However, the inefficient operation mechanism of British universities will not respond quickly to the aftermath, and it is likely to "send away" the graduating students by shortening the teaching time and delaying the graduation time, and the opportunity for economic compensation is slim. The struggle for rights protection between students and parents in China is likely to be fruitless.
S, a well-known domestic study agent friend, contacted me on WeChat, saying that the strike of British university teachers that started on February 22, 2008, 2065438, caused serious concern of international students and their parents in Britain and China, and S's work phone was almost ringing off the hook, mostly asking for information and coping plans.
Including Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Imperial College, King's College London, Manchester, Newcastle and Nottingham, 40,000 teachers took part in the strike. The benefits of teachers' pensions in Britain, the interests of students who are absent from classes, especially those in China, and the right to educate "whether public goods or commodities" are like a gushing magma, burning the credibility of international education.
If the government doesn't invest in public education, who can we expect?
According to the Guardian (2065438+February 22, 2008), the focus of the British university teachers' pension problem is to change from a defined-income plan to a defined-contribution plan, that is, employers representing British universities (UUK) require that teachers' benefits be determined according to the profitability of pensions in the stock market.
Pension has changed from a "hard-core crop" to a "blank check" with uncertain future, which has been strongly opposed by the Union of Universities and Colleges (UCU) in Britain.
At present, there is a huge gap of 665,438+billion pounds in British university teachers' pension, which is the total outbreak of many contradictions accumulated by the British education authorities in the past 10 years.
British higher education is dominated by public mode, and government financial allocation is the main body to support the normal operation of schools. Since 2008, financial pressures such as the financial crisis, the European debt crisis and the "Britain's withdrawal from the EU" breakup fee have continuously squeezed the space for education investment.
In 2009, the Cameron government abolished the system of free admission to public universities for domestic and EU students (Scottish universities still maintained the original free policy), and the tuition fee rose rapidly from the initial 3,000 pounds per person per year to 9,000 pounds. In essence, the government "got rid of the burden" and reduced the financial investment in education.
Can the increased tuition reduce the financial pressure left by the British government's "inaction"? I'm afraid not!
Some British universities, including some "top 30" prestigious schools, have hired a large number of "temporary workers" in order to tighten their budgets-reducing the number of regular teachers and increasing the number of temporary teachers. Why? English teachers are too expensive!
In Britain, although the income of university teachers is not strictly linked to the income of civil servants, it is definitely higher than the middle level of society, and the annual salary before tax is generally not less than 20,000 pounds (about 1.76 million yuan at the current exchange rate). This is the income baseline of higher education industry formed by the game and running-in between employers and employees for many years, and it has also become a universally recognized wage quota and social insurance system.
The British government, which is financially strapped, seems to have no time to manage the financial situation of universities, and the management (universities) seems to be unable to operate on teachers' pensions.
Can I get a refund for courses that have been suspended because of the strike?
The interests of British teachers need to be protected. How to deal with the interests of British students?
According to the BBC, 90,000 British college students have jointly asked the school to compensate for the tuition loss caused by the strike. On this sensitive issue caused by the strike, the British education authorities are ambiguous. On the one hand, they emphasize that British universities should ensure the interests of students, on the other hand, they say that universities have the final decision.
Although China and Britain are both public-led education systems, the role of the government is quite different. British universities are the product of "de-administration" and operate relatively independently. In this environment, there is no "red tape" like the education authorities in China. In other words, if British universities do not agree to pay tuition fees, there is nothing the government can do. Moreover, once the British universities agree to refund the fees, it means that students accept the reality of missing classes, and the missing classes can't be made up at all.
Obviously, money is not the main contradiction. Students and parents are most concerned about whether they can successfully finish their classes and get their degrees. Especially for China students studying for a master's degree in the UK, the one-year academic system is very tight, and the end of February is the key period of the main course. At present, the strike of teachers 14 days can be said to be a fatal blow. Once employers and employees still can't reach an agreement and postpone it for a longer time, the possibility of normal graduation is slim.
For foreign students in China, failure to get their degree certificates (formal degrees are usually issued at the end of the year) and transcripts in September will have a negative impact on their work and settlement in China.
Risk and crisis of educational commercialization
This strike is the most serious crisis of higher education in Britain since the all-Britain strike in 2009 under Cameron's government.
In an interview with BBC, a law student at King's College, University of London, put forward the contradiction between education as a public good and a commodity.
When the government no longer acts as a sponsor of public goods, the public function of education will give way to the commodity function, and the so-called public education will exist in name only.
When universities do whatever it takes to survive, not to mention the public function of education, the commodity function may not be satisfied, such as students' breach of contract due to strike.
As a result of the "de-administration" of British higher education, the right of independent management of universities has been clarified, but it has slipped into a state of "de-publicity" of laissez-faire and pushed all risks to universities.
At present, the British education authorities have also participated in the strike, and I don't think there will be a long-term "suspension" of university classes.
However, the inefficient operation mechanism of British universities will not respond quickly to the aftermath, and the impact caused by the suspension of classes cannot be completely repaired. It is likely to "send away" the graduating students by shortening the teaching time and delaying the graduation time.
If this can be done, it is already the best result. Students affected by low-probability events are expected to admit that they are unlucky, and the school is likely to refuse economic compensation on the grounds of "force majeure".
In addition, among the international students in British universities, China has the highest proportion, which is also the most affected by this strike. However, according to the multicultural logic analysis of British universities, they will never give priority to solving their own difficulties because of the high proportion of students in China. This is the British "principle of fairness". Students and parents in China can fight for their rights, but according to my years of observation, it is impossible to achieve the expected results.