Education letters

Pleading piranhas Academics predictably reacted to proposed cuts in higher education funding with all the community of a shoal of piranhas. So Michael Arthur and Wendy Piatt's special pleading for 800 years of Oxford's "excellence" on the front page of the Guardian, while Chris Higgins stuck up for the 94 Group in this supplement (Are some universities more equal than others? 12 January). Next, Million+ will protest against their relegation to two-year training "degrees" – in which case, whither further education and who will speak for it? The crisis in further and higher education is endemic and demands a united response because Mandelson's and other parties' proposed cuts – as well as their "apprenticeships without jobs" – miss the point of what to do with the lost generation of over-schooled but under-educated young people leaving schools, colleges and universities overqualified and underemployed. Patrick Ainley University of Greenwich • The problem with Professor Higgins's argument – as with almost all university contributions to the debate on funding cuts – is that good arguments are poisoned by appalling self-interest by university senior managers and the ­sector groups. The truth is that there is a differentiated higher education system in the UK. The problem is that "system" does not neatly correspond to institutions, elite or otherwise: it is all about the people with the knowledge: the academics. Inconveniently for those managing the self-styled "elite" institutions, the best people do not all work for them. Anyone seriously proposing a mass reorganisation of the system is therefore in effect talking about moving huge numbers of highly skilled people between universities. If the state can't manage a junior doctors' placement programme, why on earth would we expect them to do better with a wholesale reorganisation of those to whom we are trusting the next generation? Dr Paul Benneworth Tynemouth Post-Christmas blues In my role as head of counselling at the University of Bath over 25 years, the presentation of homesick students ­following the Christmas break was always significant (Heaven knows they're miserable after Christmas, 12 January). Our observations enabled us to warn first-year students during October inductions to be aware that such feelings would not be uncommon and that support services were available. It may help universities that offer work-placement years to recognise that students are often unprepared for the loss of motivation to re-engage with their degree after enjoying paid employment. Re-induction programmes can flag up awareness. Liz Davies Bath