Tag: specialist

  • What does it mean to be a specialist anyway?

    What does it mean to be a specialist anyway?

    Over the weekend, HEPI published a blog continuing the conversation about knowledge vs skills, and a blog on governance.

    This blog was kindly authored by Emma Maskell, Head of Student and Academic Services, Norland.

    As we all digest the recent Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper and what it means for us, we reflect on what it means to be a ‘specialist’ and how we think about our distinctive roles in the system. Here, we discuss what it means to be a specialist and the implications for the higher education landscape now and in the future.

    In the UK and Australia, we are seeing a shift in central government narrative towards achieving impact through specialisation. It was a key feature of the recent Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper and in proposals from the landmark Strategic Examination of Research and Development in Australia. But can we all be specialists, and by whose definition are we being defined?

    Specialisms are nothing new. Many universities started off as specialist institutions. The ‘red brick’ universities were set up in response to the regional demand for scientific and technical skills in the 19th century.  Nearly a hundred years later, the Robbins report created a new wave of civic universities responding to a need for greater advanced technical skills in the workforce.

    However, following the lifting of the student number cap and a prolonged period of below-inflation tuition fee increases, we are in an age where many universities have had to diversify and broaden their provision to survive. This shift has led institutions to adopt a more generalist, one-size-fits-all approach, often at the expense of their specialist identities. This has often meant chasing the same students, the same research grants and so on. So, have we lost sight of what makes us special?

    What’s so special about you?

    By most people’s definition, Norland College would constitute a specialist higher education institution. For over 130 years, we have been pioneering early years education and care. Indeed, when you ask most people about specialist institutions, it is our subject specialisms which most commonly define us.

    But there are other ways providers can and do specialise. This is the type of specialists the white paper appears to refer to – defined by the type of research we do, our civic mission, serving the communities we belong to or our focus on outstanding teaching and learning.  Let’s not forget industry; the recent white paper was very clear that institutions should be working in conjunction with industry to deliver the skills needed for the delivery of the industrial strategy.

    For Norland, it is not only our subject specialism that sets us apart, but also how we deliver our curriculum. Our unique four-year integrated programme – which combines degree-level academic training with rigorous vocational preparation and hands-on experience – equips our graduates with unparalleled industry-specific knowledge and practical skills. This is Norland’s ‘golden triangle’ of knowledge and understanding, skills development and practical application.

    The government is concerned that in the current landscape, providers with similar offerings are chasing the same students, and there has been insufficient focus on each institution’s core purpose.  The government’s vision is that providers will be able to leverage specialisms whilst working more closely together to create a compelling regional offer that supports students and drives growth, building on existing good practice across the sector.

    Norland is a great example of how specialist providers can and do thrive. Our students see our specialisms as our superpower, enabling them to achieve their life goals now and into the future. We have a unique offering with a strong core purpose through our community activities, student placements and graduate nannying opportunities via our agency, which in turn supports students and drives economic growth that complements the wider regional offer. We work closely with our neighbouring higher education providers. You might say that, under the current proposals, Norland is a model student.

    Yet, being a specialist is not without its challenges. As others have pointed out, there is a risk that, rather than resolving cold spots, specialisation risks exacerbating these where providers exit certain subjects or research focus.  If specialist providers withdraw from certain regions, some areas could be left without any early years provision. As a result, students unable to relocate may lose access to these subjects, limiting social mobility. Alternatively, less well-funded research that might not be ‘REFable’ is dropped, restricting innovation and knowledge creation in vital subjects like education.

    The right funding model will also be crucial for specialists to continue to succeed. Like the majority of the sector, Norland is a not-for-profit higher education provider. In some ways, we are fortunate as an ‘approved’ fee category provider that we can set our own fees, which cover the additional costs associated with our golden triangle, particularly in relation to the resource-heavy nature of our practical course. However, our students are only able to take out the basic student loan, needing to fund the difference themselves. This is a significant barrier to social mobility and equality of opportunity.  Becoming an approved (fee cap) provider would not resolve this, as we could no longer charge the higher fees to cover the cost of the very things which make our curriculum specialist and unique. It’s catch-22!

    In summary

    In recent years, the sector has sought to become more generalist in response to the reduction of specialist subject funding, competition for student numbers and the need to diversify income streams.  Up to now, market forces have largely driven this trend of generalisation of the sector. To achieve the aims of the Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper, the Government should work with the sector to ensure that any funding model allows providers to focus on their core purpose and what makes them special, or we risk perpetuating the status quo, undermining the Government’s aims to support the development of the skilled workforce the economy needs. This way, everyone can benefit from the transformative power of high-quality skills and innovation-led practice.   

    Source link

  • Specialist arts institutions are not a luxury; they are the crucibles of Britain’s creative future

    Specialist arts institutions are not a luxury; they are the crucibles of Britain’s creative future

    This blog was kindly authored by Professor Randall S Whittaker Principal and CEO Rose Bruford College.

    London’s creative industries are not a cultural accessory; they are an economic engine. Around one in seven jobs in the capital sits within the creative industries, and if you include creative roles embedded across other sectors, that figure rises to nearly one in five. Almost a third of all UK creative businesses are based in London.

    The UK’s creative success is no accident. It rests on a delicate, interdependent education ecosystem: specialist arts institutions; research hubs; and universities that together generate not only talent but innovation, identity and national soft power.

    That ecosystem is under pressure. Rising costs, uneven funding, and the new fashion for mergers, the proposed “super university” being the latest example, are driving a wave of consolidation.

    Why “super universities” miss the point

    When two generalist universities merge, their academic portfolios may blend. When a small, practice-led arts institution is absorbed, it rarely blends; it dissolves. Studios become seminar rooms. Ensemble training becomes optional. Niche disciplines disappear in the name of efficiency. Scale rewards the generic; creativity thrives in the specific.

    The Kent–Greenwich merger, planned for 2026, is being hailed as a pragmatic response to sector-wide financial stress. On paper, such consolidations look neat: shared back-office functions, pooled estates, a single regional brand. But higher education is not a spreadsheet exercise.

    It’s understandable that, given Rose Bruford College’s geography — located between Kent and Greenwich — and a financial position that has been challenging but is now improving, some might assume that joining a “super university” is the logical next step.

    Yet that assumption misunderstands what specialist colleges contribute. Rose Bruford’s strength lies precisely in what cannot be merged: its scale, its agility, its ensemble ethos, its craft-specific research culture, and its proven industry connectivity. The College’s recovery — from stabilised finances to a UKRI-funded research project and multiple national awards for both performance and technical excellence — shows that independence is not indulgence; it is impact.

    The question is not whether Bruford can survive outside the merger, but whether the creative industries can afford to lose what institutions like Bruford uniquely provide. When specialist institutions disappear, we do not gain efficiency; we lose an entire mode of creativity.

    There are, of course, examples where partnership has protected identity: the Royal Birmingham Conservatoire operates as an associate faculty of Birmingham City University, retaining its governance and character while sharing infrastructure. That balance, autonomy with alignment, is the exception not the rule. For most specialist creative institutions, a merger could mean absorption, not collaboration.

    From curtain call to crucible

    It remains true that it is a curtain call for the old, exclusionary model of time-intensive training that shuts out those without privilege or flexibility.
    What must be defended now is the right of specialist institutions to re-imagine rigorous training on equitable, sustainable terms.

    Specialist creative higher education is not a conveyor belt. It is a crucible.
    To mistake it for a “skills pipeline” is to misunderstand its purpose. Specialist higher education institutions are not service departments for the creative industries; they are cultural forces — sites of disruption, experimentation and social imagination.

    Graduates from these environments do not merely enter the creative industries; they redefine them. They found new companies, invent formats, challenge hierarchies, and expand who gets to tell Britain’s stories.

    Research, re-imagined

    Specialist arts institutions do not reject research; they redefine it. Practice is their laboratory. Performance, design and experimentation are their methodologies. Rose Bruford’s recently UKRI-funded research project exemplifies how specialist providers drive national innovation, producing knowledge that moves from rehearsal rooms to public discourse, from artistic experiment to policy impact.

    The power of the specific

    The reach of this work is visible every night on screens and stages.

    • Jessica Gunning, BAFTA, Emmy and Golden Globe winner for Baby Reindeer, trained at Rose Bruford.
    • Bernardine Evaristo, Bruford alumna and Booker Prize winner, saw her novel Mr Loverman adapted for television and a Women’s Prize Outstanding Contribution Award, recognising her “transformative impact on literature and her unwavering dedication to uplifting under-represented voices”.
    • Stephen Graham and Hannah Walters, who met as Bruford students, co-starred in Adolescence — proof that specialist institutions forge lifelong creative partnerships.
    • Sir Gary Oldman, Slow Horses, began his journey at Bruford and continues to define British performance worldwide.

    Excellence extends far beyond the spotlight. At the Profile Awards, lighting design alumni Jessica Hung Han Yun, Sarah Readman, and Joshua Pharo, together with Joshie Harriette, all received national recognition. Hung Han Yun — also an Olivier Award winner for My Neighbour Totoro — shows how specialist training produces innovators whose artistry is both technical and conceptual. These achievements prove that excellence in production crafts is not ancillary to the arts; it is integral to Britain’s creative leadership.

    Diversity and student choice

    A healthy higher-education system depends on difference, in mission, in method, in who it serves.

    If independent specialist higher education institutions disappear, the UK’s higher-education landscape flattens. The sector loses, not only training for performers and designers, but the pedagogical diversity that keeps higher education alive, the alternative modes of learning that reach students who may not thrive in traditional university structures.

    For students, the consequences are immediate. Choice collapses from a landscape of craft pathways to a handful of broad “creative-arts” degrees. The student who might have trained as a lighting designer, scenographer or community-theatre facilitator is left with a single, generic option. In a system obsessed with “student choice”, consolidation removes the very choices that matter most — about identity, craft and form.

    GuildHE’s recent Championing a Diverse Higher Education Sector manifesto underscores this point. It highlights the extra costs of small-class teaching and industry-standard facilities that specialist colleges cannot cross-subsidise, and calls for direct funding, reform of research and knowledge-exchange thresholds, and capital investment to secure the sector’s future. These are not indulgences; they are the practical conditions for diversity itself.

    Funding reform is an investment in inclusion

    What specialist institutions seek is not indulgence — and not simply more money to do the same thing. They seek resources that enable transformation: sustainable workloads, flexible modules, hybrid teaching, and equitable access, without sacrificing rigour.

    As GuildHE notes, funding architecture must recognise that small specialist colleges cannot offset studio-based costs in the way comprehensive universities can. Reforming those systems is how government can genuinely champion diversity rather than merely declare it.

    Starving specialist institutions into mergers is not efficiency; it is slow erasure.

    A national imperative

    Britain’s creative industries are a cornerstone of the economy and of international reputation. Yet the institutions that make that possible are treated as optional extras.

    If independent, practice-led institutions vanish, we lose not only talent pipelines but the laboratories of imagination, the incubators of diversity, and the ability to renew what British creativity means.

    Specialist creative institutions are not relics of the past. They are the crucibles of the future — where risk is rehearsed, difference made visible, and new worlds imagined into being. Fold them into super universities, and the loss will not be obvious at first.
    But over time, our screens, our stages and our stories will all start to look the same. And by then, it will be too late.

    Source link

  • UAE educators undertake specialist training in Russia

    UAE educators undertake specialist training in Russia

    The initiative is part of a larger strategy to build a teaching workforce in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) equipped for the demands of modern education. Organised by the UAE Ministry of Education, it reflects a broader strategic commitment in the country to invest in teaching talent and adopt global best practices in education.

    The program was held in collaboration with the Talent and Success Educational Foundation within the Sirius Federal Territory. It is part of an ongoing partnership that aims to deepen international cooperation in education and expand the professional capabilities of UAE-based educators.

    We value global knowledge exchange and the adoption of innovative, research-driven practices that strengthen our education system
    Sarah Al Amiri, UAE Minister of Education

    The training includes over 60 hours of in-depth instruction focused on modern teaching methodologies, particularly within the STEM fields. Participants are engaged in sessions on activity and project-based learning, educational transitions, and authentic assessment.

    While the identities of the participating educators have not been disclosed, officials say the group was selected through a competitive process targeting high-performing teachers with the potential to transform education in the UAE.

    Through daily workshops and peer exchange sessions, educators are also encouraged to share experiences and reflect on best practices from diverse educational settings.

    Sarah Al Amiri, the UAE’s minister of education, emphasised that the program aligns with the Ministry’s vision of developing a forward-looking education system.

    “As the world continues to evolve, we remain committed to equipping our educators with the tools they need to create future-ready learning experiences,” she noted. “We value global knowledge exchange and the adoption of innovative, research-driven practices that strengthen our education system.”

    By embedding international standards into local practice, the Ministry aims to enhance the UAE’s educational competitiveness while responding to the country’s specific needs and aspirations. In recent years, it has placed an increasing focus on educators’ mobility and professional development through international partnerships.

    The UAE’s engagement with institutions like Sirius reflects a wider regional trend of forging global partnerships to enhance workforce capacity and education systems.

    As the sector in the MENA region becomes more globally interconnected, such initiatives are expected to play a critical role in shaping longterm reforms.

    Source link

  • The Danger of Homogenisation: Why specialist HEIs are crucial to the success of UK Higher Education and the Government’s priorities

    The Danger of Homogenisation: Why specialist HEIs are crucial to the success of UK Higher Education and the Government’s priorities

    Today on the HEPI website, Annamaria Carusi challenges the common assumption that translational research is only relevant to STEM fields, making the case for a broader, more integrated approach that fully values the contributions of the arts and humanities. If we want to maximize the real-world impact of research, she argues, it is time to rethink outdated silos and recognize the creative industries as essential players in innovation and economic growth. You can read that piece here.

    Below, as the government considers higher education reform, Dr Brooke Storer-Church and Dr Kate Wicklow make the case for specialist higher education institutions and warn against the dangers of homogenisation.

    GuildHE represents the most diverse range of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) that are crucial to the prosperity of the sector, the economy, and our global reputation. We therefore argue that in an increasingly complex world, the role of specialist higher education institutions has never been more vital. These institutions, with their deep-rooted expertise and tailored approach, offer a unique and invaluable contribution to the landscape of higher education by providing diverse approaches and pathways to a wide range of students. 

    Diversity is a necessary ingredient for a successful and sustainable higher education sector, and this is becoming clearer from an analysis of the United States landscape, along with Australia and other large higher education systems.  Expert commentators grappling with some of the current challenges for American universities and colleges offer a hypothesis, positing that losing the diversity of mission and distinctiveness, objectives and audiences has been key to its diminishing public support. This homogenisation includes institutional, mission, operational, and aspirational similarities, which see every institution strive to ‘be all things to all people’ and thereby offer ‘the same thing for only some of the people.’ 

    In November, the Secretary of State wrote to the higher education sector outlining five areas for reform. GuildHE has scrutinised these areas and suggested to the Department for Education (DfE) ways to use the strengths of our sector to meet these challenges. However, some of the debate surrounding reform includes calls for consolidation and institutional mergers to offer the best ‘efficiencies’ in the sector. 

    While GuildHE members drive innovation, enrich communities and ensure access to high-quality education, their impact is often overlooked because they are not traditional, large-scale, multi-faculty universities. Funding and regulatory systems and government policies often fail to recognise institutions that do not fit this conventional university image. We, therefore, argue consolidation in the sector puts institutional diversity and student choice at risk, jeopardises our world-leading status, and undermines the Government’s missions of supporting local communities, equality of opportunity and our national economy.

    Overall, we want to see Government reform which champions our diversity, avoids policies that undermine the unique contributions of our diverse institutions, and actively invests to protect them.

    A focus on depth and industrial relevance

    Unlike their more generalist counterparts, specialist HEIs prioritise depth over breadth. They delve into specific disciplines, professions or industries, providing students with a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of their chosen field.  This focused approach fosters a level of knowledge and skills that is often unmatched elsewhere and is increasingly in demand to tackle 21st-century challenges.

    Whilst GuildHE is known for representing specialist creative arts institutions, which together train about 40% of all creative HE students in England, we represent a wider range of specialists, including healthcare specialists like Health Sciences University, specialists in the built environment like University College of Estate Management (which is also a specialist in online delivery) and all the land-based specialist universities in the sector. The agri-food sector employs almost 4 million people and is larger than the automotive and aerospace sectors combined. Technological innovations and sustainability and productivity improvements are driven by our specialist land-based institutions, which work closely with industrial partners. This specialist expertise is transforming the future of food production, bringing together disciplines such as robotics and artificial intelligence and contributing to the broader push towards net-zero food and farming. Several agriculture-focused higher education providers have their own farms and industrial research centres for testing and development.

    Nationally, our institutions work with the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, right across government and with industry sector bodies; for example, Harper Adams University has advised the government on matters related to food security.  Their impact is also international, as agri-food HEIs work with the Department for International Trade to boost the profile of UK agricultural innovation overseas and educational and research and development programmes are forged with international partners from the US and China to Kenya, Australia and the Netherlands.

    A culture of innovation

    As natural innovators, many specialist institutions know their regions well and will be a critical part of generating economic growth there. They are locally significant as employers and community anchors and active partners in Local Enterprise Partnerships and other local bodies, such as Chambers of Commerce. Below is just a small sample of the innovations delivered by our specialist institutions.

    Norwich University of the Arts collaborated with regional businesses to innovate film technology that mid-size regional film production companies use. The project created new jobs in Norfolk, boosted film production for regional, small-scale productions and start-ups, and the insights gained from the project were incorporated into the university curriculum. By equipping students with cutting-edge knowledge and skills, NUA is empowering them to contribute to the region’s growing knowledge-based economy by equipping them with cutting-edge knowledge and skills.

    Dyson Institute for Engineering and Technology is training the future workforce of engineers with a particular focus on pioneering new technologies that make intrinsically relevant real-world impacts. Innovation areas include delivering safe, cleaner, energy-efficient batteries, prototyping products in aerodynamics, mechatronics and microbiology and robotics for clinical imaging, navigation technology and machine learning.

    Hartpury University is a leading institution for agriculture, agri-tech, animal and veterinary sciences. Its Agri-Tech Centre is a state-of-the-art complex, connecting research, knowledge, data, and people in a real-world and applied setting. Through the Centre, it provides industry-led services for the advancement of agricultural technologies and delivers proven solutions and services to farms and suppliers across the UK. This hub offers a path for innovative agri-tech businesses to trial new products and services to modernise and sustain British farming.

    A sense of community

    One of the defining characteristics of specialist HEIs is their strong sense of community.  Students, staff and alumni often share a common passion for their field, creating a supportive and inspiring environment.  This sense of community fosters a deep sense of belonging and can lead to lifelong friendships and professional networks.

    Arts University Plymouth’s Young Arts programme was established in 1988.  It features the university’s renowned Saturday Arts Clubs and for over 30 years, has worked to bridge the gap in arts provision for young people created by increasingly limited access to creative activity in schools.  Young Arts uses art as a catalyst for learning, shaping the artists, makers and creative thinkers of the future, supporting learning and social development, often working with specific widening participation groups.

    Starting in September 2025, Harper Adams University (HAU) will open a suite of undergraduate courses at The Quad, Telford; its first additional site in 124 years and a new base from which the university can extend its collaboration with and connection to its local community.  In The Quad, HAU is co-located with Telford College, Invest Telford, and the local MP to broaden access for local learners to future-focused courses like data science, robotics mechatronics and automation, and digital business. HAU is also providing short courses and upskilling for local businesses to support local growth.

    Our asks of government

    As we argue extensively in our submission to DfE, specialist HEIs offer a diverse range of programmes and courses that meet the needs of a wide range of students and community partners and meet each of the five areas of higher education reform.  They are, therefore, the essential threads in the fabric of our diverse, rich and successful higher education landscape; threads that have been regrettably lost in other systems around the world. Their focus on depth, industry partnerships, innovation and community makes them uniquely positioned to prepare students for success in a rapidly changing world. As we look to the future, it is clear that specialist HEIs must continue to play a vital role in shaping the next generation of leaders and innovators.

    Observations about the increasing homogeneity of higher education have been available publicly for at least 2 decades, with some suggesting that a combination of government policies, regulation and academic communities are all playing their part. Regardless of the reasons behind it, there is widespread agreement that such homogeneity restricts access for students with different educational backgrounds or achievements. 

    Global trend analysis has shown that government policies, regulation and academic communities have all contributed to the homogeneity of higher education in other countries. This reduces social mobility by reducing modes of entry and delivery. It also weakens applied research and innovation and the pipeline of experts into the labour market, as it loses its ability to create the growing variety of specialisations needed for economic and social development. 

    At a time when we, as a sector, are grappling with the twin pressures of making our contributions to wider society clearer and delivering the promise with fewer resources, we must all protect the very diversity within it that ensures we can rise to the 21st-century challenges on our doorstep and retain a world-leading and (possibly) increasingly unique higher education sector.

    We have published a summary of our submission to DfE with our various policy asks to protect the diversity of our system here.

    Source link