What’s gone wrong with universities? – A Provocation, by Gale Macleod
There can be little doubt that the Higher Education sector in the UK is in crisis. Here I argue that at least some of the responsibility for this lies with changing understandings of the purpose of a university education. In turn I see this as driven by two separate phenomena. First is the massification of HE which really took off in the UK in the 1990s. Second are broader societal changes, and principally the shift to what might lazily be labelled ‘identity politics’. What follows is unashamedly lacking in nuance: think of it as a provocation and starter for discussion.
Since the 1990s, the UK higher education sector has expanded dramatically. The number of higher education institutions increased significantly following the Further and Higher Education Act (1992), which granted university status to many polytechnics and colleges. Student numbers have surged. According to the ONS student numbers have almost doubled over the previous 30 years.
At the risk of over-simplifying things, four main factors can be argued to have contributed to the massification of UK higher education:
-
Government Policy: Successive governments promoted university expansion to improve social mobility and economic competitiveness.
-
Economic Shifts: The transition from a manufacturing-based economy to a knowledge-based one increased demand for graduates.
-
Marketisation of Education: The introduction of tuition fees and student loans positioned higher education as a market-driven sector.
-
Globalisation: The rise of international student recruitment transformed UK universities into global enterprises.
Unsurprisingly, this expansion in the sector, has gone hand-in-glove with debates about the purpose of universities. Perhaps I’ve got rose-tinted glasses on, but it used to feel uncontroversial to believe that universities ought to serve as institutions dedicated to the generation and transmission of knowledge. A complementary view is that educating individuals benefits society at large. The expansion of knowledge and the development of a skilled workforce contribute to social cohesion, innovation, and democratic engagement as well as individual fulfilment. However, the purpose of universities is now frequently argued to extend beyond (or indeed be different from) this original fundamental function.
For some, and linked to some of the drivers of massification, the most important role of universities is to play a significant role in driving the economy. Governments often justify (admittedly increasingly diminishing) investment in higher education by linking it to economic productivity, arguing that a highly educated workforce enhances national competitiveness and innovation. However, increasing the number of graduates does not automatically create more jobs; instead, it can contribute to degree inflation, where roles that previously did not require a university education now list degrees as prerequisites, without a corresponding increase in skill demand.
While increasing numbers of graduates doesn’t grow the economy, changes and growth in the economy may drive what universities are asked to ‘produce’. Universities have been complicit in positioning themselves as in service to the economy. They have expanded their offerings to cater to the mass market with an increasing emphasis on employability outcomes—i.e., the extent to which a degree could directly translate into a job. While employability is important, this shift often led to a focus on “practical skills” and market-driven programmes, which may have diluted the academic integrity of some subjects.
The increasing commercialisation of the higher education sector also led to the development of ‘market-friendly’ offerings as universities began to treat students more as customers and to introduce degree programmes that could attract large numbers of students. Arguably, this has led to a rise in courses that align with market trends rather than academic rigour.
Some of these courses lack the intellectual depth associated with traditional university education. They may be better suited to specialised programs outside the university system that are more aligned with the needs of industry. For instance, technical institutes or specialist colleges could provide specialised training for students interested in fields like marketing, medicine, teaching, engineering, or design, which are essentially skills-based subjects (I promised I was going to be provocative). In contrast other disciplines, particularly in the humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, and pure mathematics, demand a focus on theoretical knowledge and critical thinking—skills that are nurtured within a university environment. These fields require an in-depth exploration of concepts, methods, and ideas that cannot always be reduced to practical skills or technical proficiency. University education, with its emphasis on research, exploration, and intellectual inquiry, is ideal for these subjects.
We could learn a lot from the German education system which is renowned for its dual approach to higher education, where there is a clear distinction between academic university education and vocational training. This model recognises that not all knowledge is suited for university study and that some skills are more effectively developed in settings focused on practical application.
However, for me the greatest concern and the greatest threat is that universities have increasingly become centres of social activism, with many institutions actively encouraging (even prioritising) civic engagement, advocacy, and policy influence.
Image credit Izana Nordhaus
This shift reflects broader societal movements framed by an all-consuming concern with inclusivity, identity politics, and social justice. While activism can be a valuable part of academic life—promoting debate and fostering engagement with pressing social issues—there is a growing concern that activism has, in some cases, supplanted the university’s core mission of open inquiry and knowledge generation. Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff, in The Coddling of the American Mind (2018), argue that the rise of ideological conformity and the prioritisation of emotional safety over free debate have led to an erosion of the traditional role of universities. Similarly, Frank Furedi, in What’s Happened to the University? (2017), argues that higher education has shifted from a place of intellectual discovery to one of moral and political training, where dissenting views are often suppressed rather than debated. This transformation risks undermining the very principles of academic freedom and critical thinking that have historically defined universities.Karl Jaspers, in The Idea of the University (1923), emphasised that universities should resist external influences and remain dedicated to knowledge production. This is no less true now than it was 100 years ago. Without a firm commitment to this mission, universities risk becoming institutions driven by economic, political, or social pressures rather than places of genuine academic pursuit.
The rapid expansion of the sector, along with these broader societal changes, has led to a clear dilution of what it means to be a university. By deviating from their core purpose—the pursuit of truth and the transmission of knowledge—universities have been transformed into institutions serving competing agendas. While these alternative roles, i.e., social activism and economic development, are desirable outwith universities, their proponents have increasingly sought to supplant them as the university’s core mission. Instead of being spaces for open inquiry and rigorous debate, universities have been colonised by ideological movements and commercial interests, demanding that all academic activities align with these external goals. This shift has compromised intellectual diversity and critical thinking, turning universities into battlegrounds for ideological conformity rather than places of genuine scholarly pursuit.
To get back to their core purpose universities must first prioritise research and teaching excellence because these activities serve as the foundation for advancing knowledge across fields like the sciences, humanities, arts, and social sciences.
Second, universities must resist allowing financial motivations to overshadow their primary educational mission. There is increasing pressure on universities to operate as businesses, especially with the rise of corporate sponsorships, commercialisation of research, and the prioritisation of revenue-generating programs.
Universities must also resist the temptation to pursue high-revenue programs that cater to trends in the job market while underfunding or neglecting disciplines that do not have immediate financial payoff, such as the arts or social sciences.
Finally, and most importantly, universities should provide a space for diverse ideas and perspectives to thrive, free from ideological control. This means fostering an environment where academic freedom is respected and where research and teaching are driven by the pursuit of truth rather than political or ideological agendas. When universities prioritise ideology over academic rigour, it leads to censorship, biased research, and a lack of intellectual diversity. The focus should remain on creating a space for inquiry, dialogue, and the critical examination of all ideas—without fear of reprisal or exclusion due to prevailing political or societal beliefs.
By reinforcing knowledge as their core purpose, universities would not only serve their students and staff but also wider society. If universities do their core business well and focus on the pursuit of truth, then the knowledge created within them can be used by others external to the university to improve lives and solve global challenges. This can only be achieved through a commitment to research and teaching excellence.
Ultimately, universities should be places where intellectual exploration and education are given primacy over commercial goals or political agendas. By reinforcing knowledge as their core purpose, universities would ensure that they remain institutions dedicated to fostering critical thinking, innovation, and societal progress.
(Izana Nordhaus)
(https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/collaborate/commercialising-research/)
(https://scottishcare.org/a-crisis-within-a-crisis-the-urgency-of-change-for-social-care-in-scotland/)
Recent comments