Duc Pham, chance professor of engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Birmingham
Thankfully, it is not very often that I want to copy the other DT. However, on this occasion, I have reluctantly done it. Followers of the 2016 US presidential election will remember seeing the logo MAGA printed on baseball caps and T-shirts worn by supporters of candidate Donald Trump. MAGA was of course shorthand for his campaign slogan Make America Great Again. As it proved to have served Mr Trump so well, I have decided to adopt MAGA as shorthand for my own mantra Make Academia Great Again.
Like Trump’s America, academia in this country has witnessed better days. In my previous column Academia and I, published in the August 2017 issue1, I wrote about the decrease over the years in the average amounts provided from public funds for teaching a full-time equivalent student. Between 1996 and 2016, universities have experienced a threefold reduction in the ratio of government grants to the total income of the sector. Although that drop was cushioned by the introduction of tuition fees, there is undeniably a funding gap as revenues from fees have not matched the fall in government grants.
Furthermore, tuition fees have not been allowed to rise with inflation and the funding gap has been widening. This, combined with the marketising of education and the tough competition that has ensued, has led many institutions to take desperate measures. Their insalubrious actions have included overfilling courses whenever possible, often at the expense of quality, cutting academic and support staff, and pressurising those that remain to deliver more with less. Compared with what it was a few decades ago, academic life is now anything but great.
Frankly, I am no activist or campaigner, but having seen how academia was then, I want to help make it great again. I have seven suggestions for government and university leaders to MAGA:
1. Reduce the number of universities. The UK does not need all of its 130 or so universities. Merging of institutions with overlapping provisions would lead to savings that could be used to support the sector better.
2. Reduce the number of university places. Not everyone will benefit from a university education. There are other kinds of post-secondary education that may be more suitable for some school leavers and give them better career prospects.
3. Cut bureaucracy. The frequency of assessment exercises, such as those of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) and the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF), should be reduced. They should be simplified by applying metrics and common sense, for example, as Oxbridge always comes out on top, why spend a great deal of effort assessing them?
4. Focus on outcomes and not processes. Although it is recognised that organisations can enhance their performance when their processes are well managed, the focus of attention should be on outcomes. Processes relate to activities; outcomes, to goals and achievements.
5. Concentrate on outputs rather than inputs. The cult of large research grants and contracts should stop. Those who disagree with this should remember the story of Nobel Laureate Professor Brian Schmidt, winner of the 2011 Prize in Physics. The research that led to his award had required grants totalling just US$8,000 at the time2.
6. Abandon corporateness and return to collegiality. The managerialism that has become rife in the sector is unhealthy. It causes low motivation and stifles creativity. What is wrong with the concept of the university as a self-governed community of scholars? Collegiality is still practised at great institutions here and elsewhere, and this has arguably enabled them to remain great.
7. Value all forms of contribution. There is a place for inspirational teaching, curiosity-driven research, blue skies research, impactful use-motivated research and efficient, effective and essential administration. Dedicated teachers, researchers and administrators must surely be as valuable to a university as talented strikers, defenders and goal keepers are to a football team.
I am certain that some, if not all, of the aforementioned suggestions have been considered at one time or another and rejected by those in power for being unpalatable. However, I am convinced that implementing them will lead to a better resourced university sector, greater appreciation of university education, improved staff and student morale, and higher teaching and research quality. So, who still does not want to MAGA? With apologies to the Muppets, I cannot resist urging those people to MAGA-MAGA, do-do-do!
Duc Pham
www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/mechanical-engineering/index.aspx
References
1Pham, D. (2017). Academia and I. CMM; volume 8, issue 1, p. 26. Available at: http://flickread.com/edition/html/5971d01fc3b94#27
2 Ross, J. (2018). Brian Schmidt: separating teaching from research ‘unsustainable’ [press release]. September 26. Times Higher Education (THE). Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/brian-schmidt-separating-teaching-research-unsustainable