Government reform of Higher Education - Business, Innovation and Skills Committee Contents


Written evidence submitted by the Association of Colleges

1.  The Association of Colleges (AoC) represents Further Education, Sixth Form and Tertiary Colleges and their students. Colleges provide a rich mix of academic and vocational education at all levels. As independent, autonomous institutions established, under the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, they have the freedom to innovate and respond flexibly to the needs of individuals, businesses and communities.

THE KEY FACTS ABOUT HIGHER EDUCATION PROVIDED IN COLLEGES

2.  AoC welcomes the opportunity to provide evidence to the Select Committee to inform its inquiry into higher education (HE). As the UK continues to emerge from the recession, our future economic prosperity will partly depend on our ability to develop a HE system that is responsive to demand from individuals and employers, and can develop the higher level technician skills needed to re-balance and grow the economy.

3.  Colleges play an important role in providing higher education. Over 150,000 students study HE in a College on degree courses funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) or 'non-prescribed' HE programmes funded by the Skills Funding Agency, employers or by the students themselves, usually on a part-time basis around work or family commitments.

4.  The following table illustrates the mechanisms through which College higher education is funded[1]:

Funding mechanism Number of HE students in Colleges
Funding given direct to the College (primarily by HEFCE) 57,000
Funding given to a College via a university (primarily by HEFCE) 56,000
Funding from the Skills Funding Agency (or other source) 38,000

5.  262 Colleges provide HE courses across all areas and regions of England, enrolling around 10% of all HE students in England.

6.  Of the 65 Colleges that were examined in the latest review undertaken by the Quality Assurance Agency, all were given a judgement of confidence in academic standards and the quality of the learning opportunities offered. 65 examples of good practice were identified[2].

7.  College income from HE provision is presently £500 million and the majority of Colleges charge between £1,700 to £2,200 tuition fee to their degree students, except in a few exceptional circumstances. This level of fee has offered an important alternative to courses offered at universities and other HEIs.

8.  As explained above, currently Colleges are able to offer HE through funding received directly from HEFCE; indirectly via a university or from the Skills Funding Agency. Some students are self funded. The latter two routes are mainly used for professional qualifications such as accountancy, marketing, purchasing and supply and construction management.

9.  Colleges are committed to widening participation to HE, and often provide HE in areas that traditionally have lower HE participation rates, and to students with lower eligibility qualifications than many HEIs.

10.  In the near future, several Colleges may have Foundation Degree[3] Awarding Powers (FDAP), and in a few cases Taught Degree Awarding Powers (TDAP).

THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF HE PROVIDED BY FURTHER EDUCATION COLLEGES

11.  HE in FE provides distinctive, diverse and efficient higher education:

—  HE students in FE Colleges are generally older than university students[4] and often have vocational, rather than academic, qualifications. They usually study around their work and/or family commitments.

—  Evidence shows that HE students in Colleges, particularly those on foundation degrees, are more likely to come from low-participation neighbourhoods[5].

—  FE Colleges which provide a significant number of HE places are often located in "higher education cold spots", where there was historically little HE offered locally, such as the London Borough of Havering, Blackburn, Blackpool and Peterborough or in areas where a university may have been historically focused on national recruitment such as Durham where the University recruits only 8.4% of its students from Tyne and Wear and County Durham[6].

—  FE Colleges with significant HE numbers are often also in areas with historically low HE participation rates such as the north east of England where FE Colleges in Durham, Newcastle, South Tyneside and Sunderland between them educate over 7,600 HE students.

—  FE Colleges provide specialist higher level vocational courses such as Higher National Diplomas and Foundation Degrees, across a range of occupational sectors that promote the development of technician skills. For example, 20 colleges deliver foundation degrees in the biosciences and over 80 in engineering. Examples of "niche" national courses include Worcester College of Technology's payroll courses and make-up artistry for the media at Craven College in Skipton and Somerset College.

—  FE Colleges also provide higher technician level skills courses related to their particular locality, for example Cornwall College has HE courses in marine studies and rural business management.

THE PRESENT SYSTEM

12.  At present some Colleges—about 50%—are funded directly by HEFCE for the HE courses they offer. Others are funded indirectly through one or several HEIs or through a consortium of an HEI and several Colleges. In a one-to-one or consortia the HEI controls student numbers and can increase or decrease the numbers from the partner Colleges as they see fit. All HE undergraduate awards have to be validated and awarded by an HEI.

13.  Lord Browne's vision of a managed market will not become a reality unless the system, which currently places FE Colleges under the control of universities, is modified. For example, at present:

—  When funded via a university, a College can have its student numbers withdrawn by their partner university even if the College demonstrates clear demand for courses and potential students.

—  Colleges are unable to develop new courses without the consent of their partner university, as only universities have the legal power to award degrees.

14.  Indirect funding of HE in Colleges, via a university, means Colleges are denied control over their own student numbers and although some consortia work successfully, in the last two years there have been several examples of universities withdrawing student numbers in FE Colleges. This is clearly detrimental to those students who wish to study in a College setting and the local businesses who want to help their employees gain higher level skills. We believe that maintaining indirect funding will inhibit Colleges' freedom to innovate and identify new markets and to develop the specialist higher technician level courses needed to help ensure the country returns to higher growth and future prosperity.

15.  In this situation, except in the case of very popular areas such as business or early childhood studies, Colleges in regionally based consortia can only develop courses that are not in direct competition with their partner awarding HEI. This relationship means that in some cases Colleges are unable to develop courses that meet local or, indeed national, need. Colleges could approach another HEI for validating purposes but that is not straightforward, not always possible and can lead to significant additional quality assurance (QA) processes as each HEI has different systems, despite the fact that there are national codes of practice published by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). This leads to extra expenditure for Colleges.

16.  Further, there is no consistency in the administrative fees that HEIs charge for their validation and awarding services, or indeed in the services related to the fees charged. In the better managed consortia these fees will cover administrative support, staff development, curriculum advice and liaison with international scholars. In most cases though, the service only relates to the provision of a validation service, and fees can vary between 20%-80% per student.

THE FUTURE

17.  As set out above, HE in FE provides a public good, as it brings advantages to communities and individuals who often missed out on higher level learning earlier in life, and to those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. If gaining an HE qualification brings the individual significant financial advantages it seems appropriate that they should pay a contribution towards that advantage and the Government should promote this potential gain. Therefore AoC supports a system based on tuition fees and income contingent loans.

18.  AoC also fully supports the opening up of the HE market to more competition and is particularly pleased to see the distinction between full-time and part-time HE students removed. However, we are concerned that a trebling of tuition fees by some universities could have an adverse effect on access to the most prestigious universities from students from lower income backgrounds, and possibly reverse the widening participation gains made in the last ten years. It may be significant that there seems to be a reduction in applicants through UCAS for 2011 entry.

19.  The Browne Report effectively recommended the establishment of a managed market in HE, moving from a mainly grant-based system paid for from general taxation to a consumer-based price system. AoC is not opposed to this in principle although we have several concerns about how the market could operate in practice—see below.

20.  AoC is not advocating that all Colleges should gain Taught or Foundation Degree Awarding Powers (T/FDAP), but that for the market proposed by Lord Browne to operate as efficiently as possible, Colleges with large numbers of HE students should be able to compete on a level playing field with HEIs. T/FDAP would mean that Colleges are not tied to HEI for their course development, could fairly compete with HEIs and what we believe amounts to restrictive practice is ended.

21.  AoC is supportive of different types of awarding bodies entering the market as we believe a managed market is the most efficient way of ensuring course and qualification development meets student demand, the development of higher level technician skills and the economic needs of the country. It will also break the present monopoly of HEIs.

22.  However, AoC is not convinced that a complete "free for all" is appropriate and would argue for a role for employers and agencies such as the UK Commission on Employment and Skills (UKCES) in informing course development. AoC welcomes the fact that QAA are developing revised guidelines for Colleges with polygamous awarding body relationships, to minimise over-complicated external review and associated costs.

23.  In summary, it is AoC's view that to address the anti-competition issues inherent in the present system the system of indirect funding needs to be reformed, more Colleges need to have the power to validate and award their own degree titles and that other non-teaching awarding bodies are able to enter the market.

24.  Although indirect funding may disappear in a "money follows the student" system envisaged by the Browne Review and the Government, it is still likely in the present squeeze on public spending that some form of student number control could remain. AoC would be deeply concerned if such a system maintained present indirect funding arrangements, and allowed HEIs to retain the power to effectively control the market. We would argue that if any student control system is introduced it is based on 2008 enrolment figures before recent decisions taken by universities to withdraw College HE student numbers took effect.

PART-TIME STUDENTS

25.  At least half of HE students studying in FE Colleges are part-time[7] therefore AoC welcomes the proposed improvement in support for part-time students although we have some reservations about the administration of loans to support their learning. The new system must be flexible and take into account the fact that some part-time students, who are usually older, may not wish to take out a loan, that some may want to pay back the loan quickly and that employers, in particular, may not want a long pay back time.

ACCESS TO HIGHER EDUCATION

26.  FE and Sixth Form Colleges provide 35%[8] of entrants to higher education and therefore we have a significant interest in HE from the perspective of access and progression. The actual infrastructure needed to develop a transitional or managed market in HE is only now being developed. For example, the following are being introduced: a National Scholarship Programme (NSP), tougher Access Agreements, back loaded loans, relatively progressive repayment, loans for part-time students and tidying up the external quality assurance system.

27.  Overall, AoC is supportive of these developments with certain caveats. First, we are unsure if the proposed NSP is fit for purpose as a scholarship scheme to help bright people from poor backgrounds enter higher education. In the first year of operation it is effectively a scheme that will not deter applicants, rather than one to incentivise applications, particularly to those universities with high eligibility requirements for its courses. We welcome the Government's decision to treat the first year as a pilot because we would support exploration of a scheme that involved schools and Colleges identifying students who would benefit from additional support. We are concerned that possibly over one hundred institutionally based schemes could lead to unnecessary complexity and confusion for applicants.

28.  AoC, in the main, supports the guidelines for the administration and monitoring of access agreements recently published by the Office for Fair Access, in particular the decision to await the publication of the White Paper and subsequent legislation to address the complex issues related to part-time student loans. It is supportive of a more robust approach to universities who systematically fail to hit benchmarks related to widening participation.

29.  The Browne Review identified that College students had to achieve an average of one grade better to get into certain universities. The withdrawal of the Education Maintenance Allowance, cuts to transport provision for 16-18 year olds and to overall College budgets could also impact on supply. We hope that the proposed access agreements, the introduction of better information, advice and guidance through the proposed all-age careers service and an enhanced Learner Support Fund will tackle these issues.

30.  AoC is also concerned with the ability of adults to progress into HE, and is anxious that the proposed partial removal of financial support for Level 3 students aged over 25 on inactive[9] benefits, could reduce applications from this group. Early analysis of the Skills Funding Agency individual learner record indicates that about 9% of College students aged 25 and over are on income based benefits similar to the definition of inactive benefits. This group of students are amongst the poorest in our communities, most adverse to debt and least able to pay up front fees or payback loans.

QUALIFICATION AND CREDIT FRAMEWORK

31.  AoC believes that one mechanism to create a more flexible HE system is the creation of a lifelong learning credit accumulation and transfer system (CATS) which could include the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF) and cover some HE courses.[10]

32.  AoC accepts that it would not be appropriate for some HEI courses to be part of such a scheme, and of course some HEIs with a more traditional portfolio of courses may not view participation as relevant or necessary. However, the introduction of a lifelong learning CATS would facilitate the acquisition of HE knowledge and skills on a modular credit basis allowing the individual to study at their own pace and in line with the skills needed by their occupational sector. It would create a more efficient HE system as individuals would have a record indicating the HE learning credits they had achieved. This would be accepted by all participating Colleges and HEIs, thus supporting portability, addressing duplication of learning and fostering a lifelong learning culture. We believe that the Government should explore the possibility of establishing a regional or sub regional CATS pilot, possibly involving the NHS where there is a significant amount of un-credited learning.

10 March 2011


1   House of Commons Written Answer given to Kelvin Hopkins MP, 9 June 2010, Col:193W.  Back

2   Integrated Quality and Enhancement Review: Findings from the 2009-10 summative reviews QAA 2011. Back

3   Foundation Degrees are higher education qualifications that combine academic study with work-based learning. Designed jointly by universities, Colleges and employers, they are available in a range of work-related subjects. Back

4   HEFCE analysis 2007-08 Back

5   Source: Foundation degrees: key statistics 2001-02 to 2009-10, HEFCE April 2010. Back

6   http://www.dur.ac.uk/spa/statistics/college/4.4domicile/ Back

7   HEFCE analysis, 2007-08. Back

8   Error! Bookmark not defined. Back

9   Inactive benefits are all those not including Jobseekers Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance.  Back

10   Credit accumulation and transfer systems credit 'chunks' of learning based on time and complexity, and assign that chunk a value. This value specifies the number of credits gained by learners who complete that unit. The flexibility of the system allows learners to gain qualifications at their own pace along routes that suit them best. There is already a credit transfer and qualification framework for vocational education and training (VET) and FE, including higher VET, but at present the university sector has only introduced a credit system Back


 
previous page contents next page


© Parliamentary copyright 2011
Prepared 10 November 2011