Memorandum 42
Submission from the University of Leicester
INQUIRY ON
STUDENTS AND
UNIVERSITIES
Summary
ADMISSIONS
— Current practice does not always distinguish
strategies to encourage wider participation and strategies to
encourage fair access.— There is insufficient emphasis on
the evaluation of widening participation activity.— Participation
rates amongst lower socio-economic groups have increased, but
it is unclear whether the change is a consequence of widening
participation activity, school performance or expansion of higher
education.
The Balance between Teaching and Research
— Current funding mechanisms ignore the
reality that prospective students are attracted to the group of
UK universities whose strategic mission is defined by the synergy
between research and teaching.
— An unintended consequence of ignoring
the link between research and teaching is the impact on the provision
of teaching of successive Research Assessment Exercises.
— Changes in priorities for the funding
of teaching over the last few years have not supported the research/teaching
synergy.
STUDENT SUPPORT
AND ENGAGEMENT
— The possibility that the support packages
for students might change gives rise to concern about the possibility
of major perturbations in student populations, which would have
financial consequences. This would have to be managed carefully.—
Progress towards a proper functioning market would take time,
because of the change of culture that would be required both outside
and inside universities.
— The extension of the student loan scheme
to Masters' level programmes would be beneficial for both students
and the economy.
— Policy developments appear to disadvantage
part-time students in comparison with their full-time peers.
— Particular financial problems arise for
students who need access to state benefits and are the very people
who should be benefiting from widening access strategies.
— Individuals may be prevented from undertaking
a higher education course because of benefit rules which disadvantage
students and are compounded by a seemingly widespread lack of
understanding of student eligibility on the part of benefit advisors.
DETAILED SUBMISSION
The implementation and success of widening participation
initiatives
1. There needs to be clear thinking and
delineation between strategies to encourage wider participation
(ie encouraging individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds with
ability to progress to HE) and strategies to encourage fair access
(ie that the very brightest are given encouragement and equal
opportunity to enter the country's very best universities or the
most challenging courses). This is not always the case in current
practice.
2. The two require a distinct approach both at
institutional and Government level. It is possible for a university
to have excellent schemes for widening participation, encouraging
young people to aim high, and yet have a very poor record itself
in terms of fair access to its own programmes. Schemes designed
to tackle fair access need to focus as much on admission and selection
processes as on activity to raise aspiration.
3. There is insufficient emphasis on the evaluation
of widening participation activity. Much of current evaluation
activity tends to focus on counting the volume of activity rather
than the achievement of outcomes and student progression. Greater
use of quantitative admissions data should be used to gauge success.
For example, the evaluation of the £180 million Excellence
Challenge scheme, an ambitious plan launched at the turn of the
decade to secure wider participation and fair access focused heavily
on how the money had enabled HEIs to develop additional activity.
It did not look with any degree of details at the impact on patterns
of admissions (http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR644.pdf)
4. Consistency of funding streams is also
important. The resources invested through the Excellence Challenge
were swiftly reallocated towards the end of the scheme's life.
5. A combination of inconsistent resourcing,
evaluation that focuses on activity rather than outcome and a
wooliness around whether the sector is seeking to tackle issues
of fair access or wider participation means our understanding
of what is really effective in this arena is not much more mature
than at the start of the schemes a decade ago.
6. In his annual letter to the HEFCE in
2000 the Secretary of State called for "substantial progress"
on the issue of widening participation. As the data below shows
there is evidence that participation rates amongst lower socio-economic
groups have increased both absolutely and in relative terms. What
is unclear is whether the change is a consequence of widening
participation activity, changes in school performance (ie more
students from lower socio-economic groups achieving five grades
A-C at GCSE enabling them to progress into level 3 study and hence
through to HE) or expansion of higher education. The impact of
the move to variable fees is not discernible on participation
data (except on the behaviour of deferred entrants in 2005) as
the graphs, using UCAS data, below demonstrate (note UCAS's methodology
for classification of socio-economic groups changed in 2002).
The role of the Government in promoting fair access
7. Admissions policies are the responsibility
of individual HEIs. All will focus on selecting and admitting
the very best students. It is legitimate for the Government to
engage with the sector in exploring the extent to which this stated
aim is being met—in particular the ability of HEIs to determine
talent that may be hidden because of disadvantage.
8. Although there are some shortcomings with
the system of performance indicators for widening participation
in higher education, the University believes that providing information
on institutional success in relation to this issue is right and
proper. The Government may wish to consider a carefully targeted
pilot scheme which would look at the impact of widening participation
and fair access activities on quantitative admissions statistics
in a selection of HEIs.
The balance between teaching and research
9. There are a group of UK universities,
of which Leicester is one, whose strategic mission is fundamentally
defined by the synergy between research and teaching. These are
institutions which offer high-quality courses in traditional disciplines
at undergraduate and postgraduate levels, and engage in high-quality
research in the same disciplines. They also have a strong widening
participation ethos and meet WP benchmarks. They place equal weight
on the importance of research and teaching, they recruit staff
in the expectation that they will be both research and teaching
active, and they provide their courses on the basis that students
will be taught in a research environment.
10. This research environment has a direct impact
on the curriculum through opportunities provided for the continual
updating and refreshing of core content and through the provision
of special options. It also determines forms of assessment, which
include the ubiquitous requirement for an extensive piece of independent
study, and on the delivery of skills, including the ability to
seek and assimilate information, prepare reports, think independently
and critically and communicate findings. The strength of student
recruitment to these institutions demonstrates that prospective
students are attracted by these features of a university education,
partly because employer interest in graduates with these skills
remains as strong as ever. Current funding mechanisms appear to
us to ignore these realities.
11. Universities which offer teaching in
a research environment provide educational opportunities on the
continuum from Bachelor's level to Ph.D. We believe that there
is a lack of appreciation of the extent to which research informs
every aspect of what we do in the discussions which have taken
place in relation to the Bologna Agreement; there is a particular
failure in mainland Europe to understand the strong focus on independent
research which characterises integrated Master's programmes (M.Chem.
etc).
12. We sense from recent research and public
statements about student contact hours that there is some disquiet
about the amount of independent learning built in to the undergraduate
curriculum and the impact of this on contact hours, particularly
in the arts and humanities disciplines. We would argue strongly
that it is the space allowed for independent learning which characterises
the UK HE system. Provided that such independent learning and
development is properly guided and supported by institutions,
including access to substantial library and on-line resources,
the outcome is a level of intellectual independence which cannot
be delivered through the mere transmission of the syllabus through
face-to-face direct teaching.
13. One example of what we assume is an
unintended consequence of ignoring the link between research and
teaching is the impact on the provision of teaching of successive
Research Assessment Exercises, which has led to the concentration
of around 70 per cent of quality-related research funds to 25
per cent of institutions. This has put the delivery to undergraduates
of courses in core subjects in some institutions at risk, and
in the most extreme cases has led to their closure. We recall
that during a time when Chemistry departments were closing after
the last RAE, the Royal Society for Chemistry expressed the concern
that the position would soon be reached where there were insufficient
university places to generate the number of chemists required
to support the country's needs. Action has since been taken by
HEFCE to protect such vulnerable subjects, but we see no sign
of any recognition that research selectivity is in itself one
cause of the problem. We do not object to selectivity per se,
but we do believe that funding methodologies for research and
teaching should work together, not undermine each other. Research
selectivity has gone far enough.
14. We also believe that changes in priorities
for the funding of teaching over the last few years have not supported
the research/teaching synergy. The increasing emphasis on part-time
study, employer engagement and/or regional development (for example
foundation degrees) have provided undoubted opportunities for
institutions (including ours), but have denied flourishing traditional
disciplines the capacity to expand. It is now virtually impossible
to obtain additional funding for teaching except through "employment-related"
routes, so there is a dislocation between the continuing popularity
of traditional disciplines with students and employers, in particular
the employers of young graduates, and the willingness of the government
to support these courses.
15. In relation to research funding, and
as a university which undertakes a considerable amount of medically-related,
charity-funded research, where full economic costing does not
apply, we very strongly support the continuation of the dual support
system. Many of the major breakthroughs in medical treatment arise
from the application of the dual support regime, and would not
have happened without it.
16. Finally, and in relation to the assessment
of excellence, we strongly support the continuation of some use
of some elements of peer review as a means of assuring quality
in both teaching and research. We acknowledge that the expansion
of higher education has brought challenges, but we believe that
these can continue to be met through systems which acknowledge
institutional autonomy and the considerable benefits of self-regulation.
Perturbation consequent on possible change in
the student support package
17. The possibility that the support packages
for students might change radically gives rise to concern about
the possibility of major perturbations in student populations,
which would have financial consequences for institutions. This
would have to be managed carefully.
18. The introduction of capped fees did not introduce
a market based on fee prices, since institutions generally charged
the full fee. Market differentiation continued to be based on
perceptions of quality, with the market "price" being
the admission standard. If the fee cap were removed a far more
complex market would emerge combining perceptions of quality and
fee price, which could lead to major perturbation and instability
in the sector. Progress towards a proper functioning market would
take time, because of the change of culture that would be required
both outside and inside universities. The relationship between
the university and its students would change, as a willingness
to pay more would come with a demand to receive more. Other consequences
might follow such as a decline in postgraduate applications because
of accumulated debt during undergraduate studies. All of this
would have to be managed.
Support for Masters' Programmes
19. It is acknowledged that higher level
skills acquired through masters programmes are a key driver of
innovation and creativity within the economy. Competition for
financial support for Masters' level programmes through the Research
Councils, University schemes or charities is fierce. The extension
of the student loan scheme to Masters' level programmes would
be beneficial for both students and the economy.
Supporting Part-time Study
20. For many universities part-time students
are an increasing group and require a different approach and different
types of support from full-time campus based students. The University
of Leicester, for example, has around 21,000 students, around
a third of whom are non campus based distance learning students,
requiring different learning and teaching approaches and support
mechanisms.
21. Policy development would also appear to increasingly
disadvantage part-time students, in comparison with their full-time
peers. In light of the "Leitch" agenda and the changing
demographics, HEIs are likely to find themselves targeting part-time
students in work, and there are real difficulties in engaging
and supporting these learners, given some of the financial support
issues:
— When the loan support system for HE students
was introduced it was restricted to full-time students only and
while there has been welcome provision of some support for those
part-timers studying 50% of a full load, this has not affected
the majority of part-time students in HE.
— With the introduction of top up fees,
fee levels for part-time students, though unregulated, have inevitably
risen towards pro rata against full time fees, resulting in large
fee increases for part-time students, but without access to the
degree of support offered to full time students.
— HEFCE funding did not previously discriminate
against part-time or lifelong learning students, but the introduction
of the ELQs policy removes funding for students in this group,
the majority of whom are likely to be part time.
Students and state benefits
22. Particular financial problems arise
for those students who need access to state benefits. Most full-time
students are ineligible for benefits. Those that are eligible
include lone parents, students with disabilities, carers and part-time
students studying less than 16 hours per week. These are the very
members of society who should be benefiting from widening access
strategies and yet they may experience considerable financial
hardship whilst a student, or may be prevented from undertaking
a higher education course altogether because of benefit rules
which disadvantage students and which are compounded by a seemingly
widespread lack of understanding of student eligibility on the
part of benefit advisors.
23. Student eligibility is a complex area, requiring
specialist knowledge which frontline benefit staff often do not
possess. As a result, many students who are eligible for benefit,
are incorrectly advised not to apply. These students are not easily
identifiable and generally only come to light if they approach
their institution's welfare service in relation to other matters.
24. During the benefit assessment stage
many students receive incorrectly calculated benefit awards because
of administrative errors. Student income is often inaccurately
assessed by benefits staff because they do not apply correct student
income disregards and calculate awards over the wrong periods.
This is especially evident in housing benefit applications.
25. Eligible students often face a period
of hardship between the end of the academic year and receiving
benefit payment. This is because certain students are entitled
to benefit in vacations only and cannot apply until the vacation
starts, even though their situation is clear well before this
date.
26. Regulations governing student eligibility
to benefit can also be applied inconsistently. For example, Postgraduate
Social Work lone parent students meet the qualifying conditions
for income support in the summer vacation. However, government
regulations do not specifically refer to this particular category
of students, leaving their eligibility for benefit open to interpretation.
Consequently, whether they receive benefit or not has become a
postcode lottery. This is also true for PhD students who should
be eligible for Job Seekers Allowance during their writing up
stage, providing they make themselves available for work. Unfortunately
many Jobcentre staff still treat these students as attending full-time
study and students are often refused benefit as a result.
27. Benefit regulations also penalise potentially
vulnerable students such as those in ill health. Under the former
Incapacity Benefit/Income Support rules, some students who could
prove sickness for a period of 28 weeks or more became eligible
for benefit. The new Employment Support Allowance seems to exclude
students entirely from claiming benefits whilst sick.
28. It is common for carers to struggle
financially in order to maintain themselves whilst a student.
Students are ineligible for Carers Allowance if they study over
21 hours per week, including course work undertaken at home. All
full-time Higher Education programmes offered by this institution
expect students, on average, to study over this permitted limit
and therefore carers automatically lose their entitlement. However,
their caring responsibilities are unchanged.
December 2008
| 
