Surveillance society

July 21, 2011

Gary Thomas and Nick Peim are right ("In ourselves we trust: if quality is the aim, think outside the tick-box", 14 July): the removal of trust means the removal of responsibility. I would go further: thought falls victim, too.

We are a small specialist performing arts institution with a turnover of roughly £8.5 million. In addition to external auditors, we are obliged to have internal auditors. Our governing body must have an audit committee as well.

What is the point of all this surveillance? Higher education is hardly the first port of call for fraudsters, is it? We have qualified accountants in our finance team. What is the point of gaining professional qualifications if you can't be trusted to adhere to professional standards?

Mark Featherstone-Witty, Founding principal/chief executive officer Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts

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

Most Commented

Felipe Fernández-Armesto takes issue with a claim that the EU has been playing the sovereignty card in Brexit negotiations

Female professor

New data show proportion of professors who are women has declined at some institutions

John McEnroe arguing with umpire. Tennis

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman explain how to negotiate your annual performance and development review

Man throwing axes

UCU attacks plans to cut 171 posts, but university denies Brexit 'the reason'

opinion illustration

Eliminating cheating services, even if it were possible, would do nothing to address students’ and universities’ lack of interest in learning, says Stuart Macdonald