Separate and unequal

February 14, 2013

Malcolm Gillies could not be more mistaken (“Independence pays”, Opinion, 31 January): we need only look at the US Ivy League and our own “public” schools to see the damage that such elitism does. In both cases the institutions concerned charge far more than comparable state providers, with fees increasing far more rapidly than general prices or household incomes. Much of the additional revenue goes on things - glitzy cafeterias in the US, beagle kennels over here - that have only a remote relationship to learning but denote privilege and prestige. Most importantly, the fees provide a “price umbrella” for other providers, thus increasing the general level well beyond what many families - or the state - can afford. The higher charges reflect both the positional market in which these institutions operate and their lack of accountability to the state, neither of which is conducive to price restraint. The irony is that in each case the private institutions receive huge state subsidies (federal student support and research funding in the US, tax breaks in both nations).

There is also a range of non-quantifiable detriments. There and here, elite institutions act as a barrier to social mobility. Large numbers of private institutions create negative peer effects for the majority of students. It becomes difficult or impossible for state institutions to have socially balanced intakes, itself leading to greater social segregation. There is a clear risk of “crowding out” as elite providers claim a disproportionate share of the most talented students, teachers and researchers. In the US and the UK, the elite sit at the top of an educational hierarchy that underpins and reinforces the social hierarchy, with unhelpful educational and economic consequences.

The coalition government’s educational reforms - AAB and “core and margin” in higher education, academies and free schools at the secondary and primary level - are already leading to greater stratification. A separate elite stratum is the last thing we need if we are to have a healthy, socially responsive and economically efficient educational system.

Roger Brown, Professor of higher education policy, Liverpool Hope University

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

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
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Assistant Recruitment - Human Resources Office

University Of Nottingham Ningbo China

Outreach Officer

Gsm London

Professorship in Geomatics

Norwegian University Of Science & Technology -ntnu

Professor of European History

Newcastle University

Head of Department

University Of Chichester
See all jobs

Most Commented

men in office with feet on desk. Vintage

Three-quarters of respondents are dissatisfied with the people running their institutions

A face made of numbers looks over a university campus

From personalising tuition to performance management, the use of data is increasingly driving how institutions operate

students use laptops

Researchers say students who use computers score half a grade lower than those who write notes

Canal houses, Amsterdam, Netherlands

All three of England’s for-profit universities owned in Netherlands

As the country succeeds in attracting even more students from overseas, a mixture of demographics, ‘soft power’ concerns and local politics help explain its policy