It seems that the People 'n' Planet league table of universities, with its arr[og]ant 'degree' classifications, may have gone the way of all flesh. Those who say they know about such matters think it's a dundeal. P&P probably got tired of all the carping about methodology that came from winners and losers alike. Well, it was dodgy, but P&P were overly righteous about the whole fandango.
Good riddance, say some; it was just infantile. A shame, say others; the sector needs a means of comparing and contrasting to stimulate greater efforts.
What struck me, as I have watched the usual suspects do well over the years, was the hypocrisy of it all. Those who routinely deplore school league tables (for the usual left-liberal reasons), were quite happy to see them operate in higher education – sometimes even when they thought the methodology was iffy – because it was for a good 'green' cause. An ends justifying means sort of thing than can lead the unthinking into very hot water.
This is what EAUC (which abhors any vacuum) is saying about what happens next:
"We are pleased to be supporting AUDE taking the lead on the estates areas of sustainability and we look forward to further supporting them during the forthcoming consultation period. We see this work as the first phase in a multi phased whole institution approach to all aspects of university and college sustainability including teaching, learning and research, leadership and governance and partnership and engagement. We aim to work with the sector in the forthcoming months to ensure there is a mechanism to report continuous improvement across these non-estates areas. We will be working with sector staff and student bodies, as well as our Members, to develop this. We will keep you informed as this progresses."
Note that progress is assumed (if not guaranteed). More on all this later on as EAUC attempts to square the circle of reporting "continuous improvement" without comparing any institutions.
Respond