Competitive and excellent University Board Management is Academic Freedom: White Paper provesBy Michael C. Lagura , UniversityHerald Reporter
There is a growing concern among University figures towards under-performing universities in reference to their imminent oblivion in the face of highly competitive institutes, further resulting to their inflated rates and tuition fees.
As tough as it could get, it seems to be the only effective antidote to the perennial diseases infecting the university boards with unwanted reduction of funds, hindered budgets and eventual bureaucratic outcomes.
This may appear harsh but there is definitely more to it than meets the eye, the Independent reported.
Nevertheless, this series of proposals forwarded by the HE advocates, according to Education experts, only incredibly mean well.
These proposals, represented by the "HE white paper", aim to paper in the intentions and actions among advocates of further realizing the bygone reality of academic excellence and institutional democracy in the country.
Saying it simply, the "HE white paper" draws the line between an efficient and effective university management, highlighted by an intra-disciplinary approach and a common research fund for the intricately-perused and declared excellent academic institutions.
Presently, the HE white paper swallows both sweet and bitter remarks from the rest of the critics due to its undeniably controversial "TEF 3-tier division method".
The best means for the universities that are wallowing within the cracks of the TEF 3-tier division is to ensure that more academics are elected in the University boards so that they can be able to spontaneously realize the "institutional democracy", Times Higher Education reported.
Accordingly, the TEF will be evaluated through the 3 tiers- if it is excellent, outstanding and if it meets the expectations set by the collective boards.
By these standards alone, private university boards will be compelled to adapt into their systems the famed academic excellence framework and thus compete for the common fund.
Controversial as it may seem, many experts are surprisingly shifting their attentions towards these academic proposals as these could make the best out from the under-performing universities.
So, in the pursuit of academic freedom, necessary risks have to be done and competition has to arise.
Advocates and academics alike should be focused on making University qualities even better, if not best, rather than contemplating steps which would deem to cause apparent reduction in quality, Simon Gaskell, principal of Queen Mary University of London proposed.