Government reform of Higher EducationWritten evidence submitted by the Chartered Society of Designers

The Chartered Society of Designers is the professional body for designers practicing across all disciplines. It is a registered charity and operates under Royal Charter.

1.0 The Review

1.1 The Society welcomes the report and its commitment to simplifying what has become a complicated mechanism that has proved short lived.

1.2 The Society must however question whether just four public days, 36 witnesses and 150 submissions provides enough evidence upon which to base a plan for the whole UK higher education system for the foreseeable future?

1.3 The report is a serious and welcome starting point and perhaps could benefit from an ongoing process of review and evaluation. Whilst addressing specific issues of funding and finance it raises many questions as to how the system may perform and be enhanced in the future to remain fit for purpose.

1.4 The Society would welcome the opportunity to assist in the implementation of this report in any way it can and also in collaborating with the Higher Educational Council on an ongoing basis in order to address many of the ancillary issues that are raised in the report.

2.0 Professional Bodies

2.1 Consultation with professional bodies

2.1.1 The Society notes that the recommendations of the report are “based on written and oral evidence drawn from students, teachers, academics, employers and regulators” as stated in the Foreword. It also notes the organisations consulted, the Review Panel and the list of witnesses interviewed are listed in Annex B.

2.1.2 The Society is greatly concerned that there is no evidence of professional bodies being consulted at any stage of this report.

2.1.3 Whilst the development of the UK economy is not specifically within the terms of reference of the review as set out in Annex A, it is made clear throughout the report that a “strong higher education system is an important element in the economy and culture of a leading nation” (1.1 page 14). Not surprisingly therefore the views of employers have been sought and it is proposed that their needs should inform student choice (4.3 page 12) and influence HE reforms in order to increase the quality of higher education (2.4 page 23).

2.1.4 However, the views of the professional bodies are equally important in this respect as many of them represent individuals who are employers and are placed to offer a comprehensive view across the broad spectrum of employers. This is especially true in respect of professional bodies such as our own which works within the design sector which itself operates on a “cottage industry” basis which consists of many sole proprietors and with more than 60% of the estimated 10,800 UK design consultancies employing less than five people (Design Council Research 2009).

2.1.5 The Society believes that the failure to consult with the professional bodies could be prejudicial to; an understanding of industry’s requirements of graduates, the development of HE awards, enhancing HE course quality, careers guidance for those approaching HE, continuing professional development of both the workforce and academic staff and increasing the perception of UK HE globally.

2.2 Accreditation by professional bodies

2.2.1 The single mention of professional bodies occurs on page 30 where “Professional bodies that recognize the course” is listed as course information that is “very useful” to students when choosing a course.

2.2.2 The Society considers that the accreditation of courses/awards by professional bodies is also a driver for enhancing the quality of HE and will indeed be an important factor in influencing not only students’ choice but also influencing parents and career advisors’ recommendations.

2.3 Careers advice from professional bodies

2.3.1 It is evident from the report that those considering a degree require clearer, simpler and more robust career guidance than is currently on offer (4.2 page 12). The professional bodies harbour a wealth of information on career progression and are well placed to deliver such advice through their own communications vehicles or in collaboration with education. The low status of careers advisors in schools as reported (4.2 page 29) could be addressed by a supply of professional advisors from the professional bodies. A collaborative programme of careers advice from professional bodies could identify and inform potential students.

2.4 Professional bodies and academic CPD

2.4.1 The Society welcomes the conditions being proposed that, “require all new academics with teaching responsibilities to undertake a teacher training qualification”. The Society would further propose that all academic staff should undertake regular and structured Continuing Professional Development (CPD) which could be developed in collaboration with the relevant professional bodies. This would also address issues such as the reported gap between graduate and employers expectations if academics were fully aware of the current environment under which employers operate and are kept abreast of industry evolution. This in turn will also provide academics with information useful in assessing candidates for courses.

2.5 Professional bodies and part time and career long learning

2.5.1 The Society welcomes the proposal to treat those studying for a degree part time equal to full time students. Again the Society sees a strong role for the professional bodies in supporting this mode of study by providing professional support over a period of time covering both a working and studying environment.

2.5.2 The Society has developed an accreditation programme which aims to smooth the transition “From Learning to Earning” ™ by interacting with students over their period of education in order to develop their university PDP into a CPD plan and then providing automatic entry for successful graduates from such courses to the CSD Associate Membership programme being the first stage in the Career stage development structure leading to full membership of the professional body. The support now being offered for part time students will mean that the Society can provide an overlapping professional support structure to encourage career development within the design profession.

2.6 Professional bodies in dispute resolution

2.6.1 Where the Higher Education Council is engaged in dispute resolution (6.6 page 13) the professional bodies would be well placed to provide input on specific matters such as course provision related to professional expectations and graduate outcomes.

2.7 HE Academy and professional bodies

2.7.1 The Society welcomes the development of a professional standards framework by the HE Academy (6.3 page 48) and recommends the input by professional bodies in establishing the credibility of that framework within particular industry sectors alongside making sense locally and meeting nationally recognised standards.

3.0 Earning & Paying

3.1 The Society welcomes the proposed Student Finance Plan as a means of ensuring a sustainable future for HE provision and prefers this solution to a graduate tax.

3.2 Whilst there are safeguards built into the plan in terms of paying back by way of a scaled payments related to earnings and a write off after 30 years, it is clearly in the interests of the sustainable HE funding, the viability of institutions, the taxpayer and the UK economy, that the student loan and its interest is paid back in full.

3.3 It is therefore important that graduates are able to maximize on their efforts and investment (time, stress, lifestyle, wealth) and increase their earnings capacity throughout their career and employment. The more competent and employable the graduate becomes in later life the greater the chance of repayment.

3.4 The Society, in keeping with most professional bodies, considers professional development and/or lifelong learning, to be essential for career enhancement both in developing specific skills to perform employment and in ensuring transferable skills are gained should a career or job change be required.

3.5 The provision of career structured and consistent CPD is therefore not only desirable but also necessary for career prospects and thus employee and employer benefit resulting in growth.

3.6 The Society would therefore propose that any repayment of a student loan should take into account any expenditure on career development within the repayment schedule. This would mean considering training expenditure as deductable from the gross annual earnings figure used to calculate repayments. For example, a graduate who earns £25,000 would in the table shown on page 41 repay £30 per month. However, if the graduate were to invest £1,000 during the year in CPD or training then they would come under the threshold for repayments at £24,000.

3.7 Clearly a limit would need to be set as to the maximum amount that could be set off. There would also be the need to recognize only “accredited” CPD and training possibly that offered through professional bodies. The professional bodies would be well placed to advise and provide this which could be brought under the umbrella of the HE Academy.

4.0 Design as a Priority Subject

4.1 Despite the absence of professional bodies from the consultation process the Society notes the inclusion of representation from the engineering and medical sector.

4.2 These subjects are cited as priority subjects together with science.

4.3 The Society believes that design is not only a priority subject but that its application is fundamental to the growth and success of all other sectors.

4.4 Innovation is widely regarded as key to economic growth (Cox Review 2005) and design delivers innovation. A knowledge based economy is also seen as one that advantages countries economically and socially. Therefore innovative and creative ways of “knowing”, has the potential to provide a cutting edge to knowledge based economies. Design thinking is about delivers innovative and creative ways of “knowing”.

4.5 Not all design education would warrant priority status but particular areas of study such as design management or implementation might. The society would welcome the opportunity to explore this possibility with the Higher education Council.

5.0 Access, Quality & Funding

5.1 The Society accepts that a fine balance is needed to ensure courses are accessible to those who are able to gain academic acceptance but who may be deterred by costs and the need to allow universities to increase income to invest in quality provision.

5.2 However, the issue of increasing recruitment from disadvantaged sectors of society cannot merely be addressed by the HEI targeting funding. Inspiring applicants from such backgrounds requires interventions from a much earlier stage in secondary education than merely at the point of HE consideration and application. The extent and costs of such interventions would be well beyond the scope of the HEI and their funding allocation drawn from the course fees and this has been addressed in the reports proposals for stronger targeting (6.4 page 48).

5.3 Comments made in this response in respect of the role of professional bodies could play a significant part in addressing a lack of aspiration in more disadvantaged sectors and perhaps there could be consideration of an element of the access related expenditure that could be channeled into initiatives delivered by a consortium of professional bodies to intervene at the early stages of secondary education.

5.4 The proposal to be “tougher” on institutions seeking to charge over £7,000 would seem a low cut off point given that £7,000 per year is “roughly equivalent to what institutions will have to charge to maintain investment at current levels” (6.4 page 49). There are many courses that already require an investment greater than £7,000 and up to £10,000 to currently deliver according to reports by University Alliance.

5.5 The Society understands and agrees with the principle of ensuring access for all but questions if the proposed balance is correct. As well as access to education for all, HE should also be ensuring access to quality education for those who participate.

5.6 A £7,000 limit before measures for fair access are applied appears arbitrary and well below what may be required to ensure a sustainable quality HE provision. The Society would ask that if this cannot be currently revised then it be reviewed at regular intervals based on fair access evidence.

5.7 In order to achieve the levels of quality education that are now required to allow us to compete with leading nations we not only need to allow tuition fees to rise to maintain the current quality but we also need to allow for fees to be set that allow for quality and provision that can gain a competitive edge on our economic competitors. Restricting the level of fees that can be charged would appear to repress such ambitions.

5.8 The proposal to set limits will require constant review and evaluation in keeping pace with economic performance. The Society has concerns that limiting tuition fees may restrict the ability of some courses which require to set fees higher than £9,000 to develop a quality provision in excess of our competitors. Would it not be better that rather than set limits on tuition fess in response to economic factors that economic performance removed the need for tuition fee limits?

6.0 Conclusion

6.1 The Chartered Society of Designers welcomes the report and broadly agrees with its proposals and the principles on which these are based.

6.2 It sees the proposals as a good starting point for reforms in the HE system.

6.3 The Society would be pleased to input in whatever way it can to achieve a quality HE system and to assist in the further development and widening of the scope of the proposals to ensure that a good quality HE provision is matched by good quality education and training provision across the board.

7.0 Proposals

7.1 Set up a review structure with defined time scales to monitor the implementation and success of the proposals contained in the Browne Report

7.2 Engage with the professional bodies and examine funding possibilities for the delivery of a structured programme of careers advice.

7.3 Engage with the professional bodies to structure a programme of CPD for academic staff.

7.4 Engage with the professional bodies to examine ways in which they may assist in dispute resolution.

7.4 Encourage the accreditation of courses by professional bodies and especially collaboration between professional bodies to carry out joint accreditation programmes.

7.5 Stipulate that all graduates leave with a developed CPD plan that will enhance and accelerate their career development and earnings capacity.

7.6 Allow universities to set tuition fees at a level that allows them to develop a variety of courses of a quality that is demanded by the economy and markets and not by political requirement.

7.7 Include some design degree programmes as priority subjects.

7.8 Allow set off of CPD and training against earnings repayment limits.

10 March 2011