Memorandum 74
Submission from GuildHE
STUDENTS AND
UNIVERSITIES
Summary of Key Points
This submission is presented on behalf of GuildHE,
one of the two representative bodies for higher education with
29 institutions in membership or associate membership. It argues
that:
— GuildHE institutions have a proven track
record in widening participation (including the recruitment of
students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and the recruitment
of part-time and mature students), in student retention and in
providing a good level of student support;— GuildHE institutions
also have excellent experience in working with employers and in
the delivery of vocationally based education;— In the current
financial situation it makes sense to build on these strengths—channelling
funding into a small number of research intensive institutions
and focusing on the relatively small numbers of students able
to move to those institutions may not provide the best use of
scarce resources;
— Current restrictions on additional student
numbers prevent institutions which are well placed to meet the
needs of local communities and could recruit more students from
doing so—more flexibility is needed;
— Better funding mechanisms are important
in meeting the needs of part-time students;
— Funding for capital investment is needed
to support teacher training in the STEM subjects as well as to
support high level research activity in those areas;
— The strength and value of the UK honours
degree is acknowledged but we recognise the need to ensure that
the systems by which standards are maintained and quality assured
are better understood both in the UK and elsewhere;
— We also support the need to provide more
information about the full range of student achievement through
the Higher Education Achievement Report.
INTRODUCTION
1. GuildHE is one of the two representative
bodies for higher education and the key advocate for the importance
of institutional diversity. Our member institutions comprise some
of the newest and most dynamic Universities in England, well established
University Colleges and specialist higher education institutions;
and associate members offering higher education in privately funded
institutions or specialist further education colleges.
THEMES
2. An underlying theme of our evidence is
the importance of diversity—both within the student population
and within the institutions meeting the needs of those students.
We feel that the need for this diversity in the higher education
ecology can too easily be honoured in principle in government
policies while being overlooked in practice.
3. Our higher education institutions are grounded
in areas of key strategic importance for higher education today.
Widening participation objectives are critical to all four areas
under consideration by the Committee. These are not new initiatives
for institutions like the University of Winchester or St Mary's
University College Twickenham. They were established (under earlier
names), for that very purpose over a hundred years ago—to
provide opportunities for women or for other groups who would
not otherwise have had access to higher education at the universities
of the time.
4. Likewise "employer engagement"
has always been a feature for our members working with professionals
and practitioners for example in teacher training or healthcare.
Other institutions with particular strengths in vocational areas—for
example Writtle College and Harper Adams University College in
agriculture and the land-based industries, or Norwich University
College of the Arts and The Arts Institute at Bournemouth in the
creative industries—have always had a clear focus on the
employment sectors which match the needs of their students. Buckinghamshire
New University has its origins in an institution established in
the 1890s to provide skilled people for local industry (the furniture
industry) while the Royal Agricultural College was founded even
earlier to meet the need for education to support the agricultural
industry. This viewpoint therefore underpins our evidence.
5. In responding to the breadth of enquiry
from the Select Committee, we have concentrated on those areas
where GuildHE members have a particular message or distinctive
interest. In doing so we are not disregarding the importance of
the other issues the Select Committee has raised—we appreciate
expertise offered elsewhere. The comments below follow the headings
used in the call for evidence. We are also forwarding, as further
context for our material, the GuildHE submission to the DIUS Debate
on the future of higher education—
see http://www.guildhe.ac.uk/en/news/index.cfm/nid/DCE3F5D5-7386-459D-BDBD615CCB31CAC8
ADMISSIONS
6. We feel strongly that all those able
to benefit from higher education should have the opportunity to
do so. We welcome therefore the setting of high aspirations for
the number of students participating in higher education. We seek
a transparent and effective admissions process and work closely
with UCAS and SPA (Supporting Professionalism in Admissions) as
well as with the Delivery Partnership Steering Committee in supporting
our institutions. But, we have concerns about the extent to which
policies on extending access to higher education sometimes appear
to translate into, either an aim to extend access to a small number
of students in a small number of universities only, or an aim
to give access just to those whose employers can afford, and are
willing, to pay.
7. GuildHE members' institutions have an excellent
track record in recruitment of students across the whole range
of backgrounds. They consistently exceed the benchmarks set for
the recruitment of students from low socioeconomic groups. In
the statistics published in 2007 and 2008 by the Higher Education
Statistics Agency (HESA), Harper Adams University College and
University College Birmingham were shown as being among the very
highest performing HEIs for widening participation. In the 2006-07
figures, University College Plymouth St Mark and St John had the
highest percentage from among all HEIs based in the South West
region of young, full-time, first degree entrants from a lower
socio-economic background.
8. Many of our members have a high proportion
of part-time and mature students—often coming back into
education after going straight into employment from school. York
St John University has over 30% of its undergraduate students
who are over 21. Others have similarly high numbers. It is in
these areas that there is scope for growth in admissions to higher
education.
9. Areas of concern for us are:
(i) the extent to which the current standstill
on recruiting additional student numbers, other than those which
have been already agreed, for 2009-10 and 2010-11 and the lack
of flexibility in the system (which prevents re-distribution of
numbers from those that may struggle to recruit to those that
would wish to recruit more) impacts more severely on smaller institutions
and prevents them from meeting the needs of their local communities.
Institutions such as Buckinghamshire New University, which recently
achieved university title, University College Birmingham, which
recently won the right to university college title, and GuildHE
members of the National Arts Learning Network such as Ravensbourne
College of Design and Communication, have the potential to attract
more applicants but cannot do so because of the limits imposed
on additional student numbers.
(ii) the adequacy of provision for mature and
part-time students who are more likely to rely on having good
local access to higher education, sometimes gaining entry through
further education linkages. Those with jobs, families, or caring
responsibilities cannot easily move location to find a course
to suit them. Many of those supported by the University of Cumbria
in Cumbria Higher Learning, for example, would not be able to
access higher education outside their local area. Those aspects
of government policy which rely on encouraging students to move
may be misplaced.
(iii) the importance of the higher education
role in information, advice and guidance from early stages in
schools. In particular, we have reservations about the consequences
of the new "adjustment period" which may encourage students
to switch institution at the final stage prior to starting university
or college.
(iv) the inadequacy of the financial support
packages available to part-time students. It is vital that support
for part-time students should be put on a better footing. The
distinctions between part-time and full-time students have begun
to break down with a rising number of full-time students undertaking
the equivalent of full-time paid jobs. A more even balance of
funding, with an improved package of support—both for part-time
students and for institutions—might enable a more realistic
approach. We recognise the current pressures on financial resources—but
feel that in these circumstances it is all the more important
that resources should be redirected to where they can do most
good. Funding decisions which favour the most research intensive
institutions particularly those with a more traditional, not very
diverse, student population may not make the greatest impact in
the larger parts of the population that are most in need and may
not provide the best use of limited resources.
TEACHING AND
RESEARCH
10. The balance between teaching and research
is of critical importance for our institutions. They are sometimes
characterised as "teaching led" institutions. While
they might be proud of this recognition, they would resist strongly
any suggestion of being "teaching only" institutions.
The link between research and teaching is a key aspect of higher
education wherever it is delivered. There would be concern therefore,
on the part of our member institutions, at any suggestion that
research funding be increasingly channelled, for the future, into
an even smaller group of institutions.
11. GuildHE appreciates the protection of the
unit of funding for teaching and the increased recognition for
good teaching practices. In securing research informed teaching,
and achieving a fairer spread of funding to support economic and
social prosperity, it is fundamental that a broader view of research
is recognised. This must include applied research, research undertaken
with employers and commercial interests, and practice based research.
The Centre for Sustainable Development, at the University for
the Creative Arts, for example, facilitates research on eco-design
and broader sustainability considerations in product and service
development. Newman University College, Birmingham has undertaken
a series of research studies to inform workforce planning and
training for key industry sectors as well as research to identify
why white working class boys seem to reject higher education as
a life choice.
12. The importance nationally of the STEM
subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) is well
understood and we recognise that these are resource intensive
subjects. They make heavy demands in terms of the facilities available
and expect high level research. Many of our institutions are expertly
engaged in the training of teachers who will be responsible for
teaching the STEM subjects within our schools, thus providing
for the next generation of undergraduate and research students.
There is currently a mismatch of funding in this area. The Training
and Development Agency for Schools, which is responsible for the
funding of Initial Teaching Training, does not fund capital expenditure,
while capital funding for the STEM subjects channelled through
the Higher Education Funding Council for England does not connect
to the demands made for training the teachers of STEM subjects
for the future. We would like to see support for the STEM
subjects feed through to funding for capital investment for teaching
training facilities and in particular laboratory refurbishment.
13. GuildHE was actively engaged in the
development of the Professional Standards Framework for those
engaged in teaching and the delivery of learning in higher education.
Evidence to date is that there are proportionately more staff
within our institutions taking advantage of the opportunity this
offers for the accreditation of initial and ongoing professional
development for staff in higher education. This matches the emphasis
we place on high standards of teaching and our concern that students
should gain the best possible benefit from their higher education.
The record of our institutions in achieving recognition through
the award of National Teaching Fellowships also reinforces this
point. The University of Worcester has, for example been awarded
four National Teaching Fellowships. We would like to see more
emphasis and funding recognition given to academic teaching excellence.
DEGREE CLASSIFICATION
14. GuildHE has worked closely from the
outset with the group chaired by Professor Bob Burgess on measuring
and recording student achievement. We strongly support the recommendations
of that group in the final report on honours classification that
better ways need to be found of presenting the full range of student
achievement. Not withstanding the deservedly high standing of
the honours degree itself, a simple classification of the final
degree, into first class, second class and so on, does not do
justice to the full achievement of the students concerned.
15. In the meantime many stakeholders, including
employers, continue to want a simple classification system, which
they think will give the answers they need in terms of providing
a means of discriminating between students. We hope that in time
they will be persuaded of the advantages of looking at a wider
range of information.
16. It is critical not to underplay the
strength and value of the UK honours degree. We would suggest
that one of the difficulties is that the means by which standards
are maintained and quality assured are not always well understood
by the public at large. Higher education institutions have a responsibility
to explain more clearly the systems that apply.
17. The GuildHE higher education institutions
are well placed to speak for the robustness of the systems in
place. Just like universities, those higher education institutions
that do not have their own degree awarding powers, but work in
partnership to deliver programmes leading to a degree of the university
or awarding body, will undergo institutional audit in their own
right. The reports from those institutional audits, be they private
or public bodies, are published on the Quality Assurance Agency
(QAA) website alongside those of other institutions. And, in addition,
the arrangements in place for oversight of awards and the assurance
of standards by an awarding institution is subject to scrutiny
when the awarding body undergoes its own institutional audit or
audit of collaborative provision.
18. Although such partnership arrangements
between higher education institutions work very well, many of
our institutions also aspire to award their own degrees. The criteria
for the award of taught and research degree awarding powers are
determined by Government—the award of such powers is at
the discretion of the Privy Council. Those of our institutions
which have successfully applied for and been granted degree awarding
powers under the criteria set in 2003 following the Education
White Paper, The Future of Higher Education, (Cm 5735)
have undergone a period of intensive scrutiny and review that
cannot easily be matched elsewhere.
19. Responsibility for advising the Government
and the Privy Council on the grant of degree awarding powers rests
with the QAA. The latter appoint a team of assessors, who, over
the best part of a year, spend time within the institution scrutinising
its activities, including direct observation of the operation
of examination boards and academic committees. The recommendation
that is made by the QAA to Government on whether or not degree
awarding powers should be granted is dependent on the reports
made by assessors based on direct observation and the evidence
collected over an entire academic year. Those institutions, such
as Falmouth University College or University College Birmingham,
which have gained degree awarding powers in these circumstances,
can rightly be proud of what they have achieved.
20. The importance of ensuring that the
systems in place are understood applies not only within the UK
but beyond. There are some instances where those institutions
which do not hold their own degree awarding powers find that their
international students encounter difficulties in getting recognition
for their degrees on return to their country of origin. An example
is China where an earlier memorandum signed by the British Government
differentiated between the recognition to be given to degrees
awarded after study at the awarding institution and degrees awarded
after study elsewhere.
21. Recently students graduating from, for
example Leeds Trinity and All Saints College, which awards degrees
of the University of Leeds, have found that their degree certificates
are not recognised for the purposes of state employment in China.
The consequences are very serious for the students concerned and
potentially damaging for the reputation of UK higher education
as a whole. We are aware that the UK Government is seeking to
address the problems of degree recognition in China—we hope
that it can be given priority in the interests of the students
concerned.
22. GuildHE members take plagiarism seriously
and are using many of the more sophisticated software detection
facilities. Student experiences before they enter higher education
and the ease of access to materials on the internet mean that
this is likely to remain a potential problem. But we see it being
best addressed through active teaching and learning approaches
and varying the assessment methods such as live presentations.
For institutions such as Rose Bruford College or Liverpool Institute
of Performing Arts live evidence as well as supporting written
material has always tested competences as the professional is
delivering directly. The educational and social values set in
our institutions also support that delivery.
STUDENT SUPPORT
AND ENGAGEMENT
23. GuildHE institutions have a good record
on student retention—once recruited students tend to stay.
Transfers in from elsewhere also find their feet. In the HESA
statistics for 2006-07 Bishop Grosseteste University College had
a drop out rate of just 1% for mature students—as against
a national average drop out rate of 14%. For understandable reasons,
widening participation and good retention rates do not always
go hand in hand in the same way elsewhere. We link our institutions'
good record on student retention with their similarly good record
on student support, including financial support. The evidence
of the National Student Survey is that smaller institutions have
levels of student satisfaction to match, or in some cases exceed,
those found in larger institutions. Bishop Grosseteste University
College also features at the top of the scale in terms of student
satisfaction levels (as measured by the National Student Survey
for 2008) and in terms of ensuring its students get the financial
support to which they are entitled.
24. The good results achieved by our institutions
reflects the level of care given in the delivery of teaching and
learning and the support offered to students throughout their
programmes of study. But we would argue that it also reflects
the development of a learning relationship with students that
starts before they embark on their programme of study so that
they know what they can expect, and what will be expected of them.
GuildHE institutions continue to support many initiatives on information,
advice and guidance including, in some cases, hosting the regionally
based Aim Higher hubs establish to develop widening participation.
Students also need to know—when they first start to think
about higher education—what the costs are likely to be and
what sort of financial support is available to them. Work by our
higher education institutions in providing information for schools
has been shown to be very valuable in enabling students to take
up their full entitlement to financial support.
25. GuildHE backs the current initiatives
to support and build on student engagement in areas such as the
development of the curriculum within institutions and the assurance
of quality and standards. The experience of our institutions has
been that successful delivery of teaching and learning relies
on good working relationships between students and staff. They
have found that informal mechanisms can sometimes be as, or more,
important than formal mechanisms to achieve the same end and allow
the student voice to be heard. The educational culture within
the institution makes all the difference.
December 2008
| 
