I can't be alone amongst University Administrators in silently admiring those student that have chosen to show the Coalition Government exactly what they think of their proposals for the funding of HE.
Not the one that decided to drop a fire extinguisher off the roof of Millbank (ARU must be so proud) or those that broke the windows though (far better to have just demanded membership forms for everyone outside). The Socialist Worker Party and its ilk, adherents and loose affiliates eagerly turn up at any protest believing it to be the start of the Glorious Revolution and no doubt thought this one had more weight as the middle classes were involved.
The students that get my admiration are those that are vocalising and putting into action a heartfelt belief that HE should be free to all, funded by the state. Unfortunately, it looks like that tenet of UK society was lost when Labour got to power in 1997 and abandoned it when faced with the balance sheets and the risk involved with raising taxes for the rich. They were the ones that introduced fees and shifted the responsibility for funding HE from Government to "customers".
What this government is proposing to do is the logical conclusion of that process, Arts and Humanities are to be funded entirely by the students studying them, with Sciences only getting some basic funding (even though Browne has said that wasn't what he intended). The illogical twist is that Universities will still be beholden to the Government, even for those courses it no longer funds.
All eyes are on the Commons now and the vote on 9 December. Will there be revolt amongst LibDem Cabinet Ministers? Will the coalition suffer a defeat, its first? Or will this all lead to a revolution in private provision of HE in the UK?
Showing posts with label Browne. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Browne. Show all posts
Saturday, 4 December 2010
Thursday, 4 November 2010
Top Fee or Not Top Fee?
So, Browne paved the way and then the Government announced a new cap of £6k, a new cap in "exceptional circumstances" of £9k and a rise in the earning threshold to £21k before it needs paying back.
So, what are "exceptional circumstances". David Willetts' statement to the house goes on to talk about instiutions charging above 6k basically having to agree a programme of widening participation and scholarships with the Office for Fair Access. Is everyone exceptional then? Isn't this just a carrot to say, if you want to charge the full amount, just put some of the money towards schemes to encourage social mobility, thus hoping to keep the headline amount the 6k (which most papers ignored). Given large numbers of institutions already have well developed programmes, will there be a national standard?
So, will this be a repeat of when fees rose from 1 to 3k, when a few held fire for a year, until it appeared to be more damaging not to increase to the full amount? The Russell Group have been bullish in their support of Browne and also the Government proposals. So it appear they will jump to 9k. Will others just follow to avoid being considered second rate? Crucial to this will be how it affects applications.
We'll no doubt see a boost in UCAS applications for 2011 to avoid the new fees, as we did when fees were introduced. But what then? Will those from less privileged backgrounds gravitate towards those only at 6k? Will it make no impact at all? Will they just drop out of the market entirely?
And will universities decide to raise the fees universally, or create an internal market with Law and Medicine at 9k and Philosophy at 6k? It would seem more justifiable in terms of incentive to the student to sign up for a higher costing course if the expected increase in wage post-qualification is directly connected to the degree subject. But what does that mean to the university? VIP areas in the library for those whose course funded them? Some facilities are for all and centrally run functions often work on the basis of even contributions from all admissions.
Will universities look to ditch those courses that can't attract the more financially-minded applicants? what future for a 4 year course with a year abroad in the culture being studied or a year in industry? Will that be worth an extra 6 to 9k? Pressure is on the Arts subjects and maybe a reduced fee will keep them alive.
That old Chinese curse about interesting times is on a few lips.
So, what are "exceptional circumstances". David Willetts' statement to the house goes on to talk about instiutions charging above 6k basically having to agree a programme of widening participation and scholarships with the Office for Fair Access. Is everyone exceptional then? Isn't this just a carrot to say, if you want to charge the full amount, just put some of the money towards schemes to encourage social mobility, thus hoping to keep the headline amount the 6k (which most papers ignored). Given large numbers of institutions already have well developed programmes, will there be a national standard?
So, will this be a repeat of when fees rose from 1 to 3k, when a few held fire for a year, until it appeared to be more damaging not to increase to the full amount? The Russell Group have been bullish in their support of Browne and also the Government proposals. So it appear they will jump to 9k. Will others just follow to avoid being considered second rate? Crucial to this will be how it affects applications.
We'll no doubt see a boost in UCAS applications for 2011 to avoid the new fees, as we did when fees were introduced. But what then? Will those from less privileged backgrounds gravitate towards those only at 6k? Will it make no impact at all? Will they just drop out of the market entirely?
And will universities decide to raise the fees universally, or create an internal market with Law and Medicine at 9k and Philosophy at 6k? It would seem more justifiable in terms of incentive to the student to sign up for a higher costing course if the expected increase in wage post-qualification is directly connected to the degree subject. But what does that mean to the university? VIP areas in the library for those whose course funded them? Some facilities are for all and centrally run functions often work on the basis of even contributions from all admissions.
Will universities look to ditch those courses that can't attract the more financially-minded applicants? what future for a 4 year course with a year abroad in the culture being studied or a year in industry? Will that be worth an extra 6 to 9k? Pressure is on the Arts subjects and maybe a reduced fee will keep them alive.
That old Chinese curse about interesting times is on a few lips.
Friday, 6 August 2010
Is Privatization the Future?
On 26 July, BPP, a private college providing mainly legal and business courses, was given University College status. (BPP's press release) This makes it only the second private University in the UK and the first since 1976. Much was made in the press about the Unions response to this news (particularly concerns overs standards) and the goivernment's stance on private sector involvement in HE - it wants more according to David Willetts. BPP and Buckingham (that 1976 university - Cabinet Minister for Education at the time? One Margaret Hilda Thatcher) won't be Government funded and therefore not answerable to HEFCE.
In a lot of ways, BPP is an answer to the Government's woes over HE. Any increase in UK student numbers means the Treasury having to reach into their pockets to give the students a loan for fees. Any increase in fees, although meaning they can plausibly be justified in cutting central funding, means having to reach deeper. Creating a private university means they don't have to pay out a bean. Of all the suggestions the Browne Report may contain, private universities would be one of the cheapest to implement.
The Unions' worries seem to be two-fold: that unlike Buckingham, which is a non profit making business, BPP will look to profit margins and shareholders ahead of all else and that without HEFCE enforcing audits and collecting data, standards will be allowed to slip, bringing the reputation of UK HE intitutions into disrepute. (UCU article on BPP)
The Union concerns have some merit, but if BPP is the thin edge of the wedge, Buckingham shows the wedge to be a bloody long one. BBP offers mainly professional qualifications, for which people expect to pay a fair fee in return for the directly applicable letters after their name and increased salary it means. Branching into degrees has so far been limited professional areas, where the degree has a similar effect. Whether this heralds the arrival of new private universities depends on the level of fees the market will take and the amount the universities will need to charge to keep afloat.
We might be entering into a new era if the fee cap is hiked up or removed entirely. If the proportion of money recieved directly from the Treasury shrinks to negligable, how soon before someone works out it's cheaper to charge higher fees and go private and not have to complete all those pesky returns to HEFCE or risk fines on recruitment? Those at Cranfield may be experiencing a squeeky bum moment as it might well be considering its potential standing in a private market, given its excellent reputation.
What does all this mean for the lowly administrator? Well, I'm sure we'd all like to throw a party at never having to see the Auditors again, but surely if that wedge starts to widen, some form of independent accreditation body can't be too far away to keep critics at bay? Cue a few years of establishment of rules, measures, revisions and chaos in terms of what actual data is needed.
But will it all happen? We await Browne, obviously, to see what will happen with fees, but we also wait to see what the banks might offer in terms of student loans. The one consequence of going private is that the Student Loans Company is out of the equation, and how much are banks going to be willing to loan, and indeed, charge for that BSc in Aquatic Exploration with Organic Crafts?
In a lot of ways, BPP is an answer to the Government's woes over HE. Any increase in UK student numbers means the Treasury having to reach into their pockets to give the students a loan for fees. Any increase in fees, although meaning they can plausibly be justified in cutting central funding, means having to reach deeper. Creating a private university means they don't have to pay out a bean. Of all the suggestions the Browne Report may contain, private universities would be one of the cheapest to implement.
The Unions' worries seem to be two-fold: that unlike Buckingham, which is a non profit making business, BPP will look to profit margins and shareholders ahead of all else and that without HEFCE enforcing audits and collecting data, standards will be allowed to slip, bringing the reputation of UK HE intitutions into disrepute. (UCU article on BPP)
The Union concerns have some merit, but if BPP is the thin edge of the wedge, Buckingham shows the wedge to be a bloody long one. BBP offers mainly professional qualifications, for which people expect to pay a fair fee in return for the directly applicable letters after their name and increased salary it means. Branching into degrees has so far been limited professional areas, where the degree has a similar effect. Whether this heralds the arrival of new private universities depends on the level of fees the market will take and the amount the universities will need to charge to keep afloat.
We might be entering into a new era if the fee cap is hiked up or removed entirely. If the proportion of money recieved directly from the Treasury shrinks to negligable, how soon before someone works out it's cheaper to charge higher fees and go private and not have to complete all those pesky returns to HEFCE or risk fines on recruitment? Those at Cranfield may be experiencing a squeeky bum moment as it might well be considering its potential standing in a private market, given its excellent reputation.
What does all this mean for the lowly administrator? Well, I'm sure we'd all like to throw a party at never having to see the Auditors again, but surely if that wedge starts to widen, some form of independent accreditation body can't be too far away to keep critics at bay? Cue a few years of establishment of rules, measures, revisions and chaos in terms of what actual data is needed.
But will it all happen? We await Browne, obviously, to see what will happen with fees, but we also wait to see what the banks might offer in terms of student loans. The one consequence of going private is that the Student Loans Company is out of the equation, and how much are banks going to be willing to loan, and indeed, charge for that BSc in Aquatic Exploration with Organic Crafts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)