« More brains! The perpetuation of the zombie scholar | Main | A Man/Me/Then Jim - digital storytelling »



Sheila MacNeill

hear, hear Martin! Couldn't agree more. Re wikileaks I'm actually glad to hear that diplomats are having these discussions/concerns - I'd be more worried if they weren't.

Based in Scotland adds another dimension to the fees debate, it will be interesting to see what impact yesterday will have on decisions in Holyrood next year.


Great post Martin. Sometimes the story doesn't break until well after the spin is over - wikileaks has proved this, and we'll see it again with fees and the new funding model.


Shirky was very good on the Today Program yesterday on the implications of American behaviour for democracy: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9270000/9270796.stm


And Jeff Jarvis today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/12/101209_cyber_wars_wt_sl.shtml

Magnus Ramage

Great post. Stefan Collini wrote something similar to your view on tuition fees, in the London Review of Books: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n21/stefan-collini/brownes-gamble

Joel Greenberg

Good summary Martin. Everytime Clegg and Cable are put on the spot (this is obviously the Government paty line), they say that if they knew before taking power what they know now about the state of the UK financial situation, they would have taken a different view. However, they haven't produced one example of something that they know now that they didn't know before the election. Wasn't the whole election fought by them on the terribel state of the economy?

Martin Le Voi

Hi Martin
I was one of the million or so who marched against the Iraq war. The evidence was plain that we were being hoodwinked by the USA, why Blair could not see through it defeats me.

But I won't be marching against the student fee plan. I am appalled at the way every sector threatened by cuts yells and screams "cut them, not us! We are special!". If only some could have the integrity to say "yes cut us, we can take it". Well, I will stand and say we can. Our output is (largely) privileged people who can afford the cost of the education they received. As we see in the USA, there are ways (needs blind assessment etc.) for fee-based education to reach out fairly to the poor. And why should the privileged have the source of their privilege funded by the unprivileged? The argument that its an attack on humanities is totally spurious, as any financial analysis shows.

So come on, HE sector, have the guts to say we can take it *and* support widening participation properly.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos and videos from edtechie99. Make your own badge here.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter