TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 8 °C Friday 24 May, 2013

Column: Cutting grants isn’t just bad for students – it’s bad for Ireland

The boom taught us the danger of ignoring inconvenient truths, writes Miles Link – so what are we doing with cuts to the universities?

Miles Link

FOR A GENERATION of emerging scholars, the whole of their adult lives has been an experience of constant public crisis.

Experience has taught them that ‘reform’ and ‘innovation’ more often than not mean cutbacks, privatisation and commodification. The latest, we learn, is the prospect of having funding for new postgraduates cut off completely.

Even if the proposal to end postgraduates’ grants is another example of the increasingly familiar ‘will they-won’t they?’ pre-Budget theatre, it demonstrates how the Government truly sees higher education: nice, worthwhile maybe, but ultimately inessential. In such a context, the progressive slide downwards by Ireland’s academic institutions in international standings is unsurprising.

Just as serious as the threat of emigration by a generation of students is the threat of losing Ireland’s prestige in the international community. In plain terms, the country cannot sell an image of an intellectual Ireland to tourists — the Ireland of James Joyce, or Elizabeth Bowen, or, yes, Michael D Higgins — while simultaneously cutting off its scholars at the knees.

Cutting postgraduate grants would be much more than a problem of presentation, however. It constitutes a part of the continuous ceding of ground to an idea poisonous to Irish universities as a whole: that they must serve private economic interests.

Such is the product of the mentality that university research exists solely to generate ideas for business. And so, at the bottom of this view of the university — as a combination job training centre and enterprise cabal — is a view of education as an industrial process, a sort of Ikea manual for putting together compliant workers.

This mentality concerns itself solely with ‘upskilling’ (which is not actually a word) and ‘transferable skills’ (which is a coded expression meaning qualities that make someone more economically valuable without wasting any time nurturing their spirit). Thus we have the true nature of this reformed university: an education that does nothing to lead the student to insight, personal or otherwise.

‘What is a university supposed to do?’

Here we run into a vital question: what is a university supposed to do? Well, support for higher education stems partly from a desire to live in a society that values learning in and of itself. Nevertheless, there is a basic relationship between the university and the public that demands our attention. There really shouldn’t be this artificial distinction between ‘pure’ academic research and the university’s obligation to the body politic. The one mission informs the other: universities ask how the world works, what must be done, how things can be changed for the better. An attack on postgraduates is an attack on the idea of the university as a public institution.

If we accept academic inquiry as a legitimate pursuit, we must accept that such inquiry requires the freedom to say things that business, politics or the public might not necessarily want to hear. The oft-heard refrain that ‘there is no alternative’ to our economic situation, for example, should be an alarming statement to postgraduate scholars of history, or international relations, or even the arts. These are researchers for whom one-dimensional answers delivered by authoritarian fiat are simply unacceptable.

Anecdotally, I do not know of any postgraduate student, including myself, who does not supplement his or her funding with some kind of paid job. And yet, postgraduates attack their subject with a missionary zeal. Few other pursuits can persuade you that poring over data in a library until three o’clock on a Saturday morning is a good idea. If postgraduates cannot find opportunities to study in Ireland, they will go elsewhere, and they will take their energies with them. Those who cannot go will be forced to abandon their education — a tremendous waste.

The argument will come back that ‘savings must be made’ in education. I must point these people to the Irish Times’s list of the hundred best-paid people in Irish education from last year: rather thin on lecturers and grant recipients, while flush with administrators, management and top brass. Such officials often seem unable to comprehend how bleak prospects appear for graduate students simply looking to apply their talents, if such talents are not set in the terms of venture capitalism.

The question, then, is how best to guide academia’s ongoing transformation in a way that does not neglect the academics. Ireland has seen, just in this past decade, how dangerous it can be for a society to close itself off from raising questions and challenging ideas. I ask Minister Quinn: how will restricting access to education, and thus shutting down thought, help matters?

Miles Link is a third-year English studies PhD student in Ireland.

Read next:

Comments (21 Comments)

  • And cutting of student grants – at any level – is going to be absolutely detrimental to the country. If anything they shouldnt be talking about cutting them, they should be talking about where can they find money to pump into them!

    Reply
  • Great piece, mostly on the money… But it’s fair to point out that post grads earn more, proportionately, and therefore can expect to pay in some way for their ‘extra’ education, be it through taxes or fee’s…

    Reply
  • Sean C 23/11/11 #

    If the government cuts funding to Irish universities where’s Australia going to get graduates from ?

    Reply
    • Great Piece Miles.

      It has become an accepted belief across the world that creativity is the key in achieving sustainable economies. Yes, industry needs skills but in order to be competitive and resilient it also needs new ideas.

      I had thought that this was what the emerging Ireland was going to be about.

      From personal experience this measure would be disastrous for NCAD.

      Reply
  • surely there should be a look at other ways of funding education. It is obvious from recent reports that a graduate loan style system is not the way to go forward as debts escalate for recent graduates in the united states. However there should be serious consideration given to a graduate tax, of somewhere between 3-5% once a benefactor of 3rd level education is employed in this country.
    It is something that should be looked and if it isn’t feasible fair enough. I paid for the majority of my course fees (up to masters level) and in reality we are lucky that our fees in comparison to other english speaking countries are as low as they are.
    The current system clearly doesn’t work.

    Reply
  • FoxT 22/11/11 #

    I agree that cutting postgrad research grants is wrong, and a high quality 3rd-level education system is important for Irish society as a whole, for social, cultural, and economic reasons.
    Academic enquiry is legitimate & valuable, but society loses out if results of this work are not publicised appropriately. There may well be researchers for whom ‘answers delivered by fiat’ are unacceptable – but both they and their universities are keeping awfully quiet right now.
    In fact, in general, Universities do not speak out at all unless it is to complain about funding!
    I’m also unhappy that universities are quite unaccountable. What are their performance measures? How are they proposing to deal with grade inflation for example? Who is accountable if a university spends hundreds of thousands of euro on internecine warfare ( Yes, I am thinking of UCC here).
    Finally, there is a bigger question to be answered on the structure of third level education in this country as a whole. The IT’s, UL, NUI etc are all run by different bodies. These should be amalgamated and a single body should be set the task of implementing an overall strategy for third level education.

    Reply
  • A good indicator of a mature democracy is the absence of crisis as a means for reform.

    Time after time, it has been shown that our political system can only reform through crisis whether it be in the health sector, banking civil servants, social welfare services or education. At the core of the issue is self interest which forces the government to use a machete rather than a surgical knife. It was not too long ago when union reps would brazenly say their priority lay with the paying members implying that national interest is way down the list. It’s not the government’s fault if vested interests wont allow them to remove dead wood…

    If we were able to remove under performing academics and curb some of the bonuses, pensions and increments, we probably would be able to direct the savings towards student needs. If we could save paying universal child benefit to the well heeled we more than likely would be able to afford paying the deserving. It’s a question of having the backbone to differentiate.

    My biggest fear is that when it comes to the redundancies in February it will be on a “first in first out” basis as opposed to holding on to the good people regardless of seniority.

    I find railing against industry is very often a disingenuous exercise exposing a particular political ideology. At the very least private sector does not hide it’s profit driven agenda nor does it suffer under performers gladly.

    Whereas academics have been using “academic freedom” as a method to totally insulate themselves from reality.

    We could choose to live in denial in terms of our level of maths, science and the languages weaving conspiracy theories about the intentions multi nationals who are providing us with real jobs. That wont change the reality that soon universities in Europe due to their falling birth rates will be making places available to us and in direct competition with ingenious institutions.

    Latest statistics are showing the abolition of fees did NOT significantly close participation gap between affluent and the disadvantaged. Quality is were we should focus on not quantity.

    Let’s stop asking what can the government can do for us, and instead ask what ourselves if we are prepared to drop self interest for the greater good.

    Reply
  • Great Piece Miles.

    It has become an accepted belief across the world that creativity is the key in achieving sustainable economies. Yes, industry needs skills but in order to be competitive and resilient it also needs new ideas.

    I had thought that this was what the emerging Ireland was going to be about.

    From personal experience this measure would be disastrous for NCAD.

    Reply
  • If people think that the minister cares – they need help.
    He only cares about himself 1st and then his family.
    Education just happens to be his post If it was transport he would cut back also.
    He simply turns up for work and gets on with it – who is affected dosnt impact him one bit.

    Reply
    • Ok, I’m against education cuts and I am for equal access for all of society but this comment is simply unfair and untrue. Minister Quinn is passionate about education and holds a deep value providing access to it. He was an excellent Minister of Finance in the past and is concientous and cares about the country and the Irish people.

      Cuts must happen, we all know this. However, I would be surprised and disappointed that as Minister for education and skills Quinn would bring in a policy that will most definitely create a class divide at the top end of the education system and I would like to know what alternative measures would be put in place to prevent this outcome.

      Reply
  • Good article Miles, I totally agree with you that universities should focus on more than just meeting the needs of industry. I also think that the current government’s talk of a blanket cutting of grants for post-graduate students to be very unfair – for the most part, post-grad students have to work bloody hard to get grant funding and are deserving of their grants.

    I also think that the funding of third-level education needs to change across the board in this country – fees should come in and a fair student loans system should be put in place.

    Where I have to disagree with you though is your assertion that “upskilling” is not a word. While it is a neologism, it has been around since the 1980s; whether we like it or not, it has entered the English language – most people understand what it means, it is used in a wide variety of texts and even crops up over a million times in a Google search. Its definition is even in the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary. I’m afraid I find your one-dimensional assertion that “upskilling” is not a word to be simply unacceptable.

    Reply
  • We don’t value anything we don’t pay for. If an education has value, then the recipient of that value should pay for it. Would much prefer to see students operate under a long term loan scheme. They might spend less time in the pub and more time investing in what they paid for.

    think about it, if a student (given the means via a loan) is not willing to pay for their education, what does that say about their commitment?

    Reply
  • I think part of the problem is an infatuation with the American way of doing things. Universities have to be run for profit. The thinking seems to be that if we introduce student loans then surely the students will be able to pay them back. Nobody stops to think of the crushing debt most American students are stuck with. And isn’t there enough debt in this country right now? A graduate tax isn’t a bad idea if applied sensibly but that requires sufficient graduates to make it worthwhile. Ireland should be looking elsewhere for ideas on how to fund education.

    I am also sick of this mentality from certain sections of Irish society that students can pay because they spend all their time in the pub. Actually once the novelty of third level and having all that freedom wears off, most students can be found in the library or at lectures. This is especially true of postgraduates who often don’t have the time for socialising.

    It would certainly be very hypocritical of Ireland if we elect an individual like Michael D Higgins as President and then gradually strangle education in this country.

    Reply
  • This article was written nearly a year ago on almost the same topic.
    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/innovation/2011/0128/1224288137217.html

    Education opens options for business in Ireland. It’s simple enough “net present value” math – invest now, get a future return. Don’t invest, don’t get a future return, but also don’t “get it wrong”.

    This fear of looking bad or making a mistake is what drives companies, as well as countries, to the “middle of the road”. In this day and age of Hypercompetition, companies and countries must stay fresh, stay up to date with what’s happening, and take risks.

    A quote in this article:

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2011/11/23/netflix-money-to-burn-.aspx

    from Bill Gates says:

    “You want to retain enough so that the company has the strength to be able to take big risks, even in the face of some economic uncertainty.”

    Sure, Ireland has no money at the moment, but we can’t curl up and save our way out of it. There are other places to save than education. Making it harder for our academics to further Ireland’s R&D capabilities will lead to the MNCs moving away. We need to keep our international competitive edge if we want to get through this intact. If we shut up shop to save money, the external investment will dry up and we’ll have no more income as a nation.

    As mentioned by another comment above, there may be different ways to fund education, but I can’t see it being a good idea to cut the current method without having an alternative method in place and ready to go. Education leads to ideas that lead to business. There have got to be other areas in which to save money.

    Anyway, they’re my €0.02.

    Reply
  • I’m very grateful for the funding I received throughout my postgraduate education through the grant system. It which helped me to fund my pursuit of a PhD in the Social Sciences, along with other part-time employment. These cutbacks will disproportionately affect postgraduate students in the Arts and Social Sciences, where scholarships and studentships are rare and hard to come by. This move will prevent the next cohort of students from progressing on to postgraduation education. This is a regressive step in our attempt to create a knowledge economy!

    Reply
  • Irish are going to have to stop falling back on government for everything that’s why costs are so high

    Reply
  • They have these things out there called jobs and student loans. I had to do them to get my degree. Stop moaning and get up off your arse…

    Reply
  • Blah, blah, blah.

    Reply

Add New Comment