You are here:   Academia > We Must Set Our Universities Free
 

The revival of the Western university can be attributed to the Dartmouth College case of 1819. Nine universities had been created in North America before the Revolution (starting with Harvard in  1636) and they were like most British universities today: legally private bodies that received government grants, in exchange for which they surrendered autonomy. 

But in 1815, the University of Dartmouth appointed a professor of Divinity whose theology was not acceptable to the state government of New Hampshire, which responded by nationalising the college outright, deposing the trustees and installing its own president. But in 1819 the Supreme Court ruled that, despite all the money the state had given the college, it remained an independent institution under charter and could retain its autonomy.

This case provoked all the US states eventually to withdraw their funding whenever a dispute arose with the local university. Everyone — including the universities themselves — supposed that the loss of government grants would bankrupt them. But instead it was the making of them, and thanks to alumni-giving, fee income and autonomy, the Ivy League universities have become the world's best.

The history in continental Europe is the reverse. After centuries of absolutism the universities are generally owned by the state. In consequence they are dire, with vast class sizes and little personal tuition. The global university lesson is clear: the more independent a nation's universities, the better they are.

But that does not preclude government funding if it is donated in ways that do not discourage private money. The Ivy League today receives lots of government money, especially for research, but the key to its success is that the money comes with few strings. In Britain, however, the government makes the universities sign a so-called Financial Memorandum. 

Under the terms of the Memorandum, a university loses its financial and logistic freedoms: it may not set its own fees, or accept more students than have been centrally allocated. Indeed, for every student a university accepts in excess of its government allocation, it is fined around £3,700. The Higher Education Funding Council for England is seeking to recoup some of the £36.5 million that London Metropolitan University illegitimately over-claimed from public funds. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, you should be living now. 

The solution to the universities' crisis is to construct a system of government support that helps them grow rather than one that fines them for being successful. The government should stop supporting universities and support only students. We should, indeed, copy America's system of needs-blind admissions. 

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Fabio P.Barbieri
April 1st, 2010
5:04 PM
I started reading this article in a mood to agree - the horrendous treatment of Britain's great universities by successive despicable governments, and the all too obvious fact that at least Oxford and Cambridge don't have to take it and could easily privatize themselves without the government being able to do a thing, made me think I would find common ground. Alas, the author is no historian (or if he is, God help the discipline of history) and his ugly, ideologically driven free marketeer ideology makes his contribution virtually worthless. The whole history of German universities, for instance, goes for nothing - except an ill-informed suggestion that they are "dire" and overcrowded. A person who builds on foundations so shaky is obviously not going to create anything worth doing.

James
March 24th, 2010
8:03 PM
My three degress are from state universities in the U. S., and I could not agree with you more fully. Institutions of higher learning must maintain as much independence as possible from the state, including popular passions generated by the state. Perhaps it is ironic that in the United States by far the largest single threat to academic freedom comes from universities and colleges, themselves, via their corrosive and trust-destroying speech codes, codes that seek to ban unpopular speech and speech that is not politically correct. In the 1960s we had stduent sit-ins that demanded freedom of speech, and such sit-ins are needed now more than ever.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.