Government reform of Higher EducationWritten evidence submitted by the Royal Society of Chemistry
The Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) is the UK Professional Body for chemical scientists and an international Learned Society for advancing the chemical sciences. Supported by a network of over 47,000 members worldwide and an internationally acclaimed publishing business, our activities span education and training, conferences and science policy, and the promotion of the chemical sciences to the public.
The RSC has a duty under its Royal Charter “to serve the public interest” by acting in an independent advisory capacity, and it is in this spirit that this submission is made.
The RSC welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee inquiry into the future of Higher Education. The RSC response can be summarised in the following points:
Greater support for STEM subjects in Higher Education must be provided to generate a steady supply of talented, highly-skilled individuals.
Chemistry research underpins many sectors, contributing 21% of our GDP, or £258 billion each year.
Chemical sciences education must be available to all students with the ability and desire to study the subject, irrespective of their ability to pay.
In 2007–08, chemistry departments in England suffered on average a 10% deficit in teaching income. Cuts to the capital budget and any further decrease in teaching income could lead to difficulties in maintaining infrastructure and facilities to teach chemical sciences in universities.
Recent progress in recruiting more undergraduates to studying chemical sciences may be reversed under the new fee regime, which could have unforeseen consequences in placing institutions at the risk or closure or in the recruitment of subject-specialists for teacher training.
1. The RSC believes that greater support for STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) subjects in Higher Education must be provided to generate a steady supply of talented, highly-skilled individuals who will become the next generation of scientists and engineers, as well as being members of a wider, more scientifically literate workforce.
The Case for Investment
2. Chemistry is a key science, which underpins many sectors; overall, chemistry research enables the UK to generate £258 billion each year, or 21% of our GDP.1 Chemical scientists are renowned for their ability to transfer their skills set to other, often, unrelated careers. The government should recognise the diversity of occupations that graduates of chemical sciences occupy, including (but not limited to) those based in research, industry, teaching and the civil service, all of which benefit the economy.
Funding
3. The RSC believes that the funding model adopted by the government should take in to account the following considerations:
The system of funding should be able to support, over the long term, a fully funded, world class chemical science base.
Chemical science in the UK should consist of centres of research excellence with strong links to industry, complemented by support and encouragement for entrepreneurship and innovation.
There must be diversity of provision in chemistry education, with a fully flexible approach to study including multiple access and exit points, full and part-time and flexible study options as well as integration of work-based and applied learning.
Chemical sciences education must be available to all students with the ability and desire to study the subject, irrespective of their ability to pay.
4. The RSC is concerned about the possible damaging impact on science and engineering programmes under a differential fees system. If such fees were to reflect the significantly higher costs of laboratory-based programmes, student recruitment in the chemical sciences may be adversely affected.
Maintaining Excellent Facilities
5. The university system must be able to deliver science teaching for the 21st Century, including provision of modern laboratories and excellence in teaching to engage students. A recent report on the finances of UK Chemistry departments noted that the deficit on teaching income in English universities was on average 10%. When research costs were also taken into account, the average deficit across UK universities increased to 31.7%.2
6. The RSC is concerned that the capital budget cuts in combination with the removal of funding from strategically important and vulnerable subjects will lead to difficulty in maintaining the current standard of facilities.3 The infrastructure and equipment in UK Chemistry departments was judged excellent in the recent International Review of Chemistry.4 Decreasing standards could negatively impact on the international standing of UK Chemistry.
7. The BIS allocations also depend on £324 million of efficiency savings in 2014–15 (7% of the £4.6 billion resource funding).4 UK chemistry departments have already made significant efficiency savings by increasing student:staff ratios and lowering departmental space per member of academic staff.3 Demanding further efficiency savings, as detailed in the Wakeham report, risks compromising the quality of teaching if the student:staff ratio is further increased.
Maintaining Student Numbers in the Chemical Sciences
8. The latest UCAS figures show that the number of entrants to chemistry undergraduate degrees has increased by 28% over the last four years to reach 4,290 in 2010. The RSC is concerned that the recent progress in recruiting more undergraduates to studying chemistry may well be reversed under the new fee regime.
9. With a key component of funding now following the student in the form of increased tuition fees, alongside a decrease in the HEFCE teaching grant, falling student numbers at an institution may place it at risk of closure. In the absence of a comprehensive strategy to support a strong national science base, closure of Chemistry departments may occur on an unplanned, case-by-case basis. This will create regions in the UK with no provision for students who wish to study the chemical sciences. Those whose backgrounds require them to live at home for financial or other reasons will be unable to study these subjects, irrespective of their ability. Additionally, businesses will be unable to benefit from the knowledge and expertise of their local universities thereby impairing regional economic development.
10. Additional consequences are likely to be seen in the recruitment of initial teacher training students. The latest guidance from the Department for Education indicates that 1,070 places should be allocated to chemistry subject-specialists in 2011–12.5 Decreasing numbers of chemistry graduates would negatively impact on the future recruitment of these highly sought-after subject-specialists, which could have a cascading effect on future applications for degrees in the chemical sciences.
Student Support
11. The RSC believes that access to the study of chemistry and chemical science based courses should be irrespective of the ability to pay. The RSC is concerned about the possible damaging impact on science and engineering programmes under a differential fees system. If such fees were to reflect the significantly higher costs of laboratory-based programmes, student recruitment in the chemical sciences may be adversely affected.
12. The support system in place should guarantee a flexible approach to study, regardless of whether a student follows full or part-time study, or a mixture of the two pathways. In addition, the potential longer length of chemical science degrees (which can involve incorporated Master’s courses or industrial placements) should not act as a financial disincentive. Each of these options provides invaluable training and experience for the student but can incur extra expense.
13. Where possible, students who are not able to complete the full degree programme should be provided with an appropriate certificate of achievement that they could use to support applications for employment and/or for credit, should they find it possible to resume study at a later date in their career.
References
1
2
3
4
5
10 March 2011