Letter: Harper Adams university bid foolish
Am I alone in being baffled by the acquisition of university status by Harper Adams Agricultural College?
Harper have apparently campaigned for this status for a while.
Surely, a major problem is that it puts Harper on a par with the old universities, leaving those with no distinguishing description.
Why did Harper need this designation? Students do not need to go to university to learn how to plough land and sow seed. A budding farmer does not need to attend such an institution to know the content of his soil: he knows this by looking at it or feeling it.
A university is a place where men go to study the philosophies of Aristotle and Wittgenstein, the physics and chemistry of our planet and the universe, and the theories of men such as Darwin, not to mention such trifling disciplines as divinity, medicine and the law.
To compound things, after the announcement of the new status, the Star reported that Harper's principal Dr David Llewellyn had, Napoleon-like renamed his post to that of vice-chancellor, adding to this farce.
I am all for an institution, such as Harper in its known form, where young farmers get to know, in formal educational surroundings, about advancements in the world of agriculture, but I think that the recent event is a bridge too far.
What concerns me is that, whether students come from within farming or not, the reality is that, when they are handed their degrees, which should be the pinnacle of a young person's life, instead of finding the holy grail, they will be holding fool's gold.
Hugh Haycocks
Telford
