Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 179)
MONDAY 9 FEBRUARY 2009
WES STREETING,
ALEX BOLS,
ROB PARK
AND LISA
CARSON
Q160 Chairman: Who is going to pay
for it, Rob?
Mr Park: I am just going to come
on to that, actually.
Q161 Chairman: No, just tell us who
is going to pay for it.
Mr Park: Well, ultimately in the
short-term the students are going to have to pay more.
Q162 Chairman: The students?
Mr Park: Yes. That's not my opinion,
it's what is going to happen.
Chairman: It is what is going to happen.
I will move on to Gordon.
Q163 Mr Marsden: Thank you, Chairman.
I am going to talk about part-time students. Although it is a
matter of historic rather than current interest in terms of declaration,
I will say that I was a part-time course tutor at the Open University
for nearly 20 years. Therefore, when I read in your written evidence,
Lisa, what you said about the overwhelming majority of Open University
students not receiving support from their employers that was something
which struck a chord in terms of my experience. The problem is,
both in terms of the absolute debate about funding and the specific
debate on part-timers and ELQ the Government has consistently
produced statistics which have suggested that a significant number
of part-time students, mature students, do get funding from their
employers. That is because lots of them tend to have professional
degrees. How do we get across the fact that that is not the case
for the majority and what sort of funding regime would you like
to see in the future?
Ms Carson: On part-time students,
I think the figure which came out when we were looking at ELQ
was that of those students who are paying their own fees, as it
were, only 17 per cent were supported by employers. That leaves
a hell of a lot of students who are not supported by their employers.
Particularly when students are mature and part-time they are looking
at expanding their horizons and actually moving on from where
they are. Therefore, an employer is not particularly disposed
to actually supporting them in furthering that development. If
they are actually wanting to better themselves and actually get
that education which the Government has clearly stated there is
a need for, they are having to do it off their own bat.
Q164 Mr Marsden: That is helpful.
I want to ask you, Rob, if I may, just picking up on that and
on the current situation which my colleague Ian Stewart talked
about, these are hard political decision times and they are hard
economic decision times. We have heard a number of calls, and
in fact we touched on this subject in our own last report, for
there to be an equalisation of funding criteria between part-time
and full-time students. But if we are to do that, would it be
reasonable, in your view, in a downturn that more attention should
be given to the skills outcome of part-time study as opposed to
the purely academic?
Mr Park: Yes. I think the skills
outcome actually benefits the economy, the students and our future
employers and is a worthwhile test.
Q165 Mr Marsden: Can I, because time
is tight, press both of you on a second question? Again, there
is much debate about the so-called gold standard impact of A-levels
and everything, but we know that a large number of not just part-time
students but mature students, whether they are part or full-time,
come either with few A-levels or with a mixture of A-levels which
are not appropriate. In your experience, Lisa, in terms of OUSA,
obviously the situation in the Open University is different but
many of your students also go on and do courses at other universities.
Are you satisfied that in general the HE system recognises non-A-level
qualifications, not just vocational ones but diplomas, and where
are we going to be in terms of getting them to recognise some
of the new apprenticeship qualifications which come forward?
Ms Carson: I have concerns about
higher education in general accepting those from the point of
view that it is seen more that their catchment is the younger
student who is straight out of school and basically hasn't left
the system. When it comes to the mature student, it is a different
set of issues and they are coming from all different backgrounds,
so you have got students who have life experience which isn't
a paper qualification but it is equally valid as experience towards
setting them up to be able to cope with higher education.
Q166 Mr Marsden: Rob, what is your
take on this? Birkbeck, as I think most people will know, has
got a fairly broad policy in terms of accepting people's backgrounds
but that is not true, I would suggest, of the majority of Russell
Group universities?
Mr Park: Yes, that's correct.
We do support PQAs, the post-qualification admission, also based
on a case by case basis for the students as well and individual
faculties and courses will set their own admissions targets within
a quality assurance framework. One thing I just wanted to talk
about was the entrance tests, which we have talked about in the
original questions the Committee set down. Our feeling is that
if there was a move to introduce entrance tests in either some
institutions or across the board, then we would oppose it on the
principle of, "What are we testing for?" Are we testing
people's ability to take tests or are we testing people's ability
to be able to develop into a good student and therefore be one
of the success stories which our economy needs for the future?
Q167 Dr Harris: If it is the latter,
you would welcome that? If there was academic research which showed
that the test actually was quite good at identifying the people
who do well in their degree and was actually quite hard to tutor
for, then you would accept their extension in order to make it
fairer, or would you be opposed to it anyway?
Mr Park: If it was the traditional
written examination, then we would oppose it because I think you
are testing someone on how to take a test.
Q168 Dr Harris: No, no, let us say
it was shown in academic research that the test, written, oral
or visual for all I care, showed that it actually did not select
those people who could be tutored for tests and were good at exams
but actually very well judge those people who are able to benefit,
then would you support the rolling out regardless of the format?
The format is a secondary issue, is it not?
Mr Park: Yes.
Chairman: I think there was a misunderstanding
there on that.
Dr Iddon: I think I will address this
one to Alex as he has been very quiet up to now!
Chairman: Can I say, Brian, that Lisa
has to leave at ten past and I want to finish this line of questioning
by ten past.
Q169 Dr Iddon: We have created a
football-like league of universities, have we not, where the standards
in the premier division are much higher than the standards in
the lower divisions? Would you agree with that?
Mr Bols: No. I think the important
thing to recognise in terms of different institutions is that
actually different institutions offer very different student experiences
and offer actually quite different qualifications. They are broadly
comparable but just because they are different doesn't mean that
they are worse and I think the fact that we have such a diverse
HE system is actually one of the benefits of it, the fact that
a student from a research intensive course comes out with a set
of skills based on the fact that it is a very research intensive
course, the skills that go along with that. But actually then
coming out of the student experience report which NUS produced
a significantly higher proportion of students at Russell Group
institutions are likely to go on to further academic study, so
actually that is a relevant set of skills for those students,
and actually looking at, for example, Liverpool John Moores, their
"World of Work" scheme, working very closely with employers
to provide highly equipped, highly skilled graduates for the workplace.
Different institutions provide different skills within a broad
framework. I think the key point is that students, when they are
applying to institutions, are not clearly advised through that
process of what a different qualification from a different institution
means.
Q170 Dr Iddon: I am a chemist, Alex,
and that is not the perception employers have of chemistry students
across the spectrum. Why have employers got a different perception
to the one you have got?
Mr Bols: As I say, I think the
key point is to recognise that different institutions offer different
experiences.
Q171 Dr Iddon: But a chemistry degree
is a chemistry degree. It is a factual course. It is teaching
basic knowledge in chemistry and whether it is applicable in different
circumstances.
Mr Streeting: But our employers
use grounded in evidence and factor their perceptions based on
the market and prestige which exists between different institutions.
Q172 Dr Iddon: I am just asking you
the question, why have employers got a different perception than
you have got as the NUS?
Mr Streeting: I think that is
actually more to do with snobbery and misunderstanding on the
part of employers and the discourse that takes place in the national
media rather than an evidenced assessment of what's taking place
at different institutions up and down the country.
Q173 Dr Iddon: Okay. Let me pitch
this one at all of you. The Quality Assurance Agency, that is
supposed to maintain quality across the universities in the same
course and they should be roughly comparable with the proviso
you have made. Do you think the Quality Assurance Agency has the
teeth to do that? Is it doing the job it was set out to do or
is it failing in its mission?
Mr Bols: I think the key point
about the Quality Assurance Agency is that it is doing a very
good job at what it is being asked to do. In terms of actually
going in and ensuring that institutions manage the quality assurance
procedures, they do a good job at that, but the key point you
are asking is actually about standards. Each individual institution
as the awarding body is obviously responsible for the standards
of that award, but that needs to be within a broadly comparable
system, and actually I think one of the key areas we would want
to highlight is the external examiner system because it is actually
the external examiner system which provides the comparability
of qualifications across the sector. Actually, in terms of the
external examiner system, it is a system which is certainly poorly
understood by students let alone the general public.
Q174 Dr Iddon: Does it work, do you
think?
Mr Bols: I think there is a lot
of investment which would need to be put into the external examiner
system, I think having a national body or national network whereby
they are able to get different experiences of standards in different
institutions, additional training and actually the fact that people
don't want to go and apply to the external examiners under the
current system, partly because of the lack of recognition, partly
because it doesn't support in terms of the career development,
but also the fact that they get a nominal salary for that. But
actually if you look at the salary, for example, which those members
of staff who do institutional audits receive it is not comparable.
So if the external examiner system is the system by which standards
are comparable across the sector, then I think we need to put
more investment into that, in short.
Q175 Dr Iddon: Does the QAA ever
ask the consumer, namely the students, about the quality of universities?
Are you consulted by the QAA?
Mr Streeting: Certainly there
is a student written submission. The auditor will go in and actually
meet the student panel from the Union. QAA is actually actively
consulted and pressed ahead with introducing student auditors,
which I think is a really welcome development. I have to say in
terms of representing the user interest in the quality assurance
process I think the QAA ought to be commended for the way in which
they have driven this agenda forward and actually pressed harder
than most other sector agencies on actually engaging students
in the learning experience. At a time when 23 per cent of our
members tell us that they are currently directly involved in shaping
their learning experience, the assessment curriculum, content,
design, and so on, but 57 per cent actually want to be, that disconnect
exists and I think the QAA really has pressed ahead on that agenda.
Chairman: I know that Lisa has to go
because she has a plane to catch.
Q176 Dr Iddon: I am just turning
to Lisa now, and Rob indeed, but Lisa first. First, second, upper
twos, lower twos, it is a nonsense now, is it not? The degree
classification system is a nonsense, is it not?
Ms Carson: It is not something
I particularly understand in that what I have in my university
is a different system. So I do not fully understand it, having
not studied in the traditional university, as it were.[3]
Q177 Dr Iddon: What would you replace
it with, Lisa?
Ms Carson: I think the qualifications
need to be recognised, what the standards are. I think the content
of the qualification, some sort of summary and some sort of record,
is very important.
Q178 Dr Iddon: So you think the student
record from a different module should follow the student not just
the degree classification, is that what you are saying?
Ms Carson: Yes.
Q179 Dr Iddon: A percentage award
would be more meaningful than a first or a second?
Ms Carson: I believe so.
3 Note from witness: I misinterpreted this
question. For the record, my university does of course operate
within the current system of degree classification. Back
| 
