Government reform of Higher EducationWritten evidence submitted by the Built Environment Skills Alliance
This submission is from the Built Environment Skills Alliance (BESA1) in response to the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee’s call for evidence in support of its inquiry into the future of higher education. It outlines only matters which appear to BESA to be the most immediately relevant and urgent.
Executive Summary
1. BESA warmly welcomes the inquiry, given what is emerging in the lead up to the higher education White Paper. The changes which this White Paper is likely to set in hand will potentially have a significant impact on the future of the built environment sector and its ability to meet the demands placed upon it within the economy in critical areas, including those relating to the low carbon and sustainability agenda.
2. BESA wishes to make the following key points:
Higher education does not appear to be using information critical to its capacity to meet emerging and future built environment industry needs. If this situation continues, it seems highly likely to reduce the accuracy of “signalling” of employer requirements to prospective students, including of employment opportunities.
Significant effort has been made by BESA members to work collaboratively with the relevant higher education communities and stakeholders, to prepare for the considerable changes facing the built environment sector in the future. It seems important that these activities develop and continue and are not hampered as the new systems in England move towards implementation.
More information is needed about how built environment employers can articulate their needs to higher education and influence provision, particularly towards fulfilment of the low carbon and sustainability agenda. More information is also needed about how built environment employers will be able to feed into and influence cost and quality levels to ensure courses are fit for purpose.
Precipitate cuts by HEIs in the lead up to initial implementation of the new system in 2012 may create mismatches leading to failure in graduate supply and lack of built environment provision, including for update of existing workers necessary to deliver the low carbon and sustainability agenda.
It seems that there is a need to more closely coordinate and avoid inconsistencies of interpretation in planned changes to higher education funding across the UK leading to unintended consequences that could reduce capacity to deliver what is needed by the built environment industries and so ensure opportunities for future graduates.
There is a need to consider that a wider range of built environment subjects receive some ongoing teaching grant on the grounds of high cost and/or unique contribution to the UK’s economy and its development eg architectural technology, building surveying, building services engineering
While there are distinct opportunities arising for higher education from the creation of truly valuable work - based route to higher level achievement in built environment occupations, this may prove impossible due to the lack of appropriate part - time provision. Should this route not exist, it is likely to impact adversely on social mobility potential in the built environment industries.
Evidence, Concerns, Potential Impacts and Issues Arising
3. Industry Labour Market Intelligence2 to 2014 suggests that there may be sufficient numbers of graduates in general terms, though there are known areas of potential shortage, which primarily associate with growth. These areas include nuclear new build and power redevelopment, for example. However, BESA’s significant contact with higher education which has been consistently sustained over the last two years strongly indicates that Labour Market Intelligence across the built environment industries is not in general being used appropriately at course, Department/School or Higher Education Institution (HEI) level. If this situation continues, higher education will not support growth in the built environment industries, and be unable to cope with demand for specialist skills which are already arising. Prospective students will be less accurately informed than is desirable about industry expectations and opportunities.
Higher education does not appear to be using information critical to its capacity to meet emerging and future built environment industry needs. If this situation continues, it seems highly likely to reduce the accuracy of “signalling” of employer requirements to prospective students, including of employment opportunities.
4. The forthcoming changes may add complexity. BESA members are preparing for the future – both in terms of the higher education financial implications, but also in relation to the considerable changes facing the ways in which the built environment sector needs to operate in the future. For example ConstructionSkills is considering how the Construction Industry Training Board levy - grant system may best articulate with the new funding system in England, which could provide a clear, early example of how employers can share responsibility for higher education within the changed arrangements.3 Furthermore, all BESA members have made great efforts to communicate with the relevant higher education communities and stakeholders in relation to the sector’s skills agenda. This is difficult, partly because of the diversity of built environment higher education, merely establishing and maintaining the appropriate mechanisms has required great effort and relatively significant resource. Without such mechanisms, “future proofing” of provision will be reduced, resulting in graduates being less prepared than they might be for the realities of working in the built environment industries
Significant effort has been made by BESA members to work collaboratively with the relevant higher education communities and stakeholders, and BESA members to prepare for the considerable changes facing the built environment sector in the future. It seems important that these activities develop and continue and are not hampered as the new systems in England move towards implementation.
5. Browne’s proposals for England on higher education funding and the increased competition which should associate with these proposals when implemented should result in higher quality and more efficient and responsive courses. However, there will be situations where this is not the case. For example, where the true cost of particular courses exceeds the tuition fees payable. In this situation HEIs could be expected to support successful delivery of these higher cost courses with income generated elsewhere in the Institution, including by higher volume, lower cost courses. But HEIs being willing and able to do this appears to require that all subject costs are as accurate as possible. There may also be a relatively small number of cases where the true costs of courses are so high that the assumption of HEIs supporting them internally without some additional external funding ceases to be reasonable.
6. BESA members should be able to influence the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) benchmarking statements where this is relevant to their occupational areas and the costing assumptions behind these. BESA members should also take sufficiently active part in any Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) led mediation relating to subjects where costs of courses exceed tuition fees. This is especially important in response to Growth Reviews where high cost courses will need employer engagement.
More information is needed about how built environment employers can articulate their needs to higher education and influence provision, particularly towards fulfilment of the low carbon and sustainability agenda. More information is also needed about how built environment employers will be able to feed into and influence cost and quality levels to ensure courses are fit for purpose.
7. Although the majority of built environment firms have been hit hard by the recession, smaller firms have been particularly affected. While it is to their credit that many such firms continue to support higher education of their workers, the numbers tend to be relatively small. Because these are employed workers, part - time provision is preferred, and across all built environment firms and occupations, skills required may be specialised. These factors also lead to numbers offered to HEIs being small by comparison with more “popular” subjects. There is already evidence that HEIs are thinking of cutting smaller courses, and within the next twelve months. This could impact badly on part - time participation.
8. The majority of built environment courses are highly supportive of the agenda for sustainability and low carbon – areas in which the built environment industries are central. It is estimated that half of the work in construction itself is already conservation and/or maintenance. Highly relevant courses for example in regeneration/renewal and building conservation could be under threat, and in the relatively near future. Significant loss of such courses would be likely to reduce the capacity of existing workers to deliver the agenda for low carbon and sustainability. As the prospective students concerned would be employed individuals, they are most likely to mainly seek part - time provision. If part - time courses are reduced, HEI income goes down and full - time built environment provision may be similarly affected over time, as would be postgraduate provision, full - time and part - time. Additionally, key postgraduate courses appear threatened from a number of directions, including by declining numbers which are blamed by many on tightening visa restrictions. BESA warmly welcomes the recent decision by the Minister for Universities and Science to ask Sir Adrian Smith, the chair of last year’s Postgraduate Review panel, to reconvene the panel and look at postgraduate access and finance in the light of the new undergraduate funding system.
9. Redevelopment of existing provision is far less resource intensive than development from scratch. If courses disappear they cannot be redeveloped to serve emerging needs, obviously. Furthermore, should provision disappear completely, it is fairly unlikely to be replaced, mainly because resources have dwindled, and perhaps disappeared, including that experienced staff needed for delivery have been “lost”. While HEIs concerns are understandable, as they must balance their books, precipitate action may damage critical longer term aims. It has been said that the amount of money available to any one course could end up about the same as it is now in 2014-15 when the new system in fully in place in England. While it is hoped that this forecast is correct, it does assume that the course still exists in 2014-15.
Precipitate cuts by HEIs in the lead up to initial implementation of the new system in 2012 may create mismatches leading to failure in graduate supply and lack of built environment provision, including for update of existing workers necessary to deliver the low carbon and sustainability agenda.
10. Leading edge provision directed towards the agenda for low carbon and sustainability tends to be in England at present. For example Foundation degrees for Building Services Engineering (occupationally critical to development and implementation of environmentally friendly energy systems) do not run in Scotland, as Foundation degrees were ruled out by Scottish Parliament decision in 2003. This also exemplifies issues of future cross - border finance which are potentially far more extensive, of course.
Unintentional effects of policy and funding changes may create unevenness across the UK which would damage the capacity of higher education to deliver what is needed in the built environment industries. It is apparent that there are already potential different interpretations of funding allocation between the home nations.
It seems increasingly clear that there is a need to more closely coordinate and avoid inconsistencies in planned changes to higher education funding across the UK leading to unintended consequences that could reduce capacity to deliver what is needed by the built environment industries and so ensure opportunities for future graduates.
11. There could be emergent supply difficulties which derive from existing Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) policy interpretation in higher education and from the related approach known as SIVS (Strategically Important and Vulnerable Subjects). For example, recent figures for undergraduate recruitment issued by UCAS suggest that applications to study civil engineering (recognised as STEM and SIV) are either increasing or holding relatively steady, depending on the figures for the particular month. But in general, numbers fell across built environment subjects, and dramatically in some cases. A number of these subjects are high cost due to their nature and facilities required to support delivery, but are not STEM/SIV. These reductions may have negative impact given future employment requirements, but this prospect is unfortunate for other reasons, not least as these subjects also have significant STEM demand and low numbers may lead to their being cut precipitately by HEIs. It is hoped that there will be HEFCE - led mediation involving BESA members relating to subjects where true costs of delivery will exceed tuition fees, as this could help to address potential difficulties. Subjects such as architectural technology, building surveying and building services engineering are fundamental to the low carbon and sustainability agenda. It was previously mentioned that BESA members must be able to influence the appropriate QAA benchmarking statements and costing assumptions behind these. In BESA’s view, other relevant Sector Skills Councils across all industries should also be engaged here.
There is a need to consider that a wider range of built environment subjects receive some ongoing teaching grant on the grounds of high cost and/or unique contribution to the UK’s economy and its development eg architectural technology, building surveying, building services engineering
12. While Government recognises that “efficient part - time provision may...have additional costs” (Higher Education Funding Council for England – HEFCE – grant letter 2010, para 17), the relatively small numbers generally seen in such courses suggest that they may be in danger. Part - time provision is critical to progression from Apprenticeship and the future of Higher Apprenticeship, probably in all industries. But particularly in built environment, significant loss of part - time provision has negative implications for progression and development of alternative routes to higher level achievement, and so for increased social mobility supported by work - based approaches. Universities should also be encouraged to become more engaged with University Technical Colleges (UTCs). This would make progression to higher education from UTCs clearer and be likely to enhance what UTCs provide.
13. HEIs that do cut built environment provision could be missing a trick as built environment part - time courses are already well within proposed 25% of full - time equivalent, so should be immediately saleable to part - time students eligible for tuition fee loans in the new system from its outset.
While there are distinct opportunities arising for higher education from the creation of truly valuable work - based route to higher level achievement in built environment occupations, this may prove impossible due to the lack of appropriate part - time provision. Should this route not exist, it is likely to impact adversely on social mobility potential in the built environment industries.
14. Of necessity, this submission does not cover many relevant concerns in the built environment sector, or what BESA is trying to do about them through collaboration between industry and higher education stakeholders. Members of the Select Committee wishing to know more about higher education strategy and related work being undertaken by BESA and its relationships to present and future issues are most welcome to contact David Cracknell, Director of Skills and Lifelong Learning, Construction Industry Council.
References
i The Built Environment Skills Alliance’s (BESA) roles include the identification of key collective and shared skills issues affecting the built environment, and devising and promoting positive solutions to them. BESA’s membership comprises the Sector Skills Councils and Standards Setting Bodies operating across the built environment. BESA members and occupational interests include Asset Skills (property, housing, facilities management); ConstructionSkills (including Construction Industry Council hence Professional Institutions in addition to numerous forms of professional employment eg civil engineering, majority of surveying, construction management, architecture); ECITB (engineering construction); Energy & Utility Skills (aspects of electricity, gas, waste management, water industries); ProSkills (process and manufacturing, including building products); Summit Skills (building services engineering, includes plumbing, heating and ventilating, refrigeration and air conditioning); Lantra (built environment aspects of the land based industries).
ii See, for example Construction Skills Network CSN Outputs http://www.cskills.org/supportbusiness/businessinformation/csn/csnoutputs/index.aspx
iii Initial indications from the review of Construction Industry Training Board levy - grant arrangements indicate that in 2010, at least £10 million in grant supported higher education. This figure seems likely to increase rather than decrease as the study progresses. More than 4,500 graduates were supported by grant in 2008. Both of these figures must be remarked upon as economic conditions were impacting so heavily on construction and related employers across these timescales. Furthermore, actual expenditure on higher education by the relevant employers was far greater, as the grant concerned supports rather than pays whole cost. This indicates the importance which construction and other built environment employers attach to higher education given developments in the industries.
11 March 2011