Enrollments at the five recently established technology universities (TUs) have experienced a 9 per cent decrease in the last two years, contrasting with the 4 per cent growth witnessed by eight conventional universities. Detailed analysis reveals that each TU saw a continuous decrease in enrollments shortly after their founding. This should be a concern to anyone involved in this sector.
The Technological Universities Bill, introduced by former education minister Jan O’Sullivan, aimed to increase opportunities at university-level. This objective has been constantly underscored by her successors. However, the crucial role TUs play in promoting economic, social and cultural growth outside urban centers is being overshadowed. There is a significant need for these institutions in correcting the disproportionate investment in Dublin that has been twice the per capita rate for over ten years, even before the Metrolink fiasco.
The National Spatial Strategy has been deserted in all but document, and the neglect of TUs reflects a Dublin-centric political approach. This has led to substantial portions of Ireland feeling forgotten, causing many to turn their political allegiance away from conventional government parties.
The declining student numbers at TUs put the institutions at substantial financial risk, given their largely fixed labor expenses. A decrease in revenue can easily lead to insolvency. The Irish public sector has historically avoided layoffs, opting instead for attrition and gradual reduction. With demographic decline expected to happen by the end of the decade, TUs are now confronted with serious challenges. This understanding is reflected in the fact that 91 percent of Teachers’ Union of Ireland members, one of the key staff unions, voted for industrial action against the government’s failure to deliver.
The TU programme’s success can be largely attributed to the overly optimistic promises made by Minister Simon Harris. His flamboyant, theatrical political style set high expectations, especially in lesser-known academic institutions he vowed to transform to the level of intergalactic awe. He sold an ambitious vision rooted in the 2011 Hunt report that recommended a unification exercise of our rather splintered higher education system. Over the past decade this initiative has seen the list of government financed higher education establishments shrink from 39 to 18. This could likely be a strategic move towards managed downsizing rather than the promised grand advancement.
The Hunt report highlighted the necessity for a united system, half a century after the establishment of the original regional technical colleges (RTCs). The diverse performance indices of these institutions heavily influenced students’ preferences in colleges and courses via the CAO points. The 1980s were simpler times when universities were quaint centres educating a select few sectors of society, with most students using slow modes of transport and few owning their own vehicles. Universities have significantly evolved over the last 40 years into colossal corporate entities, powered by public funds and loans from the European Investment Bank. They modernised their curriculums to rise to the competition from traditional RTCs and Institutes of Technology (IoTs), offering a broad range of degree programmes and previously unthinkable elements such as work experience and entry level courses. The accessibility improved with motorways and targeted student housing attracting younger students from wider regions. The progress of ambitious, university-level IoTs has seemingly been hindered and the decline of some IoTs concealed due to the TU mergers.
The government’s insular attitude towards investment has only worsened these trends. TU Dublin’s plans for a billion-euro mega campus contrast sharply with the modest facelifts dominating the rest of the sector. Over the past two decades, MTU Cork’s expenditure on new structures has exceeded half a billion euros. The growth of new disciplines seems to have plateaued roughly 20 years ago, with no significant developments since the approval of architecture and arts degrees in 2005.
Universities, strongly enmeshed in our political landscape, waged a war to obstruct the rising influence of the Institutes of Technology (IoTs). They seized an opportunity as the entire sector was chiefly crafted from OECD reports and global bank funding, backed by EU solidarity funding; it was never a truly beloved component of Ireland’s public sector. When EU funding evaporated, the State did not adequately intervene to shore up the sector. Most strikingly, no comprehensive study advocated for the entire project of Technological Universities (TUs). An earnest attempt to analyse system financing, the Cassells report, eventually became a series of random funding boosts.
The newly appointed presidents of the TUs, drawn towards the roles with the allure of revolution, have found themselves handling highly sensitive and poorly-funded mergers. The anticipated revolutionary agenda of innovative schemes and subjects, particularly in areas like pharmacy, veterinary medicine, teacher education, capital programmes, new lecturer contracts, a borrowing framework and a student accommodation initiative, seems to be in a standstill.
While each of the eight universities is currently investing €200-300 million in their quintennial capital initiatives, the TU sector is still anticipating its landmark future; the sector remains drenched in austerity.
This administration has attempted to declare the “end of mission” on the TU agenda, all without delivering on the promises they made. With enrolment numbers shrinking, there’s always a threat that the succeeding administration might reduce the focus on the TU agenda, reset policies and follow through on the Hunt report’s proposition of consolidating and systematically diminishing the sector.
Dr Ray Griffin, a senior lecturer specialising in managing and organising at the South East Technological University, penned this piece.