At the moment, because all our universities are heading towards financial disaster, there is a deep and ferocious row going on between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (Chancellor of the Exchequer) about the future of university funding. A mixture of possibilities is being talked about -- increased top-up fees being charged to students, a new graduate tax-band to recover state spending on universities, state endowment of universities before releasing them from state control, a break-away by the best universities (about ten of them -- "Universities UK") to become endowed privately and join the only private university in this country (Buckingham), a break-away by some universities from the state examination system (A-levels) and towards the International Baccalaurate or American-type SATs, and so on, and so on.
One of the most trenchant observers of the increasing confusion is Prof Andrew Oswald of Warwick University. The following is an extract from his article in the Education Review of The Independent of 12 December. <<<< . . . . The first thing to grasp is that at a world class level we are now badly behind, and Mr Blair. thanks in part to the persistence of some admirable advisors, has finally grasped the fact. Worrying new information has just been released by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISD), for instance, to demonstrate that, in lots of fields, Britain is now everely short of world-class scientists. The numbers can be found at <isi-highlycited.com>. Of the top 100 physicists across the globe, just two now work in Britain. Yet Princeton University, a tiny American university in New Jersey, has eight. In agricultural science, just four out of the world's best 100 researchers are in this country. Immunology is similarly unimpressive. The US walks away with it at 78 of the globe's top 100 researchers. The british Isles can manage four. In engineering, too, we have opnly four out of the best 100 people worldwide. In molecular biology and genetics, it is three. Britain is pretty good at biology and biochemistry. In this area, there are a respectable 10 of the world's leading 100 scientists. Admittedly, the US has 64. But our country is still ahead of Germany at five, France at three, and Japan at six. In microbiology we have lnly six out of 100. Chemistry is better. Within our shores are 11 of the globe's 100 star people. Yet overall, the picture is poor. . . . . As a whole, we now have just 80 out of the world's best 1200 scientists. >>>> There we are. We are fast losing whatever scholastic and scientific excellence we once had. Keith Hudson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________________________________
