|
Memorandum 40
Submission from Heythrop College, University of London
1. Arguments for and against the Government's decision to phase out support to institutions for students studying ELQs:
There is a superficial attractiveness in the argument that the public purse should not support students at University studying for a qualification which is equivalent to or at a lower level than a qualification which they have already achieved. It seems equitable that everyone should get one bite at the cherry and no more. However, English Higher Education is a large, diverse and complex system; applying to it apparently simple and straightforward principles can often have deeply undesirable effects, and this is a case in point. The effect of the Government's decision is to withdraw support from a large number of mature adults who have made the decision to pursue (usually while maintaining a full-time demanding career) arduous high-level study partly for the sake of their own intellectual development but also for the sake of their employers, the organisations they support on a voluntary basis, and society at large. The fact that the Government and the HEFCE have together drawn up such a long list of exemptions from the policy should in itself be seen to be clear evidence of the fundamentally flawed nature of the policy.
It is not as if the funding at stake here, in a national context, is very large. In that context the net sums which will be released are in fact small. These sums will, it is said, be used to support students entering HE for the first time or pursuing a higher qualification, but there is no evidence that students who wish to enter HE and are qualified to do so are unable to do so though lack of funded places: rather most evidence suggests that many HEIs have difficulty meeting recruitment targets. There is no queue or backlog of would-be students being kept out of HE by the funding supporting ELQ students.
2. The Timing and Implementation of the Change:
The timing of the change is dreadful. HEIs drew up publicity material for their courses commencing in September/October 2008, which of course includes material on costs and fees, many months ago. Formal offers have been made and accepted for entry in 2008 by this institution and by most HEIs. The changes made by the Government mean that in relation to these students we must honour our contracts but at a significant financial loss, or breach our contracts with them. Neither prospect is acceptable. The time for 'managing this change smoothly' (as Mr Denham puts it in his letter to the HEFCE) was 12 months ago: now is a year too late.
3. Exemptions from the Withdrawal of Funding proposed by the HEFCE:
We have no specific observations, other than to repeat that the wide extent of these exemptions is a powerful argument against the policy itself, and to note that by the HEFCE's own calculations the greater part of the brunt of the policy will be felt by Philosophy and Theology students. These are of course the subjects in which Heythrop College specialises.
4. The Impact Upon Students:
In the case of the College the students adversely affected by this change will typically be mature in years (usually 30 plus) who are already graduates and who work in the not-for-profit sector or have a substantial voluntary commitment to that sector. They will have taken on or be preparing to take on leadership roles in voluntary community groups which are often but not always faith-based in character. These are precisely the groups which the Government rightly hopes will be able to deliver a substantial part of its ambitious agenda in relation to social development and social exclusion. Some of these groups specialise in inter-faith work.. The groups are mostly small and financially fragile, without the resources needed to meet the full costs of the courses under discussion. For this target group, foundation degrees are inappropriate both intellectually and professionally. If the policy is implemented as at present proposed, the students affected will simply lose the opportunity to study at the College.
5. The Impact on Heythrop College
Our best estimate of the immediate impact of the change on Heythrop College is that from 2008 we will lose 20% of our part-time taught postgraduate student population (about 40 students) and 5% of our full-time undergraduate population (about 15 students).
Alan Smith Acting Clerk to the Governing Body Heythrop College University of London
NOTE ON HEYTHROP COLLEGE:
Heythrop College is a Jesuit foundation tracing its origins to 1614. It is now an autonomous College within the federal University of London, with its own Royal Charter, located in Kensington Square, London. It specialises in the teaching of Philosophy and Theology and is open to students and staff of all faiths and none. It has about 350 undergraduate students and 300 part-time postgraduate students, and in 2007 began a unique BA course in Abrahamic religions. This is the only course in the UK which focuses attention on Islam, Christianity and Judaism and the relations between them. |