Dissolution of the universities
The case for a "dissolution of the universities," modelled metaphorically on Henry VIII’s dissolution of the monasteries, rests on several systemic failures in modern higher education. The arguments in favour of such a dramatic intervention suggest that a reasoned proportion of such institutions might be "culled" under this rationale:
Many of them represent a misallocation of both public and private resources. There is excessive public subsidy for low-return degrees. Many degrees offer little to no return on investment, either economically or socially. Government-backed student loans and subsidies may fund courses with negative economic value.
They involve high opportunity cost. Years spent pursuing degrees with limited market utility could instead be used for acquiring vocational skills, apprenticeships, or entering the workforce earlier.
In too many cases there are poor outcomes for graduates. A significant portion of graduates work in roles that do not require a degree. According to some reports, up to 40–50% of recent graduates are in jobs not needing a degree.
It was recently revealed that roughly one in eight graduates may end up on benefits, undermining the premise that university guarantees upward mobility.
Student debt often exceeds graduates’ earning capacity, especially in non-STEM or non-professional degrees, leading to what is effectively a "student debt trap."
There has been a tidal wave of degree inflation. A university degree has become a baseline credential for jobs that historically did not require one, shifting the burden of basic employability onto individuals rather than employers or schools.
Universities produce far more graduates in certain fields than the labour market demands. Too many qualifications in such areas as anti-colonialism, gender studies, slavery, and grievance studies contribute to low wages and underemployment because there is no market demand for them.
Some make the case that, instead of opening minds to possibilities, many universities now represent ideological capture, intellectual redundancy and institutional conformity. Some argue that universities have become ideological echo chambers, especially in the social sciences, serving political ends more than critical inquiry or innovation.
People point to an erosion of rigor, grade inflation, lack of academic accountability, and low standards in certain disciplines, all of which diminish the credibility of university qualifications.
Just as the monasteries in Tudor England had accumulated wealth and influence while drifting from their original purpose, universities today are accused of hoarding endowments while students struggle financially, expanding administration while cutting teaching quality, and losing connection to public service and practical education.
How much might be culled? A rough segmentation based on performance and economic return would suggest that for top-tier institutions, maybe 10–20%, we’d need to preserve high-ROI degrees, global research and innovation.
For middle-tier institutions, perhaps 40–50%, we could restructure and pivot toward vocational training, apprenticeships, or STEM-focused education.
The bottom-tier institutions maybe 30–40% could be dissolved or converted, either shut down or repurposed into polytechnics, digital learning centers, or community colleges.
Just as Henry VIII reclaimed monastic wealth and land for state use, a targeted dissolution of universities could reclaim public funding, reduce personal debt, and refocus educational infrastructure onto high quality learning, practical, and socially productive outcomes. It would prioritize value creation, intellectual and financial, over meaningless grade inflation, decentralize knowledge production, and reintroduce competition and accountability into higher learning.
Madsen Pirie