Part-time proposals welcome but could go further
The IPPR Commission on the Future of Higher Education’s report, A Critical Path: Securing the Future of Higher Education in England, includes welcome recognition of the current ‘crisis’ in part-time recruitment to higher education, and calls for a partial extension of loan eligibility for part-time students, echoing recommendations made by NIACE ahead of the government’s spending review.
The report, which was published today, recognises that ‘higher education has been transformed from an elite system to one in which nearly half of all young people and more than a million mature students participate’ and acknowledges that intervention is required to turn around the sharp decline in part-time recruitment to HE.
The recommendations include:
• the partial relaxation of the ELQ (equivalent or lower qualifications) rule which means that the majority of part-time students are currently not eligible for tuition fee loans;
• the provision of low-cost £5,000 fee degrees, ‘focused on vocational learning and offered to local students who are eligible for fee loans but not maintenance support’;
• the strengthening of systems of vocational provision, with further education colleges given the ability to award degrees and granted the ‘renewed title of Polytechnic’;
• the introduction of a £1,000 premium for students from low-participation areas ‘to create an incentive to recruit such students and to recognise the additional learning support some students need’; and
• more widespread use of contextual data to improve participation from students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
There are some useful recommendations here, but the proposed extension of eligibility to part-time loans in strategically important subjects is particularly interesting and timely, given the increased profile given to these issues by the Part-Time Matters campaign – a response to the crisis in participation which has seen part-time numbers fall by 40 per cent since 2010 – and the hints made by Universities Minister David Willetts at NIACE’s recent parliamentary reception that he was interested in revisiting the issue of ELQs.
Increasing participation by part-time and mature students is critical, not only to the quality and versatility of the HE system, but to the health of our democracy and the resilience of our economy. Extending loan eligibility would undoubtedly help, but, as the poor take-up of part-time loans suggests, it can only be part of the answer.
As the report acknowledges, far too little is understood currently about the barriers part-time students face, but it is clear that some combination of increased costs (as they affect both prospective students and employer sponsors), debt aversion, and poor understanding of what is on offer all play a part, alongside restricted eligibility to loans. And while some of these issues are recognised, the recommendations do not address them. This seems to me something of a missed opportunity.
The report also includes welcome recognition of the importance of vocational learning and high-level apprenticeships and some of the proposals will be useful in supporting the growth of this area of provision and raising its prestige – a long-term concern in this country, where those who follow a vocational route have, traditionally, had to deal with being labeled second-rate. This is a persistent irritation for those who work in the vocational education sector, as it must be for those who follow this path and recognise its equal claim for esteem with academic study. It needs to change, for economic reasons as well as for reasons of equity.
The introduction of fee-only degrees for local students is another positive proposal, and represents a useful opportunity for colleges to play an enhanced role in higher education. The role of further education in widening participation and developing vocational opportunities deserves to be better recognised, though the jury is out on whether the renewed use of the term “polytechnic” will support this – as well as on what appetite there will be in the FE sector for such a rebranding. The government’s considered response to the report should be interesting.
