WIT University

Bards

and the biggest parish pump politicans come from cork - need we mention the "I want a brand spanking new €200m Airport Terminal for Free" whine

merlante

nesf wrote: »

Beyond parochial desires to have a university on your doorstep, within the context of Ireland, we don't need another university diluting the value of degrees in this country.

The reason why these debates so often degenerate into mud slinging and 'parochiality' is because of comments such as this. Imbedded in your question is the insinuation that the people of Waterford and the south east want to grab more than their fair share, and to hell with the country. Imbedded in there also is this idea that the people on the opposite side of the debate from you are doing damage to the country, while the 'we' in 'we don't need another university' know better.

Your own outlook is itself sectional and parochial. Statements like 'we don't need another university' and 'diluting the value of degrees' are the sort of unproved 'truisms' that are bandied about in Dublin and elsewhere by those who have access to all levels of service provision and decry the vast sums of money supposedly squandered 'in the regions'.

First off, nowhere is it written or suggested that 7 universities is the perfect number of universities for Ireland. Judging by our current distribution, 8 is more logical. Judging by foreign examples, Finland has a lot more whereas Norway has more or less the same distribution.

The problem at the moment in Ireland is that we have a university is every large region (350-550,000 people) situated in the main economic centre for that region, except for the south east (460,000 people) and Waterford.

The issue here is twofold:

a) Parity of 3rd and 4th level investment in Ireland across the regions is not there. Once a geographic/demographic distribution has been established, it is criminal to make a single exception.

b) According to every major economic indicator, the south east is weakening to the point where it is not generating its fair share of wealth for the nation. (The south east was formerly one of the wealthiest regions in the state.)

If we as a country could truly shake off our 'parochial' shackles, and do what is objectively good and right, the WIT's development would be given priority over that of NUI Maynooth and DCU.

nesf wrote: »

It's not like people from Waterford don't have access to many good universities already. People are no more entitled to a university on their doorstep than they are a hospital, if you want the advantages of a large city, then move to one. diluting the value of degrees

In the wider sense of the word, everyone in Ireland would have 'access' to universities whether or not there were any universities in Ireland at all. But what kind of access?

Every large region, the West, mid-West, East, Dublin and South has at least one university, usually centred in the regional capital.

Waterford is entitled to a university just as much as Galway or Limerick. It plays the same strategic regional and national role as those cities. But far more importantly, it is the capital of the south east region, a region that exceeds the population of the West and mid-West in population.

You have three universities on the western seaboard within 225km. There is not a single university within 120km of Waterford city, or within 160km of Wexford town.

So when you talk about 'access', please bear in mind the facts. Access to 3rd and 4th level education is a fact of life elsewhere on the island within a reasonable commute. There is no such access in the south east region, which has a larger population than the West and mid-West.

Regarding your 'diluting if degrees' comment. Iot degrees are accredited by the same bodies, and must measure up to the same standards, as university degrees. Moving towards a knowledge economy, we need more people with degrees in this country, and it is a fact that the proportion of degree holders in the south east is less than the national average.

nesf wrote: »

The IT system most definitely has its place in our third level system, they don't offer lesser versions of university degrees they offer different qualifications altogether.

Correct. They have their place in localities where there is demand for practical, industrial qualifications, where there is no requirement or justification for a university. There is a far greater need for a university in the south east than another IoT.

The south east has the same skills need as the West, the mid-West, the South, the East and Dublin. This need must be met similarly.

nesf wrote: »

For all the fun of the UCC/CIT rivalry it is a fact that the grads leaving both were snapped up by companies for different reasons (I'm generalising horribly here). For years (perhaps not nowadays, I've no friends who recently graduated from either institution) if you wanted a hands on practical IT guy you hired the CIT grad, if you wanted a more abstract programmer guy you hired a UCC guy. The pay grades were fairly similar once both got experience, and I'm horribly generalising here, but the IT grads weren't lesser cousins of the UCC grads, they just had undergone a different kind of training.

This distinction is dated in that IoTs and universities offer many of the same degrees these days. However, IoTs are not permitted to offer Arts or Humanities degrees. If IoTs are really (and nobody truly believes they are) 'equivalent but different' to universities, then why are universities permitted to intrude on the territory of IoTs in offering Engineering and Computing courses, and so on, or should IoTs be reduced to certs in basket weaving?

This is a moot point regarding the south east's case for a university in any case.

We have sufficient access to the industrial type of courses offered by IoTs in the south east as it is. That is not what people are fighting for. What we don't have access to are Arts and Humanities courses. Is the south east to remain a hinterland of factory towns while the West, mid-West, East, South, etc., etc. develop culturally?

We in the south east are fully in favour of the binary system of IoTs and universities with their separate missions. But we currently don't enjoy the binary system in the south east, because there is no university.

nesf wrote: »

Removing ITs and calling them all universities just to give an ego boost to some people would be a bad thing imho.

I agree, this would be a disgrace. (Ignoring the 'ego boost' comment.)

There is only one case for the creation of a new university (or upgrade) that should be entertained over the next century in this country, because there is only one large, populous region of the country that is not served by a university; that is the case for a university in the south east.

This is not about a bishop trying to build an airport to a remote shrine, this is about providing a parity of education and investment across the country and giving the south east what it desperately needs. Please try to see the difference.

Essexboy

The North-West does not have a university. Sligo and Letterkeny have ITs only.
Should we get a uni too?

BBM77

Essexboy wrote: »

The North-West does not have a university. Sligo and Letterkeny have ITs only.
Should we get a uni too?

If ye have a genuine case, ye should. If this is a “if ye are getting one, so should we” kind of post it is a petty attitude. Waterford was a rock solid case for a university and does not need to apologise for it even if other regions do not have one or has one and is put out about it.

nesf

Bards wrote: »

and the biggest parish pump politicans come from cork - need we mention the "I want a brand spanking new €200m Airport Terminal for Free" whine

Nah, our guys have nothing on the jackeen lads.

Dac51 wrote: »

NESF, your comments are seen as parochial by a lot of people here. From our point of view it is almost like you are telling us to bow down and accept Dublin / Cork dominance over the south east region.

If you want to view them as such you're misreading them and missing my points on the unusual position of the south region as being an area that is "naturally" split by the influence of one really big city and one small city. Versus say Galway which is all on it's ownsome out in the West somewhere. To say Waterford deserves a university because Galway has one isn't comparing like with like for this among many other reasons.

nesf

merlante wrote: »

Regarding your 'diluting if degrees' comment. Iot degrees are accredited by the same bodies, and must measure up to the same standards, as university degrees. Moving towards a knowledge economy, we need more people with degrees in this country, and it is a fact that the proportion of degree holders in the south east is less than the national average.

I was specifically referring to the "market value" of degrees and how more people holding them essentially forces people to do masters to "distinguish themselves from the pack". If you don't believe me, think about how common MAs and MScs were versus ten years ago. The idea that we need more people with degrees in this country than we already produce misses the point, we already have an absurdly high percentage intake into third level from secondary. Despite what politicians want you to believe, we can't all be in high grade IT jobs (I know you weren't making as simplistic a point as this, I'm using an overblown and simple example to underline my point better).

merlante

nesf wrote: »

I was specifically referring to the "market value" of degrees and how more people holding them essentially forces people to do masters to "distinguish themselves from the pack". If you don't believe me, think about how common MAs and MScs were versus ten years ago. The idea that we need more people with degrees in this country than we already produce misses the point, we already have an absurdly high percentage intake into third level from secondary. Despite what politicians want you to believe, we can't all be in high grade IT jobs (I know you weren't making as simplistic a point as this, I'm using an overblown and simple example to underline my point better).

That's fair enough up to a point.

It's a fact that less people have degrees in the south east than people in, say, the south or the west. If you saying that one of the ways to prevent the slide in the market value of Irish degrees is to deprive the people of the south east, I'm not going to agree with you. If there are too many degrees, and I'm not convinced of that, and the government would certainly disagree vis a vis science and engineering degrees, then a mechanism should be brought in to address this across the board, not to merely prevent one region from developing.

It's worth pointing out as well, that the introduction of a university in the south east would stimulate Arts and Humanities degrees to a far larger extent than technology degrees. The WIT already produces a high number of computing and science graduates, so that is not going to change much. Carlow IT also has these courses.

Arts and Humanities courses do not have a direct bearing on the economy, but they do have an indirect benefit, and they do directly affect the cultural development of a region. The more graduates in history, literature, philosophy and so on that we have, the less 'parochiality' and the more civic spirit we engender in a region and in the country as a whole.

Nobody wants to live in an area dominated by industrial and commercial concerns where there is not the slightest hint arts and culture. We in the south east want the same quality and extent of education that is taken for granted in the West, mid-West, South, East and in Dublin. No more, no less.

merlante

Essexboy wrote: »

The North-West does not have a university. Sligo and Letterkeny have ITs only.
Should we get a uni too?

There is a university in Derry that covers most of the north west. Also, the population density of the north west is only half that of the south east.

There is only one gaping hole on the map as far as university education goes, and that is the south east.

nesf

merlante wrote: »

That's fair enough up to a point.

It's a fact that less people have degrees in the south east than people in, say, the south or the west. If you saying that one of the ways to prevent the slide in the market value of Irish degrees is to deprive the people of the south east, I'm not going to agree with you. If there are too many degrees, and I'm not convinced of that, and the government would certainly disagree vis a vis science and engineering degrees, then a mechanism should be brought in to address this across the board, not to merely prevent one region from developing.

It's worth pointing out as well, that the introduction of a university in the south east would stimulate Arts and Humanities degrees to a far larger extent than technology degrees. The WIT already produces a high number of computing and science graduates, so that is not going to change much. Carlow IT also has these courses.

Arts and Humanities courses do not have a direct bearing on the economy, but they do have an indirect benefit, and they do directly affect the cultural development of a region. The more graduates in history, literature, philosophy and so on that we have, the less 'parochiality' and the more civic spirit we engender in a region and in the country as a whole.

Nobody wants to live in an area dominated by industrial and commercial concerns where there is not the slightest hint arts and culture. We in the south east want the same quality and extent of education that is taken for granted in the West, mid-West, South, East and in Dublin. No more, no less.

I think you are overestimating the effect of a university and underestimating how much of what you speak of is for actually caused by other factors. Putting the degree holders into the south east won't make factories spring up, the factories spring up where infrastructure (and a huge bunch of other things) happens to be in place. People migrate towards these areas simply because they want to do them. UCC has many fine courses for people wanting to get into investment banking but there are very few jobs of that kind in Cork and the surrounding area, for the vast majority of the graduates they have to go to Dublin or London or similar to work in the area because despite a steady stream of fresh faced bright graduates there's no reason for an investment bank to set up in Cork when you take other factors into account. Again, I'm using a restricted example to underline my point, which basically is that you're looking at universities in the wrong way, there most certainly are positive externalities that spill off being a university town but it's all to easy to mistake positives that are unrelated to a university town that for example, Cork and Dublin might have because of their relative sizes and/or strategic advantages.

I'd also be sceptical of the cultural benefits that you assign to having a university. They are not really the public centres of culture of idealism and closer to the more harsh ivory tower image in many ways. Much of the work that is done, in humanities departments especially, does not in any way have positive spill over effects for the city around it. I think you are being too idealistic about what universities give back to their cities and might need to think more about what the cities give to their universities.

Ri na hEireann

Putting the degree holders into the south east won't make factories spring up, the factories spring up where infrastructure (and a huge bunch of other things) happens to be in place.

Care to elaborate on "a huge bunch of other things"?
As far as infrastructure is concerned in the South-East I can't see how you may have an argument that questions/disputes whether we have a suitable or adequate level of infrastructure.

Your missing the point completely regarding the overall national neccessity for a university in the south east. Yes it is a neccessity rather than a desire. As a region with a population of over 460,000,comparative to all other cities with universities we are underperforming as far as FDI is concerned and this is a fact. So would you accept that I'm right in saying that a university must bear some major significance in determining the springing up of factories? (I hope your able to recognise that factories do not just "spring up" as you put but that these successful companies locate where the knowledge based economy is...ie where the best graduates are relative to the nature of the business and that's not even considering the R&D factor)
On a larger scale this lack of performance from the region in effect takes away from Ireland's performance as we have 460,000 of the nations population. We don't contribute to the GDP as much as other regions so it indirectly effects all parts of the country.

People migrate towards these areas simply because they want to do them.

This, not doubt, is true to a certain extent. But like with every point thus far that you've made your oversimplifying everything. Is there no consideration of the cost of having to live 100km plus away from home when one is deciding where to study? Well in my case and from what I've seen its certainly a major factor. Do you not acknowledge that 460,00 people should have the option to do at least some of their desired course within a reasonable commute? The simple fact that an economic aim of government is balanced regional development which is not being provided in this case and is plainly being ignored.

UCC has many fine courses for people wanting to get into investment banking but there are very few jobs of that kind in Cork and the surrounding area, for the vast majority of the graduates they have to go to Dublin or London or similar to work in the area because despite a steady stream of fresh faced bright graduates there's no reason for an investment bank to set up in Cork when you take other factors into account. Again, I'm using a restricted example to underline my point

It's generally accepted that when people leave home to study alot of them will stay in the region they study in. The lack of a university in the South East mean alot of the potential is leaving the region and leaving for good with a brain drain following. Your "restricted example" is again too simplistic to have any real significance. Your point if anything illustrates an exception to the norm.

, which basically is that you're looking at universities in the wrong way, there most certainly are positive externalities that spill off being a university town but it's all to easy to mistake positives that are unrelated to a university town that for example, Cork and Dublin might have because of their relative sizes and/or strategic advantages

Your making an incorrect observation here. This will be a university for the south east not for Waterford (which is a City incidentally,not a town). Mybe these strategic advantages and relative sizes are in someway resulting from having universities? Or maybe they just appeared co-incidentally "unrelated" to the universities being located there?

I'd also be sceptical of the cultural benefits that you assign to having a university. They are not really the public centres of culture of idealism and closer to the more harsh ivory tower image in many ways. Much of the work that is done, in humanities departments especially, does not in any way have positive spill over effects for the city around it. I think you are being too idealistic about what universities give back to their cities and might need to think more about what the cities give to their universities.

Sceptical of cultural benefits? Universities are essentially a "meeting of the minds" so to speak and if the presence of a strong and highly educated workforce in a region doesn't benefit the region culturally I don't know what does? Cork was the capital of culture was it not? I presume having a university is again merely co-incidental? Would Waterford be considered for the title? I think not.
Maybe our "idealism" is rooted in the fact that we're well behind the other regions economically and losing ground? All thes regions who just happen to have universites?

nesf

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

But like with every point thus far that you've made your oversimplifying everything.

Indeed, since this is an internet forum and not an academic discussion aimed at a audience familiar with the topic. I use simple examples purposefully (and have repeatedly admitted this) because often it is better to underline the gist of a point with a simple example than to throw a bunch of figures out there and end up clouding the message you're trying to get across (though, some people seem to be swayed simply because someone dropped a few stats a figures, regardless of their quality). That I use restricted examples doesn't invalidate my points nor does refuting my example necessarily invalidate them either. Suggesting that I believe factories spring up like trees simply because I disagree with you is also a fairly cheap debating tactic.


One simple question for you. Where are you going to find good academics to fill these humanities departments that you want so much? Forgetting money and all that for a moment, is there enough good people out there to make it the equivalent of going to Trinity for example? And why would they leave Cork/Dublin/Galway/wherever to live in Waterford? Some departments would easier to fill than others, but for instance in Irish there isn't a huge glut of available talent that you (ideally) want to be lecturing.

Bards

nesf wrote: »

is there enough good people out there to make it the equivalent of going to Trinity for example? And why would they leave Cork/Dublin/Galway/wherever to live in Waterford? Some departments would easier to fill than others, but for instance in Irish there isn't a huge glut of available talent that you (ideally) want to be lecturing.

In dublin there are 4 Universities for approx 1m people, that is 1 for every 250,000 people (Approx)

we are advoacting 1 University for 460,000 people. If Dublin can find the students in 250,000 I am sure the S.E will be able to find them in almost twice the number.

Now, please don't tell me that by having a University in the S.E we are going to decrease the amount of students available to Dublin Universities, because if that is true that the S.E region would be subsidising the Dublin Universites to the detriment of the S.E region as a whole:mad:

nesf

Bards wrote: »

In dublin there are 4 Universities for approx 1m people, that is 1 for every 250,000 people (Approx)

we are advoacting 1 University for 460,000 people. If Dublin can find the students in 250,000 I am sure the S.E will be able to find them in almost twice the number.

Now, please don't tell me that by having a University in the S.E we are going to decrease the amount of students available to Dublin Universities, because if that is true that the S.E region would be subsidising the Dublin Universites to the detriment of the S.E region as a whole:mad:

I was talking about lecturers for the departments. Sorry, for the ambiguity. This is an important practical point and (bluntly) I really don't feel like getting bogged down with points scoring on this thread because I don't have the time (or honestly, enough interest) to play toss the stats around. I'm just curious as to why people genuinely think that WIT needs a university which (let's be blunt) would by its nature sap money, people and students from other universities (at least, in the short run), other than the standard, we want one in our backyard argument which isn't enough imho. I don't doubt that it would be preferable for Waterford people to go to do their undergrad in Waterford but would it be worth the potential cost if it lowered standards in other institutions and would it be worth it for the country as a whole?


(Importantly: There is no right or wrong answer to the above, it's an open question and pretty much all of it is up for debate, I just want to get people to think through stuff like this before they cry out demanding a university. It's not a simple matter of WIT should get one because the people of the S.E. deserve one, despite that being a good answer for local opinion columns and local politicians)

El Siglo

I've been reading the news papers, radio, t.v. and boards etc... on the "up grade" of IT's to University Status, this is simply ridiculous. We've enough universities as it is, three in Dublin, Maynooth, Cork, Galway, Limerick, two in Belfast, for God's sake do we need another in Waterford, Cork and Dublin? A population of 4 million, with three more universities sounds kind of silly to me. It's only a status issue, would it not be better to concentrate investment on the existing universities and maintain the IT's as they are and keep pumping money into them? Really think about in an educational sense, universities are mainly focused upon academic education (i.e. "a rounded education, but no real training"), whereas IT's you are trained and are pretty much gauranteed employment afterwards, unless of course further study is pursued. The IT's have great courses but essentially they are designed for people who don't want to put up with reading Homer's Illiad or Burke's interpretation of the French Revolution, that isn't a bad thing to not want that, that's the crowning achievement of IT's never having to learn bull****! Then why is it such an issue to swtch from being called WIT to WU? It's shear status and giving into the "prestige" of being a "university graduate", when simply we're all graduates (or graduands) and our degrees under law are equal and really you can go from having a degree in Social Care (is it a BSc or BSocSc or BA?) from WIT or IT Carlow, to studying for an MSocSc in TCD, as equally as the UCD graduate with a BSocSc or BA.

Remember even if you are "upgraded", you can still be called an IT, look at Massachusets Institute of Technology or MIT, world renowned and an IT!;)

merlante

nesf wrote: »

I was talking about lecturers for the departments. Sorry, for the ambiguity. This is an important practical point and (bluntly) I really don't feel like getting bogged down with points scoring on this thread because I don't have the time (or honestly, enough interest) to play toss the stats around. I'm just curious as to why people genuinely think that WIT needs a university which (let's be blunt) would by its nature sap money, people and students from other universities (at least, in the short run), other than the standard, we want one in our backyard argument which isn't enough imho. I don't doubt that it would be preferable for Waterford people to go to do their undergrad in Waterford but would it be worth the potential cost if it lowered standards in other institutions and would it be worth it for the country as a whole?


(Importantly: There is no right or wrong answer to the above, it's an open question and pretty much all of it is up for debate, I just want to get people to think through stuff like this before they cry out demanding a university. It's not a simple matter of WIT should get one because the people of the S.E. deserve one, despite that being a good answer for local opinion columns and local politicians)

The university would be for the south east region, not as some prize for the WIT or Waterford.

A university for the south east would put the south east on a level playing field with other regions in terms of education, investment, attractiveness for FDI and so on. That in itself is enough of a reason.

How would a university in the south east 'sap' money? Does TCD 'sap' money, does NUIG 'sap' money. What constitutes a good use of government money in your book if a university for a large, populous region, provided in line with the accepted practice for all other regions, is considered a bad use of government money?

Harvard has less than 7,000 undergrad students. NUI Galway has far more than that, so does every other university except DCU and NUIM. It is not a race to the highest student numbers. Having some universities lose a few hundred students to a university in the south east would be no big deal. Plus, there would be hundreds more students in the system than before.

We are all entitled to our opinions. You think that universities aren't all that big a deal for a region. The Goodbody and Port reports take a different line, as does, in my opinion, common sense. You think that this is a parochial parish pump pride issue, whereas I look at it as the very thing that the government of Ireland should be about.

I could argue that the Dublin airport extensions and Dublin port improvements are a waste of money giving that there are facilities elsewhere with unused capacity. It's very easy to adopt a closed mindset where certain groups take it as a given that X or Y is a waste of money, when the same could be said for other things in their own back yard.

I gave a long and detailed post about why the south east needs and deserves a university and you sidestepped 90% of the points I made, but you are still asking the same questions with this 'please tell me why you want to waste state resources' kind of attitude. You have a particular opinion, a parochial, narrow view, indicative of the social society you associate with. As do others on here. Neither side is right or wrong except where objective facts are brought to the fore. Thus far, you have ignored anything you don't want to hear and just restated your opinion again and again.

Where is the evidence that upgrading the WIT would lower standards? Where is the evidence that the WIT would even cost the state more than the income it generated? I could just as easily argue that the WIT would generate income for the state and that the competition would improve standards across the board.

And let me reverse your question: aside from making vague (unproven) arguments about the 'lowering of standards' and the 'dilution of degrees', what good reason (parochial comments about wasting money are not enough imho) do you have to deny a region of 460,000 people a university, when every other region with a population of over 350,000 already has one?

Does fair play ever enter the equation? Or should we just happily inherit a rotten system and stick with it in case some supposedly delicate balance is disturbed?

merlante

El Siglo wrote: »

I've been reading the news papers, radio, t.v. and boards etc... on the "up grade" of IT's to University Status, this is simply ridiculous. We've enough universities as it is, three in Dublin, Maynooth, Cork, Galway, Limerick, two in Belfast, for God's sake do we need another in Waterford, Cork and Dublin? A population of 4 million, with three more universities sounds kind of silly to me. It's only a status issue, would it not be better to concentrate investment on the existing universities and maintain the IT's as they are and keep pumping money into them? Really think about in an educational sense, universities are mainly focused upon academic education (i.e. "a rounded education, but no real training"), whereas IT's you are trained and are pretty much gauranteed employment afterwards, unless of course further study is pursued. The IT's have great courses but essentially they are designed for people who don't want to put up with reading Homer's Illiad or Burke's interpretation of the French Revolution, that isn't a bad thing to not want that, that's the crowning achievement of IT's never having to learn bull****! Then why is it such an issue to swtch from being called WIT to WU? It's shear status and giving into the "prestige" of being a "university graduate", when simply we're all graduates (or graduands) and our degrees under law are equal and really you can go from having a degree in Social Care (is it a BSc or BSocSc or BA?) from WIT or IT Carlow, to studying for an MSocSc in TCD, as equally as the UCD graduate with a BSocSc or BA.

Remember even if you are "upgraded", you can still be called an IT, look at Massachusets Institute of Technology or MIT, world renowned and an IT!;)

I suspect you haven't read very much of this thread. If you want your arguments answered comprehensively, why not have a read?

There is one gaping hole in the map of Ireland where universities are concerned and that is the south east. It is a region of 460,000 people unserved by a university while every other region in the state with a population of over 350,000 people is served by a university. There are three universities on the western seaboard within 225km, yet there is no university with in 120km of Waterford city or 160km of Wexford town.

There is only one compelling argument for the creation of new university in the state, and that is the south east's case.

On population and demographic grounds, there should have been a university in the south east before UL, DCU and NUIM. Just because this did not happen is not a good enough reason not to establish a university in the south east now.

8 universities for a population of 4.2 million people is fine. That's more or less the same as Norway. Finland has far more universities, they have a different model. Applications from DIT, CIT or whoever should be dismissed out of hand -- their regions already have excellent access to universities.

And El Siglo, there are plenty of people in the south east that want to study Homer's Iliad, and so on. There is more to life that industrial training. There is more to the south east than factories.

The south east needs a university, it would rejuvenate the region, and in all likelihood, add to the national wealth. We have two universities in the top 100 in the world, TCD and UCD (Times review); both are ahead of all the top German universities. What we don't yet have in Ireland is parity in 3rd and 4th level education investment across the regions, because the south east is not provided for. Lets do things properly in this country for once.

nesf

You missed my points really.

I don't think this is a parochial pump issue, I just object to all the standard parochial answers that people dole out as reasons (ie that the S.E. deserves it's own university and similar). They are really convincing arguments only when you've an interest in the project (ie you are in the S.E. or whatever). To an outsider looking in, I'm sure that you'll appreciate this, the argument isn't very convincing.

Neither do I think universities are not a big deal for a region, I just think that in your post above you were over-stating their effects. Things just aren't that simple and universities and the regions they are in are hugely complex things. Is Maynooth an economic centre on a par with Galway or Limerick because it has a university? Common sense is not a good rule of thumb in these things necessarily. Again, your points were fine, I just think you're overstating the effect of a university. Arguing that I think that universities have little effect on their regions misses the whole point of my response.



I ask the same question again simply because your long and detailed post, which was fine, didn't answer my query with this. You are pigeon holing my posts by focussing on the wrong parts of them. The general theme that's running through them is this: "Why, is this the case?". Emotive language, population stats etc are all really useful debating tools but I'm not really interested in a debating match over this (because bluntly, I don't really have a strong opinion on this issue, I think it's far more complicated that any of the analysis I've read here and elsewhere and no one has convinced me firmly either way). I'm using simple language, concepts, examples etc because I'm asking a straightforward question and I'm trying to make it accessible to anyone to reads it. This is a general forum, there's no point in trying to get overly technical. If I start points scoring against you and other people here this will only result in our views getting more entrenched (and most likely blind to the other side's points), which is a bad thing.

nesf

merlante wrote: »

There is only one compelling argument for the creation of new university in the state, and that is the south east's case.

See, I actually agree with you here. I think the argument for placing a new university (if we needed one in this country) in the South East is rather compelling and would be good for a multitude of reasons.

I just haven't seen any argument that makes me believe that we need another university. If we assume that we need one, the WU argument is straightforward and simple, but do we actually need one?

merlante

nesf wrote: »

See, I actually agree with you here. I think the argument for placing a new university (if we needed one in this country) in the South East is rather compelling and would be good for a multitude of reasons.

I just haven't seen any argument that makes me believe that we need another university. If we assume that we need one, the WU argument is straightforward and simple, but do we actually need one?

Nesf, who is the 'we' in 'do we actually need one?'

If the 'we' is people in the south east then the answer is (more or less) 'yes'. If the 'we' is people outside of the south east, then the answer varies between 'I don't care' and 'no because we have enough universities as it is'.

Do you see what the problem is here?

The answer to your question depends on who the 'we' is and what constitutes 'need'.

Because of the nature of the 'we' problem population stats have to be used. If 460,000 people want the university and 3.7 million people don't want it, is that a reason to say no? I'd say not, on the basis that the 3.7 million people are trying to deny the 460,000 what they themselves have. I am not trying to blitz people with statistics, I am trying to point out that your question depends on who you ask, and when the people of the south east have to make arguments about why 'we' need a university, when they are not allowed include themselves in the 'we' you end up having to give reasons why the other 3.7 million disinterested and begrudging people on the island would need a university in the south east. This is not a fair question.

As to the question of 'need'. The south east needs it. Goodbody (2005) indicates this and Port thinks it would certainly give the region a boost but is unsure of whether the region 'needs' it. Does Leitrim need it? Does Dublin need it? No. Does Ireland Inc. need it? Maybe. Maybe not.

Again, it's not fair to demand that what is first and foremost regional infrastructure, and national infrastructure second, be of some overwhelming benefit to people elsewhere on the island -- when the equivalent can be found in every other region.

Regarding your point about me overestimating the value of a university on a regional centre. I disagree. NUI Maynooth is too close to Dublin to generate its own centre of gravity, and Maynooth has no special significance as a town except its proximity to Dublin.

NUIG and UL on the other hand (especially the former) have very strong links with the cities their inhabit. They underpin the strategic roles of those cities and there are much stronger links with the cities and regions in question. The same sort of phenomenon is already observable in the WIT. The WIT has become intertwined in the city and region and both feed off each other. The success of one becomes the success of the other. What happens in these institutions is not the same as what occurs in colleges like DCU, for example, which stand apart from the local community. DCU does not embody Dublin or Glasnevin in the way that NUIG embodies Galway and the WIT embodies Waterford.

A university centred in Waterford offering Arts and Humanities degrees would have a dramatic effect on the local arts scene (just as it would have an effect on knowledge based employment). Ivory tower existences are not practicable in provincial cities. People mix. Where in Dublin you might feed into an elite, in the regional cities, you can give the regional population a real injection of culture (not that the arts is anything like 100% of culture).

nesf

merlante wrote: »

Nesf, who is the 'we' in 'do we actually need one?'

If the 'we' is people in the south east then the answer is (more or less) 'yes'. If the 'we' is people outside of the south east, then the answer varies between 'I don't care' and 'no because we have enough universities as it is'.

Do you see what the problem is here?

Yes, I do. This isn't a regional issue, otherwise it'd be straightforward, upgrading WIT to a university would require money, lots of it (I'm assuming that they'd do it properly and put up the cash to attract good people etc), this cash (and the people) would need to come from the other universities essentially (or divert future increases of funding or whatever). So this is an issue that effects the entire country unfortunately. Which is why making the regional argument falls down, because it's too limited in scope to compel people from outside the region (ie CIT asks for it too, so you end up with an even worse situation where you'd have two extra drains on resources, and I fully agree that making CIT into a university is a waste of bloody time, Cork is nowhere near big enough to have two competing universities). It's simple to make the argument for a mere name change and a few token departments but that's worse (imho) than leaving it as an IT. To do it properly would require massive investment which potentially (if you take regional concerns out of the picture for a moment) might be better invested in already present universities. Can you see where I'm coming from (I assume you wouldn't agree with any of the previous stuff)? When I use we, I mean the country, because this is an issue that has to be decided at national level. If it was a straightforward regional issue then you and I wouldn't be discussing it most likely.



I agree with you with you about Maynooth btw, the issue I had with your initial post about universities is that a university in a city does X, Y, Z and didn't give enough weight to the effect of other factors "independent" of the university. I'd disagree about not being able to have your ivory tower existence in provincial cities though.

merlante

nesf wrote: »

Yes, I do. This isn't a regional issue, otherwise it'd be straightforward, upgrading WIT to a university would require money, lots of it (I'm assuming that they'd do it properly and put up the cash to attract good people etc), this cash (and the people) would need to come from the other universities essentially (or divert future increases of funding or whatever). So this is an issue that effects the entire country unfortunately. Which is why making the regional argument falls down, because it's too limited in scope to compel people from outside the region (ie CIT asks for it too, so you end up with an even worse situation where you'd have two extra drains on resources, and I fully agree that making CIT into a university is a waste of bloody time, Cork is nowhere near big enough to have two competing universities). It's simple to make the argument for a mere name change and a few token departments but that's worse (imho) than leaving it as an IT. To do it properly would require massive investment which potentially (if you take regional concerns out of the picture for a moment) might be better invested in already present universities. Can you see where I'm coming from (I assume you wouldn't agree with any of the previous stuff)? When I use we, I mean the country, because this is an issue that has to be decided at national level. If it was a straightforward regional issue then you and I wouldn't be discussing it most likely.

I see where you're coming from, and I am all too familiar with the argument that you are making.

What I want to challenge is this idea that a university in the south east would primarily be national infrastructure as opposed to regional infrastructure. Yes Oxford, Harvard, and in fairness, Trinity, are heavy hitting universities that bat for their countries so to speak. They are national infrastructure, pure and simple, just as the IFSC is national infrastructure and not Dublin infrastructure. They must benefit the entire nation in a clear way to be worth their money (although I'm not familiar with Trinity's financing).

But UL, DCU, NUIG and others are primarily regional infrastructure, i.e. they are not big players on the international stage but they do serve the regional requirement for higher degrees in all areas, as well as regional investment, industrial support, cultural development and so on.

Trinity will not be growing any bigger. It has capped its student numbers. It does what it does. It is not there to serve the 3rd level needs of the whole country, and given its location, would be unable to do so efficiently in any case. That is why we need regional universities. And, not to labour the point, but every region except for the south east has one, so this is a distribution that is in situ. The university for the south east's justification is the same as NUIG, UL, DCU, etc. The burden of proof should not be solely on the people of the south east to show that this is the best distribution!

Taking all this aside, there is evidence to suggest that a university based on a WIT upgrade would generate income for the country as a whole and would certainly unearth more graduates. It is estimated that the recurrent funding for a WIT upgrade would be something of the order of €20-30 million (WIT upgrade application). It is expected that more than this would be generated indirectly by the upgrade.

Ri na hEireann

Nesf with all do respect you keep claiming that you don't want to be bogged down in a debate because you have no real interest and basically a "couldn't care less" attitude. It's obvious to me as I'm sure it is to others that you won't change your mindset no matter how good the argument given against you is. You keep saying things like "i'm overgeneralising here" to illustrate your point but at the end of the day none of your arguments are delivered with anything but a biased half-opinion. If you really want to shoot down our argument for a university I think you should use relevant facts and figures rather than your own analogies because this is an issue that the region feels strongly about. You forcing the same regurgitated points is hardly constructive to the debate at hand unless your willing to back up your points with proof.

As far as I can see, any point Merlante and indeed other posters are making in favour of the upgrade you avoid the majority of what's beign said and basically say the same thing. If your read over my previous post and then your reply to it you'll see yourself you address none of it really and frankly it angers me that you can be so certain of your opinions but refuse to back them up.

We could sit here for the next month debating back and forth but unless your actually willing to provide proper replies or consider the pro-upgrade sides opinion we're "pissing into the wind".

nesf

merlante wrote: »

I see where you're coming from, and I am all too familiar with the argument that you are making.

What I want to challenge is this idea that a university in the south east would primarily be national infrastructure as opposed to regional infrastructure. Yes Oxford, Harvard, and in fairness, Trinity, are heavy hitting universities that bat for their countries so to speak. They are national infrastructure, pure and simple, just as the IFSC is national infrastructure and not Dublin infrastructure. They must benefit the entire nation in a clear way to be worth their money (although I'm not familiar with Trinity's financing).

But UL, DCU, NUIG and others are primarily regional infrastructure, i.e. they are not big players on the international stage but they do serve the regional requirement for higher degrees in all areas, as well as regional investment, industrial support, cultural development and so on.

Trinity will not be growing any bigger. It has capped its student numbers. It does what it does. It is not there to serve the 3rd level needs of the whole country, and given its location, would be unable to do so efficiently in any case. That is why we need regional universities. And, not to labour the point, but every region except for the south east has one, so this is a distribution that is in situ. The university for the south east's justification is the same as NUIG, UL, DCU, etc. The burden of proof should not be solely on the people of the south east to show that this is the best distribution!

Taking all this aside, there is evidence to suggest that a university based on a WIT upgrade would generate income for the country as a whole and would certainly unearth more graduates. It is estimated that the recurrent funding for a WIT upgrade would be something of the order of €20-30 million (WIT upgrade application). It is expected that more than this would be generated indirectly by the upgrade.

Nice trick in not putting UCC into the national big hitter and the regional university camp and avoiding biasing the discussion.

My question is this, would it not be better to focus on (post graduate) splitting of centres of excellence (which is kind of what happens already, Trinity is great for some stuff but really isn't ahead of the pack across the board)? Undergraduate isn't that big a deal (imho) because it's pretty cookie cutter stuff (I know, I'm horribly oversimplifying here but I think that the focus more and more will fall on producing high quality "fourth level" graduates. Yes, this is very much open to debate but there is definitely a trend in this direction at the very least). If the infrastructure for producing these already exists somewhat in the present universities (be they of national or regional importance) would it not be better to invest the money among the present group? I appreciate the 3rd level feed in idea but WIT already does this with many solid courses that it offers (I vaguely remember something about your BSS course being good, though I could be confusing it with somewhere else). You don't need a Humanities department to feed into the existing network of institutions (where at "fourth level" you'll travel because where you do it, because the cost of travel is hugely reduced if you are going to be getting the best education you can in your area). Converting WIT to a university does create complications in the split of departments (at the highest levels, perhaps not so much at undergraduate level). If we sorely lacked research grads in some area that was not already covered then the argument for the conversion would be much stronger, but I'm not aware of such an area.


In brief: Converting to a university brings in, by its nature, national infrastructure. Perhaps not for BAs but certainly for the PhDs being produced.

nesf

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

Nesf with all do respect you keep claiming that you don't want to be bogged down in a debate because you have no real interest and basically a "couldn't care less" attitude. It's obvious to me as I'm sure it is to others that you won't change your mindset no matter how good the argument given against you is.

This isn't a two sided matter where you're either for the university or against it. I'm interested in teasing out a few points with people rather than actually "winning" an online debate. Neither am I overly pushed about changing people's minds, I'm just interested in people's answers to my specific questions/points here.

merlante

nesf wrote: »

Nice trick in not putting UCC into the national big hitter and the regional university camp and avoiding biasing the discussion.

UCC's role in Ireland is split fairly evenly between the two. It has a big regional responsibility, offering university education to something like 550,000 people and it is Ireland's third highest rated university internationally (according to what I've read).

nesf wrote: »

My question is this, would it not be better to focus on (post graduate) splitting of centres of excellence (which is kind of what happens already, Trinity is great for some stuff but really isn't ahead of the pack across the board)? Undergraduate isn't that big a deal (imho) because it's pretty cookie cutter stuff (I know, I'm horribly oversimplifying here but I think that the focus more and more will fall on producing high quality "fourth level" graduates. Yes, this is very much open to debate but there is definitely a trend in this direction at the very least). If the infrastructure for producing these already exists somewhat in the present universities (be they of national or regional importance) would it not be better to invest the money among the present group? I appreciate the 3rd level feed in idea but WIT already does this with many solid courses that it offers (I vaguely remember something about your BSS course being good, though I could be confusing it with somewhere else). You don't need a Humanities department to feed into the existing network of institutions (where at "fourth level" you'll travel because where you do it, because the cost of travel is hugely reduced if you are going to be getting the best education you can in your area). Converting WIT to a university does create complications in the split of departments (at the highest levels, perhaps not so much at undergraduate level). If we sorely lacked research grads in some area that was not already covered then the argument for the conversion would be much stronger, but I'm not aware of such an area.

According to the Times Higher Education Review, 2007, Ireland has two colleges in the top 200 in the world: TCD (53rd) and UCD (177th), and both have improved their rankings on the previous year. This is absolutely fantastic for a country of 4.2 million people. UCC, using other rankings, is not that far behind UCD. So we have our big hitters. We also have universities that are not (yet in any case) big hitters but are crucial for offering third and fourth level education in the regions (I could include DCU here). We need both.

So no, I don't see any cure to the south easts problem by producing ever more highly qualified graduates, 3rd or 4th level, elsewhere.

There is this misconception that 3rd level education is sorted in Ireland. In the south east, there is no access to a whole range of third level courses, and the spend on 3rd level education in the south east is far less than the equivalent spend in the West, mid-West, South, etc. You get out what you put in, and not much 3rd level investment goes into the south east. The impact of this is measurable, and numerous posts on this thread have already highlighted various metrics that illustrate this.

Until third level education is sorted it makes no sense to talk about 4th level.

With regard to 4th level education, a certain amount of research activity in the regions is required in order to create an ecosystem that is friendly to high tech industry and in order to produce graduates of all levels.

4th level education is not (just) about getting to the top of a league table, it is not even about making epoch making breakthroughs on our own doorstep. It is not about winning nobel prizes. These are all very good but the vast, vast majority of people with PhDs do fairly low key research, that gets a certain job done or fulfills a certain contract, or whatever. It is vitally important that we increase the number of PhD holders in this country. For the sake of industry and research it is better to have 100 average PhDs than 5 Einsteins. This is not an attractive message to those who believe that 3rd/4th level education is sorted in Ireland, and all we have to do is bankroll a few college to the point where more nobel prizes are coming to the country. But it is a fact.

Having an internationally respected college like TCD with highly respected academics and so on is great, but they are not necessarily doing the practical research that support commercial R&D and FDI companies, more often than not it's a PhD graduate from DCU or UL or wherever.

We need this in the south east. It is extremely difficult for the WIT to square up against the better funded universities with a broader educational remit when competing for FDI.

Incidentally, would you be in favour of the prioritisation of WIT investment over that of NUIM? The WIT, with its large, populous hinterland, has a far higher potential than NUIM. Even now the WIT is a larger institution in terms of students, generates more or less the same research funding, even though it is crippled in numerous ways by the IT remit and by its far lower level of recurrent funding.

nesf

merlante wrote: »

UCC's role in Ireland is split fairly evenly between the two. It has a big regional responsibility, offering university education to something like 550,000 people and it is Ireland's third highest rated university internationally (according to what I've read).

It's a weird hybrid all right. Honestly, it's shown in its departments, some are world beaters and some, bluntly barely keep their head above water to be perfectly honest from what I've seen/heard/experienced.

merlante wrote: »

According to the Times Higher Education Review, 2007, Ireland has two colleges in the top 200 in the world: TCD (53rd) and UCD (177th), and both have improved their rankings on the previous year. This is absolutely fantastic for a country of 4.2 million people. UCC, using other rankings, is not that far behind UCD. So we have our big hitters. We also have universities that are not (yet in any case) big hitters but are crucial for offering third and fourth level education in the regions (I could include DCU here). We need both.

I definitely agree with you that we do need both. I also think that ITs (in the more traditional sense of being more "applied" if you know what I mean) also play an extremely important role in our economy/society. For every high minded "thinker" we produce we need five "practical" people (made up numbers obviously). For all the mocking that goes back and forth between UCC and CIT (most of it is in good spirit, the minority unfortunately isn't), both serve different purposes essentially (I know I've an "old fashioned" view of ITs here)

merlante wrote: »

So no, I don't see any cure to the south easts problem by producing ever more highly qualified graduates, 3rd or 4th level, elsewhere.

I don't disagree, my main issue with this isn't that Waterford doesn't need a university, it's that I'm not convinced that moving funding out of the already present system is a good thing.

merlante wrote: »

There is this misconception that 3rd level education is sorted in Ireland.

<snip>

Until third level education is sorted it makes no sense to talk about 4th level.

(I'm just snipping because these two lines are what really interest me). I completely agree with your first point and I'd differ slightly with the second (both need resources aimed at them to be honest). This was one of the counter arguments raised by a bunch of university heads in the Irish Times (I think, someone mentioned to me and I didn't get to read it myself). We already have funding problems at 3rd level in our present system. Diverting more resources away to Waterford, while good for Waterford, would most likely make this situation worse (assuming there isn't a major restructuring in the way the Government makes out the Budget, which is possible but unlikely unfortunately). My objections on funding grounds are born more out of the realistic issues of there most likely won't be enough funding to go around if another slice has to be taken out of the pie. If the pie was increased by the amount a new university would need then there'd be some objections possibly on the efficiency of spending on a new university but by and large these would be technical issues for the most part (ie something for regional/educational economics people to get their teeth into). It's just that I have no faith in this actually happening. All of the third level institutions have been crying out for more funding for years and it hasn't materialised (undergraduate level really doesn't have enough funding in most universities for instance, similar issues create huge problems for ITs.

If given a choice between weakening our present institutions and having a university in Waterford versus a slight increase in funding for our present institutions, I'd plump for the latter to be honest. I don't think that a big enough increase to make setting up a new university feasible will happen, but then, I'm a bit of cynic when it comes to politicians.

merlante wrote: »

With regard to 4th level education, a certain amount of research activity in the regions is required in order to create an ecosystem that is friendly to high tech industry and in order to produce graduates of all levels.

4th level education is not (just) about getting to the top of a league table, it is not even about making epoch making breakthroughs on our own doorstep. It is not about winning nobel prizes. These are all very good but the vast, vast majority of people with PhDs do fairly low key research, that gets a certain job done or fulfills a certain contract, or whatever. It is vitally important that we increase the number of PhD holders in this country. For the sake of industry and research it is better to have 100 average PhDs than 5 Einsteins. This is not an attractive message to those who believe that 3rd/4th level education is sorted in Ireland, and all we have to do is bankroll a few college to the point where more nobel prizes are coming to the country. But it is a fact.

Having an internationally respected college like TCD with highly respected academics and so on is great, but they are not necessarily doing the practical research that support commercial R&D and FDI companies, more often than not it's a PhD graduate from DCU or UL or wherever.

I broadly agree with you here, and when I talk of 4th level I'm not thinking of cutting edge academics really (you can't train them, they're born that way and you just "hand them some tools" and point them in the direction of the nearest open question). My issue with 4th level stuff is that to even produce "normal" PhDs you do need very good teachers for them. The best and brightest are the least weight on a department's resources, they generally need the least guidance, it's the more "middling" students that require more intensive guidance and they take up more "man hours" (they need more tutorials, classes, guidance etc before they start a PhD because they need more and longer training, the really good people can just jump into it and figure out a lot of stuff for themselves). ("middling" when we're talking about PhDs is certainly no insult to a person and I'm not trying to imply that they are "lesser beings" or any of that elitist crap)

My main issue is that to get people who would normally not be "able" to do a PhD (because they don't have that academic spark naturally or whatever) to the point where they could do a PhD is a lot of pedagogical work and requires a lot of good people around (and good systems, structures, approaches etc etc) to get them there. This is a hard and expensive (in terms of time, training etc) transition for departments to make from the more traditional "scholars do PhDs" style of thing which was essentially the standard until very recently (and continues to be in many "less marketable" subjects). To look at training "normal" level PhD people as being easier than training "academics" I think misses the point a bit.

merlante wrote: »

We need this in the south east. It is extremely difficult for the WIT to square up against the better funded universities with a broader educational remit when competing for FDI.

I sympathise with the position but, honestly, it's not just a problem for the south east.

merlante wrote: »

Incidentally, would you be in favour of the prioritisation of WIT investment over that of NUIM? The WIT, with its large, populous hinterland, has a far higher potential than NUIM. Even now the WIT is a larger institution in terms of students, generates more or less the same research funding, even though it is crippled in numerous ways by the IT remit and by its far lower level of recurrent funding.

When discussing it as a counterfactual, if I was given an option of putting a university in Maynooth or in the South East (or North West tbh), Maynooth would automatically drop to third on that list (I think the competition between the SE and NW would be tighter than that). The problem is that "moving" a university is a far more difficult thing than "creating" one and crippling NUIM to feed WITU would be political suicide (among other things). NUIM is an unfortunately historic oddity (and I've friends who'd strangle me for so demeaning their alma mater) but we're stuck with it and with politics in this country I can't see that changing any time soon.

gravity1036

nesf wrote: »

I sympathise with the position but, honestly, it's not just a problem for the south east.

When discussing it as a counterfactual, if I was given an option of putting a university in Maynooth or in the South East (or North West tbh), Maynooth would automatically drop to third on that list (I think the competition between the SE and NW would be tighter than that). The problem is that "moving" a university is a far more difficult thing than "creating" one and crippling NUIM to feed WITU would be political suicide (among other things). NUIM is an unfortunately historic oddity (and I've friends who'd strangle me for so demeaning their alma mater) but we're stuck with it and with politics in this country I can't see that changing any time soon.

Perhaps not just a problem for the South East but in terms of population service if you take people outside of a 120km radius in the North West (120km being the distance from WIT to UCC according to theaa.ie) you are dealing with a very small population that is not within easy reach of a university facility in either UL, NUIG, NUIM, Derry, or Belfast. Probably a population to the order of 200,000, at the very most. The same radius applied in the South East chops off a small bit of North Carlow and results in a population of about 420,000. The average number of people served by a university in Dublin for example is only 390,000. The argument may be made for other regions in the country but is certainly strongest for the South East.

All this talk of robbing Peter to pay Paul, not just you but many others in the media and so forth, is really silly scaremongering; I presume borne of some political persuasion or other partisan leaning that does not lend itself to objective decision making. WIT at the moment is pulling in the same amount of independent R&D funding as NUIM without having a university stamp or any additional government investment. The reason it is doing this is because it has an excellent track record with both EI and EU funding programmes and has been largely self-sustaining in the R&D aspects of its existence for many years now. Suggesting that this doesn't exist and that monies would have to be taken from the big university pot, making one or more universities suffer accordingly is frankly ridiculous. All third level colleges are competing as we speak for these funds, re-designating another university for the greater good of economically seeding the South East region to sustain itself, is a non-issue in terms of these arguments.

We have a huge problem with centralisation at the moment in this country and enabling another region outside of Dublin to appear on the FDI map as a place to be looked at because of university, population, workforce, port and many other reasons will ultimately contribute back to the national profit by reducing the crippling dependency on one or two major investment areas within Ireland. Preventing this from progressing would be astounding and incredibly difficult to comprehend. The government has to make decisions that are for the betterment of the country and its people, creating another wealth producing, self-sustaining region is surely a undeniably large part of that overall national wealth project?

Marcus.Aurelius

WIT is not sufficiently well organised to obtain or distribute the increase in funding should it receive university designation. It's science facilties, as an example, are hopeless, and have been ignored since the 70s.

I did my BSc in Appl Bio in WIT and then moved to UCD for a PhD. There's just no comparison in terms of facilities, organisation and attitude. PhDs in Waterford were in the stone age a few years back when I was there, UCD already was moving toward structered research, with proper graduate schools and systems of thematic designation.

WIT is a great institution, the smaller class sizes were great for individual tuition and thus there was an excellent rapport between students and staff, that you just don't get in the larger universities. But KR "PR" Byrne is an idiot if he thinks WIT can be brought up to standard just by new buildings. Until he gets off his backside and starts re-organising schools, getting rid of the yes-men morons in charge of Schools of Science, Arts etc WIT hasn't got a hope.

And frankly, If I were Minister for Education and Science, I wouldn't let them have it, no matter how much I like the place.

And Waterford is not in the Southeast!!!! Its in Munster, the southern province. WIT alone created this southeast nonsense so it didn't have to compete with UCC. Pathetic!!

fricatus

maoleary wrote: »

And Waterford is not in the Southeast!!!! Its in Munster, the southern province. WIT alone created this southeast nonsense so it didn't have to compete with UCC. Pathetic!!

Munster, to my knowledge has never been a region in terms of local or national government organisation, other than in the area of European electoral constituencies. And even there, it doesn't exist any more (there's a South constituency, which is Munster less Clare). Munster these days is only a reality on the GAA and rugby field.

The South-East region (Waterford, South Tipp, Carlow, KK and Wexford) on the other hand is well established as an organisational/governmental unit in this country. The health boards, IDA and Bord Fáilte were all organised along regional lines, with the south-east forming part of that. There is even a South-East Regional Authority, comprising these counties, whose brief is to coordinate planning and development matters across the region.

Your assertion that WIT somehow "created" a south-east region that previously didn't exist, to somehow avoid competition with UCC (or for that matter any other reason), is total and utter nonsense.

Bards

If this is the standard of education our so called 'Universities' are producing whose PhD graduates don't even know about Irish regions then god help us is all I have to say.

the the old Irish expression when looking for directions comes to mind "I would'nt start from here if I were you....":D