Nick Hillman (Letters, 21 December) claims to be “a huge fan” of Danny Dorling (Let’s say Auf Wiedersehen to our rip-off tuition fees, 19 December) yet criticises his statistics without providing any source for his own. Dorling and Ben Hennig’s data is the most recent available, uses the proper method to look at children’s life chances, and shows that a higher number and higher proportion of young people go to university in Germany than in the UK.
When Hillman asserts that the UK “spends more than Germany educating each student”, he fails to recognise that this is not wonderful if it is a consequence of our universities being more expensive – costing more and delivering less.
Thank goodness Dorling and Hennig are not simply in the business of bringing “geography alive” but also apply their discipline to helping us understand the social and economic issues of our times.
Kate Pickett
Professor of epidemiology, university champion for research on justice and equality, and deputy director of the Centre for Future Health,
University of York
• While for Hillman “Danny Dorling’s goal is ideological”, I find the comparison between England and other European countries in “Let’s say Auf Wiedersehen to England’s embarrassing tuition fees” refreshing and necessary. My own comparative research conducted across the three very different systems of student support in England, Italy and Sweden shows that inequalities are increasing, not just through access to higher education but because of the very different social conditions that students have while in higher education.
It is about time that we ask: does it make sense to have a state-funded student support system, like the one we have in England, that feeds rich universities and student landlords, rather than assisting students and their families? The issue of how inequalities are reproduced through higher education is the key debate of the years to come.
Nick Hillman’s role in setting up the current system of student support through his various past advisory roles in the government makes him (ironically) the one who is too ideologically biased to contribute to the debate on how to develop a better system for our youth.
Through existing comparative studies, the British public can get a better sense of how (economically and socially) regressive the English student support system is and of the different policy solutions available to reform it (for example, abolition of fees, universal student support, state-owned student housing).
Dr Lorenza Antonucci
Fellow and lecturer in social policy, University of Birmingham, and author of Student Lives in Crisis
• Nick Hillman is cross that Danny Dorling criticised his numbers on higher education in Germany. He claims that the German funding model of free higher education is unsustainable. It’s pantomime time so we can say: “Oh no its not, Nick.” The Germans like their free higher education and are not about to charge fees, however much Andreas Schleicher (the German-born director of education and skills at the OECD) would like them to. Apparently, Dorling is ideological for wanting higher education without fees; “Oh yes we all do”, and we can afford it.
Hillman has been a Conservative party candidate and writes for Conservative Home. So he has an “ology” too.
Emeritus Professor Sally Tomlinson
Goldsmiths, University of London
• In refuting Danny Dorling’s excellent article on the increasingly discredited and unsustainable student fees regime, Nick Hillman claims Dorling’s criticisms are “ideological”. Would this be the same Nick Hillman who was the Conservative candidate for Cambridge in the 2010 general election, and was also employed as a special adviser to David Willetts, the Conservative minister for universities, when the fees were trebled to £9,000?
Pete Dorey
Professor of British politics, department of politics and international relations, School of Law and Politics, Cardiff University
• Nick Hillman tells us that British universities, typical student fee £9,000, spend £16,500 on teaching each student while the Germans, typical fee £750, spend only £13,665. Given the choice, I wonder which system the average student would prefer? It would also be interesting to know how the £16,500 is calculated. Does it, for example, include the salaries of vice-chancellors who, in my experience, don’t do a lot of teaching.
Robert Walls
Camberley, Surrey
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
