Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

Laurie Penny

Pop culture and radical politics with a feminist twist

Syndicate contentRSS

It’s an education, all right

British universities now see themselves as companies, and students are the losers.

Anyone who believes that knowledge has no price should look away now. For the past month I've been involved with an investigation for Channel 4's Dispatches that revealed just how far the market has penetrated higher education. We discovered highly paid managerial elites running universities as factories where students are little more than customers shopping for degrees.

We started with the top university bosses, who have been lobbying for a rise in tuition fees for years. Vice-chancellors take home an average salary
of £254,000, are often given free accommodation, and claim thousands in expenses.

Take Brian Cantor from York University, who last year took home nearly £255,000 even as York faced a £1.48m cut in state funding. His expenses totalled £135,000 over three years - and then there's his grace-and-favour home and his private property portfolio in Mont Blanc, France, which is managed for him by his secretary in York. Cantor nonetheless found time to launch a public attack on desperate teachers and lecturers striking against a savage pensions cut. (York University said all his expenses were vital to the commercial success of the institution.)

Vice-chancellors claim that, "like chief executives", they deserve their huge salaries because theirs is a stressful job. How curious, then, that some others find the time to earn tens of thousands of pounds on the boards of drugs companies and arms dealerships. The notion that such appointments might cause a conflict of interest in how research funding is allocated is dismissed by university bosses as they accept payments from the likes of AstraZeneca and Shorts.

British universities now see themselves as companies: in order to boost profits, many have turned their attention to the £26,000 annual fees that can be squeezed from a rich minority of non-EU students. Agents are paid on commission to peddle degree services aggressively in India and the Gulf, and many universities are opening franchises abroad.

Consumerversities

Let's join some dots. The coalition government has justified its decision to triple university fees for home students by citing the expansion of student numbers over the past decade. If we want more students to attend, the logic goes, we need to find the extra money from somewhere.

The government promised that only top institutions would charge the full £9,000 but - in a move entirely unforeseen by all but a few hundred thousand protesters - nearly every university has decided to do so. To finance these debts, the coalition may have to cut domestic student numbers and recruit more from abroad, leaving us, as if by magic, with a small pool of rich international student-consumers.

Everything has its price. Our universities were once publicly owned and financed, free for anyone to attend, as much a part of the common wealth of Britain as our forests, rivers and mines. And just like the mines, rivers and forests, higher education is being plundered piece by piece,mortgaging the future of education for short-term profit. No wonder students won't stand for it.

59 comments

wightangler's picture

Well done Laurie, another informative and excellent article and personal consideration of this further example of profit lead education entrenchment with accompayning financial admin. tier- puts to shame most of your fellow N/S collegues with often displayed seeming prejudice against UK working class people and coalition consequences in favour of demonisation under the ignorant and non-factual myth of the 'squeezed middle'-and underlying sentiment for lib-dems.

REPAY's picture

Laurie - you are on to a real story about the elites in the public sector. Salaries and their unfunded pensions have ballooned in recent years - and when cuts come, they are their deputies are the last to feel the pain...as they administer the cuts.

Akshay's picture

Laurie - I was a student at the LSE some years ago. Like many at the LSE, I am also from India. I had classmates from India in my masters programme that could not write English properly. I was really astonished back then. Fortunately, those students were not awarded degrees and they were failed (as they ought to have been). However, how did such students gain admission in the first place? Your story on the LSE did not shock me in the least and actually I am not at all amazed by the whole Gadaffi fiasco at LSE. The LSE is an amazingly hypocritical organisation - greedy to the core while pretending to espouse left-wing causes. I am shocked that more people do not notice this obvious fact.

Mary Tracy's picture

RE: Vice-chancellors

Anyone else got a mental image of Ridcully and the other wizards in Unseen University when reading this?

Finnegan's picture

Great article, Laurie. Pity the lumpenfash has yet again emerged from the woodwork, as it always seems to do...

Mr. Divine's picture

@Joseph: You and your friends make get 2:1s or if they are really good, like me, firsts. However, there are many students who get passes and thirds and only get these by cobbling together assignments from 'others'.

My point is that because there are so many of these latter degrees all degrees have to be suspect. This is particularly true on the lower end of the university status scale especially when a university relies heavily on the income of foreign students.

And why are doing a English Lit course Joseph? You can just read stories in your spare time. You don't need someone to teach you that.

"What does the author mean by this? " "What does he mean by this." Yadda, yadda yadda. English Lit is all bull. Do something else.

matt s's picture

"Our universities were once publicly owned and financed, free for anyone to attend"

I'm not entirely sure this has ever been completely true.

They were free for a small minority to attend. Then J.Major, T.Blair and co relaxed the entry criteria without appropriate funding increase (in order to massage youth employment figures?). Is it any wonder that universities took up extra income where it was available? Would the vice chancellors have retained their positions if their institutions ran at a loss every year?

Mrs.Josephine Hyde-Hartley's picture

"Anyone who believes that knowledge has no price should look away now"..

Yes and go and have a look at the picture of the sewing machine shop over on the business article by Alice Gribbens. That in my view is why the education world is becoming so self important and generally overblown and arrogant -jumped up executive effects such as ridiculously high wages are probably bound to happen when those wielding such powers know they have an almost captured market here in the UK. People have nothing else to do in life because there's hardly any decent manufacturing jobs going these days.

Industrial scenes like that sewing shop depicted in Alice's article remind one most sharply of how generations of families here in the UK worked in just the same type of places, running the same type of machines. We hated that type of low status sweat shop work at the time as I remember - and longed to get out, go to night school so we could get a fancy public sector cushy job - but now there's not even any basic sweat shop jobs around and everyone's an executive .. or so it seems. Even worse, education is too expensive. Who in their right mind still believes debt is a great way to acheive one's goals after the latest financial fiasco?

It's galling to see but common knowledge that our manufacturing industries have long since been packaged up and sold to places where even poorer workers can be paid peanuts to do the same job.

Is it any wonder those in education are lording it over the rest of us, charging us whatever they want when they have no real competition in the broader context of a full economy ie one with more than enough decently paying manufacturing jobs or other gainful employment opportunities.

Luddite's picture

British universities now see themselves as companies, and students are the losers. And who's fault is that Miss Penny?

Pete stevenson's picture

Ehtch tee might I suggest that you start your own blog or join Facebook. At least limit your domineering contributions to this forum and let said contributions be vaguely relevant! Cheers. This is the second time I've seen you dominate a forum with utter twaddle

Mr. Divine's picture

Iden. BA in PPE, MA in Linguistics

KeyboardCouch's picture

Laurie, based on the show you either have no idea of what a non-executive director does or you you willfully misrepresented it.
The fact that laws about non-executive directors are so lax that most do nothing but show up at the board meeting once or twice a year is a disgrace to which a whole episode of Dispatches could be devoted, but to claim that it's a distraction from being a Vice-Chancellor is total nonsense.

Mr. Divine's picture

You tell him ET. What you post is sheer.

Mr. Divine's picture

What only the second time!

Mr. Divine's picture

Leave it out pete Stevenson. Ehtch Tee is the Dylan Thomas of the Blog Commenting World. He's won awards , didn't you know? Blog commentary awards. If you look at all his links and listen to the lyrics of the music you will understand his profound and relevant message.

Owen Spalding's picture

I must say Laurie, I can't help feel that by trying to find a new angle, you've lost any sort of journalistic credibility (when it comes to this issue).

It's not the VCs that we should be blaming - when it comes down to it, it wasn't their decision to hike up tuition fees, it was the coalition's. By spreading the blame our argument is being watered down.

I'm sure Gove and co. breathed a sigh of relief when they saw Dispatches.

InNegative's picture

"Educating Gita" might have been a better titls for this post - hoho.

David D's picture

Students really have become the punchline to someone else's joke.

Gita's picture

Owen: I don't think that's entirely fair - we all hear a lot about the coalition's plans for higher education but the fact that Vice-Chancellors themselves have been lobbying for these changes for a long time, and the way universities have become more commercial *from the university management's end of things*, is something that isn't brought to light very often, so I don't think it somehow ruins anyone journalistic credibility to highlight it.

I will agree with you however that Dispatches could have been a bit more balanced in showing successive governments' moves towards increasing commercialisation as well, in tandem with the university managements'. And the programme didn't really offer any concrete solutions or ideas for change, either.

Owen Spalding's picture

You're right Gita, I had forgotten about the point made that the VCs had lobbied for the changes. Perhaps I was slightly too explicit in my choice of words but I still feel that from a journalistic viewpoint it put too much negative press on the universities for something the previous governments and current government have allowed them to do (commercialisation etc).

Mr. Divine's picture

Is that 255,000 before or after tax/NI ?

All public employees must not receive more than 50,000 quid pa. That'll save a bit of money.

Tom's picture

Note to Laurie and NS sub-editors:

York University is in Canda.

The University of York is in Yorkshire.

Long live the White Rose etc.

David Vinter's picture

M/S Penney, I watched your TV progamme, you seemed at one stage to dislike the idea of UK universities setting up overseas. But clearly the demand is there. I was a bit miffed when you mentioned Nottingham alongside of others you disapproved of, and then offered neither good or bad marks for its teaching. Amazing as Nottingham is well rated as a
'Russell' university, and lies well within the top 100 in the world. So do you approve of us or not?
Graduated Nottingham 1973.

Mr. Divine's picture

And you're right about universities being run as a cash cow, lowering standards to gain more students especially foreign students.

Most arts degrees aren't worth anything now because there are so many people with them. And they're dead easy to get using copy and paste tactics.

Hugo Daddy's picture

You have me confused, Mr. Divine. On the one hand, you seem to bemoan (rightly) the utilitarian view of universities as money makers. Yet on the other, you have a strictly utilitarian view of the worth of degrees as being determined by a wider market of the number of people who have them. "There's no point me reading them books - too many other people know about them." The worth of a degree is what you gain in understanding, and if that can be used to get a better job, then that's dandy too. Let's not reduce degrees to NVQs.

"Dead easy to get using copy and paste tactics"? You can come along to the various plagiarism hearings I'm running this week - I bet my students would be heartened to hear that.

Joseph's picture

@Mr.Dvine

How dare you besmirch the arts with your hackneyed right wing rhetoric regarding art courses.

Cut and Paste? My friends who do Humanities (which is an amalgamation of politics, history and philosophy) work day and night in the library reading book after book on their subject. For you to say the course it worthless is offensive and wholly untrue. I am currently doing an English course and I am not sure whether I will find a job at the end of it but what I will do is understand, through examining different theories, contexts and points of view in literature, what is intrinsically right and what is intrinsically wrong and I know have a greater understanding of the world I live in now.

Claire's picture

Archange Thanon- Oh. Whoops. I don't watch much TV so rarely know what's on. Would haveliked to have caught it though.

I know all about Laurie's feelings on internships and having just read her Guardian article, I also know about her own internship debacle. Having been lucky enough to have experienced a very successful internship (got through application and not grace and favour), I disagree with her, and disagree with her on many points mainly relating to feminism (her article on the Shaftas was quite offensive to me, as I currently work in the adult entertainment industry) but on the student issue I believe her to be almost always bang on the money.

Steven Huttton's picture

@Joseph. "The world in which I now live."?

Claire's picture

Very nice article Laurie, will look forward to seeing the programme

Iden's picture

I notice you claim to have a 'first' in some degree or another and quickly disparage Literature and Arts as subjects - yet you neglect to mention what exactly you studied.

I'd guess from your demeanour that it was Business Studies, and I'd argue that is a vocational subject with no academic merit whatsoever.

Archange Thanon's picture

Claire: The Dispatches program was on last week. This article is just more self promotion for lovely Laurie. Just bought her feminism pamphlet on Zero books, look forward to seeing what that researcher has come up with. Remember that’s the one who was paid less than minimum wage to do Laurie’s research for her if anyone’s forgotten.

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets