Have universities not always been driven by indoctrination and financial gain? You pay for their books and answer their exams, and you have to pay for their qualifications – most of which are not fit for purpose in the twenty first century. Logic and common sense does not seem to be common on this earth. –Anthony The main article mentions Britain then reels off English greats; Scottish physicist and mathematician James Clerk Maxwell is surely up there with them if Britain, not England, is the main driver. –Andrew In the article by Guy Standing on financialisation of universities (which is otherwise very interesting and concerning), I'm disappointed that he refers throughout to 'UK' universities, without recognising the very different university system in Scotland. Unlike England, we have no 'private' universities (all are publicly funded) and no tuition fees for Scots – that is, all the people who live in Scotland, whether born here or having made Scotland their home. As a result, our universities are much less highly 'marketised' than those in England. They do have financial issues, of course – often as a result of appallingly bad UK government policy, such as Brexit – but the key difference is in people's attitudes about what education is for and how it should work: the majority of people in Scotland do want to keep university education free and accessible by all, whereas in England the marketisation of education, including schools, has just been accepted by the population. Many things work better in Scotland than in England – another example is reduction of child poverty – and they are mostly ignored by biased England-centric mainstream media; we Scots are fully accustomed to this! But please, in openDemocracy publications, make sure you do not neglect important differences between devolved nations. –Morag |
No comments: