Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 174)
MONDAY 19 FEBRUARY 2007
MS GEMMA
TUMELTY, MR
WES STREETING,
PROFESSOR MICHAEL
ARTHUR AND
MS TABITHA
ALDRICH-SMITH
Q160 Mr Marsden: Ms Aldrich-Smith,
you referred to the longitudinal nature of your surveys. What
do your surveys tell you about satisfaction rates of older and
part-time students? Are they getting better or worse or staying
the same?
Ms Aldrich-Smith: Our survey does
not cover part-time students. In terms of older students, we find
that they are less satisfied than the younger first-year students.
That has held quite constant over time. There have not been dramatic
shifts in satisfaction over the seven years we have done the survey.
In terms of first-year students, they tend to be more satisfied
and that level declines as they go through the university experience.
Q161 Mr Marsden: Is there a particular
reason why you do not look at part-time students at the moment?
Ms Aldrich-Smith: No, apart from
funding.
Q162 Chairman: Presumably, they do
not stay in your accommodation?
Ms Aldrich-Smith: No, and that
is another factor.
Q163 Chairman: The same goes for
people who stay at home and go to university, so you do not know
about them?
Ms Aldrich-Smith: Yes. To be clear,
this survey comprises 1,500 face-to-face interviews and online
interviews of all students, so they are not just from UNITE accommodation.
They come from 20 universities across the country, so I am not
talking here of UNITE customers but about a representative sample,
although it does not include part-time students.
Q164 Mr Marsden: Ms Tumelty, we have
already discussed with you the focus of your written evidence
as opposed to the broader issues that you have talked about today.
Given that the student experience is more than just fees, although
that is an important part of it, what are you doing in terms of
either your activities or survey to ensure that students who live
at home during their study period have as well rounded an experience
as possible?
Ms Tumelty: This has always been
one of our concerns, and we have talked to the DfES about home
students having that student experience.
Q165 Mr Marsden: I am not asking
you necessarily what the DfES should be doing; I am asking you
what you should be doing.
Ms Tumelty: We have seen a couple
of examples of really good practice in some of our student unions
where specific representation for home students has been introduced
to try to build a little more integration and movement between
home students and social experience, for example by way of clubs
and societies. Birmingham University Guild of Students is one
example. It now has an elected home student officer to try to
bridge that gap. There has been more home student participation
in that student union. That is something which we are looking
at as a model of best practice that we would encourage other institutions
to look at. Whether it is a staff member or an elected officer,
it should be somebody.
Q166 Mr Marsden: Therefore, as a
union you are committed to spreading that best practice and putting
greater focus on it. I ask because, frankly, in the past when
NUS has come before the Committee it has been quite critical of
its lack of focus in that area. I am not talking about you personally
but about previous years.
Ms Tumelty: Essentially, whilst
there is plagiarism within academic establishments there is no
such thing when it comes to really good student representation.
We try to share best practice across the country. Where something
works it tends to have a really good knock-on domino effect round
the country as well. We shall be looking at that and taking it
forward.
Q167 Jeff Ennis: Representing as
I do a fairly deprived constituency in South Yorkshire, obviously
I am interested in the Government's widening participation agenda.
I am just wondering whether any of the witnesses have any evidence
about the success or otherwise of the Aimhigher programme and
its impact on the student experience.
Professor Arthur: I was not expecting
the question and so do not have specific data, but my impression
is that it has been a good thing and is beginning to be effective.
For my own institution, the Widening Participation agenda data
has remained unchanged following the recent introduction of fees,
et cetera. We have seen almost no impact on WP at least
in the first year.
Q168 Jeff Ennis: As part of the survey
are you able to identify students who have participated in the
Aimhigher programme?
Professor Arthur: I am not sure.
Unless it is identified on the statistics we would not be able
to do that.
Q169 Jeff Ennis: Is it something
that you believe may need to be looked at in future so that the
Government can analyse the success of the Aimhigher programme?
Professor Arthur: Certainly, it
is something of which we have taken note.
Q170 Jeff Ennis: Does the NUS have
any comment to make on that?
Mr Streeting: I certainly agree
with that. One requirement is a proper review of the success of
the initiative. Some things work better than others; some institutions
have tried different things and have had different rates of success.
Last week the UCAS figures were quoted by Bill Rammell in a comment
in The Guardian. He noted the increase in students from
lower socio-economic groups for this year, which is welcome, but
one matter that surprised me was the level of glee about it given
the great ambition of the Government in the Widening Participation
programme. We have always supported it. In the context of the
cat-and-mouse game about fees, admission numbers and that side
of the debate I would not want to see the Government lose its
commitment and become complacent about rather smaller increases
given its overall, overarching and welcome ambitions on wider
participation.
Q171 Chairman: It must have been
of interest to the NUS to see Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland
not doing as well as England.
Mr Streeting: It is interesting.
There is an interesting Northern Ireland dimension as well. With
the restoration of the Stormont Assembly hopefully, we will see
what decisions the elected Members in that area take in the field
of higher education funding given our views.
Q172 Paul Holmes: On the wider issue
of the student experience, when I went to university in 1975—a
long time ago—I was told not to work during term time to
earn money and certainly not during vacations because that was
for wider reading, but in your submission you point out that these
days on average 40% of students work in term time and among working
class students it is 55%, and they work longer hours. What effect
does that have on the wider student experience, quality of degree,
result and that sort of thing?
Ms Tumelty: That has been one
of our key projects this year. We have found that there has been
a 50% increase in students working over the past 10 years. Bill
Rammell says that it is a good thing that students work, and we
believe that getting that well-rounded experience where one takes
on a bit of extra work is a good thing. On average students work
14 hours a week and one fifth of them work over 20 hours a week.
Full-time students who undertake that amount of work believe that
it has a detrimental impact on their studies. Obviously, there
is lack of equality. If one is working 20 hours a week and sitting
next to somebody in a lecture theatre who does not have to work
there will be an impact. It is those students from lower socio-economic
backgrounds who have to work a bit more because they are not getting
additional money from their parents.
Q173 Chairman: Is there data on that?
Ms Tumelty: Yes.
Q174 Chairman: Are working-class
students from poorer backgrounds forced to work or, as some may
suggest, is it the case that all students want to spend more money
clubbing and having a couple of pints?
Ms Aldrich-Smith: 67% of students
work to buy basic essentials, so in some way there is a need to
work, but we have quite a big chapter on this. The Committee may
want to review it. There are three main reasons why students say
they work: to be able to continue studying, which is an important
reason; to have a more enjoyable studying experience because they
learn from their work; and to gain experience so it looks good
on their CV. Students think about why they work and they manage
it. They say that one of the things universities could do better
is help students juggle their part-time work commitments with
their university courses.
Ms Tumelty: We have done a report
with the TUC called All Work and Low Pay. It is based on
a comparison of official labour force service statistics over
a 10-year period. We have that report and are quite happy to send
it to the Committee. It reveals some interesting things. On the
back of that we have been quite pro-active about trying to encourage
students to become members of trade unions so that their rights
are protected off work as well. They tend to work in the low-paid
sector of retail hospitality with poor conditions where rights
are not necessarily upheld all the time. We are also doing some
proactive work in that area.
Chairman: I am sorry that we have been
pushing you to answer briefly which seems scandalous given the
quality of the evidence we have, for which we are very grateful.
I bring this session to an end. This has been a very good session
and on the way home it will make you think of all those things
you should have told the Committee if you had had more time. Keep
in touch. We want to make this an extremely good inquiry, whether
or not it is called the "shearing" report.
| 
