FINANCIAL INCENTIVES
72. In our Office of Science and Technology: Scrutiny
Report 2003, we recommended that, in order to maintain sufficient
demand for particular subjects, "the Government should consider
establishing bursaries for undergraduates to study shortage subjects,
such as physical sciences and engineering".[146]
In its Response, the Government rejected our suggestion.[147]
In the US, a Bill is currently being drafted that would remove
interest on college loans for students graduating with science-related
majors and subsequently working for at least three years in the
field, until the point when their salaries exceeded four times
the median US income ($32,000).[148]
In the UK, the IoP has already introduced a bursary scheme for
physics students worth £1,000 a year. In oral evidence, Professor
Michael Sterling, Chairman of the Russell Group, told us that
the scheme was "already attracting increased student interest.
Positive intervention can influence the market for strategic purposes".[149]
He told us that national bursaries "need not be very many
[
] and they need not cost very much money", and emphasised
that "it is more the message that is given to prospective
applicants rather than the actual sum of money that they would
get that is important".[150]
Indeed, all three of the other members of the panel of Vice Chancellors
that we saw on 9 March were strongly in favour of the introduction
of such a scheme.
73. Evidence on the effectiveness of financial incentives
at stimulating student demand for STEM subjects is largely speculative
because, apart from the still-embryonic IoP scheme and sponsorship
deals run by employers, no such national bursary for STEM subjects
currently exists. However, a similar venture has been used by
the Government to try to increase the number of PGCE students.
As is shown in paragraphs 34 to 35 of this Report, financial incentives
for teachers have increased the recruitment of teachers, but have
not improved retention rates. This experience suggests that, whilst
financial incentives may be sufficient to attract initial student
interest, recipients do not necessarily sustain their interest
once funds dry up. This is potentially a serious limitation of
a science bursary scheme, given that part of the intention of
attracting more students into STEM courses at university is to
increase the number of graduates pursuing long term careers in
science.
74. In order to better understand the factors that
motivate students, we asked a panel of students whether they thought
that a bursary scheme would increase demand for STEM subjects.
Danielle Miles told us that "I think it would appeal to people
but I think you would get the wrong people on the courses [
]
you might end up not having as many researchers and people going
into the fields that they have studied in, and more people just
going into IT with good degrees and things like that".[151]
Ian Hutton agreed, saying that "I think you would have to
be very careful about what incentives you offered because it is
not just taking the places as a blank spot and trying to put people
in them, you need the right kind of people to fill those places
and careful consideration would need to be given as to why those
places are not being filled by the people you want them to be
filled by".[152]
Attracting students who are more interested in the money than
the subject, or its potential applications, is an inevitable risk
of introducing a bursary scheme.
75. We recommend
that the Government introduces a national bursary scheme, based
on the scheme currently being run by the Institute of Physics,
for outstanding university applicants in shortage STEM subjects.
Such a scheme would give a much needed boost to levels of student
demand in the short term. However, bursaries are not a cure-all,
and the Government will need to introduce further measures to
sustain increases in demand in the long term.
77 Department for Education and Skills, The Future
of Higher Education, Cm5735, January 2003, p 57 Back
78
Libby Aston, Higher Education Policy Institute, Higher education
supply and demand to 2010, June 2003, pp 8-9 Back
79
Q 185 Back
80
Ev 136 Back
81
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD),
OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard, 2003,
p 51. The percentages given have been rounded to the nearest whole
percentage point. Back
82
Ev 133 Back
83
The Engineering Council (UK) and the Engineering and Technology
Board (etb), Digest of Engineering Statistics 2003-04,
July 2004, p 28 Back
84
Ev 180 Back
85
HM Treasury, Department of Trade and Industry and Department for
Education and Skills, SET for Success: The supply of people
with science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills:
The report of Sir Gareth Roberts's Review, p 24 Back
86
Ev 173 Back
87
Q 419 Back
88
Q 458 Back
89
Q 60 Back
90
Higher Education Funding Council for England, Funding higher
education in England: How HEFCE allocates its funds, May 2004,
pp 7-11 Back
91
Ev 183 Back
92
Ev 127 Back
93
Ev 173 Back
94
Q 457 Back
95
Ev 134 Back
96
Ev 146 Back
97
Q 352 Back
98
Bahram Bekhradnia, Higher Education Policy Institute, Government,
Funding Council and Universities: How Should They Relate?,
February 2004, pp 11-12 Back
99
Ev 99 Back
100
Q 419 Back
101
www.savebritishscience.org.uk Back
102
Q 327 Back
103
Mike Hill, Responding To The Challenges Of The Global Market:
Ensuring Careers Education And Guidance Is Relevant To The Demands
Of The Twenty First Century Back
104
Dearing Report 2, Students' motives, aspirations and choices,
1997. See Ev 307 Back
105
http:www.set4women.gov.uk/set4women/statistics/ Back
106
as above Back
107
For example, see Department of Trade and Industry, A strategy
for women in science, engineering and technology, April 2003 Back
108
Baroness Greenfield, Dr Jan Peters, Dr Nancy Lane, Professor Teresa
Rees and Dr Gill Samuels, Department of Trade and Industry, SET
Fair: a Report on Women in Science, Engineering and Technology,
November 2002, p 40 Back
109
The Engineering Council (UK) and the Engineering and Technology
Board (etb), Digest of Engineering Statistics 2003-04,
July 2004, p 8 Back
110
Q 36 Back
111
as above Back
112
Geoff Mason, National Institute of Economic and Social Research,
"The Labour Market for Engineering, Science and IT Graduates:
Are there mismatches between supply and demand?", Department
for Education and Employment Research Brief No. 112 Back
113
Ev 146 Back
114
Q 36 Back
115
Ev 156 Back
116
Q 436 Back
117
Q 476 Back
118
Seventh Report from the Science and Technology Committee, Session
2004-05, Forensic Science on Trial (HC 96-II), Q 245 Back
119
HC [2004-05] HC 96-II, Q 362 Back
120
HC [2004-05] HC 96-II, Q 305 Back
121
HC [2004-05] HC 96-II, Q 246 Back
122
Ev 311 Back
123
Q 335 Back
124
Q 476 Back
125
Q 328 Back
126
Q 128 Back
127
Q 322 Back
128
HC [2001-02] 508, p 5 Back
129
Ev 126 Back
130
"Why do our youth stay out of scientific careers? New EU-wide
data", Press Release from the Press and Communications Directorate
General, European Commission, December 2003 Back
131
Ev 86 Back
132
Ev 82 Back
133
Q 274 Back
134
Q 254 Back
135
Ev 237 Back
136
Sixth Special Report from the Science and Technology Committee,
Session 2001-02, Science Education From 14-19: Government Response
to the Committee's Third Report (HC 1204), p 6 Back
137
HM Treasury, Department of Trade and Industry and Department for
Education and Skills, Science and Innovation Investment Framework
2004-2014, July 2004, p 90 Back
138
Q 75 Back
139
HC [2001-02] 508, p 5 Back
140
Mike Hill, Responding To The Challenges Of The Global Market:
Ensuring Careers Education And Guidance Is Relevant To The Demands
Of The Twenty First Century Back
141
Ev 132 Back
142
Royal Society of Chemistry and Institute of Physics, The economic
benefits of higher education qualifications: A report produced
for the Royal Society of Chemistry and the Institute of Physics
by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, January 2005, p 3 Back
143
HM Treasury, Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration,
December 2003, p 108 Back
144
Ev 311 Back
145
HM Treasury, Department of Trade and Industry and Department for
Education and Skills, Science and Innovation Investment Framework
2004-2014, July 2004, p 91 Back
146
Fourth Report from the Science and Technology Committee, Session
2003-04, Office of Science and Technology: Scrutiny Report
2003 (HC 316), p 28 Back
147
Fourth Special Report from the Science and Technology Committee,
Session 2003-04, Government Response to the Committee's Fourth
Report, Session 2003-04, Office of Science and Technology: Scrutiny
Report 2003 (HC 588), p 8 Back
148
"Forgiving Science Majors", Science, 18 March
2005, vol 307, p 1707 Back
149
Q 411 Back
150
Q 412 Back
151
Q 45 Back
152
Q 51 Back