Oxford University Gazette

The University's evidence to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (the Dearing Inquiry)

Supplement (1) to Gazette No. 4418

Monday, 25 November 1996

Contents of the supplement:

Note: the extract from the evidence submitted to the inquiry by the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals, appended to the printed supplement, is not reproduced here. The CVCP's full evidence can be found on the World Wide Web at: http://www.cvcp.ac.uk/dearing/dearing.htm .

To Gazette No. 4419 (28 November 1996)

To Gazette Home Page

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

Earlier this term, the questions put to all higher education institutions and other interested bodies and individuals by the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (the Dearing Committee) were published in the Gazette (p. 58). Council and the General Board have now submitted the following replies. First is a letter from Mr Vice-Chancellor to Sir Ron Dearing, summarising points of particular concern to the University. Second, is the reply to the detailed questions.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

Letter of 15 November 1996 from Mr Vice-Chancellor to Sir Ron Dearing

We have today submitted Oxford University's replies to your committee's questions. I thought that it might be helpful to you and to the other members of the committee if I tried to summarise the points of major concern to us. These are set out below.

1. A balance has to be struck between increasing opportunities and the constraints of funding. There is no point in continuing to expand higher education if the result is impoverished institutions and students. Whether participation rates for traditional full-time undergraduates are simply maintained or are increased, there must be adequate funding. We see little alternative but the creation of arrangements under which students make a greater contribution, to the cost of courses, and to their maintenance, by means of loans. Repayment of loans should be related to income. The effect will be nullified however if existing funding is then clawed back. In particular, the existing resources allocated to student support must not be diminished. We are very concerned at increased levels of student hardship and we think that it is essential to ensure that students on full-time courses are not impelled by financial pressures to take jobs in term-time. This is inefficient, a waste of resources and likely to lead to lower standards of academic performance. Hardship funds, flexibly administered, must continue.

2. Many different institutions now make up the higher education sector. Identifying a funding structure capable of application to all is not easy. It is essential that systems are flexible, and that diversity should be permitted so that teaching and research may be pursued in the manner most appropriate to the mission of each institution.

3. Consideration of the future of higher education should start from a recognition that education is not an economic or industrial process. Of course lessons can be learned from industry and commerce but it has too often been assumed in recent years that education (at all levels) is little different from a manufacturing process. The purpose of higher education is much more subtle. It enables the best minds to develop to their highest level so that they can identify, analyse and solve large and abstract problems. It involves the advancement of knowledge and the general development of the intellect. It involves the search for truth. If those in higher education are not engaged in the pursuit of ideals, others are unlikely to be so.

4. The value to the UK of a system of higher education which, for all its diversity, contains a group of universities which can meet the highest international standards and matches the great universities elsewhere and especially in North America or Europe, must be recognised. If we cannot compete in this league, this will be bad for our international standing and for our economic performance.

5. It is essential that universities be funded at a level which does not disadvantage them in this competition. This means in particular adequate funding of expensive science and adequate funding of other resources which are often resources available not just to the universities which possess them but to the world-wide scholarly community (e.g. libraries and museum collections). A country must invest in its intellectual resources.

6. Our concern about the position of UK universities compared with those in other countries leads us to support selective funding of research. We agree that such selectivity must identify the high quality group or individual as well as the high quality department. This is particularly important for research in the humanities which is still much more of an individual affair than research in the sciences.

7. We believe in the full-time, three- or four-year residential undergraduate course. The opportunity to study a subject in depth, to concentrate on it and to allow understanding to grow over the period of the course is of great importance in the intellectual development of the individual. We do not doubt the value of part-time and continuing education (in which we have a long history). We believe, however, that any higher education system must make significant provision for `traditional' undergraduate education. We have in mind again here the UK's position compared with other countries with major institutions of higher education and also the importance of training the next generation of academic staff.

8. We continue to believe strongly in our tutorial system (in which a teacher regularly and systematically engages with a small group of students (no more than three or four at a time) and takes direct responsibility for their academic work over a whole course or a substantial part of it. Advancement of learning and the training of minds are best achieved through regular contact between students and teachers; the process is in many ways as beneficial to the latter as to the former. Students must, of course, fend for themselves to a large extent: self-organisation is one of the benefits of all types of university education. But if education is lacking in human contact it lacks the edge which is essential for the development of flexible, questioning minds. Teaching quality assessments have been clear about the value of the tutorial system.

We do not see IT as a substitute for personal contact. It provides opportunities for the improvement of the quality of teaching, for innovative teaching and for distance-learning, and for reinforcement of part-time learning. It cannot, however, replace human contact between teachers and the taught. Nor should it be thought that IT can reduce cost in higher education in any significant way.

9. The United Kingdom's international position depends not only on the excellence of undergraduate education but on the excellence of graduate education. High quality graduate work is essential for the advancement of learning and hence for the benefit of society and there is a duty to provide it both for UK and for overseas students. The UK plays a particularly important role in helping to educate overseas graduate students and this is beneficial both for academic reasons and for more utilitarian reasons. Academically, there is much value in the mixing of graduate students from a wide range of nations. The exchange of ideas and the experience of different backgrounds and cultures help to stimulate intellectual understanding. More prosaically, relations between the UK and other countries can greatly benefit over many years from the experience of those who have undertaken graduate work in the UK. Decisions on the funding of universities must bear this in mind; overseas students are not going to wish to come to run-down, inadequately staffed institutions whose best people have left for better paid jobs elsewhere.

10. We are deeply concerned at salary levels for all categories of staff. The responsibility borne by university staff is now inadequately reflected in rates of pay which have declined drastically relative to average earnings. This is made clear in respect of academic staff in the comparative information given in our answer to question 26 of the committee's questionnaire.

11. The principle of the block grant should be maintained. It is a vital component for the maintenance of institutional autonomy. Autonomy does not mean irresponsibility. We recognise that all institutions must be accountable for the way in which they spend their money but institutions must be free to decide how best to achieve their academic objectives. Excessive external control is incompatible with responsible freedom of thought.

12. It is important not only to maintain the block grant but also to allocate sufficient resources to universities to enable them to undertake research and other forms of scholarship which is not supported from elsewhere. Further transfer of resources to the research councils would seriously hamper the initiation of new research or the pursuit of research which is currently regarded as unfashionable but is intellectually demanding and justifiable and may in due time prove highly significant, whether in intellectual or economic terms.

13. Appropriate use of financial resources depends at least as much on internal systems as on external regulation. At a time when there is much debate (not only in the UK) about excessive intervention by the executive arm of government, we would strongly urge that central authority (by whatever agency it is exercised) should not be prescriptive as to the management structures to be adopted by individual universities—subject always, of course, to the proviso that universities must be answerable for their use of public funds. For our part we believe that democratic forms of government are ultimately the most effective for academic communities.

(Signed) P.M.NORTH

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

Answers to questions posed by the Dearing Committee

1. What should be the aims and purposes of higher education over the next 20 years?

The purpose is to maintain intellectual development in all its aspects, particularly by extending the boundaries of knowledge, to the benefit of the common good including the continued provision of thinking and cultured members of society.

(a) the effect of past or future changes in the numbers entering higher education.

Increases in numbers entering higher education, at least on the scale of recent years, require a more diverse higher education system to accommodate students with a wider range of ability and academic background. It is essential, however, that the necessary changes do not obstruct the maintenance of the highest international standards in teaching and research in at least part of the sector.

(b) the effect of changes in the backgrounds of students entering higher education.

Changes in school education have already led, and may yet lead further, to more ground having to be covered by higher education institutions. This may mean that lengthening undergraduate courses and/or more participation in postgraduate education will be necessary in many areas if the highest standards of education and preparation for future employment are to be achieved and particularly if we are to compete with major universities in other countries.

(c) the effect of wider changes in the economy and society on teaching, scholarship and research.

Wider changes in the economy and society have produced on the one hand a greater demand for higher education and on the other relatively diminished resources to fund it. Since the assumption must be that demand will be sustained, or increased, it is of the utmost importance that efficient use be made of necessarily limited resources and that the higher education sector is not subjected (and does not subject itself) to wasteful practices in pursuit, for example, of a spurious uniformity of standards. It is also important that education is not treated as a commodity but as a complex intellectual process. Whatever the changes in society, they do not lessen the need for the pursuit of knowledge, for intellectual rigour and honesty.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

2. What features are, or should be, distinctive of higher education as opposed to other levels or forms of education or training?

Higher education should involve developing and training the best minds to their highest level so that they can identify, analyse and solve large and abstract problems. This means that a proportion of those undergoing higher education ought to be exposed to work in the most demanding environment and involved on a daily basis with teachers working on the frontiers of their subjects. Work at this level necessarily involves the inculcation of transferable skills though not be taught as such.

(a) the distinction between higher education and further education and how sharply the distinction can (or should) be made.

The distinction is now blurred. This is one of the difficulties attending efforts to impose common systems and standards in the `higher education' sector. It is hoped that the committee will be honest in recognising that higher education has changed its meaning in the last 20 years and that it will decide that steps should be taken to preserve what used to be regarded as one of the UK's strengths. Further education's main role is in taking existing knowledge and enabling people to understand and to apply it. There is, of course, an overlap with higher education but higher education must advance knowledge and undertake analysis and assessment of both new knowledge and received opinion.

(b) the distinction between higher education and employer-led education and training.

Higher education as defined above can never be wholly employer-led though some subjects clearly have a considerable vocational emphasis with a significant input into courses and examinations by representative bodies of professional associations and employers. Employer-led education in the end depends on a flourishing higher education sector. Employers must put first the needs of their particular enterprise. Higher education must be interested in knowledge for its own sake and not only in helping to forward the particular objective of a particular group at a particular time.

(c) the distinction between vocational and non-vocational higher education.

For normal purposes, vocational higher education means the provision of courses at the highest level which train (or go a substantial way towards training) people for particular professions (such as medicine, law or engineering). Non-vocational higher education is that which is not immediately directed towards preparation for a particular professional occupation, but provides a general foundation for many different careers. Both vocational and non-vocational courses in higher education should have a common underlying ethos. Students should be taught to think for themselves and to adopt a critical and analytical approach. The knowledge which they acquire should be as up-to-date as possible and the students should be given at least a flavour of the current debates within the subject. Habits of thought and of working should be acquired which make individuals flexible and capable of adaptation.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

3. What forms of higher education will students need access to over the next 20 years?

(a), (b), and (c) (modes and methods of delivery and level of provision)

Within diversity it is important to make provision for the most able candidates to undertake rigorous and coherent full-time, residential courses at first degree and postgraduate level. There is great merit in teaching students face-to-face. It allows students both to defend their own ideas and to discuss and debate and, if necessary, challenge the ideas of those who teach them. By engaging in such discussions, understanding and analysis are highly developed and a valuable approach to life and work is instilled. Residential courses mean that students are an essential part of this process. This does not preclude the development of new teaching methods, such as those drawing on information technology, but such methods should continue to be used in the context of a residential full-time degree course, whose benefits are part of the particular educational experience which some institutions have to offer. The assumption would be that a university which has a long and successful experience in offering this type of course would probably not seek to offer degrees through distance learning nor to establish subsidiary campuses elsewhere in the UK or abroad. This mission can, however, with good effect be combined with provision in continuing education for a limited number of part-time and/or modular awards (including graduate level awards) for a wide range of post-experience courses and for other part-time courses which make the highest levels of scholarship more readily accessible.

(d) the structure of courses (e.g. modular and non-modular provision).

It is essential that some institutions within a diverse system should continue to offer integrated courses which provide for increasing maturity over the course and continuous development of studies in depth as well as breadth. Within modular systems it is important that the modules be coherent and build on each other, rather than being isolated and self-contained.

(e) the length of courses.

Three to four years of full-time study is the minimum period in which even the best candidates can achieve the skills, knowledge and maturity to enter employment or postgraduate work. No practicable adjustment to the length of courses can, however, make up for a failure to maintain academic standards at the highest levels in comparison with universities in other countries (especially in the USA and Europe) in both pre-university education and in university education itself.

(f) the balance of subject provision and how an adequate supply of specialist graduates (e.g. scientists, engineers and technologists) can be ensured.

All graduates are, to a greater or lesser extent, specialists. Maintenance of numbers reading science subjects requires greater investment in the training of teachers of science, including measures to improve the quality of those teachers. It also requires maintenance of the intellectual level of science subjects in secondary education. Ensuring an adequate supply of highly qualified manpower requires for its success that these problems be tackled and that sufficient resources be made available for the essential space and facilities that training students in science and technology in universities demands.

(g) the feasibility and desirability of extending credit accumulation and transfer arrangements between institutions.

The University recognises the value of this (and is involved through its Department for Continuing Education) but a balance has to exist between such arrangements and the provision of full-time, long-term courses in a single institution.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

4. What knowledge, skills and aptitudes will those leaving higher education need over the next 20 years and how can these be best delivered?

We believe there will be a continuing need for transferable skills, personal and cultural growth and development, a balance between the provision of a broad knowledge base and highly specialised knowledge, and a disposition to continue learning throughout life.

(a) the need for, and feasibility of, including transferable, general skills in the curriculum.

This is best achieved by training all students in critical evaluation and presentation, both orally and in writing. These skills are highly prized in the market place.

(b) the emphasis placed on personal and cultural growth and development.

Full-time, residential study in a stimulating academic environment with the face-to-face pupil/teacher contact entailed by the tutorial system should ensure essential personal and cultural growth and development.

(c) the balance between the provision of a broad knowledge base and highly specialised knowledge.

We believe it is desirable to educate students as broadly as possible whilst providing the specialist knowledge necessary both for those who are entering a wide range of employment and those who are going on to advanced study and research.

(d) who should shape or determine the curriculum content (e.g. teachers, students, employers, professional bodies)?

We accept the importance of, and already practise, consultation with all these individuals/bodies though the degree to which each will influence a particular course must depend on the discipline in question. It is, however, essential that, all their views having been taken into account, the final decision on course content is taken by the appropriate academic authority in the institution concerned.

(e) how to prepare students for diverse forms of work (e.g. self-employment, employment in small and medium sized enterprises).

The evidence suggests that the tutorial system is the single most effective method of preparing students for diverse forms of work (see (a) above).

(f) the development of special relationships and tailor-made courses for employers and professional bodies.

The expansion through the Department of Continuing Education and the School of Management Studies of high quality post-experience vocational courses, including tailor-made courses for particular employers, is one of this University's principal aims.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

5. How can effective teaching and learning be identified and how should they be encouraged?

(a) characteristics of effective and efficient forms of learning and assessment;

(b) incentives to improve the quality of teaching and learning;

(c) the role of staff development and academic rewards in relation to teaching;

(d) new developments in higher education, such as cross-institutional collaboration in teaching and potential of information and communications technology;

(e) developments to increase the professionalism of teaching in higher education.

We recognise the importance of developing teaching skills and of the increased use of IT and are pursuing both. We would, however, continue to stress the vital nature of face-to-face tuition by teachers working at the frontiers of the subject for a small group of highly qualified students and believe that there is no adequate substitute for this. We recognise also, and have begun to implement, the principle that teaching performance (as well as research) should be taken into account in promotion and the award of titles of distinction.

Cross-institutional collaboration makes more sense for smaller institutions; for the larger, with very significant internal commitments, internal collaboration and exchange of experience make better use of time and money.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

6. What is the place of scholarship (as opposed to teaching and research) in higher education?

(a) the relationship between teaching, scholarship and research.

Scholarship is essential for teaching, is synonymous with research in the case of the humanities, and is the foundation for research in the Sciences.

(b) how much time should be devoted to scholarship?

Sufficient time must be allowed for the mature reflection which leads to creative thinking and in the end feeds through scholarship into specific research and into teaching. The preservation of vacations and the sabbatical leave system are crucial to this.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

7. How can the standards of degrees and other higher education qualifications be assured and maintained?

There cannot be national standards over the present diverse range of higher education institutions with different (and valid) missions. It is important to maintain the highest standards, measured by international comparisons and the judgement of employers of graduates. For some institutions, the comparison is not only within the United Kingdom but with institutions in other countries (and particularly with the USA and Western Europe). This means that conformity in procedures and systems within the United Kingdom is not wholly desirable since this may not allow institutions which need to compare themselves with other major international institutions to do so advantageously.

(a) whether standards have changed and reasons for change;

(b) whether it is feasible to have national standards of qualifications;

(c) whether it is necessary to have national standards of qualifications;

(d) implications for standards if participation in higher education continues to expand.

Increased participation has inevitably led to changes in standards which now vary conspicuously. We are clear that the wide range of abilities and backgrounds of students participating in higher education means that common national standards are impossible to achieve. Whether or not participation in higher education continues to expand, any move to set standards will have to relate to a range, rather than a single, level.

(e) mechanisms used to maintain standards;

We are concerned about the prospect of intrusive and expensive mechanisms which attempt to equate standards and methods across the full range of higher education institutions.

(f) the role of professional bodies.

We recognise the important role of professional bodies (which are helpful and supportive), external examiners and peer group review by members of comparable institutions. It is possible, however, that professional bodies do not help to maintain international standards.

(g) the implications of developments such as franchising, modularisation, credit accumulation and transfer for standards and their maintenance.

No comment.

( h) the relationship between degrees and other qualifications, such as national vocational qualifications and higher national diplomas.

We recognise the value of GNVQs and in particular think that the development of the science GNVQ will be of value in helping to keep the study of science more buoyant, both in secondary education and beyond, thereby helping to create a more scientifically literate society. We are not certain that to rename GNVQ `Applied A level' is necessarily in the long-term interest. We would also be concerned if developments in GNVQs reduced the availability of A levels for students of high academic ability and so made them less well prepared for our courses. We would not therefore expect to find GNVQs replacing A levels as the normal entry qualification for Oxford although candidates with them are of course considered on their merits.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

8. What proportion of higher education resources is it reasonable to use to verify standards of awards and the quality of provision?

This University is clear that the imposition of review procedures conducted within a framework purporting to reflect common standards over the full range of UK higher education institutions is distinctly unhelpful and wasteful of resources. A real emphasis on internal review procedures (peer pressure within an institution is an under-rated force), combined with external peer review on, say, a ten-year cycle, would be far more effective and far less costly than the cumbersome scheme now about to be put in place as a result of the report of the Joint Planning Group.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

9. How should research carried out in higher education institutions fit with the wider spectrum of research undertaken in the UK?

(a) The role played by industry and other private sector companies engaged in research;

Research by universities is, of course, not conducted in a vacuum. Industry and other private sector companies are bound to concentrate on research that is likely to result in products with commercial potential in the short to medium term or to be narrowly based in a particular area. University research must be more broadly based, especially in the bigger universities. It may be less likely to be relevant to an immediate application and it will cover a range of subjects which have no obvious attraction for the private sector (e.g. in the humanities). The private sector cannot be expected to maintain a continuity of research across all major areas of intellectual activity.

(b) the distinctive role played by higher education institutions;

HEIs, and especially the major research universities, undertake a wide range of research but their distinctiveness lies in the fact that they are virtually the only institutions responsible for basic research. Without such research, no other research is possible. If universities do not undertake basic research, it is not clear who will, particularly in the case of the humanities. Although the University is rightly concerned to exploit developments with commercial potential and therefore to protect its intellectual property, it (and all other universities) have a more open culture that permits a freer exchange of information amongst HEIs in the UK and internationally. This facilitates their role in the advancement of knowledge in co-operation with other researchers in similar fields elsewhere. Keeping research alive on a broad front maintains the best possibility of generating ideas or developments of significant benefit in the long run, in commercial or other terms. Commercial potential of university research should be realised through effective technology transfer mechanisms, either by licences to industry or by the setting up of spin-off companies in which the University has a share of the equity. This is an increasingly important and successful activity. The universities also have the very important role of educating and training the next generation of researchers and academics, through undergraduate and graduate taught courses, but in particular through doctorates and through up-dating provision.

(c) the balance between research providers in conducting basic, strategic and applied research.

It is by no means clear that this categorisation is useful. What is clear is that industry and commerce (rightly) wish to be assured of a predictable return on their money. Therefore, the increasing tendency of the research councils and Government to provide funding on condition that a high proportion of the funds needed are provided by industry seriously restricts the universities' potential. This is especially so of projects requiring capital resources, as in the BBSRC equipment initiative in 1995, and the Joint Research Equipment Initiative in 1996, both of which required 50 per cent funding from industry or other non-university sources. In the latter this University was only able to put in about six applications because of this requirement, since industry is in general not interested in providing the substantial sums of funding required for research projects that are not commercially viable in the short to medium term. The application of the Private Finance Initiative to research (and teaching) equipment is a further recent development of this: it is extremely unlikely that the equipment needed for basic research can be funded through this route, and it is not realistic for the Government to suppose that industry and charities can make up for the severe cut in the formula capital funding—largely used for equipment—by these means.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

10. How should public funding for research in higher education institutions be distributed?

(a) how national need should be determined and defined;

The UK needs to be actively involved in a broad range of research, whether or not it is immediately commercially viable, in order to maintain a position in world class research, and (in commercial terms) to provide through basic science the home-grown foundations on which UK industry can build. The national need should not be determined by too narrow a grouping, eg industry alone, for this might risk narrowing too far the research that is undertaken in the UK, to the detriment of basic scientific research, research that is not immediately commercially viable, and research in the social sciences and humanities. In general, a sensible balance has to be struck between ensuring that research is carried out in what appear to be areas of immediate national or international need and ensuring that there is enough scope for a very wide and balanced range of research to be undertaken to meet many possible circumstances. There is ample evidence of our inability to predict successfully the needs or problems of succeeding generations. The options for responding to particular issues must therefore be kept open as far as possible (e.g. one may not be able to predict new forms of infectious disease but research into the mechanism of infectious diseases needs to be carried on). We do not think that central planning of research works and in any case it is contradictory to intellectual freedom.

National needs for research (particularly but not exclusively, in the humanities) might also include the need of a democracy for new and free thought, for contributing to and understanding its own and other cultures, and (particularly but not exclusively in the social sciences) to the need to understand the workings of society and of the economy for the improvement of the economic and social conditions of the nation and the international community.

(b) the consequences of concentrating research resources or of dispersing across many institutions or centres;

In general it is advantageous (particularly in the sciences) for research resources to be concentrated in a relatively small number of institutions so that they are used to maximum benefit, in terms of attracting and retaining world class researchers in the UK, and providing the necessary infrastructure and academic environment to enable them to carry out their research to the highest level possible. The consequence of spreading research resources too thinly might be that there was nowhere in the UK sufficiently well resourced to be attractive to world class researchers, and nowhere in which such work could be carried out. In all subjects, the spreading of research funding too thinly could result in academic staff having insufficient time to carry out research as a result of having to give so much time to teaching. There should, however, be some fraction of research funding available to provide scope for new developments in other institutions. Arguments for institutional concentration are less strong for the humanities.

Dispersal of research resources also limits creative development of academic subjects. Such developments regularly take place at the boundary between traditional disciplines (e.g. research into environmental issues). This is less likely to happen in the absence of a concentration of strength in those disciplines.

(c) the effectiveness of the dual support system;

The recent Coopers and Lybrand report has highlighted difficulties caused by the recent changes to the old dual support system under which funds have been transferred from the funding councils to the research councils. The recent decision to increase the contribution by research councils to indirect costs from 40 to 45 per cent is welcome but the underlying difficulties caused by the transfer remain. A higher proportion of research funds is now earmarked and institutions have less discretion for the pump-priming of new research or about how particular research is best supported. In addition, the recent severe reduction in the formula capital funding, if not rectified, will result in the loss of the ability of universities to provide the fundamental infrastructure in which research can take place—the universities' side of the dual support system. This is true of the humanities and social sciences as well as the natural sciences.

The dual support system is also failing to cope with the problems caused by the increase in research funding from charities and from the EC.

No further funds should be transferred to the research councils or the Academy from the funding councils. We think that the funds available to the research councils and the Academy are grossly inadequate but we do not think the position would be improved by increasing their resources at the expense of the funding councils. Similarly we do not think anything would be gained by transferring resources from the existing research councils to a new humanities research council.

(d) the effectiveness of the funding councils' research assessment exercise;

These exercises are effective in helping to concentrate research funds into institutions with peer-judged excellence in the relevant subject areas and so in maintaining the necessary centres of international excellence. The system is not perfect, not least in that it distorts the research that is carried out with quantity of research being pursued at the expense of quality. Pressure to publish quickly is particularly undesirable in the case of the humanities. where more time is often needed to produce valuable results. It is hard, however, to imagine a politically acceptable alternative system.

(e) the effectiveness of the research councils' and British Academy's methods of allocating support and the peer review process;

The research councils and the British Academy are increasingly tending to direct research resources to particular objectives, and leaving less available for research proposals generated by researchers and assessed for funding by peer review. There is a risk that managed programmes might stultify what in the end could prove to be the best research. It might be argued that peer review alone is the best way of allocating research funds—the humanities and a good proportion of scientists are likely to support this view. If directed programmes are to continue, great care is needed over the balance of funding within the individual research councils between targeted funding and reactive funding, so that excellent research initiatives that happen not to fall in the target areas are not lost, either entirely or to the UK. The dual support system works best in our view when research councils are operating in responsive mode.

(f) the effectiveness of the Technology Foresight Exercise.

While it is hard to say that there is no value in the Technology Foresight Exercise it should not be regarded as the sole determinant for the allocation of research funds.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

11. How should the organisation of research activity be developed over the next 20 years?

(a) arrangements which provide a good basis for universities and colleges to plan and manage long-term research.

The retention of the block grant is essential to maintain the infrastructure which supports research in the universities. The block grant provides funds for the salaries of established academic staff, for the basic equipment and support staff which are needed for the well-found laboratory, for libraries and for IT. All these provide the essential environment within which research can be undertaken. Beyond this, the continuation of the block grant is not just a mechanical matter of providing support for research funded in other ways but for funding research itself. Much research is funded (and particularly in its early stages) only by universities themselves.

The sabbatical leave system and the three-term year which allows for vacation work are also crucial. Where these are in place institutions which aim to achieve the highest international level of excellence can plan and manage long-term research.

(b) how to promote interdisciplinary research activity.

It is at least as much the function of individual universities, their departments and their academic staff to promote interdisciplinary research as it is of the funding or research councils.

(c) how to remove impediments to collaboration across universities and departments.

The current impediments to such collaboration are generally lack of resources and inflexibility which that brings. We think that research councils might reserve a proportion of funding for collaborative and interdisciplinary activity but believe that if the research councils are largely responsive and the block grant is sustained, universities may be relied upon to follow up good collaborative initiatives with enthusiasm. The need for joint funding must be recognised. Sponsors of research, including research councils, the EC, charities and industry should allow universities to set up more multi-donor arrangements.

(d) the means of successful exploitation of university-generated intellectual property for the benefit of individual institutions and the country as a whole.

Licensing and spin-off companies are the obvious devices. Universities find, however, that the cost of maintaining patents is so high that they are inclined to license their inventions before the end of the first year after filing. This is certainly detrimental to universities' income as it may often be that licensing after further development will be more lucrative. On the other hand, such pressure to license does help to ensure that universities are not spending too much time on research and development work which is more properly the prerogative of industry.

(e) how to maintain international standards of research excellence.

See comments on funding at (a) above. Institutions which aspire to maintaining international standards should be expected to measure themselves against these standards in the course of their own regular review procedures.

(f) the extent to which public funds should be used to assist with the costs of research sponsored by third parties (e.g. the European Union, charities, private industry).

Public funds are needed to put in place the infrastructure in which research sponsored by these third parties can be carried out. This includes capital and equipment funding. Given the huge increase in charity-funded research in recent years, more attention needs to be paid to the provision of resources to support that research.

(g) how effective links between researchers in higher education and users of research can be promoted.

Apart from the obvious development of links made by individuals between particular disciplines and those who use them, organisations such as this University's Innovation Society are also an effective way of bringing the scope of a university's research to the attention of those who might need it and therefore a way of securing funds for research.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

12. How can the quality of research in higher education best be maintained and enhanced.

By allowing time and providing sufficient funding, both for facilities such as laboratories (bearing in mind the increasing cost of health and safety legislation) and for salaries for all categories of staff to ensure that high-quality individuals are recruited and retained.

(a) the training of future researchers.

It must be accepted that at least seven years are required between entry to an undergraduate course and the completion of a doctorate. It is important at least to maintain the value of resources allocated to the training of future researchers if there is to be an adequate supply to replace members of the academic profession who will retire over the next ten years.

(b) the career structure of research staff.

We welcome the recent concordat on the career management of contract research staff and would wish to see it further developed and enhanced. It does not, however, face the real problem which is shortage of money for long-term contracts of employment.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

13. What should be the participation rate for higher education in the context of changes in society, the economy and the labour market over the next 20 years?

Both the maintenance of present rates and any further increase (in full-time undergraduate students) seem impossible without further public resources or student contributions (backed by appropriate loan and hardship schemes). Higher participation rates should not be encouraged if this would mean a consequent increase in drop-out rates.

(a) the participation rate for different age groups of students.

So far as this University is concerned, the expectation is that although recruitment to degrees will be broadened somewhat and continuing education provision will be expanded (both vocational and non-vocational courses), the majority of UK undergraduate students will continue to be in the traditional 18-22 age range;

(b) access to higher education for different groups of students.

This University aims to encourage students of the highest calibre from overseas and to be more widely accessible, both by adapting its entry requirements to facilitate access to the University by a wide range of candidates and by expanding its provision for access and post-experience courses in continuing education.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

14. What factors should determine the appropriate level of participation in higher education?

(a) the needs of the labour market;

(b) wider benefits of higher education;

(c) the demand from students;

(d) the nature of higher education provided (initial higher education, postgraduate and continuing education);

(e) levels of participation in competing countries.

A sensible balance has to be struck between the demand from those able to benefit and the resources available. Participation rates (at undergraduate level) in competing countries are little guide if many students there fail to complete their courses.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

15. How do you expect the student body over the next 20 years to differ in age, background, education, employment, experience and motivation, aptitude and lifestyle from today?

We would expect the full-time student body in this University to be slightly more varied in academic background but equally highly motivated. Though there will be some widening of access, the majority of undergraduates will continue to be at the younger end of the age range (18–22), full-time, residential and very able. We envisage further growth in numbers of students enrolled in all forms of continuing education.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

16. What should be the requirements for entry into higher education?

Academic ability, potential and motivation.

(a) the principle for selection, assuming a continuous demand for higher education;

There must be a choice for both candidates and selectors, i.e. the students should both be those who wish to attend a particular institution and those whom the institution wishes to accept.

(b) the relative merits of different types of entrance qualification;

The University favours the broadest possible education from 16-19 which is consonant with attainment of high standards in specific academic subjects.

(c) the potential of the advanced diploma as recommended in the Dearing Report on qualifications for 16–19 year olds in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and the proposed National Certificates in Scotland.

It is not the diploma as such which is important but the proposed curriculum and qualifications which lead to it. The constituent parts might be regarded as the closest to which it is possible to come in balancing breadth and depth. This University would welcome broadening of studies at 16-19. From our point of view, the provision of a solid core of two A levels seems essential. In welcoming the breadth offered we are concerned that this should not be at the expense of giving students of high academic ability the opportunity to go beyond the minimum; the option to take three A levels should remain open for the students who are to be trained as subject specialists in universities which still offer traditionally demanding specialist courses.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

17. How should the admissions procedure be organised for entry into higher education?

(a) the desirability and practicability of pre-or post-qualification entrance systems;

Any scheme should recognise and accommodate diversity in the selection procedures and requirements of different institutions. A post-qualification system would probably find considerable support in this University but only if the time-scale permitted us to continue to have enough time to interview candidates for admission, and did not impose a year (or several months) out on candidates who, for many reasons, not least financial ones, would not wish to defer entry in this way.

(b) entrance procedures for part-time students;

This is best handled at the institutional level because the wide range of backgrounds and of the circumstances of applicants means that flexibility is essential.

(c) the costs and efficiency of current arrangements.

The current UCAS system has served us reasonably well but we are very concerned about the latest proposals for changes, particularly in the suggestion that `insurance offers' should be abolished.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

18. How diverse should the higher education sector be across institutions over the next 20 years?

(a) the benefits or otherwise of diversity.

The different needs of students and employers favour diversity. Institutions may from time to time change, or evolve different, missions but it has to be recognised that high level research cannot be pursued by all of them. Some institutions must be internationally competitive and in a small nation this can only be a few.

(b) how diverse institutions should be and what forms diversity should take.

Diversity should embrace quality of intake, methods of teaching, structure of courses, shape of the academic year, funding fitted to mission and monitoring arrangements.

(c) what distinctive features an institution should have to be recognised as a higher education institution and/or a university.

At the margin at least minimum standards should be set to define the level of achievement, i.e. the degree, and the methods by which it has been obtained.

(d) the interaction between teaching and research.

For universities like Oxford which must be judged against major institutions abroad, this means that most teachers at this level are and wish to be actively involved in research.

(e) the relationship between higher and further education institutions.

No comment.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

19. What should be the balance between different providers of higher education?

(a) higher education institutions which currently receive significant public funding;

(b) other higher education institutions;

(c) further education colleges;

(d) in-house company education and training schemes;

(e) commercial enterprises;

(f) other providers.

The proportion of public funding devoted to higher education should remain at least at the present level. The amount of higher education, however funded, ought ideally to be maintained at its present level; if it were diminished this would diminish all others involved in higher education. The influence of higher education extends far beyond HEIs themselves. Training by industry or commerce or other organisations will satisfy their business or professional needs but will not produce the necessary wide advancement of learning for which HEIs must be responsible.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

20. How should higher education institutions themselves develop?

(a) the balance between direct delivery of education and franchising of courses.

We have considerable doubts about the desirability of franchising in view of the difficulties of maintaining quality under these arrangements.

(b) the implications of continuing to develop international links.

The development of international links in both teaching and research are highly desirable and essential for a world class university. We seek to encourage students of the highest calibre from overseas to study in Oxford (both for full-time courses and for continuing education courses) and to facilitate appropriate international experience for our own staff and students.

(c) the impact of new technologies on the structure of institutions.

New technologies may be expected to bring increased opportunities for co-operation and joint developments. Though we do not expect any major change in the structures of this University, the University will continue to develop a strategy which ensures the adequate provision of information, to achieve its academic objectives. These steps will include the development of a distributed computing strategy and significant plans and investment in the application of IT to the University's libraries with associated changes in the constitutional and management arrangements for those libraries.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

21. How should the shape and structure of the higher education sector be determined?

(a) the desirability and the effects of having a nationally or regionally planned system.

(b) the desirability and effects of having no such planning.

(c) the balance between central direction and the freedom of institutions to decide the way they provide higher education.

There is clearly a limit to the role of central planning. The State should lay down broad principles, provide reasonable levels of funding and require institutions to be financially accountable. The pursuit of knowledge and all that follows from it thrives best in institutions which have a high degree of autonomy.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

22. What requirements on internal governance in institutions of higher education should there be as a pre-requisite for receipt of public funds?

Requirements on internal governance in institutions of higher education should emphasise the need for a coherent structure of accountability with clear lines of responsibility, open communications, and a strong, independent audit function. A university's raison d'être, the development of the intellect and the advancement of knowledge, can be achieved only through the intellectual resources of all who are associated with it. Organisationally it must be different, particularly in its relations with its academic staff, from standard corporate organisations. A greater sense of democracy is required to ensure ethical and responsible governance.

(a) the need to provide arrangements which are flexible and responsive.

Internal management must be flexible and responsive to changes in circumstance and in an institution's needs but only within a proper framework. The need for action and initiative should not undermine the peculiar strengths of institutional management in terms of the devolution of decision-making to the appropriate level, and the requirement for open debate.

(b) the varying degrees of private income between higher education institutions.

It is difficult to comment, other than as a matter of fact, on differing levels of private income between institutions, since Oxford and Cambridge are so different from the rest of the sector in this respect. In the rest of the sector private income is marginal. Universities have an assurance in the 1988 Education Act that no account will be taken in determining public funding of universities' private sources of income.

There is no reason why external review of standards should not apply to institutions whatever their source of funds, provided that the regulatory mechanisms are sensible and non-intrusive. All institutions must be financially audited.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

23. What local and regional role should higher education institutions have over the next 20 years.

(a) whether all higher education institutions should have the same role or whether some should have international, some national and some local roles.

We are in favour of diversity but most higher education institutions will have some local role even when their main focus is at the international or national level. In the case of this University, its role in continuing education is particularly significant at the local level.

(b) the economic and social impact of higher education institutions on localities and regions.

This will vary according to the size and nature of the institution. Some institutions, like this one, may be an important employer for the local community as well as providing lifelong learning opportunities and access to museums, libraries and theatres, and serve as a significant tourist attraction which substantially benefits the local economy. Universities like Oxford have to look beyond the local community but they must be good neighbours and not be aloof. Science-based companies (stemming from research in university laboratories) are an increasingly important contribution to the local economy.

(c) how higher education institutions should relate to small and medium sized enterprises.

Many such enterprises are created from within higher education institutions and maintain close links with them. On another front, institutions can through their Continuing Education activities be of considerable value in providing a variety of post-experience training for SMES which cannot provide their own.

(d) co-operation and co-ordination between higher education institutions and other educational establishment and training providers.

There would appear to be scope for this within localities and regions between different educational establishments (for example, in Oxford, between this University and Oxford Brookes (which have several joint projects including the Oxford Institute of Legal Practice) or between Westminster College and this University which validates almost all that college's taught courses in Education and Theology).

(e) the provision of cultural, sporting and other facilities for local communities.

There is no reason why current provision should not continue but it is to a large extent dependent upon funding. We suggest that local authorities should recognise and accept their responsibility for contributing to the funding of, for example, the education services for school children provided by university museums.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

24. How can UK higher education capitalise on the fact that higher education is an international activity?

(a) how to take full advantage of the exchange of students and staff to the benefit of quality and diversity;

Links with appropriate overseas institutions must be developed to ensure that outgoing students will be attached to a university with a strong academic reputation and that incoming students will also be high quality and therefore make a positive contribution to the UK institution. This requires careful selection of partners.

The possibilities for exchange must be publicised to attract high quality students to degree programmes.

Exchanges must be developed with academic staff in departments in overseas institutions which add to the strengths of the home institution to increase the quality/breadth of programmes which can be offered. In some cases, development of joint courses may be possible.

(b) how to maximise the benefits to higher education institutions and the UK culture and economy of providing higher education to overseas students and markets.

High standards in recruitment practice and in the courses offered to international students must be maintained. UK education costs are relatively high and recruitment is likely to suffer if some institutions are perceived to be offering a poor quality product.

For Oxford and other leading universities, it is important to be able to compete with top universities in other countries to recruit the best students from any background or country. This may require selective marketing. Such students will then make a positive contribution to the academic life of the University as well as contributing to its cultural diversity. The government funded ORS Awards scheme plays an important part in attracting high quality research students to top UK institutions. If this scheme is not maintained, it is probable that many of the best research students will go to leading institutions in the USA, Australia or Europe. It will also suggest that the UK is more interested in attracting students who can afford to come here rather than those of the highest quality.

(c) the scope of UK higher education to become a major international business by harnessing of information and communications technology.

This University would expect to be in the forefront of such developments (the Oxford University Press is a major exporter of knowledge and scholarship and of English language and culture). Large international universities are well placed to fill this role if they have sufficient support. Computerisation of library and museum holdings is another obvious example but this creates extra demand and resources are needed to meet the demand. In general, United Kingdom higher education cannot play a role internationally if there is a great disparity in funding between it and the institutions overseas with which comparisons should be made (particularly in the USA and Western Europe) and with which experience should be shared.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

25. What should higher education seek to contribute to the social, cultural, moral and spiritual life of the nation?

Higher education clearly supports wealth creation and the social benefits which ensue from that. Education whether in the sciences or humanities is no less important in enhancing the quality of the cultural life of the nation and in promoting good citizenship. Above all, just as institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge still owe much to their moral and spiritual foundations, whose purpose has always been to contribute to a society in which truth and integrity are paramount, so higher education should have that same purpose.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

26. How can institutions which offer higher education best ensure that they have an expert and effective workforce?

(a) recruitment of appropriately qualified staff;

The recruitment of appropriately qualified staff depends both upon the availability of such staff and upon the attractiveness of university salaries, conditions, and facilities as compared with competing employers. Among these factors salary levels are of crucial importance. There are areas (computing, law, economics, biosciences, etc.) where relatively few qualified individuals seek to work in universities, and in all subject areas the relative decline in university salaries means that many of the most able individuals no longer opt to work in universities because they can command much greater salaries in other employment sectors. The real terms decline in the average academic salary as compared with even the average teachers' salary or the Average Earnings Index (some 20 points difference by 1995 from a common base of 100 in 1985 (source UCEA)) and the associated underfunding (through the device of continued `efficiency gains') of even those inadequate national salary settlements, means that an institution like Oxford, which seeks to maintain excellence across a wide range of subjects and to compete with the major international universities, can no longer finance the payment of competitive salaries to the vast majority of its staff. Some institutions can respond by offering enhanced salaries to a small number of `stars' whom they wish to recruit, but at Oxford the stars are, and should be, too numerous. The salary difficulties are compounded by the fact that the decline in university funding also means that the University's ability to recruit staff (particularly professorial staff in competition with the major international universities) by ensuring that they are not grossly overburdened, and by offering attractive research and support facilities, has been seriously diminished. The college system remains attractive to many but this increasingly does not compensate for inadequacies in laboratory or library facilities or in research support.

Salary levels are equally inadequate for all other categories of staff.

(b) terms and conditions of employment;

We see this (and items 26 (d), (e) and (g)) as of considerable importance and a matter for determination locally by each university.

(c) career structures;

Thought needs to be given to the possibility of more diverse structures of academic post to correspond to the needs of institutions and of individuals. This might involve the creation of more `entry-grade' academic posts specialising in either teaching or research; and more flexibility for established academics to concentrate for periods on teaching or research alone. This is not to undermine, however, the belief that for the vast majority of academics at research universities a commitment to teaching and research is important.The huge expansion in short-term funded contract research at Oxford has led to an increase from 500 in 1980 to 1600 in 1995 in the number of post-graduate and postdoctorate research staff employed by the University on a temporary fixed-term basis of typically two or three years (the life of average externally funded research project). There are now more contract research staff at Oxford than established academic staff, and contract research staff form the largest staff group in the University. Although there is a grading structure for contract research staff which parallels that for academic staff and the University has introduced various measures to provide for their career management and the bridging of employment over short gaps between contracts, the insecurity which these staff face and the time which has to be committed to securing future funding for them seriously undermines their productivity and commitment. An increase in longer term funding for proven members of contract research staff is urgently needed (the dual support transfer has of course exacerbated the problem), and the finances for this must come either directly from those external bodies which fund contract research (the research councils, charities, and the private sector), or from an element of (HEFCE) funding.

(d) the need for training and development of staff;

(e) recognition and reward for the full range of activities undertaken by staff;

These matters are of considerable importance and should be determined locally by each university.

(f) the process for determining academic pay and wage structures for academics;

Academic pay should be determined by a fully funded national pay review body, with linkages to the salaries of, amongst others, senior civil servants, the professions, MPs, and those in private sector research establishments. Each university should then be free to determine its own salary structure in the light of its particular mission and culture.

(g) the deployment of staff.

This is a matter which should be determined locally by each university.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

27. What further measures may be available to increase the cost effectiveness of institutions of higher education without reducing the quality of teaching and research?

We are clear that quality has been maintained so far only by increasing workloads to an extent which is not sustainable in the long run. No further reductions in public funding can take place without directly threatening quality; maintaining the morale and motivation of those who have undertaken more burdens is already a problem as our own internal surveys show.

(a) the use of the estate and other fixed assets.

This can only be done to the point where it does not interfere with academic activities. The use of facilities for conferences during vacations is already developed to a high degree.

(b) patterns of student attendance;

Money can obviously be saved if the majority of students live at home and attend their local university. We think, however, that at least some universities must remain residential (see answer to question 3).

(c) the organisation of the academic year.

We would regard the reorganisation of the academic year to provide, e.g., a fourth term as inimical both to research and to the students who need time to reflect on their work and to allow their ideas to mature. The vacations are crucial to the adequate pursuit of research and scholarship and to general intellectual development.

(d) the role of information and communications technology.

We do not think that IT should be regarded as an instrument for reducing the cost of higher education. It plays a valuable role in improving the quality of teaching and is essential for research, for libraries and for administration. Its effect is, however, to increase costs (or at least increase expectations) (e.g. the humanities are now much more equipment-oriented).

(e) institutional co-operation.

We favour this where it is appropriate (the Oxford Institute of Legal Practice run jointly with Oxford Brookes University is an example). We believe, however, that certain types of co-operation have drawbacks if sufficient quality control cannot be exerted.

(f) franchising or accrediting arrangements.

We do not have franchising arrangements so offer no comment.

(g) shorter or more intensive courses.

We do not consider these to be appropriate at the undergraduate level in a university which aims to achieve the highest international standards. (They are, of course, appropriate in continuing education, particularly for continuing professional development).

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

28. What factors should be taken into account in determining the level and proportion of public expenditure spent on higher education?

The nation should compare itself with competitors in the proportion of GNP allocated to higher education. Given its relative lack of natural resources and the stage it has reached in its industrial development, it is arguable that its investment in higher education should be proportionately greater than that of obvious competitors.

(a) the value of higher education to society and individuals and the consequences of under-and-over investment.

The value of higher education to a society and individuals includes economic prosperity, appreciation and greater understanding of the cultural and intellectual elements of society and, it is hoped, greater social well-being. The consequences of under-investment will be the absence or relative lack of these things. Over-investment is difficult to define; one answer might, however, be that if the investment is mis-applied (for example, to those who would benefit more from a different form of education) the resources are wasted and the individuals are disadvantaged.

(b) the relative merits of expenditure on higher education compared with other forms of public expenditure.

Choices always have to be made. The value of public expenditure on schools or the health service is obvious and we would particularly agree that inadequacies at the school level are damaging to higher education. Again, however, a balance must be struck. A society which does not invest a sensible proportion in higher education is failing to invest in its future. It is failing to stimulate intellectual development which can feed through into all aspects of society and can in particular contribute hugely to the excellence of the other main competitors for public funds.

(c) the possibility of securing funding from other, private sources for particular higher education activities.

This University is committed to furthering its ability to provide for the needs of a major international university by securing additional resources through its development programme. It must, however, be recognised that private sources of funding are available, and more suited, to only a proportion of higher education activities and that public funding to secure the base will continue to be essential.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

29. Who should pay for the costs of tuition and student maintenance?

(a) the balance of contribution between students, students' families, public funds, employers and other users of higher education;

(b) possible mechanisms for securing contributions from private contributors;

(c) the balance of contribution between different types of students, different types of courses or different modes of attendance.

Sources of funding are already increasingly diverse. In future it seems likely that more will be required from students and/or their families. Whatever the future funding system, an adequate loan scheme and access/bursary schemes are essential. Increasing levels of student hardship give great cause for concern to Oxford and to all other universities and we believe that all those best able to profit from higher education should be able to do so.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

30. How should scholarship (as distinct from research or teaching) be supported)?

Scholarship is so inherently tied up in research and teaching, which cannot be conducted at the highest level without it, that it is bound to be supported in the same ways as research and teaching.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

31. What is the most effective way of channelling public funds for teaching to higher education?

Through the national funding councils.

(a) whether there is a practicable alternative to the funding bodies for the distribution of central funds.

We think there is not and would wish the bulk of funds to be distributed through the funding councils.

(b) whether funding should be routed through individual students.

We would wish to retain the block grant but would not object to a suitable proportion being routed through individual students.

(c) whether the funding method used should reflect distinctive roles of individual higher education institutions and/or their performance.

We think it is of the first importance that the funding method reflect both of these.

(d) whether higher and further education should be funded differently.

Since further education will inevitably have little research activity, a different funding mechanism seems reasonable.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement

32. To what extent is it practicable and desirable for facilities and services in higher education to be provided by the private sector outside higher education?

The private sector will tend to concentrate only on profitable activities or those where a market might develop. This is obviously inappropriate for much of higher education which is not engaged in commercial activity.

More specifically, the report on the Private Finance Initiative shows the limitations of that scheme for universities (not least in the fact that universities are charged VAT on their recurrent payments to those who provide services). It is of course possible to contract out certain services such as catering. Great care is needed, however, to ensure that the service provided by an external body is not impaired because those who undertake the work have no loyalty to the institution in question. The fashion of contracting out a high proportion of services pays no attention to this aspect but only to the financial element.

Return to List of Contents of the supplement