This article, on a more serious topic than my first, looks at higher education reform and why I feel that current proposed policies (from both left and right leaning commentators) fundamentally ignore the key issues the sector faces.
Plenty has been written over recent months and years over how the UK Higher Education (HE) sector needs to change in order to meet the changing demands being placed on it. Three problems in particular need addressing. Firstly, we need to find a way of upskilling the population in a way that can meet the ever-evolving demands of our economy. Secondly, we need to find a way to address the inequality of HE opportunity that exists between the state and private education sectors. And thirdly, all this has to be done at a time when the government needs to cut costs in order to tackle the deficit.
So far, only two real solutions have been offered, both of which I feel are highly unimaginative. The coalition has raised tuition fees (albeit with more favourable loan repayment terms) which provides a quick fix to the financial problem, but does little to address the other two issues. Student bodies and unions have proposed a continuation of the lower fee levels with some even advocating increased HE funding. This allows continued upskilling but doesn’t really tackle issues of inequality of opportunity, and simply leaves the financial issues for someone else to deal with at a later date.
I argue that neither of these options is appropriate and that the country is better off adopting a third but more radical solution: raising the standard entry age for undergraduate degrees to 20.
I’ll start by looking at the resource and financial constraints currently faced by the HE sector. In the long-run, my proposal would make relatively little difference as student numbers wouldn’t change, cohorts would simply start degrees later. However, important short-term cost savings could be realised by universities. In switching to my proposed system, there inevitably would be an initial decline in student numbers as the first cohorts delay the start of their degrees. This however, would also entail reduced expenditure for the HE sector, which would provide some respite to the huge spending squeeze that the sector is currently seeing.
The main benefits of my proposal though lie elsewhere. Let me examine the upskilling of the population to begin with. The university path is not the only way of improving individuals' work skills and indeed, may not even be the most appropriate step straight after school/college. By raising the standard university entry age to 20, people will have two full years which they can spend in the working world. Any job, regardless of status or sector, will provide future students with a vital perspective on how the wider world works, leaving them well-placed not only for university (especially so for prospective arts students) but also for their longer term careers. Furthermore, with two years to play with, it’s not unreasonable to think that firms might set up school leaver programmes, similar to graduate training schemes, again helping broaden the skillset of future undergraduates.
I’ll end by considering equality of opportunity. Clearly one policy alone will not address this issue but raising the university entry age would certainly help. Firstly, it would mean that most candidates would apply for places with grades in hand, giving them a better idea of which courses and institutions would be realistic and appropriate choices. Clearly this is preferable to what we have right now: guess work based on sketchy predicted grades. Furthermore, the extra two years allows more time to research possible future paths, as well as providing an opportunity to reflect and to try out new things away from the academic environment. My proposal could also help tackle some of the financial barriers to HE participation. By making it normal to work for two years before university, students will have to chance to earn at least some money that can immediately contribute towards their HE costs.
I appreciate that my proposed changes would represent a huge shift in the status quo and I don’t claim that this solution is flawless. Nonetheless, I believe that policy needs to big, brave, and bold as it’s the only way that our higher education sector will continue to be meaningful and well-regarded.
No comments:
Post a Comment