|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
In the longer term, studies have shown that graduate unemployment decreases over time and that four years after graduating, unemployment rates have fallen to 2-3 per cent. (3 per cent. for men and 2 per cent. for women), and 90 per cent. are in employment.
|Average starting salaries of UK and EU domiciled first degree graduates ( 1) in full time employment , a cademic years 2002/03 to 2005/06|
|Academic year||Average starting salary( 2) (£)|
|(1) from both full and part time modes of study|
(2) figures rounded to the nearest thousand
HESA Destination of Leavers in Higher Education Survey
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills following the oral statement of 5 July 2007, Official Report, columns 1108-10, on Higher Education, what estimate his Department has made of the cost of providing more maintenance grants to students of higher education institutions. 
Bill Rammell [holding answer 10 September 2007]: We estimated that the additional costs of providing more generous maintenance grants to students would be £330 million across the three years of the next spending review period. Our costs forecasts will be revised as we receive further data about numbers of students and the incomes of students and their parents.
Mr. Boris Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how much funding was given to (a) higher education institutions, (b) further education colleges for higher education activity and (c) further education colleges for further education activity from each relevant public sector budget, including European Union funding, in the last year for which figures are available. 
|Annex A: public income received by HEFCE funded HEIs 2005-06|
HESA finance record, Table 5a and 5b
As part of (b), the HEFCE recurrent funding that we allocated to directly-funded further education colleges (FECs) in 2005-06 was £147 million (source: HEFCE 2005/43 Recurrent grants for 2005-06: final allocations). In addition to this, special funding and capital allocations to directly-funded FECs in 2005-06 totalled £24 million.
As for (c), the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) is responsible for funding of Further Education colleges. In 2006-07 financial year, total expenditure by the LSC on further education was £4,979 million; this figure excludes expenditure by LSC on further education colleges funded through the European Social Fund (ESF). Details of ESF expenditure is a matter for the LSC as they determine these matters. Mark Haysom, the Councils chief executive, will write to the hon. Gentleman with further information. A copy of his reply will be placed in the House Library.
I am responding to the second part of your question to the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills on your question around funding for further education colleges for further education activity from each relevant public sector budget, including European Union funding, in the last year for which figures are available.
In addition to the £4,979m total expenditure by the LSC on further education in the 2006-07 financial year already provided in the written reply of 11(th) July, an additional £55m of European Social Fund was also spent in further education colleges.
Mrs. Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills (1) which European legislation regulates the provision by local authorities of age-related subsidies for educational courses; and what assessment he has made of the effects of such legislation; 
(2) whether local authorities may put in place age-related subsidies for educational courses at institutes of further and higher education; and if he will make a statement on lifelong learning. 
Bill Rammell: The Government believe that learning should serve the needs of the whole community. That is why we are committed to reducing barriers to learning, sustaining equal opportunities and ensuring a wide range of suitable learning opportunities in every area, for learners of all ages, including older people within and outside the workforce.
As I said in my written statement to the House on 16 May 2007, Official Report, column 35WS, the age regulations do not bar providers from giving fee discounts, but they do require that such positive action can be objectively justified. Guidance on the regulations is available on the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform website. It makes it clear that age-related practices, such as age-related fee concessions, may be objectively justified where they are a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. That judgment can only be made by the individual provider in the light of local circumstances, the courses they offer and their own legal advice.
Those learners receiving a means-tested benefit, including those in receipt of Pension (Guarantee) Credit, will continue to benefit from free tuition on publicly-funded courses. Learners of any age will continue to have access to literacy and numeracy courses, as well as free tuition to undertake a first full level 2 qualification (ESOL provision is free only to learners who can prove they are on income related benefits).
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what the non-completion rates were for students enrolled in teacher training courses at UK universities in each year between 1997 and 2006. 
Information about failure to complete Initial Teacher Training (ITT) courses is only available for trainees in their final year of training. The Training
and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) only collect information relating to ITT courses in England. Prior to 1998/99 this data is not in a consistent format, so those gaining QTS in 1997/98 are not included in the response.
1. The number of final year Initial Teacher Training (ITT) trainees, who were completing their ITT courses in a university in England, for each academic year between
1998/99 and 2005/06 who did not gain Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) in their final year of training and of these the number who are known not to have completed their courses and the number where the outcome of QTS is unknown.
2. The percentage of final year ITT trainees in universities in England
A. Known not to have completed their ITT course for each academic year between 1998/99 and 2005/06
B. W ho have failed to gain QTS for each academic year between 1998/99 and 2005/06
|Final year ITT trainees in universities in England gaining QTS|
|Number of final year trainees in Universities in England who have not gained QTS|
|Total number of trainees in their final year in universities in England||Known not to have completed course||Undefined outcome||Other outcome||Total||Number of trainees who are known not to have completed their ITT course as a proportion of all final year trainees||Number of trainees who have not gained QTS as a proportion of all final year trainees|
| Notes: 1. Numbers are individually rounded to the nearest 10, therefore may not sum. 2. The table includes ITT trainees who trained in universities only. This excludes those trained through Employment Based Route (EBR), School Centred ITT (SCITT) and Open University courses. 3. 'Other outcome' includes final year trainees who are yet to complete their course, those with withheld QTS (including those where their skills test was not met, their standards were not met and where both their standards and skills test were not met) and those where the skill test has not been taken (including those whose standards were met and those whose standards were not met). 4. Non-completion rates presented are based on: A. Those known not to have completed their ITT course. B. Those who have failed to gain QTS because they are yet to complete their course, QTS has been withheld, the skills test has not been taken or the QTS outcome is undefined. Source: TDA performance profiles.|
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what percentage of higher education institutions are charging annual tuition fees in excess of £1,125; and how much extra income his Department estimates these institutions will receive from charging these fees compared with the 2005/06 academic year. 
Bill Rammell [holding answer 10 September 2007]: In 2006/07, all Higher Education Institutions in England who were running undergraduate courses had an access agreement to charge Variable Tuition Fees, and were charging over the £1,200 fixed fee amount for that year.
However, the Departments estimates for the expected receipts from university tuition fees were given in the November 2005 statement to the Commons. These were based on the income from UK and EU full-time undergraduate students studying at English Higher Education institutions; where we estimated that once all cohorts of students were paying variable fees, the total fee income would equate to £2,250 million in 2006-7 prices which compares to an estimated income of £900 million from standard fees of £1,200. Therefore, our estimate for the additional fee income from Variable Tuition Fees is £1,350 million.
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what estimate his Department has made of the cost of (a) providing fee deferral to students at HE institutions and (b) writing off any student debt still outstanding after 25 years. 
Bill Rammell: Provision for the cost of fee loans for English domiciled HE students in FY07-08 is £349 million in resource accounting and budgeting (RAB) terms(1). The current RAB charge for fee loans is 33 per cent. This shows the future cost to Government of subsidising and writing-off student loans issued in any given year.
(1)( )The RAB charge is an estimate of the percentage of the face value of loans issued in that year which reflects the resource cost over the expected life of the loan to the Government of making the loans.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|