探花视频

Husbands warns research cuts could force Russell Group expulsions

Continuing on current path will lead to course closures, reduced research investment and mergers, says former Sheffield Hallam vice-chancellor

Published on
June 6, 2024
Last updated
June 7, 2024
A muddy road in the countryside
Source: iStock/Berezko

UK universities could be forced to close courses, increase class sizes, focus research investment and consider mergers if聽they continue on their current trajectory, a former vice-chancellor has warned.

Outlining one scenario for how聽the sector might look in future in a new paper, Sir Chris Husbands, who led Sheffield Hallam University between 2017 and 2023, said a lack of any serious attempt to address funding difficulties could also see scholarships cut, welfare services pared back and moves to 鈥渕ore flexible staffing models鈥.

Universities that were previously research-intensive may have to 鈥渟ignificantly鈥 shift their business plans, which could even lead to their expulsion from the Russell Group, the paper published by the Higher Education Policy Institute on 6 June says.

Describing what the hypothetical聽scenario could look like, it says:聽鈥淲hile the sector remained large, the number of institutions fell by comparison with the early 2020s and government and the sector became adept in managing mergers and聽market exits.鈥

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

Sir Chris聽told聽探花视频聽that the description would be seen by many as one of 鈥渦npalatable decline and I wouldn鈥檛 disagree with that. But it is the trajectory we are currently on.鈥

鈥淚f there isn鈥檛 action, this is where we will end up,鈥澛爃e said.聽鈥淵ou can see it happening now: universities are making some really聽tough decisions聽that involve de-specifying elements of the model, because they have got to.鈥

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

Currently聽the sector is being told by government 鈥渨e want you to deliver a high-touch, high-cost, high-quality model, but we are not going to allow you the resources to do it鈥, which Sir Chris said was 鈥渏ust crazy鈥.

Another scenario outlined in the paper is therefore one that delivers on the聽government鈥檚聽vision but involves universities being properly funded to 鈥渄o the job they are being asked to do鈥.

Two more options are outlined: closer integration with further education to create a 鈥減lace-based tertiary system鈥 or sharper differentiation between research and teaching institutions.

Sir Chris said the exercise was not intended to make predictions for the future but to聽follow what the repercussions of various policy changes could be to help shape thinking in the sector.

探花视频

ADVERTISEMENT

The paper says that 鈥渕any institutions will look fundamentally different in five years鈥 time鈥 and all the roads ahead require 鈥減ainful choices鈥.

Even the second scenario that is mostly closely aligned with the policy wishes of university leaders comes with downsides, it adds.

The paper estimates that this system would cost 拢8 billion more and it would also be seen as 鈥減olitically expensive鈥, according to Sir Chris, because it would involve聽increasing fees聽and, although it would take university deficits out of the headlines, it 鈥渄oes not offer the government much that is new鈥.

tom.williams@timeshighereducation.com

POSTSCRIPT:

Print headline:聽Research cuts 鈥榗ould force Russell Group exits鈥

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

No British public university has ever had to close its doors, but funding pressures are leading to vast numbers of redundancies and fuelling dire warnings that some institutions are close to the edge. So what would a collapse actually mean for students, staff and wider economies? John Morgan reports

Reader's comments (5)

Undoubtedly the funding model has to change otherwise VC's and other senior leaders may end up being paid what they are actually worth and their vanity projects and foreign trips cancelled. Accountability may even be intoduced into the model in the worst case scenario !
I am really sorry to say that this trend has been going on for at least the last 15-20 yrs but academics have largely lacked the hard headed unity needed to take the sector in less market driven direction. The sector has been getting away with an Animal Farm model for staff. This is where Boxer exports himself to work harder and when he lays broken with overwork, he is despatched to the Knackers Yard for his bones to yield a last profit being boiled down to glue. Tragically extending this Orwellian metaphor, there are plenty of young naive geldings in the paddock waiting to be blinkered with promises of green fields and daisies, but first they need to be put to work and the story repeats...
Personally I have no issue with institutions being expelled from the Russell group given its members have been working to line their own pockets at the expense of much of the rest of the sector for far too long (and membership is opaque at best). Time for a more level playing field and fewer of this kind of barrier so the sector can work effectively together to the benefit of the whole.
Aacademics have lacked unity because some have benefitted immensely from it. The rent seekers have had a field day while the structure has been crumbling around them.
While we are it get rid of the so-called Russell group tag.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT