̽»¨ÊÓƵ

The Labour government¡¯s new higher education reforms represent a ¡°radical¡± shift for the sector but the fee rises universities are being offered as ¡°quid pro quo¡± for making changes won¡¯t go far enough, according to vice-chancellors.

A long-awaited White Paper on skills proposed a series of changes?including linking fee increases to teaching quality, an emphasis on regional collaboration and specialisation, and enhanced powers for the regulator, the Office for Students.?

Given the financial pressures on the wider economy, Graham Galbraith, vice-chancellor of the University of Portsmouth, said?proposals to uplift university tuition fees with inflation?were ¡°the best the sector could have hoped for¡±.

¡°It¡¯s really positive to see the government recognising the central role that universities play in their industrial strategy and in the development of the UK economy,¡± he told?̽»¨ÊÓƵ.

¡°Seeing that written down in that way, I think is really good news. I¡¯m also pleased that they have recognised the financial challenges that the sector is facing.¡±

However, Galbraith said he was concerned about the impact of increased fees on widening participation and how the government will choose to measure quality. The Social Market Foundation also raised concerns that it was a ¡°missed opportunity to hold universities fully to account for their progress on widening participation¡±.

Peter John, vice-chancellor of the University of West London, praised the government¡¯s ¡°strong ambitions¡± but said key details around new levies, the future of international recruitment, expanded OfS powers and the performance thresholds tied to future funding were still unclear.?

¡°The proposed fee increase is welcome but there is still a need for capital investment to match the scale of the ambition. Without that clarity and support, it¡¯s hard for universities to plan with confidence,¡± he added.

The government has also pledged to deliver a ¡°prestigious¡± further education system?that brings higher and further education providers closer together by simplifying the regulatory framework for higher-level study.

Paul Kett, the new vice-chancellor and chief executive of London South Bank University, said collaboration can make it simpler for students to navigate and for employers to engage, as well as meeting opportunity and economic need.

He said the proposal for a single primary regulator for level 4 qualifications and above would enable providers to spend less time on bureaucracy.

¡°However, the call for more coordination between institutions to develop comprehensive offers in their local area needs new practical mechanisms to truly enable this at a regional level, including ensuring the school system is more focused on vocational and technical pathways.¡±

Andy Westwood, professor of public policy, government and business at the University of Manchester and a former Labour adviser, said?many in the sector will be surprised by how central the industrial strategy is to its post-16 offering.

He said the White Paper offers a clear statement about how the government?wants universities to be celebrated and what?it wants them to do ¨C but doubles down on its ¡°more interventionist, more activist¡± stance towards universities and puts a ¡°lot of faith¡± in the OfS.

¡°They want to prioritise, they want to specialise, and that¡¯s a pretty radical shift from the way not just the previous government set things up¡­but also pretty different to the way universities and colleges have been organising themselves over the last 10 to 20 years.¡±

While many vice-chancellors will be relieved by the locking-in of tuition fee increases, Westwood said it leaves them with a lot of work to do. And though the government faces ¡°a big political selling job¡± to the public over fees, it is part of a ¡°quid pro quo¡± with universities that aims to keep standards high.

Jess Lister, director of education at Public First, said the government has put a clear offer on the table for universities ¨C two years of tuition fee increases in exchange for stronger governance, greater efficiency, deeper collaboration, and closer alignment of the sector with national priorities.

¡°It¡¯s a fair proposition, but the higher education sector remains driven by incentives (including in legislation) that prioritise competition over cooperation. Unless those structural incentives change, universities will find it difficult to meet the government¡¯s expectations.¡±

Extra oversight from the OfS?has also not been greatly welcomed by the sector. Vanessa Wilson, chief executive of University Alliance, said awarding it more powers ¡°comes with some red flags given its past performance¡± and warned that a differential fee system could have intended and unintended ¡°disastrous consequences¡±.

The government outlined its commitment to the Lifelong Learning Entitlement (LLE) ¨C outlining aims for students to be able to move between universities, colleges and training providers, and building up qualifications over time.

Dave Phoenix, vice-chancellor of the Open University, said giving people the opportunity to earn while learning, and to undertake shorter, more focused study rather than committing immediately to a full degree, is key.

¡°For too long, higher education has been perceived as a rigid system: complete your A levels, leave home at 18, and go to a university far from where you live. While the sector has adapted, it hasn¡¯t always kept pace with the changing needs and expectations of learners.¡±

Andy Forbes, executive director of the Lifelong Education Institute, said the UK was evolving from a system focused on school-leavers to one that ¡°embraces a vision of lifelong education¡±.

¡°The White Paper is clear about the need for a 21st-century HE system designed not only as the culmination of young people¡¯s academic education, but as a provider of higher skills for working adults. Getting the balance right between these two aims is quite a challenge, but will be the key to success.¡±

But he warned that the methods for measuring teaching quality must take into account the reality of older part-time learners, adding: ¡°The danger is that the kind of measures currently used by the OfS are designed to evaluate traditional three-year degree courses, and will inadvertently penalise lifelong education providers.¡±

The QAA warned that tying fees to quality risks harming a provider¡¯s ability to address the problems identified, ¡°locking its students into a cycle of poor-quality provision¡±.

And Rachel Hewitt, chief executive of MillionPlus, said concerns remain around the limited ways available of measuring quality in higher education, which is generally based on ¡°lagged data and inappropriate proxies for teaching quality in particular¡±.

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com