Examination of Witnesses (Questions 381
- 399)
WEDNESDAY 21 JUNE 2000
SIR BRIAN
FENDER AND
MR BAHRAM
BEKHRADNIA
Chairman
381. If we can switch our minds from early years
to a rather later stage of education and can I welcome Brian Fender
and his colleague here this morning. I understand that this is
the first time that the HEFCE has ever given evidence to the Select
Committee which seems a great omission on our part.
(Sir Brian Fender) It is and we are very pleased that
we have broken the ice at last.
382. Charlotte Atkins, who has been a member
of this Committee longer than I, thinks we have had an informal
session.
(Sir Brian Fender) Absolutely correct with Margaret
Hodge.
Charlotte Atkins: It was a very good session.
Chairman
383. Can I introduce the session by saying that
we welcome your attendance, it is a good first in terms of formal
evidence. This is the second session of evidence that we have
had on this specific phase of our higher education inquiry. You
will know that we have been embarked on an investigation into
the higher education area since January. We have looked at the
implications of the Cubie Report and what happened in Scotland
and the rest of the United Kingdom as a discrete part of that
inquiry and we are now looking at these broad questions of access
which fit very nicely into our inquiry because the terms reference
did include the student experience and we believe there is nothing
more important than the experience of trying to get into university
in the first place or failing to apply to university if you have
the qualifications. It is widening that and the Committee, and
I think I speak for all of us, has no other interest than the
fact that we believe that the talented people in our country should
get the education that they deserve and merit. Is there anything
you would like to say to the Committee before we start?
(Sir Brian Fender) Very briefly because we have given
you, I am afraid, a rather long memorandum but that rather reflects
the fact that rather a lot is going on. What I would like to do
is to place this in context. I think there are four very clear
goals for higher education in the next decade. The first is to
make use of new technologies and the Internet in particular, and
that is why we have introduced the e-university; to build and
widen our very successful record in research; to very considerably
build up the interface between business and the community; and
the fourth, and not the least, is widening participation. You
will see that we have been, in fact, engaged in widening participation
for a long period of time, ever since HEFCE in this particular
form of the UGC came into existence. We see two key words, the
first of which is progression. You have had Chris Woodhead in
before you and that progression into higher education does start
with early years with an understanding of the learning social
environment, of course going on and encouraging students into
post compulsory education making sure they stick through to level
three and then this important interface between those that finish
that at 18 often (and of course we are very much engaged with
mature students) but nevertheless getting through into HE and
having progressed in HE finally not to graduation or completion
of their higher education but into satisfactory and successful
employment. That is the progressional bit but of course our aspiration
is very simply that we hope and want to encourage students to
seek the maximum challenge out of their higher education, not
just simply to do what is obvious and convenient.
384. Can I ask you what I suppose is a leading
question. We had some very interesting evidence from the Sutton
Trust yesterday and I think really at the heart of what I took
away from that session was that universities sort of sit there
waiting for applications and then deciding on these applications.
This is the traditional way that universities have looked at the
relationship to their students. Having some experience of the
private sector innovative supply chain and managing and going
down your supply chain is absolutely vital to any progressive
business. Does it not strike you as odd that universities seem
to have taken so long to think it important to go down their supply
chain in a more vigorous way when they can see very clearly that
that supply of students did not really represent a broad range
of talents from social backgrounds? I say talents from social
backgrounds because it is not a question of people without qualifications
coming through the system but it is people with qualifications
either not coming through to university or not getting a full
choice. Do you not think that is a rather odd situation?
(Sir Brian Fender) I think universities have always
paid considerable attention to their supply chain and to the schools
and colleges which provide students. What we are seeing now is
an intensification of that and we have seen that over the last
few years partly because institutions share that goal that you
described at the beginning of trying to attract and draw in the
talents of all our young people, but also because government policies
have indeed encouraged that. That is excellent and indeed in this
whole area of trying to maximise the opportunities for students
I think there is complete unanimity and I cannot find anybody
who is not just participating in this, but is not an enthusiastic
participant. If I looked through what universities have proposed
in terms of the special funding we have given them, that is a
good indication of their priorities, they are very simply outreach
into schools, further education/higher education progression routes,
targeted groups in geographical areas, and particularly with specific
initiatives to raise aspirations and access in what are sometimes
called "coal pockets", areas where we know participation
is low. We as a funding council have done a lot through our neighbourhood
analysis to enable that type of analysis to take place and then
just to go down this list to show how comprehensive this is, a
lot of attention given to guidance. This is the proactive bit
about going out and giving information about opportunities that
exist in higher education and, indeed, following up the outreach
into schools. It is not just the supply chain, it is the issue
of getting into the community and providing examples of education
and the wider community. I know of examples where units are going
out and putting on courses in community halls and the like with
the target not just of attracting students but of trying to raise
the aspirations and interest of parents as well so that we are
not specifically talking about the student supply chain but trying
to change the culture in some communities.
385. What Sutton Trust was saying to us yesterday
is that it is all very well to have very good guiding principles
and good intentions but whether you are HEFCE or individual institutions,
what Peter Lampl is telling us is until October 1997 when he went
to a number of leading universities and said he personally and
the Sutton Trust thought it rather poor performance that many
of our leading universities had such a poor representation from
the state sector students, that all those universities he was
talking to were not running such schemes on any scale at all and
were not doing very much at all really actively and the evidence
we got yesterday and some of the other evidence that has appeared
over recent weeks might suggest that it is a very little, a bit
late and has HEFCE not got some sort of responsibility for this?
(Sir Brian Fender) I think you have seen our contribution
in the way that we have brought forward an increasing amount of
investment and an expansion in the range of those activities.
386. Could you give us a scale of how much?
(Sir Brian Fender) If you look at it in terms of the
formula funding that we give, which is based on the records of
those institutions pulling in students from low participating
areas, we put £24 million into that. There is another £85
million that comes from the Department of Education to support
students facing hardship and access at a general level.
387. What is the £24 million for?
(Sir Brian Fender) It is there as an allocation to
institutions based on the number of students coming from low participating
backgrounds and it is there for two purposes, one, to provide
extra support for students who come from backgrounds—
388. It is not very much money. How many universities
do you cover?
(Sir Brian Fender) We cover something like 100 universities
and 30 colleges.
389. Divide £24 million into that, it does
not seem much more than a can of beans to me.
(Sir Brian Fender) That has to be set against a background
of universities' unit of resource being steadily cut. Last year
the allocation was again a cut of one per cent and when you take
into account the salary demands that effectively means a cut of
greater than two per cent on universities. We have to allocate
our funds with that in mind and our first priority must be to
keep universities running and the quality of programmes as high
as is allowed under the funding given. We eke out money for programmes
like widening participation. We have done the best we can and
I think that would be mirrored at the institutional level where
institutions would like to do more but they have not got the resources
to do so. In the end they have to maintain the quality of teaching.
390. Which universities are at the cutting edge
of encouraging disadvantaged students into their universities
and is that affected by the increasing trend for students to go
to their home universities?
(Sir Brian Fender) There is some tendency for students
to go to their home university. It is a gradual change, it is
not a dramatic change, but there is a steady increase in that.
There are a whole lot of universities, Charlotte, as I am sure
you are aware, which have made access at the heart of their mission
and I think the results in many areas demonstrate that. If we
look at ethnic participation, for example, that is very good except
for these troublesome areas—troublesome in the sense that
we have not been successful yet in attracting some groups of Asian
women and black Afro-Caribbean—otherwise the record is very
good. The record of the institutions in attracting mature students,
over a third are over 25 now, is further evidence of many universities
putting those goals very high on their missions.
391. Clearly the £24 million is not spread
equally across institutions and presumably you monitor that money
because it may not be a huge amount of money, but it is a significant
amount of government money, presumably you monitor the effectiveness
of that money against the goals being achieved. So what I am asking
for is an example of universities that we should be looking at
not as a league university but right across the board of universities
that have been particularly successful in reaching their goals
as indicated when they applied for their share of that £24
million?
(Sir Brian Fender) I do not want to pick out particular
examples simply because in doing so I would probably miss out
others who are doing very well, and that is why we have produced
the performance indicators which give you a very clear indication
of who is achieving what, not only, if you like, in absolute terms
but against reasonable expectations for the students that they
have. We think this is a very important step change in awareness
of institutions, not only their own performance, and we have had
a discussion with them and fed data to them over a period of time,
but an opportunity which is unique anywhere in the world of being
able not only to measure their own performance but see it against
the performance of others.
392. If you will not name institutions can I
ask you a few questions about the method used. I am a Staffordshire
MP and know the work that the Staffordshire University does, which
is excellent, but my concern is that universities put on summer
schools, as does Keele and Staffordshire, but they either are
pitched at the very able student, the top 2 per cent, the maths
master class type A approach, and those in general who even if
they are from non-institutional backgrounds would probably find
themselves going to university. The other issue is that they are
pitched at students about 16 or slightly younger, whereas my view
is that most young people have in their mind what their future
is going to be much earlier on, 11 and 12, before they do their
GCSE choices, they have in their mind whether they are likely
to leave school at 16 or 18 or go on to university. Certainly
that would be my experience. Are you funding initiatives which
focus on much younger pupils who have not already been influenced
and have not already got a mind set which is set against even
staying on at 16?
(Sir Brian Fender) The answer to that is people do
not know quite what is the best most effective intervention point,
but I agree with you that paying attention to 11 and 12 years
olds I am sure is important and we do have a number of universities
which are mentoring at that age group. I think it is true to say
that the majority are probably focusing on older levels, but some
are certainly targeting the 11 and 12 year olds, and we would
be very interested to find out how that works out.
393. In general what age are those interventions
targeted at?
(Sir Brian Fender) Some of it is certainly about trying
to identity the barriers which exist between FE and HE, for example.
A lot of work on the whole with six formers and 16 plus, you can
assume that that is normal. As I said, a number of universities
are exploring mentoring with younger children, and I would applaud
that and think that it is an important part of the target.
Chairman
394. What is disturbing about this is that all
the evidence we have is that HEFCE has enormous knowledge, and
you have just held up a document that represents a great deal
of research and information, but what the critics out there seem
to say to us as a Committee is that HEFCE has all this information
but does not actually do anything in terms of championing. I will
just quote to you first of all, you argued that "prospects
will be transformed when schools succeed in persuading students
to stay on in school beyond the age of 15. You note that at any
given total A level point students from top ends of schools performed
better in terms of degree classes than pupils from private schools."
In a sense what we are saying is; why is it that HEFCE is not
a champion and if it is not a champion, why is it not and why
do you not go to the Secretary of State and say, "Come on,
we have the facts here. This is a pretty disgraceful situation.
Why don't you give us more money to do something about this?"
(Sir Brian Fender) You can rest assured just on the
latter point that we do, but as you also know, our advice to the
Secretary of State is private advice and that is a requirement
that is placed upon us, it is not particularly our wish.
395. So you are suggesting that in confidential
relationships with the Secretary of State you have brought the
inequity of the situation in terms of people from less wealthy
backgrounds in this country failing to get into higher education
to the attention of the Secretary of State but he has not responded
sufficiently?
(Sir Brian Fender) I think the Secretary of State
is well aware of all ends and this is a very prominent aim which
is to widen participation in bringing forward these disadvantaged
groups. In terms of championing we were way ahead of the game
in identifying how we could focus attention on these under performing,
under participating areas, we have produced the information about
that, we have supported the CVCP in their Elitism to Inclusion
study which was designed to identify good practice and promote
it through the sector. There is a follow up of that report going
on. We have created our own action for access group which is taking
the work of our 7.5 million special initiatives and finding the
best practice and charged with disseminating it both, if you like,
visibly through communication, but also we have a mechanism because
we have regional consultants that deal with groups of universities
in each region, making sure that good practice which is identified
by this action group, which is lead by Jeff Layer from the University
of Bradford and making sure that those regional consultants are
aware so that they can go and talk directly to universities—
Charlotte Atkins
396. Can you make us aware of good practice?
Tell us what good practice is about? Let us have some concrete
examples. If you are not naming universities you can at least
give us some good examples of concrete good practice that we can
actually disseminate in our report.
(Sir Brian Fender) I think maybe the best way of looking
at that is to give you an illustration of the kind of projects
which are going on very specifically. I think one of the nice
things that we have been able to do over the last few years is
encourage universities not just to do this on their own, but to
do it in collaboration with others. If I take, for example, one
of these proposals which is a specific proposal to improve guidance
and progression of widening participation in the universities
of Derby and Nottingham and life-long learning partnerships of
Derbyshire and Greater Nottingham and North Nottinghamshire partnerships
there and in the list of FE colleges. All of those are working
together on a project and the main aims of the outcome are the
development of strategic sub-regional partnerships which between
HE and FE and, as I have said, the relevant life-long partnership,
the aim is to target activities of communities identified by a
number of indicators as under represented in further and higher
education and to include specific areas in Mansfield, Ashfield,
Greater Nottingham, Erewash and the Amber Valley, as well as North
East and North West Derby and by the end of the project we expect
at least six institutions to be offering credit based progression
routes into higher education from specially targeted groups. That
is a degree of specific detail which is mirrored all round. I
can give you lots of other examples where this is not talk, this
is about groups of universities with a very specific programme
and with targets which we will, of course, monitor and share with
others.
397. That is very much in the future. Have you
any examples where you can show that there has been progress?
You are talking about his being in the future and that is great,
it is important that that work is done, but have you any evidence—because
I am sure that that is your job, to collect evidence—of
demonstrating where approaches have been successful over time?
(Mr Bekhradnia) If you find it helpful, we will gladly
write to you with some examples of outcomes from previous projects
that have been supported. May I say one of the points I think
you were making about the intervention points really is rather
critical, and one reason is because already almost all of those
who have the conventional traditional qualifications of A levels
are coming into higher education. So really if we are going to
expand access, we do need to persuade more to stay on or more
to achieve the qualifications. One of the successes of higher
education has been to go out, perhaps not sufficiently, but to
go out and identify those who do not have the conventional qualifications
to come in. We are actually rather good at this in international
terms in the sense that, as Sir Brian has already said, one third
of all students enter over the age of 25. This is quite unusual
in international terms, so it is not as if universities are not
already doing quite a lot and rather well in international terms,
I am saying that they may not seem very good in national terms,
but in a comparative sense, they are looking and seeking to include
higher education students who might not otherwise normally have
expected to come in.
398. That is perhaps not so good at the traditional
entry stage internationally?
(Mr Bekhradnia) You mean the 30 per cent participation?
399. I mean if you are talking about the traditional
student going in at 19.
(Mr Bekhradnia) With the traditional qualifications?
|
