Anyone who’s been on a university campus in the last 10 years will get a powerful sense of déjà vu reading Petrified Campus. The authors, a triumvirate of history professors, have compiled an impressive list of the incompetencies that plague so many Canadian universities.

They argue that nearly illiterate students, unprepared by high school, are pushing university standards ever lower. They outline the huge number of unread and obtuse academic journals that help fuel the publish-or-perish climate, and waste bags of government cash. They describe the abuse of tenure by professors who clearly gave up thinking years ago. And they decry the rise of political correctness, which they blame for stifling debate on campus.

While many writers before them have noted these trends, the authors have a unique explanation for them. They argue that Canadian universities are victims of the very things that originally made them famous: plenitude and openness. By pushing to enroll as many students as possible, and – to this end – opening a huge number of institutions in every regional backwater, Canada has found itself unable to afford even one “world-class” university.

The solution? Forget about equality, and pour resources into only a few high-end, research-heavy institutions: “Some schools will be first rate, some will be specialist institutions, and some will exist to serve regional needs or lesser-quality students.” Increase tuition to make up for government cutbacks, and create new student-loan arrangements. Jack up entrance standards at the high-quality schools. On top of it all, get rid of tenure, and allow universities to cull their dead wood, opening up spots for cheaper, up-and-coming talent.

There is much to commend here. To their credit, the authors provide concrete suggestions, and criticize tenure and other sacred cows. The book is also terse and clearly written and may provoke debate among a wider audience.

The problem with Petrified Campus – and, indeed, with almost every book written about universities – is that it’s strangely myopic. You can’t fix universities without also fixing, say, elementary schools and federal taxation. Focusing on “merit” alone won’t do it. The authors argue that only merit should count in admission to and promotion at universities, and of course it should. But merit costs money, and, as in so many other things, those that have, get. In the ideal universe of this book, private-school-educated kids will grow up quite bright, naturally, and will head off to university loaded down with scholarships they intellectually deserve yet do not truly need. Genuine intellectual elitism is sorely needed in our half-assed universities, but this sort of economic elitism is half-cocked.