Will superuniversities save UK HE?

The "quasi-merger"--whatever that means--of Kent and Greenwich does not constitute a "super-university," whatever that might mean. Language matters. Logic matters. Facts matter. there is actually a history of mergers. Dare I challenge these authors to examine it?

This all sounds awful. Some of these VCs are just making excuses for our rapidly declining academic standards, which they should be preventing not facilitating. Which one of these so-called super-universities is going to attracted the world's best scholars and students? None.

An interesting article, although all but one of the segments were written by a VC, Pro-VC or former VC, which is not particularly representative and maybe gives the slight impression of future candidates to lead new mergers posting their CVs… The merger between the New University of Ulster (NUU) and Ulster Polytechnic in 1985 is a particularly interesting example. In that case entire subject areas were lost, so staff at ‘Kentwich’ should brace themselves for something similar. “Nor should we underestimate the significance of the interim leadership in place at one of the institutions, meaning that leaders’ egos – which bedevil private-sector mergers – were not in play.” Yes, deciding who should be VC of such a quasi-merger could have led to serious issues, but with Kentwich the choice on which side should lead couldn't possibly have been argued any other way, given the relative financial imbalance and a range of other factors affecting one of the two organisations.

For all this academic debate about mergers, it is absolutely clear that the driving force bringing mergers into consideration is financial, but where does this discourse examine how mergers will actually create more financial sustainability. If that core purpose isn't clear, then this remains a purely academic debate.