![]() |
| Close Window |
| The Future of Higher Education |
The Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) is pleased to comment on the Department for Education & Skills White Paper on the future of higher education. This response has been compiled by the General Secretary, Professor Andrew Miller and the Research Officer, Dr Marc Rands, with the assistance of a number of Fellows with extensive experience in this area. The White Paper on the future of higher education in Britain has done much to consolidate the Government’s view that higher education is a desirable goal for a large fraction of school leavers, translating into life-long assets for those who complete their studies. Either at the point of leaving school or through learning opportunities later in adult life, further and higher education together provide the essential basis for an educated and skilled work force able to sustain Britain’s position as a modern, industrial country. The Paper also recognises the pressures which face higher education both from our failure to invest adequately over many years in resource, the challenge from overseas and the social class division which continues. But while the view from Whitehall appears to have stabilised, the higher education system and the universities themselves are far from being in a settled state. There is an intensifying competition for status between otherwise collegiate institutions; the growing gap between higher education in Scotland and higher education in England; and the problem of funding an expanding higher education system at an adequate level without on one hand, bankrupting the exchequer or on the other, alienating potential students. The changes proposed in England will also impact on Scottish higher education in a number of significant ways. In many vital respects (the market for academic staff, most aspects of research activity, and marketing overseas, to give just a few examples) higher education is predominantly a UK system. It should also be emphasised that this is a UK-wide problem that needs to be addressed urgently by all the relevant administrations, and that the actions taken need to be co-ordinated because the HE sectors in different parts of the UK are not self-contained. However, the actions do not have to be identical. The White paper could have done well to look to the situation in Scotland. Several of the new strategies for the English system proposed in the Paper are already in place in Scotland. For example, Scotland’s participation rates in higher education as a whole (50.4%) are currently at the level proposed as a target for the English sector in 2010 (50%). In this regard, there is merit in Westminster and Whitehall looking to both the Scottish Parliament and the Executive when formulating what are effectively UK wide policies. The Government clearly wish to create a much more differentiated university sector and quote, with apparent approval, the Californian State University system. However, this system came into being as a result of legislation by the State of California in which the roles of the individual constituted colleges were carefully defined. The White Paper pulls back from this reasonably rational approach, presumably because it would require potentially contentious primary legislation, and seeks to do the same thing by manipulating the Funding Council. The Funding Council can, in turn, only manipulate the universities by altering the parameters in its funding formula. The problem with this approach is that not only is the funding formula becoming immensely complex, but it is becoming more and more difficult to predict the longer term consequences of these changes. Universities have local, regional, national and international roles and responsibilities and it would have been better to have examined, at each geographical level, the roles that should be played by the FE and HE sectors together, rather than attempting to create a striated system through the manipulation of so blunt an instrument as the Funding Council formula. In addition, care should be taken to avoid the assumption that ‘world class’ research should be concentrated in a very limited number of ‘world class’ Universities, on which the bulk of public research funding would be concentrated. The idea that ‘world class’ research essentially covering all disciplines should reside in a single, or limited number, of individual institutions is a flawed and outdated concept and one which has the potential to seriously damage the vast majority of Universities and higher Educational institutions, not only in Scotland, but also throughout the UK. Instead, the focus should be on ‘world class’ departments within different Institutions rather than on ‘world class’ institutions. In other words diversity should be actively promoted and Institutions should be encouraged to concentrate resources on areas where they can achieve international excellence rather than seeking to cover all disciplines. The specific areas of the White Paper are addressed below: The need for reform Research excellence - building on our strengths A healthy system must be dynamic and flexible. The danger of creating new demarcation lines is that they may become very rigid and hierarchical, inhibiting cross-boundary interactions. Depending upon the regional distribution of differentiated institutions, it may also limit the expectations for regional economic growth and cause further imbalance in demographics between regions. The approach will also run the risk of an overly great focus of people and resources into a narrow range of topic areas. This may be good for the research output but will have detrimental effects on the range of knowledge and skills available to the UK economy. There is need for a mechanism to ensure that the skills requirements of particular sectors of the economy are kept in view. The Paper also discusses the relationship between research and teaching. While the link may be relatively weak at the level of the first two years of undergraduate education, for those who have taught in universities, it is clear that research is very valuable in underpinning advanced levels of first degree (Honours) education, as well as masters degrees. Research Assessment Nevertheless, if a 6* rating is introduced, it will be important that this should be on the basis of it being a UK wide designation and as such, as a prerequisite to its introduction, it will be essential that a fair and equitable assessment methodology be established for all institutions throughout the UK. Supporting our Leading Universities and Emerging
Research The Creation of an Arts and Humanities Research
Council Investing in Researchers Higher education and business - exchanging
and developing knowledge and skills While success in pursuing research of relevance to commerce and industry may not correlate directly with RAE ratings, it could be virtually impossible to establish successful consultancy at least in scientific and technical subjects, without experience of research and generally a close link with research. Additionally, in more technological areas of work, there is a close link between research and development and the technology transfer. Academics should be encouraged to think, in not necessarily to practice, how knowledge can become useful knowledge. Knowledge Exchanges Strengthening Regional Partnership Higher Education and development of skills for
the workplace Teaching and learning - delivering excellence Fair pay in higher education Spreading Best Practice in Teaching Rewards for Excellence University Title Expanding higher education to meet our needs In addition, it is clear that unless this is associated with a significantly increased injection of resource, the quality of the educational opportunities which will be available to students will necessarily diminish, as size and structure are intimately associated. Changing the pattern of provision Delivering Higher Education (HE) in Further Education
(FE) Inclusive and Flexible Teaching and Learning Fair access The Access Regulator Freedoms and funding The Paper recognises the funding difficulties being experienced within the HE sector but takes the view that these cannot be resolved by the provision of further large increases in public funds. There is an apparent contradiction between this position and the statement that fees charged by universities, which will only be recovered on a 10 to 20 year time scale following graduation, will nonetheless be made available immediately by the Treasury to universities. In addition, it is pledged that the Treasury will recompense the immediate loss of £1,100 per student, currently paid up-front to every university. The only way of reconciling this promises with the reluctance by the Government to commit significant additional public funds to universities could be to believe that the Treasury will reduce its block grant to the Funding Council by an amount approximately equal to the additional funds that the universities otherwise might expect. However, if this is not the case resources available to English HEIs will increase substantially from 2006 under the proposed deferred fee regime of up to £3,000 per year of study. It is proposed that HEIs in England would be free to impose such deferred fees selectively or generally, while in Scotland the Scottish Executive has indicated that it would oppose the introduction of ‘top-up’ fees. If the Westminster Government uses resource accounting to convert the payments due at some future date into cash in hand at the time the commitment is incurred, then the additional resources may start to flow into English, Welsh and Northern Ireland institutions during the course of 2006-7. If no more resources are made available in Scotland, there will be higher increases in the rest of the UK compared with modest movement in Scotland. This would again adversely affect Scotland’s ability to attract and retain the best academic staff. It should also be recognised that universities in regions with difficult socio-economic conditions may be unable to charge the full amount of student fees and that this shortfall will further expand the gap between unit funding provision and the actual cost of providing courses. Independence through Endowment The Graduate Contribution Scheme The level of graduate annual income proposed of £15,000 when a liability to pay will commence, whilst clearly more appropriate than £10,000 as introduced by the Scottish Executive in 2001, remains too low. There would be merit in the level of annual income being at least £25,000. It is worth noting that in many countries such as the USA, students do depend on large loans to finance their education. However, in these countries, at least on average, the pay differential for having a good qualification is normally very significant and more than compensates for the loan. As it stands, it is likely to affect attitudes to employment and remuneration. For example, the question needs to be asked whether the level of debt adversely affects recruitment to jobs or professions with high academic requirements but often below average financial rewards e.g. the caring professions and certain areas of teaching. Accordingly, some of the most academically able graduates may therefore be discouraged from entering these nationally important jobs by high levels of debt incurred as students. In addition, if the Scottish graduate endowment level remains unchanged, then price incentives for students to study in Scotland could result. Since, under current legislation, EU domiciled students must be treated the same as Scottish domiciled, it is possible that Scotland could also look more attractive than the other regions of the UK to existing EU students. This potentially higher demand for places in Scottish HEIs could hamper efforts to widen access to disadvantaged communities in Scotland, although it could be argued that the potential benefits to Scotland of inward migration of talented people from across Europe may have wider social and economic benefits. Safeguards for students It is also recognised that while there are certain benefits from an element of work experience, the present higher education system is not geared to students working part-time during the academic term. There is also strong evidence that in some subjects this work impinges upon the quality of students’ performance and causes some students to fail to reach their full potential. Many students also experience stress both during and after their courses as a result of their relatively high level of financial indebtedness. The restoration of maintenance grants, albeit at low levels is a positive move to increase access for students from deprived backgrounds. Additional Information Knowledge Transfer Higher Education Research Student Finance Higher Education - General May 2003 Further information is available from the Research Officer, Dr Marc Rands |