The Future of Higher Education

Written evidence from The British Academy

Introduction

1. The British Academy, the national academy for the humanities and social sciences (H&SS), is pleased to respond to the Select Committee’s Inquiry on the Future of Higher Education.

Response

2. The British Academy considers that the White Paper for Higher Education for England should address the following priorities:

· Develop a long-term vision for higher education. Although higher education has been among the most successful sectors in the UK, it is undergoing a period of exceptional turbulence due to a variety of factors, including changes in the fee structure, problems regarding visas for students and staff, changing methods and criteria for research evaluation, and the introduction of new requirements regarding student access. It is essential that the White Paper for Higher Education sets out a clearly articulated vision for higher education, recognising its significant and wide-ranging benefits to the individual, to society, and to the economy as a whole, and ensures that universities can be sustainably funded both now and in the future. While short-term fiscal constraints have led to a rethink in the way in which higher education teaching is funded, it is vital that the government’s vision for higher education looks ahead to the longer-term, given the social and economic importance of the HE sector.

· Maintain institutional autonomy and academic freedom. It is essential that institutional autonomy is maintained as a central feature of the UK’s world class higher education sector. A stable regulatory environment is also of crucial importance in the HE sector.

· Give explicit recognition to the importance of the humanities and social sciences. The White Paper should make it explicit that the government recognises the vital contribution that H&SS disciplines make to the UK’s higher education sector, as promoters of understanding of ourselves and our world, as contributors to local, national and international policy making, and as a driver of the UK HE sector’s considerable offering to the UK economy. [1]

· Maintain quality. Every effort must be made to ensure that the ‘marketisation’ of higher education does not compromise the quality and the international renown of UK higher education. We note the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) consultation on the introduction of a revised institutional review method from September 2011, which seeks to safeguard standards and quality of HE, and also improve the student experience. [2]

· Recognise the importance of maintaining the supply of postgraduates. It is essential that safeguards are in place to ensure that the new funding arrangements do not unintentionally act as a deterrent to postgraduate study.

· Recognise and encourage the international dimension to UK HE. On the subject of student immigration and visas, the Academy has particularly serious concerns and calls for government policy on this issue to be reviewed. The adequacy of access by researchers at all levels for a variety purposes (from taking up posts in the UK to full engagement in collaborative research activities) should also be reviewed carefully to ensure that the research base is not damaged by an over-restrictive approach.

· Widen participation and access. The British Academy (and many others) is concerned that those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds may be deterred by the new funding arrangements. It will be essential that the government sets out clearly to the wider public (school pupils and their parents and prospective students) what these changes will mean to them.

A long-term vision for higher education that gives explicit recognition to H&SS

3. The UK currently has a world-class higher education system, which brings considerable benefits both to the individual and to society as a whole. There are currently many uncertainties about how the changes to the funding system for higher education teaching will impact on the health and well-being of the sector. Will the new funding system ensure that the UK HE sector can remain at the international leading edge, in terms both of the quality of its teaching and of its research? What will be the impact on the number of students? Will there be increased demand for some courses at the expense of others? While the government is proposing that there should be in essence a ‘free market’ for higher education, there are questions about how the sector will be regulated that will need to be addressed.

4. H&SS disciplines are a major national asset, ranking first in the world on publication productivity and citations relative to research and development public spend. As David Willetts (Minister of State for Universities and Science) recently said: "the humanities and social sciences are essential to a civilised society. They bring deep fulfilment to us personally. They often give meaning and shape to our lives." [3] We would add that these disciplines play a particular role in:

· contributing to the international standing and health of UK universities, which are worth £59bn p.a. to the UK economy;

· ensuring an income flow to universities from overseas students: 61% of overseas students in the UK in 2008/09 were studying H&SS disciplines;

· providing crucial expertise for the service sector – which constitutes 75% of the UK’s economic activity;

· building understanding of the world around us and ourselves – as individuals, groups and societies – what we think, how we behave, how we live and how we interact with each other. H&SS disciplines serve to define the moral and ethical context within which scientific and economic advances can be accommodated in a civilised society;

· offering informed and critical assessments of contemporary debates, providing expert input to policy development and, where relevant, warnings about consequences." [4]

5. Given the importance of H&SS to the UK, it is disappointing that government statements often fail to mention the humanities and social sciences. For example, the 2010 election manifestoes of all three main parties upheld the importance of science generally, but made no specific mention of the humanities and social sciences. [5] This failure to state publicly the value of H&SS had contributed to the perception within the H&SS academic community that they under threat – a perception that has been exacerbated by the removal of HEFCE grant for Band C and D programmes. It is essential that the government’s vision for higher education should embrace all disciplines – the humanities and social sciences as well as the sciences – in order to ensure that its strategic thinking and direction is properly informed by the insights of these disciplines, and to exploit more effectively all that they have to offer.

Institutional autonomy and academic freedom.

6. Given that the provisions of the 1992 Act guaranteeing university autonomy have underpinned a hugely successful higher education sector, the British Academy does not believe that there is a need for the White Paper to make changes to governance, either by creating additional regulatory controls, or by concentrating regulatory oversight in a new quango. This threatens to create additional and unhelpful bureaucratic burdens of accountability. We therefore welcome the recent statement by David Willetts that: "Our ambition is to make this framework as de-regulatory as we can. Freeing up student numbers will give institutions more flexibility. We are also looking at other ways of removing unnecessary burdens on institutions or reducing regulation over time." [6]

Maintain the quality and international reputation of HE sector

7. The uncertainties about the future shape and size of the UK HE sector come at a time of increasing competition from international education providers. With greater numbers of courses in non-English speaking countries being taught in English, the UK is already finding that its native language is no longer sufficient to confer a special status on its universities, which now have to compete for students on an international stage.

8. In addition, the government has made it clear, as David Willetts, Minister of State for Universities and Science said recently, that it wants "to make it easier for new and alternative providers to enter the new system". [7] The future role of private providers and international education providers is closely linked to the question of whether the government can free up student numbers, while still managing government spending. If numbers are fixed, encouraging the development and expansion of private providers or overseas providers based here risks damaging the UK’s own HE sector.

9. Every year, the UK HE sector contributes £59 billion to the nation’s economy. [8] As such a significant number of students study H&SS subjects, these disciplines are centrally important to the economic value of higher education in the UK. Moreover, the UK’s reliance on the service sector (which accounts for 75% of the economy) places H&SS in a strategically important position, as these subjects supply the sector with skills and expertise that are crucial to its ongoing success. An analysis of the reports of the skills sought by employers shows that there is considerable emphasis on generic skills (such as the ability to think innovatively and creatively, the ability to analyse data and argument in a rational fashion, the ability to synthesise complex materials drawn from a range of sources, and the ability to think critically) that are offered by H&SS as well as by the sciences.

The international dimension

10. The world class status of UK higher education depends in part on its ability to attract students and researchers of high calibre, both from home and overseas. A large and increasing number of overseas students in UK HE are studying Arts, Humanities and Social Science disciplines. Between 2001/2002 and 2009/2010 overall student numbers in these disciplines have grown by 40%. 60% of non-EU (higher fee paying) students in the UK study these subjects, and the rate of growth in the numbers of these students (more than 78% between 2001/2002 and 2009/2010) far outstrips that of the number of non-EU students in the ‘sciences and other disciplines.’ [9]

11. Given the considerable benefits flowing from the recruitment of overseas students, the British Academy is concerned by the current government’s decision to limit the number of visas available for overseas students undertaking below-degree-level courses. These courses often constitute pre-university training, such as that necessary to acquire an appropriate level of English language skills. By reducing the accessibility of these courses to non-EU students, it is likely that this policy will discourage otherwise well-qualified and high-calibre students from applying for degree-level courses at UK institutions. We urge that the evidence provided to the recent Home Office, UK Border Agency consultation exercise on the Student Immigration System should be made available on the web. [10] In addition, the Academy draws attention to the recent report published by the Higher Education Policy Institute, The UKBA’s Proposed Restrictions on Tier 4 visas: implications for University recruitment of overseas students, which notes that these proposals will "devastate pre-university pathway courses, costing universities c.£1bn in fee income alone", and which makes a clear distinction between sub-degree and pre-degree courses. [11]

12. The Academy recommends that the issue of student immigration should be rapidly addressed, as pertinent not only to the immediate and future health of UK HE but to the UK economy and fiscal planning.

13. One further issue arising from the international character of higher education provision is the openness of universities outside England to students from England. The introduction of a new fee regime in England may have as an unintended consequence an increase in the numbers of such students deciding to study outside England. It is important that any such migration (whether to other parts of the UK or overseas) be monitored, with a possible view to adjusting policies if that should prove to be necessary.

14. UK researchers must be able to engage with the best researchers from overseas in order to develop effective responses to national and global challenges. It is important that foreign researchers should be able to take up posts in the UK, both to enhance the research resource base, and to contribute to the formation of robust and enduring links between UK and foreign researchers. While the Academy acknowledges that many of the concerns of the science and research community have been addressed in the formulation of criteria for Tier 2 visas, including the introduction of a salary points weighting for researchers, the overall limit of 20,700 places may prove to be detrimental to the research base. The Academy would urge careful monitoring of the first year of operation, and review in the event of serious and significant pressure on the number of places. The new Tier 1 Exceptional Talent route may prove to be a useful addition, but details have yet to be worked out and it will not have a significant impact on researcher numbers. It is equally vital that conference attendance and short research visits should be easy to arrange, so that networks can be established and research programmes developed. Restrictions and inconsistencies in the issue of visas for such visits do little to enhance the UK’s reputation.

Widen participation and access

15. It will be essential that the new funding arrangements do not discourage those from the most disadvantaged backgrounds from entering higher education. As has been recognised already, the information and guidance provided to school advisers, pupils and their parents, as well as to the wider public, will be critical. It is clear that there are many widespread misunderstandings about the new system. In this context, we support David Willetts’ recent call for more explicit information and advice to be provided by schools to prospective HE students. We also recognise the role that universities themselves must play to improve the quality of information that they provide on their HE courses The recent guide published by the Russell Group to post-16 subject choices, Informed Choices, is an excellent example of the way in which universities are working with schools to advise them on the subjects at GCSE and A-level most in demand for particular university degree programmes.

16. We also recognise the role that universities themselves must play to improve the quality of information that they provide on their HE courses. There are also questions about the student experience at university, and how this might be improved. We understand that many of these questions are currently being considered by the QAA, and look forward to its forthcoming report on the findings of its consultation. We also believe that there is a need for more longitudinal data on the earning potential and pathways of degree programmes.

17. Finally, we note the obvious but important point that any changes in rules and regulations regarding fair access must be within certain limits, and must respect the freedom of HE institutions to determine the criteria for the admission of students. [12]

The supply of future postgraduates

18. The Academy welcomes David Willetts’ recent statement that a fall in postgraduate numbers would not be beneficial to the UK, and his announcement of the reconvening of the Postgraduate Review Panel chaired by Sir Adrian Smith. Given the possibility that postgraduate fees might rise in line with those charged to undergraduates, Sir Adrian’s panel has been asked to re-examine the position of postgraduate education in the UK. The Academy is concerned that such a rise, combined with the debts incurred by graduates of UK universities, will discourage graduates from embarking on postgraduate study in the UK. This would have serious knock-on effects both on UK research capabilities and on the supply of suitable UK applicants for academic posts in the UK.

Endangered and vulnerable areas

19. As stated in its position paper Language matters more and more, the Academy is concerned that the changes to UK HE funding will precipitate the large-scale closure of language departments, or lead to the concentration of language learning in a few institutions or areas of the country. [13] The individual decisions taken by vice-chancellors as they respond to the new funding system may unintentionally compromise the fragile health of these disciplines, including minority languages of strategic national importance where student demand is low. This will not only be damaging to the UK’s international role and to its research base, but will also have wider detrimental impacts on UK social, cultural and economic well-being. The UK’s capacity to understand foreign countries and their cultures is likely to be diminished, with adverse effects in foreign policy and in international business. UK researchers who have not been able to gain or consolidate good language skills are likely to find it more and more difficult to engage with worldwide research – 90% of which is currently carried out overseas.

20. The Academy also notes a concurrent problem with the quantitative skills of researchers in the H&SS disciplines. The shortage of skills in this area is well documented. In the last ten years alone, there has been a series of reports drawing attention to this decline. [14] For example, a report commissioned by the ESRC in 2009 from Professor John MacInnes called for a range of long-term initiatives to address the skills deficit, which ranged from co-operating with bodies like the Royal Statistical Society and the Royal Society on the teaching of maths at secondary school and ensuring that quantitative materials were brought into secondary school A level and AS level curricula in the social sciences to working with universities to improve standards. [15] It is essential that the UK should maintain the health of these (and other) disciplines.

21. For these reasons, the British Academy believes that a mechanism should be found to ensure that the individual decisions taken by universities to close or shrink academic departments do not collectively damage the provision of disciplines that are essential for national purposes. The British Academy would be happy to work with the funding councils and representative bodies for universities to discuss ways in which this threat might be averted.

Research Excellence and Impact

22. The Academy recognises that the setting of the impact weighting for the 2014 Research Excellence Framework is a compromise and regards its lowering as a sensible decision. However, the Academy maintains that the figure of 20% remains too high, particularly given the significant sums of money that will be allocated on the basis of the exercise and the fact that we are at early stage in the evaluation and development of impact assessment exercises. The Academy remains firm in its position that this weighting should have been set at 15% at this stage and recommends that the percentage should not be guaranteed to rise in the future.

17 March 2011

A contribution from:

The British Academy

10-11 Carlton House Terrace

London SW1Y 5AH

For further information contact:

Ms Vivienne Hurley

Head of Policy Development

The British Academy Policy Centre

v.hurley@britac.ac.uk

The British Academy, established by Royal Charter in 1902, champions and supports the humanities and social sciences. It aims to inspire, recognise and support excellence and high achievement across the UK and internationally. The British Academy is a Fellowship of 900 UK scholars and social scientists elected for their distinction in research. It is an independent and self-governing organisation, in receipt of public funding. The Academy’s work on policy is supported by its Policy Centre, which draws on funding from ESRC and AHRC. Views expressed by the British Academy are not necessarily shared by each individual Fellow.