Universities must share research funding

As a philosopher, Professor John Haldane (Opinion, 17 February) can afford to be dispassionate in addressing the vexed issue of the role of research in the university, and there can be little doubt a university such as his own, which currently depends as much upon research income as upon teaching grant, is badly out of kilter.

But reliance upon the views of Newman and Mill to the exclusion of Humboldt, the true father of the modern university, leads him to an opposite, even worse distortion. As Humboldt saw, both students and academics are engaged in continual learning, and must take all knowledge as provisional.

Only by engaging students in research-type activities can we develop the graduate attributes of questioning and critical judgment. University teachers who embody and transmit these qualities will do research, whether funded to do so or not; but the concentration of research funding in a few elite universities is harmful to all, encouraging grantsmanship and managerialism, rather than the pursuit of ideas for their own sake.

JULIAN NEWMAN

Professor of computing

Glasgow Caledonian University

Like all of us who have done original research in philosophy, Prof Haldane will be aware of two things: teaching in universities is not restricted to the transference of knowledge, and the outcomes of original research, and therefore of its possible benefits, are logically out of reach of any predictive model.

If no teaching of research degrees were carried out in universities, then his argument that too much emphasis, and ipso facto funding, is being given by academics to research would not be tenuous, neither would it be tendentious.

Further, if Prof Haldane has discovered a way of assessing the possible benefits of original research in the humanities, we need look no further for proof of the existence of God, as he has obviously found it and, with it, direct access to the deity.

By the way, has Prof Haldane's own research into the benefits of research in the humanities been evaluated, and has this evaluation shown that it is of benefit to society?

(DR) FRANCIS ROBERTS

Greenbank Avenue

Edinburgh

Prof Haldane makes the sensible point that, in reappraising our financial priorities, it is an opportunity to review the principal role and aims of our universities. If it is, indeed, a question of weighing priorities, should anyone be be surprised that teaching and learning tops the list ahead of research?

Typically, his critics, in their rush to protect self-interest, contrive to give the false impression he is opposed to all research.

Of course, genuine research is vital if our depth of knowledge and understanding is to be extended, but there are too many glaring examples of university academics carrying out self-indulgent, trivial and, frankly, bizarre "research".

ARCHIE STIRLING

Craigarnhall

Bridge of Allan, Stirling