Memorandum 44
Submission from the University of Cumbria
1. SUMMARY OF
MAIN POINTS
The University of Cumbria strongly argues for:
— A delay in the introduction of this
policy until the commencement of the academic year 2008-9.
— An increase in the number of subjects
exempted from the policy to include courses relating to child
workforce, health care and all teaching qualifications.
— Recognition of the different levels
of progression at postgraduate level study (from Certificate to
Diploma to Masters).
2. ABOUT US
The University of Cumbria was formed on 1st
August 2007 formally, from an amalgamation of St Martin's College,
Cumbria Institute of the Arts, and the Cumbrian campuses of the
University of Central Lancashire. The University has campuses
in Carlisle, Newton Rigg, Penrith, Ambleside and Lancaster and
a specialist teacher-education centre in London. The University
also has strong links and close partnership working with the four
FE Colleges in Cumbria (Lakes Colleges, Furness College, Carlisle
College and Kendal College) to enable HE delivery locally across
the county. In addition, the University is the lead institution
of Cumbria Higher Learning, a Distributed Learning Network for
Cumbria.
3. FACTUAL INFORMATION
3.1 According to the calculations published
by HEFCE, which were based on the 2005-6 HESA return, the policy
will disproportionately affect older students at the University
of Cumbria as is shown by the following table which looks at students
who are identified as an ELQ from a known level entry qualification.
| Age | Total No ELQ
| % ELQ | % of total student population
|
| Under 21 | 2 | 0.28%
| 14.99% |
| 21—23 | 30 | 4.24%
| 20.10% |
| 24—30 | 153 | 21.61%
| 19.20% |
| 31—40 | 145 | 20.48%
| 19.95% |
| 41—50 | 187 | 26.41%
| 16.43% |
| Over 50 | 144 | 20.34%
| 6.19% |
| No age on file | 47 | 6.64%
| 3.13% |
The table shows that in the 21—23 age bracket only
4.24% of students are potentially affected by the ELQ proposals,
while this age group makes up 20.10% of the total student population.
For the 41-50 age bracket however 26.41% of students are affected
by the proposals which compares unfavourably to the figure of
16.43% that this age group represents of all students at the University.
Therefore there is a disproportionate affect on the over 40s,
especially when compared to the under 24s. With 80% of the workforce
for 2020 having already left compulsory education it is the University's
opinion that the disproportionate affect on older students will
have a negative impact on re-skilling and those wishing to return
to the workforce. It will also undermine the lifelong learning
agenda, as well as the ambitions outlined in the Leitch review
which the government supports.
3.2 The proposed policy on withdrawal of funding for
ELQs also hugely impacts upon part time students at the University
as the following table clearly demonstrates:
| Mode | Total No ELQs
| % ELQ | % of total student population
|
| Full Time | 18 | 2.54%
| 45.22% |
| Part Time | 690 | 97.46%
| 54.78% |
While nearly 55% of the student population is part time,
an overwhelming 97% of those potentially affected are part time
students, demonstrating the disproportionate affect on this type
of student. It is a concern of the University that if part time
students were to diminish, this could undermine the provision
of certain courses that, by their nature (eg short modular qualifications),
are part time.
4. RECOMMENDATIONS
The University has the following recommendations to make:
4.1 The University believes that the proposal to introduce
this policy from the start of academic year 2008-9 is unworkable.
The UCAS deadline for applications (15th Jan) will have passed,
therefore students who have applied for 2008-9 entry may suddenly
find themselves subject to changed circumstances of which they
would have been previously unaware. This would prove to be unfair
on students (if they were suddenly presented with higher fees)
and the institutions themselves (if they were to absorb the cost).
The University therefore proposes that any implementation of this
policy should be postponed to the 2009-10 academic year which
would allow for communication of the policy, and advice to be
given, to prospective students. It would also allow more time
for institutions to examine, and if necessary reposition, their
academic portfolio in the light of losses incurred owing to the
withdrawal of funding for ELQs and would enable the issue to be
taken into account in future curriculum planning (in which the
University is heavily engaged at the moment).
4.2 The list of exempt subjects is welcomed, but these
should be expanded to include all professionally relevant qualifications,
in particular:
— An expansion of the exemption to include all teacher
education. This can often take the form of stand alone modules
(for example in the areas of Child Protection and Every Child
Matters). Such programmes have a positive impact on the commitment
and capability of teaching professionals.
— A significant proportion of child workforce related
areas of study such as Child Care; Early Years; Community Work
and Youth Work are also not currently covered by exemption. This
runs counter to the current government focus on children's workforce
reform, and therefore the University would argue that these subject
areas should also be exempt.
— Health related subjects not already covered in
the student support regulations. A significant proportion of the
University's Health Care provision is delivered as stand alone
modules which support continuing professional development mainly
to Health Care professionals in the NHS. The concern is that higher
fees in this area might deter individuals or lead to a reduction
in NHS Trust budgets.
— Those training for the Ministry often do so as
a second career choice, and the Church Certificates that the University
offers are also almost exclusively taken by students who already
hold a degree. Training costs for the Church of England will undoubtedly
increase as a result of this proposed policy, and there may be
a detrimental impact on attracting people to the Ministry.
4.3 Currently there is also no differentiation between
levels within postgraduate study, and the University has many
examples where students will enrol on a Postgraduate Certificate
and then return to complete a Postgraduate Diploma and then a
Masters with a break in between each level. Students would therefore
fall foul of the ELQ ruling owing to the single HESA code of 02
for this level of qualification, and the University would strongly
suggest that a way to make such a differentiation is found. Many
students would be deterred if it was necessary to commit to a
Master's Programme at the outset. This lack of differentiation
is also found at undergraduate Certificate/Diploma level with
HESA code 23 and differentiation also needs to be made for these
cases to recognise vertical progression within HE.
January 2008
| 
