It is important for any organization to be aware of its purpose or causes. But there is no longer a decisive time to re-examine the "raison dreete" than during the reduction and the financial retention. And what kind of organization can better philosophically question its existence than universities based on critical thoughts (and even the discipline of philosophy) – I'm sorry I'm biased and I've studied my master's degree!) And I may be raising my bias to the importance of the question or its central significance.
What is the university?
Is this knowledge generated? But research is also taking place in the private sector, albeit less transparently – but the expert review system also causes fire.
Did " Learn" teach students and "experts"? But MIT places the curriculum online free of charge – so why pay an increasing tuition fee? And what's the value of a piece of paper that says you knew something when you forgot about 10 years or did I replace the information with more current information?
The fact that graduates " get work" as many universities claim in their promotional material? It is assumed that the glass ceiling on earnings will be reduced to a lesser degree, but to increase access to education to distinguish themselves from "competition", students must take second or third grade – first grade is often insufficient.
Do universities have an impact on the economy and the community? But industry is undoubtedly the same, but unreasonably this is a certain one-way argument, as the other nourishes the other. "Freedom of expression" (19459007), but not widely used in the United Kingdom, where both students and staff feel that hard questions are handled without difficulty? I think most people would agree that this is a bit idealistic.
This is physical experience ? But classes are often virtual, and e-books and online journals slowly replace their paper brothers. While many students live on campus and socially organize their studies and interests, this is not the exclusive feature of university experience. I would say that all of the above – as these pieces intertwine and can not exist without each other – though such an ambiguous, large-scale "creature" is a challenge to "sell" to politicians and the general public. It's blurry and complicated, and it's wonderful.
But do all universities have their own identity, purpose, interests? Or should they be linked to achieving common goals? How do you evaluate their success? Communication in the era of classification, ranking and "labeling," clarity, and differentiation are important.
I do not have all the answers, but the question continues, and not just in the United Kingdom: a warning that American universities have to change their retention and employment rates today, Economist ; former BBC CEO Greg Dyke recently called on universities to "think about what they are doing and how they do" at a recent conference at CASE Europe as a result of the growing public finance pressure; and of course a new challenge for private universities in the United Kingdom's higher education sector … the list goes on.
Perhaps universities need to reimburse their offers and concentrate on their strengths. Some institutions may be lost during the process. In any event, if they survive, universities must develop a state participation program that translates their rebel (or at least neutral fences) into the institute's advocates. There is no bigger or more important work ahead of them.