Abstract

Justifying higher education is a political exercise in which representatives of universities advocate for resources from the state while also seeking autonomy to manage their own affairs. This analysis builds upon Collini’s identification of the conflict over the value of higher education in the UK. It sets out the ‘worlds of worth’ typology to explain the basis of conflicting justifications in UK higher education policy debates. It elaborates the six worlds of worth and links them to pragmatic justifications utilised in higher education, varying according to situated contexts. It explains the conflicts between the worlds and how they play out in practical ways in higher education policymaking. The Research Excellence Framework constitutes a compromise between multiple worlds of worth. Debates around ‘low value’ courses are centred around conflicts between the industrial and market worlds. It concludes that the worlds of worth model offers a productive framework for the analysis of pragmatic policy conflicts and illuminates political struggles about what universities are for, embedded in power struggles for autonomy and control.