The “Super University” where bigger might be better

Now let us take a more positive approach.

In days gone by, I thought and wrote about “ponds” rather than “pools”. I canvassed the view, with no small measure of support, that what the university system needed were “big ponds, small ponds, but no stagnant pools”… no relation to the homonymous Vice-Chancellor Poole, of course. There is no place for stagnation, but plenty of room for diversity.

Even if policy and funding environments tend to support “bigness” as a key parameter for success, there IS an alternative. Those who care about diversity of opportunity, equality of access, regional relevance, niche research excellence, quality of teaching interaction (on campus and off campus) and the centrality of providing a coherent, inclusive learning experience MUST NOT surrender these imperatives. Bigger will only be synonymous with better - no matter what the political and policy fashion-of-the day - if “super universities” are led, in fact as well as by rhetoric, with these imperatives in mind.

I am not sure whether Matthew 19:24, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”, offers much consolation for the poorer, secular universities when they are planning the way forward. I’ll put a few shillings on a couple of other things, though: “the regionals” can’t “do a Millie” without massive interference with their local identities, loss of independence, and great damage to the communities they ought to be serving. But they had better not take their eye off the ball; there’s nothing like the possibility of a bit of empire-building to excite our policy-makers and the predators.

It’s easier to drain a stagnant pool than a bubbling brook. Whatever the future direction for system amalgamations, “market forces” and “targeted funding”, the best defences against predatory behaviour are vibrant performance, proactive leadership and a distinctive profile. All our smaller universities need to decide which of their own behaviours set them above the rest and define the uniqueness of their contribution. If they don’t do this, they won’t survive.

Professor Poole is a cunning old fox. Her proposed solution is not the only one, but stagnant pools dry up fairly quickly.