Your report on the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Select Committee evidence session failed to highlight the real dangers of the proposals being advanced by a small number of pundits ("MPs call for 'toothless' watchdog to be put down", 12 March).
These people propose a draconian inspection regime that would treat universities as if they were schools. A national curriculum and examinations, the logical outcomes of these ill-thought-out ideas, would put an end to innovation, creativity and competitiveness.
Institutions do receive large amounts of public money, and they recognise that they must be accountable. All have in place internal quality assurance processes and are subject to external review by the Quality Assurance Agency. Where the QAA finds problems, it reports publicly and gives institutions a time frame within which these must be rectified.
The QAA also analyses reports and other material relating to standards and will soon publish its findings of an investigation into concerns reported by the media. These findings will be based on evidence, not anecdote.
I believe that institutional autonomy and independent external review are at the heart of higher education's success in this country.
Peter Williams, Chief executive, Quality Assurance Agency.
Register to continue
Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.
Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:
- Sign up for the editor's highlights
- Receive World University Rankings news first
- Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
- Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to THE’s university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?Sign in now