Irish universities and a tale of efficiency

There is, I think, a growing sense of alarm in Irish higher education that when the 2010 global university rankings are compiled, the position of Irish institutions may be found to have slipped; or if not in 2010, then certainly in the following years. As the available funding declines, various metrics commonly used to determine rankings will begin to work against us, from higher student-staff ratios to lower research funding and outputs. We are, as I have pointed out before, talking the language of education and innovation, but we are not paying the bills.

However, if it’s any comfort, we are right up there in another league table: the table of the most ‘efficient’ universities. A little while ago the European Commission published a Study on the efficiency and effectiveness of public spending on tertiary education. In this Ireland was found to have the 5th most efficient university sector in Europe, coming behind the UK, Japan, the Netherlands and Finland, but ahead of such countries as Germany, Belgium, France, Finland and the United States. It must be pointed out that the most recent year in the study was 2005, and given all the cuts we have probably become massively more ‘efficient’ still. In essence the table measures the funding and other revenues received by universities, and then looks at the various outputs achieved on the back of that funding. Ireland does well, and this has been noted in the media.

But what does this mean? Is it being suggested that the silver bullet of higher education is high quality education and research funded by very little? Is the process of pushing through ‘efficiencies’ a limitless one? In other words, can further cuts be applied incrementally more or less for ever without compromising quality? I remember vividly the then UK government’s policy in the early 1990s of applying an annual ‘efficiency gain’ to university budgets, meaning an annual reduction in the core grant. It did not take too long before serious questions began to be raised as to whether the universities could maintain quality in such circumstances.

At one level it is good that we are doing more with less. Maximising performance is always great. But efficiency is not a strategy. It is merely a form of good management, and there isn’t really any credible route to better results via less money. The ultimate efficiency, if this policy were extended logically, would be to give up teaching and to hand out degree parchments on the day the students first register. But I doubt that would impress the world; and that’s whom we have to impress.

Explore posts in the same categories: higher education

Tags: , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

6 Comments on “Irish universities and a tale of efficiency”

  1. Vincent Says:

    I see the fellow that wrote the Lisbon Treaties is alive and well and has moved on to report writing. I do wish someone would tell him that Language is designed as a means of communication and as such is an ART.
    Sorry, I halted reading at page 20, the spectre of another 127 pages I have to rewrite in my mind was giving me a migraine.

    Abstract: Public tertiary education systems in the EU Member States are studied by comparing used
    resources with education and research outputs and outcomes. Efficiency in public tertiary education
    systems across EU countries plus Japan and the US is assessed with semi-parametric methods and
    stochastic frontier analysis. A core group of efficient countries is identified. A good quality secondary
    system, output-based funding rules, institutions’ independent evaluation, and staff policy autonomy
    are positively related to efficiency. Moreover, evidence is provided that public spending on tertiary
    education is more effective in what concerns labour productivity growth and employability when it is
    coupled with efficiency.
    Key words: efficiency; effectiveness; public spending; tertiary education; universities

  2. Aoife Citizen Says:

    I did try to look in to the issue of efficiency using the THES scores; my idea was that staff/student ratio was a measure of resourcing and could be used as a factor to multiply the over-all score to give a measure of efficiency. We, at Ireland’s leading university, did extremely well; in the top ten, just below the famous public universities, like UofT and Berkeley.

  3. kevin denny Says:

    I have quickly looked through this report. They use a variety of techniques & seem to have done a good job so I would be inclined to remove the commas from ‘efficiency’. Measuring efficiency in services is more difficult than say manufacturing where it is easier to count the “widgets”; its generally also harder for the public sector than the private. But unless you have a strong background in economics or statistics a lot of this report will be pretty opaque (thats what PhDs are for, alas). Whoever wrote the Lisbon Treaty wouldn’t understand it either for the same reason that I don’t understand legal documents: its hard when you don’t have the training.
    It does *not* follow, incidentally, that we have become massively more efficient since 2005 unless the outputs haven’t fallen or fallen that much. If we can do much the same with less, well isn’t that an efficiency gain?
    The report distinguishes between efficiency in teaching & in research and its the former that we excel in being fairly average on the research efficiency front. The UK excels in both (see Figure 18). So some good news but room for improvement.
    Incidentally, I can’t think of any part of the public sector in Ireland whose efficiency has been so thoroughly analysed.


Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.