Can academic freedom survive at for-profit universities? The UK's newest example is under the microscope

This week saw the creation of the first private university in decades. David Willetts made it clear that this small step for BPP - a private degree provider owned by US corporate giant Apollo Global - was one giant ideological leap for higher education as a whole.

If so, we need a bigger debate. So far we've heard Geoffrey Alderman - professor at the private University of Buckingham - singing tributes, but there are still three big concerns to be addressed.

Let's take quality first. According to Alderman, we have nothing to worry about. But in the liberalised US, Congress has seen fit to launch an inquiry into the growth of for-profit universities, where questions have been raised about BPP's parent group, which owns the largest for-profit university in the US. One of US lawmakers' biggest criticisms seems to be the aggressive recruitment of students – something that BPP has already been investigated for in the UK. No one is saying that our two systems are identical, but you'd think that Professor Alderman should be a bit more familiar with these dangers. He is, after all, former senior vice-president at the London Branch of the American Intercontinental University, a US for-profit institution that received a damning report by the UK Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) and was subject to much stronger criticisms in the US.

As commentators on Alderman's article have already pointed out, the second – and more important – point concerns access. Private universities may help meet a shortfall in places, but for whom and at what cost? They are not bound by any limit on tuition fees, and they are under no obligation to offer bursaries or financial support. And we mustn't be conned into thinking that this set up will just affect those who want to study in the private sector. Apollo Global is one of the largest private education providers in world; if traditional universities are forced to compete with such companies under current funding caps, they will be at a disadvantage. That tension could leave us choosing between higher top-up fees, or accepting the emergence of a two-tier system like we have at school level.

Alderman has pointed out that his highly regarded not-for-profit university costs "just £2,000 more" than mainstream fees over the course of a degree, but he forgets that for risk-averse students who are worried about debt, this could be enough to put them off – even if it is not a rational economic decision. More importantly, the problem is not so much the fees offered by private universities that exist now, but those that might be welcomed by our Conservative education minister in the future.

The final point concerns accountability. One of the key factors behind British universities' international reputation is their commitment to academic freedom, which they have built into their constitutions from the 1988 Education Reform Act. This guarantees academics' right to publish controversial or unpopular material without fear of reprisal – something that private providers aren't required to offer.

By their very definition, private universities will always be subject to their own authorities. As Alderman has pointed out, institutions such as BPP can up and leave the UK with just two weeks notice, potentially leaving students high and dry. Yes they are subject to QAA inspection, but they are not covered by Freedom of Information legislation. For those of us on the outside, it will be even harder to assess what is going on behind private university walls.

read full article