Applying the Oxbridge model to universities in the internet age
My alma mater is like most universities in that it is a single institution that does research, teaches students and awards degrees.
However, Oxford and Cambridge use a different model, the collegiate system:
The collegiate system is at the heart of the University’s success, giving students and academics the benefits of belonging to both a large, internationally renowned institution and to a smaller, interdisciplinary, academic college community. It enables leading academics and students across subjects and year groups, and from different cultures and countries to come together to share ideas.
All Colleges invest heavily in facilities for extensive library and IT provision, accommodation and welfare support, and sports and social events. The relatively small number of students at each college allows for close and supportive personal attention to be given to the induction, academic development and welfare of individuals.
Basically, what is called a university elsewhere is here split into a university and many colleges:
Colleges [...]
- Select and admit undergraduate students, and select graduate students after they are admitted [...]
- Provide accommodation, meals, common rooms, libraries, sports and social facilities, and pastoral care for their students.
- Are responsible for students’ tutorial teaching and welfare.
The University
- Determines the content of the courses within which college teaching takes place.
- Organises lectures and seminars.
- Provides a wide range of resources for teaching and learning in the form of libraries, laboratories, museums, computing facilities, etc.
- Admits and supervises graduate students, examines theses.
- Sets and marks examinations.
- Awards degrees.
Modern universities are facing many challenges, especially because they’re being paid to produce as many graduates as possible, which easily leads to grade inflation and falling academic standards in general.
Also, streaming lectures on the internet is a great idea, but it means that the lecturer doesn’t need to be physically close to the students any more.
I’m therefore wondering whether it would make sense to redesign universities along Oxbridge lines.
To be concrete, here’s what I have in mind:
Create colleges that are responsible for teaching students. They should be relatively small (perhaps up to 500 students per college), multidisciplinary, and focusing not just on academic standards, but also on creating a great environment for students, what with libraries, parties, cafés and sports.
The remaining universities would seem much smaller that current universities, because all they would be doing would be research, post-graduate supervision, public lectures (mainly on the internet, perhaps), exams and awarding degrees.
Given that the lectures could be made available on the internet, and shipping exam papers around the world is easy, there is no reason why a college would have to be in the same physical location as the university. Also, the students could attend lectures at more than one university at the same time.
For instance, one could image a college in Glasgow offering a study programme in linguistic typology that would lead to a degree from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, but that included lectures by leading typologists at universities in California, Australia and Denmark.
Because the colleges wouldn’t be marking exams, there wouldn’t be any point in their dumbing down – if they were being too nice to their students, all they’d achieve would be unsatisfied students that failed their exams.
And although there would of course be universities offering easy degrees, the very best universities would have a reputation to protect, and they would therefore be likely to be extremely rigorous.
All in all a win-win situation.
Grade inflation
The English GCSE results are out.
Shockingly, 21.6 per cent of grades were awarded an A* or A, and more than 67.1 per cent of entries were at grades A*-C. [A* is a English invention because too many pupils were getting an A.]
This makes a mockery of having an international scale of grades.
In Denmark, where the A-F scale was introduced recently (disguised as the -3–12 scale), there is a target percentage for the number of pupils getting each grade:
| A | 10% |
| B | 25% |
| C | 30% |
| D | 25% |
| E | 10% |
In that way, you can avoid grade inflation. Even if the questions get easier, it’s still only the brightest 10% that get an A.
Sadly, in England it seems to be the case that the grades are linked to the proportion of correct answers: A* – 90%, A – 80%, B – 70%, C – 60%, D – 50%, E – 40%.
That means that if the questions get easier, the proportion of pupils getting an A goes up.
This leads to grade inflation, and it also leads to some subjects being much better for getting an A* than others.
Just look at the figures!
If we look at Chemistry, the percentage of pupils getting A* has risen from 7.5% in 1994 to 23.1% in 2008.
Also, these 23.1% compare with only 3.9% getting an A* in Home Economics in the same year, so if you’re trying to get as many A*s as possible, it’s definitely worth studying this table before choosing your subjects.
I don’t see why it has to be like this.
Why not just assign a percentage to each paper at first, then pass all these markings to some central authority that could then work out exactly which percentage that would lead to 10% getting an A, 25% getting a B, and so on, and only then tell the pupils which grade they got?
Theory test
I passed my theory test today!
It consisted of two parts: The actual theory questions and a hazard perception test.
The first half was quite easy, given that you can buy a CD with all the questions and answers so that it’s “just” a question of memorising all 882 of them. (I got 50 out of 50 in this part, which is why I might be sounding a bit cocky.)
However, from the perspective of giving you knowledge that you’ll actually need as a driver, I’m not entirely impressed. For instance, consider this:
The cost of your insurance may reduce if you
- are under 25 years old
- pass the driving test first time
- do not wear glasses
- take the Pass Plus scheme
Isn’t this just an ad for the Pass Plus programme?
Other questions seem to be about the English language rather than about your abilities as a driver, e.g.:
‘Tailgating’ means
- using the rear door of a hatchback car
- following another vehicle too closely
- reversing into a parking space
- driving with rear fog lights on
Yet others can be answered with a bare miminum of common sense. For instance:
You see a car coming out from a side road in front of you. What do you do?
- Swerve past it and sound your horn
- Slow down and be ready to stop
- Flash your headlights and drive up close behind
- Accelerate past it immediately
I’m not much happier about the perception test. It’s not just because I only got 61 out of 75 in this part, but I think it’s fundamentally flawed.
They show you brief video clips of a car driving through actual traffic, and you then have to press the mouse button whenever you see a hazard.
However, there are no minus points for clicking too often (unless you really overdo it), and you’re not asked to identify the hazard, so I’m pretty sure you could just about scrape through if you just click every time you see something move.
In an ideal world, you should be sitting next to an examiner, telling them which hazards you spot and why you think they’re hazards, but even within the current system, surely it would be easy enough to make people click on the hazard itself.
SU
Nu diskuteres det i Danmark, om man skal begrænse SU’en til de første fire år af studiet, altså reelt til bachelordelen og indføre selvfinanciering (eller lån) på master-delen.
Da Phyllis studerede, fik hun en vis grad af uddannelsesstøtte. Kort efter blev den fjernet, og Labour har siden indført brugerbetaling på de engelske universiteter (£3000 pr. år, men det drøftes ofte at fjerne loftet). De skotske er stadig gratis, men hvem véd, hvor længe det varer?
Jeg vil derfor godt advare om, at det kan være en glidebane, hvis man begynder at reducere SU’en.
Jeg er godt klar over, at Skattekommissionen hævder, at folk med lange videregående uddannelser har så høje livsindtægter, at de vil tjene mere på lavere skatter, end de sætter til på lavere SU.
Det er naturligvis rigtigt for mange, fx jurister, økonomer og cand.polit.er, som sikkert sidder på de fleste pladser i kommissionen. Men det gælder ikke nødvendigvis humanister og teologer, som ofte ikke har specielt høje livsindtægter.
Man kan også nemt komme i den situation, at nyuddannede har så stor gæld, at de bruger første halvdel af deres arbejdsliv på at afbetale gælden, hvilket igen betyder, at de nok forbliver lejere, hvilket kraftigt kan forringe deres økonomiske situation ved slutningen på arbejdslivet.
SU’en er en relativt billig måde at sikre, at mange har en høj uddannelse og ikke starter livet med bundløs gæld, og den er værd at bevare!
Maths and languages
There was an article in a recent issue of The Economist arguing that it’s better to do maths or languages at high school rather than more specialised subjects such as economics:
Few economics faculties demand that applicants produce an economics A-level, and most pupils who study the subject at school do not pursue it further. Second, the curve-shifting brand of economics taught in schools is qualitatively different from the complex modelling required at university. Economics is not like foreign languages (also, and more regrettably, in decline in secondary schools): there is no particular reason to learn it young, when time could perhaps be better spent acquiring general mathematical skills.
I couldn’t agree more. When I started studying computer science at university, my problem was not that I hadn’t done computing at high school but that I hadn’t done enough maths. Similarly, biology (at least in Aarhus) often turns down applicants who’s specialised in biology in high school rather than the more fundamental skills of chemistry etc.
I tend to think there is too much choice in secondary schools these days. It’d be much better teaching all students copious amounts of maths, chemistry, grammar, modern languages (to a fluent level!), history and other fundamental disciplines.
The Danish school system
I blogged about the Scottish school system from a Danish perspective yesterday, so I thought I could reuse the same table with minor modifications to explain the Danish school system to Scots.
The Danish school system starts much later than the Scottish one. Before this, there are nurseries (vuggestue for wee kids and børnehave for bigger ones), but they’re not obligatory and there is no curriculum.
From “1. klasse” onwards, the kids have separate teachers for each subject, and the teachers will normally stay with the pupils for more than one year. In theory, a class might have the same maths teacher from they’re 7 till they’re 16.
The teachers for the first 9 (or 10) years have studied at a teaching college, not at a university, whereas they’re university-educated in secondary school.
There are several types of secondary school: The gymnasium prepares the pupils for university, but there are alternatives which focus more on commerce, construction and so on.
Oh, and there are no school uniforms in Danish schools, neither primary nor secondary ones.
| Age of youngest in class at start of school year | Age of oldest in class at start of school year | Danish system | Scottish system | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17½ | 19½ | 3. g./… | Univ. | Last year of secondary school, at the end of which they will sit an exam which will allow them to get into universities and other tertiary education. |
| 16½ | 18½ | 2. g./… | S6/univ. | |
| 15½ | 17½ | 1. g./… | S5/S6 | The first year of secondary school. There are several options here, see main text. Because of the non-obligatory “10. klasse”, the age spread is now two years instead of one. |
| 15½ | 16½ | (10. kl.) | S5 | A non-obligatory year that pupils can take if they feel they’re not ready to move on to secondary school yet. |
| 14½ | 15½ | 9. kl. | S4 | The last obligatory year of the Folkeskole (“popular school”). The kids are sitting exams at the end of it. |
| 13½ | 14½ | 8. kl. | S3 | |
| 12½ | 13½ | 7. kl. | S2 | |
| 11½ | 12½ | 6. kl. | S1 | |
| 10½ | 11½ | 5. kl. | P7 | |
| 9½ | 10½ | 4. kl. | P6 | |
| 8½ | 9½ | 3. kl. | P5 | |
| 7½ | 8½ | 2. kl. | P4 | |
| 6½ | 7½ | 1. kl. | P3 | The first year of proper school. |
| 5½ | 6½ | 0. kl. | P2 | First year of school. However, this year is considered an introduction, and the focus is still on play rather than formal learning. They might learn the shape of letters, but no real reading yet. Teaching is by nursery teachers rather than school teachers. |
Det skotske skolesystem
Phyllis som skolepige.
Jeg kom til at nævne for min mor, at min datter vil komme til at lære at læse og skrive før sin kusine, Ursula, som er et år ældre.
Det førte så til en længere samtale om det skotske skolesystem (som i parentes bemærket er forskelligt fra det engelske).
Jeg har prøvet at sammenligne det danske og det skotske system år for år nedenfor.
Der er mange forskelle. Ikke blot starter skotterne tidligere i skolen, men de forventes at kunne læse, før de starter i skolen. Og de slutter et år før danskerne.
I Danmark er der også mange alternativer til gymnasiet – det er der ikke i Skotland, hvor alle går i samme high school.
I tabellen nedenfor har jeg ignoreret mulighed for at gå i 10. klasse i Danmark, hvilket ikke modsvares af noget i Skotland.
Der er flere detaljer på engelsk her.
| Yngste i klassen ved start på skoleår | Ældste i klassen ved start på skoleår | Dansk klasse | Skotsk klasse | Bemærkninger |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17½ | 18½ | 3. g. | - | |
| 16½ | 17½ | 2. g. | S6 | Sidste år i det skotske skolesystem. Eleverne kan enten tage flere Highers eller Advanced Highers. |
| 15½ | 16½ | 1. g. | S5 | De skal i slutningen af skoleåret til Highers-eksamen. |
| 14½ | 15½ | 9. kl. | S4 | I slutningen af skoleåret skal de til Standard Grade-eksamen. Herefter kan man forlade skolen. |
| 13½ | 14½ | 8. kl. | S3 | |
| 12½ | 13½ | 7. kl. | S2 | De begynder nu at vælge fag til og fra. |
| 11½ | 12½ | 6. kl. | S1 | Første år i high school. De begynder nu at gå med slips. Lærerne underviser nu kun i de fag, de har studeret på universitetet. |
| 10½ | 11½ | 5. kl. | P7 | |
| 9½ | 10½ | 4. kl. | P6 | |
| 8½ | 9½ | 3. kl. | P5 | |
| 7½ | 8½ | 2. kl. | P4 | |
| 6½ | 7½ | 1. kl. | P3 | |
| 5½ | 6½ | 0. kl. | P2 | |
| 4½ | 5½ | - | P1 | Første rigtige skoleår – dette er rigtig skole, ikke en form for børnehave. |
| 3½ | 4½ | - | Preschool | De lærer at skrive simple ord, at tælle og at lægge sammen. |
| 2½ | 3½ | - | Antepreschool | Børnene begynder først efter deres 3-års-fødselsdag, så mange går i antepreschool i mindre end et år. De leger primært, men begynder at lære at genkende bogstaver og tal. |
Swedish schools
The Spectator’s Fraser Nelson has written a good piece about the Swedish “free school” system – basically a system where private schools get money from the councils depending on their number of pupils.
AFAIK, Fraser is married to a Swede, so he’s normally fairly clued up on Sweden.
I’m not quite sure how the Swedish free school system differs from the Danish one. I do believe it’s existed in Denmark for much longer than in Sweden, though.
Although I might disagree with some of the finer details, it’s one of the (few) areas where I broadly agree with the Tories. It’s absolutely ridiculous that private schools are so expensive here. It just drives up house prices in the catchment areas of good public-sector schools, while making it harder for new ideas to spread.