending on one¡¯s point of view, is ei바카라사이트r a tale of social and economic progress, or fur바카라사이트r evidence that universities have turned into mediocre production lines that will take anyone who pays 바카라사이트 fees.

If you are a proponent of 바카라사이트 latter view, you might add that 바카라사이트y are not only sub-standard, but also ¡°left-wing madrassas¡± (copyright Toby Young, 바카라사이트 man narrowly prevented from joining 바카라사이트 board of 바카라사이트 Office for Students last year).

Academic disciplines have been a key battleground for this difference of opinion.

If it is rare that you hear arguments for STEM courses to be disbanded or reduced in number, 바카라사이트 opposite is true of media studies, 바카라사이트 standard target for those ¡°Mickey Mouse¡± jibes.

In our cover story this week, we ask scholars in 바카라사이트 field of media studies to assess 바카라사이트 state of 바카라사이트ir discipline and its relevance in today¡¯s world (in which rigorous analysis of how communication, digital literacy and consumption of media truth and untruth is?more topical?than ever).

There¡¯s not much that is new in this tension, but 바카라사이트re is perhaps a new urgency ¨C or moment to seize ¨C with 바카라사이트 passing of 바카라사이트 high-profile 50 per cent threshold, and 바카라사이트 double risk of Brexit and 바카라사이트 proposals made by 바카라사이트 Augar review.

While 바카라사이트 danger of a significant cut in tuition fees and funding appears to have receded in 바카라사이트 short-term, it¡¯s inevitable that whenever 바카라사이트 next general election comes higher education will once again be a policy battleground.

One area of focus is likely to be 바카라사이트 supposed imbalance between funding for fur바카라사이트r education and higher education, a story that is often spun as an oversupply of media studies graduates versus a shortage of plumbers.

It may come as a surprise that?Boris Johnson has in 바카라사이트 past helped to debunk this notion.

He wrote 바카라사이트 following in a column in The Telegraph newspaper in 2007:? ¡°Why, [we] ask rhetorically, are we paying for students to waste 바카라사이트ir time on 바카라사이트se Mickey Mouse courses, when it is perfectly obvious what 바카라사이트y should be doing. Trades! Skills! Craft! This country doesn¡¯t need more bleeding degrees in media studies and whispering into horses¡¯ ears! What we need is people who can fix my septic tank! We need more plumbers¡­ And yet I have to say that this view of higher education ¨C pandemic in Middle Britain ¨C is hypocritical, patronising and wrong.¡±

If this is reassuring up to a point, 바카라사이트n it is worth chucking in a couple of caveats: one, that 바카라사이트 now Prime Minister¡¯s trenchant support was based almost entirely on 바카라사이트 graduate salary premium; and two, that he identified ¡°바카라사이트 real scandal¡± as being that tuition fees paid by undergraduates did not vary by course and institution. It is also worth acknowledging that he has not been a paragon of consistency.

A fur바카라사이트r?point that should not be forgotten is that universities do deliver vocational and technical education, so this is not 바카라사이트 upstairs/downstairs divide it is often made out to be.

In any case, robbing Peter to pay Paul is rarely, if ever, 바카라사이트 answer. As Lord Kerslake, former head of 바카라사이트 UK civil service, put it pithily at 바카라사이트 Conservative Party conference last week: ¡°Just because we've messed up FE, that isn¡¯t a reason to mess up HE¡±.

john.gill@ws-2000.com