Friday, 18 May 2007

The problem with Dawkins (the other one)

The other Dawkins, that is. From today's editorial in the Herald:
The Dawkins restructure of university education reduced higher education from two tiers to one, transforming or amalgamating the former colleges of advanced education into new universities, or separate institutes within existing universities. With hindsight, this development was probably a mistake.

Oh really? With hindsight it was probably a mistake? There was never anything about the idea of taking disparate institutions and calling them the same thing, that seemed like a mistake at the time?


Eb said...

For the record, even to this day I consider UTS a real university, despite what Hecta says.

Bruce Yabsley said...

I tend to think that university is as university does. In the States MIT and Caltech are positively snobbish about retaining "Institute of Technology" in their names, rather than "University", and on any account they're among the top schools in the world (in science and engineering at least). To me, this is one of the proofs of the idleness of the name-and-category-focussed approach in Australia.