Sir, – I note with curiosity the recent rebranding of almost all hospitals in the country as university hospitals. Doubtless due to copying an international trend, presumably it is merited on the basis of a formal connection to a university and that university-level teaching, learning and research occur there. Since this could take place just as effectively without a name change, presumably also it is done to add a certain gravitas or other advantage to otherwise anonymous hospitals. But it raises the question, why limit conferring this esteemed epithet just to hospitals?
In my time as a lecturer at an Irish university, we had thousands of students for eight months of their third year formally undertaking accredited education and research at what could be called, for the sake of equality and equity, “university building sites”, “university solicitors’ offices” or “university stud farms”, to name but a few “university level” employers. Likewise, throughout the country, we have trainee teachers doing core teaching practice and research in elite “university schools”.
The Universities Act regulates university status itself, but seemingly no such barrier exists to the use of university as an adjective. Given the apparent value of this attractive appellation to hospitals and the relatively low cost of meeting the necessary criteria, why are we not capitalising on the opportunity and describing as “university” anything else that fancies a little free upgrade? In fact, it’s so obvious, one wonders why the Institutes of Technology didn’t think of it first. It might have saved them a lot of bother! – Yours, etc,
CONOR MOONEY,
Paris.