8. Higher education in the future
212. The White Paper is called The Future of Higher
Education but it appears the future means the short term future.
During our inquiry there has already been discussion about policies
that may come forward in the next four or five years to expand
on or clarify what is in this White Paper.[260]
However, some long term trends or policy objectives are clear.
213. A significant conclusion that can be drawn from
the White Paper is that the Government sees universities and colleges
principally as economic agents; there is very little in the document
about intellectual or cultural life in higher education, or the
broader development of the individual. The economic role of universities
is significant, but it would be wrong to suggest that the only
benefit of higher education for society in general or for individuals
in particular is an economic one:
"In the domains of health, the labour market,
citizenship and parenthood, young people with experience of higher
education seem, over and above other attributes, to profit significantly.
Although some of these benefits are clearly in the private interest
of individuals…others have indirect benefits to the economy
such as cost savings to the health service. In relation to the
evidence on citizenship and values, the benefits may be seen as
even more relevant to society [than] to that of individual gain.
In terms of a political agenda that sees social cohesion as a
primary goal, the expansion of higher education to produce more
graduates can only be seen as beneficial."[261]
214. The Government's extra investment in higher
education can therefore be justified on a number of grounds. What
is remarkable is the muted response that this extra investment
has evoked. It has become apparent during the course of our inquiry
that this is largely because there are few outright winners under
the proposals, and many institutions feel that what they do is
being undervalued, or even undermined, by the Government.
215. We have commented at some length on the proposals
for more selective funding of research, and it is clearly the
case that those universities that are receiving increased funding
under this year's settlement and into the future will be better
placed to undertake research than others. However, it could be
argued that what has happened is not so much to do with research
capability but with finding a mechanism to provide more cash to
a small number of institutions, enabling them to recruit and retain
the most highly qualified staff and so enhance their position
as world class universities. The real effect is on those which
are not so generously funded. They will not be prevented from
undertaking research, but it will become more difficult for them
to do so within a smaller overall budget.
216. The most remarkable element of the Government's
funding settlement for higher education, however, is the absence
of any substantial overall improvement in academic and other salaries.
By not seeking to increase salaries generally, it has made its
task of reshaping the higher education sector much harder. Its
proposals on access, expansion and teaching quality, for example,
will come to nothing without the efforts of staff in higher education.
Their willingness to cooperate with the Government's policy aims,
or in many cases even to remain in the sector, must be put at
risk. It has been estimated that in order to achieve the 50% participation
target the sector will need to expand by 350,000 places and 17,000
staff by the end of the decade. At the moment, it is difficult
to see where those 17,000 staff will be coming from.
217. The other main issues are fees and student support.
Everything that the Government wishes to do in encouraging greater
participation in higher education, encouraging more people from
non-traditional backgrounds into higher education and ensuring
fair access on merit to all institutions could be undermined if
its policies on differential fees and student support are not
sufficiently well thought through.
218. We are of the view that maintenance, not fees,
is the more significant problem. Fees are a fixed cost and, even
at £3,000 per year, less than the cost of maintenance, which
is also more variable. Loans for maintenance, debt incurred at
commercial interest rates and the need to work while studying
could all have a significant deterrent effect on the participation
in higher education of those from non-traditional backgrounds.
We believe that this problem should be addressed by the provision
of substantially enhanced and targeted support for those from
low-income families.
- The Government introduces the White Paper with
a downbeat assessment of higher education. It says that there
is a great deal of high quality work done within the sector, but
then says that despite this "the whole system is under severe
pressure and at serious risk of decline".[262]
If that is so, the question then arises of why so many overseas
students come here to study. We believe that one reason is that
the student experience is a good one. Research is not confined
to research institutes but takes place in universities and colleges
which also teach undergraduates. Much of the teaching place in
relatively small groups with opportunity for individual contact
with lecturers. Whatever else happens as a consequence of the
Government's programme of change, we believe that this model should
be preserved for the sake of the students and for the sake of
the sector as a whole.
220. The Government is to be congratulated for seeking
to tackle some difficult issues in higher education, but it has
not provided the solutions to make its proposals work properly.
It recognises the realties of institutional diversity and difference,
but some of the changes it is proposing risk freezing the structure
of the sector in its current shape.
221. There are a number of actions it could take
which we believe would make its proposals more generally acceptable:
- draw back from the further concentration of
research funding at least until the revised research assessment
system is in place
- provide for an overall increase in starting
pay for academic staff and in other salaries which takes some
account of the relative decline of recent years
- provide enhanced and better targeted support
for those from low income families to be funded by abolishing
the interest rate subsidy for student loans
- withdraw the proposal for the access regulator,
allowing HEFCE to continue its work on access
- separate the expansion of foundation degrees
from the achievement of the 50% target for participation in higher
education
- set general parameters or frameworks within
which the sector can operate on issues such as knowledge transfer,
but not seek to micro-manage what universities do.
260 See, for example, Q 525. Back
261
Revisiting the benefits of higher education, A report by
the Bedford Group for Lifecourse and Statistical Studies, Institute
of Education, for HEFCE, April 2003, p 4. Back
262
The Future of Higher Education, para 1.11. Back
|
