What is higher education and who is it for?

The Vice-Chancellor and I have joined the debate on behalf of Uppsala University and presented our views. Our argument, principally, is that the role of a university is to educate and pursue research. To be able to do this, we need to decide ourselves what is required. What research we do within the budget provided by unrestricted direct government funding must be decided by reference to research issues and gaps. The same applies to education. Universities and other higher education institutions must educate students who are equipped for future employment. The education must be research-based and of a high standard. The focus and the scale of education must be determined by those who are responsible for it – though in close dialogue with future employers and politicians. Ensuring that society is provided with the skills that are needed involves much more than producing labour to meet urgent needs and for shortage occupations.

The overwhelming criticism against the government’s initiatives from virtually the entire sector as well as many other actors in society is therefore not directed at the government’s desire to decide on the focus or point out an area where skills are needed. An initiative in one area without additional new funding obviously means a need for prioritisation. We could take on tough issues of this kind in dialogue with the decision-makers. But no opportunity has been offered for this.

The government wants us to reallocate resources from freestanding courses and distance learning courses. The question naturally arises where the money is to be taken from – at our University? In the humanities and social sciences, we educate 60 per cent of all students at Uppsala University, around 18,000 full-time equivalent students. They study in some 70 Bachelor’s programmes, 95 Master’s programmes and more than 1,100 freestanding courses. We are constantly deliberating, setting and changing priorities. Courses that fail to deliver quality or have few applicants are discontinued. Other courses are expanded. This is how we work all the time. Moreover, we have good collaborations with the other disciplinary domains, so it is regrettable to put us up against each other.

But does this mean the government, in its stewardship of tax revenues, should not be able to decide what the taxpayers’ money is used for? This is a very legitimate question. We cannot expect to be allowed to do whatever we want with the funds we receive from the government. However, we are already (too?) thoroughly regulated by appropriation directions, learning outcomes, thematic audits, reporting requirements, annual reports and so on. So this is not a valid argument.

Academia stands for continuity and takes responsibility for identifying needs for both specialised and broad knowledge. In this way, we in the humanities and social sciences can stand for a strategic long-term approach, planning for education that benefits society far beyond stop-start actions and immediate needs.

For society is rapidly changing and facing great challenges. Precisely for this reason, it is important that we stand firm, that we have a holistic perspective and do not give in to populist conclusions. We should instead continue and intensify the dialogue between academia and other actors in society. We take our democratic responsibility and provide specialised and broad education to equip the people of Sweden for a changing environment.

Tora Holmberg
Vice-Rector, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences