|
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.
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
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 (e.g. 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.
Christopher J Carr Vice Chancellor University of Cumbria
|