On the basis of some reminiscences about his student days, such as will be familiar to anyone who's ever been a student and had student and post-student discussions - 'I did so little work for that paper etc.' - and then a few well-meaning generalities about getting some life experience and the benefits of reading, Stephen Moss concludes that going to university at 18 or 19 is a waste of time - 'irrelevant and pointless and anti-educational'.
Without wanting to suggest there are not other ways to get an education - reading and going about to accumulate some life experience being two of them - I'd say this is philistine drivel. A person can make better or worse use of their time at university, and there are a few whom it doesn't suit at all. But for a lot of people, higher education introduces them to new ideas and ways of learning; it gives them the time and opportunity to study topics of interest to them, and this includes time to read; it makes available the disciplines of scholarship to those who want to acquaint themselves with these; and it brings people into contact with many and various others, providing them with the possibility of expanding their horizions in ways they choose. Going to university is an obligation on nobody. But to dismiss it in so light-minded a way - that's what I'd call anti-educational.
Here's a suggestion: speak to people who have had a university education, speak to large numbers of them, and see how many feel they got nothing out of it.