jump to navigation

24 Nov – Times Higher Education – Listen to the heart November 28, 2011

Posted by AaronPorter in Higher Education, Tuition Fees.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Times Higher Education, 24 November 2011

Listen to the heart

Aaron Porter says that in a high-fees world, the sector must do more to involve an increasingly diverse student body in decision-making

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=418207&c=1

Listen to the heart

Credit: Elly Walton

Today, it seems, there is barely a consultation paper or university strategy that does not refer to the importance of “student engagement”. But for all the talk, how effectively does the academy engage with students? Has it merely become adept at paying lip service to the idea?

It is often observed that since the introduction of tuition fees, students increasingly have asked what they will get for their money. The Labour government’s response was to introduce numerous initiatives for student engagement, including student juries, a national forum and even a minister for students. The usefulness of each, however, was questionable – and all were axed by the coalition when it came to power.

The emphasis on student engagement has grown for other reasons, too. One imperative has been the move from an elite to a mass higher education system and the consequent need for universities to involve students other than full-time, 18-21-year-old undergraduates. This has led to an important shift in activity by the National Union of Students.

I know from my time as NUS president that its emphasis on student engagement – built on a sound evidence base – has played a considerable role in ensuring a credible and more mature student contribution to national debate. It has also supported students’ unions to do much the same at the institutional level.

When universities are asked how they engage with students, they are quick to point to committees with student representation, and to students’ unions that have been consulted in their decision-making.

But whether these structures genuinely reach beyond traditional full-time students is questionable. And for all the consultation that takes place, do students really have a greater influence than they did decades ago?

I am not convinced. There has undoubtedly been progress, but it has been too slow and too constrained. Far too many universities are still content to have a handful of students on their committees and a staff-student liaison meeting once a month.

Relying on committees does not cut the mustard. Often the students who attend these meetings have the time to do so because they do not need part-time jobs and don’t have caring responsibilities. How are part-time students or distance learners being involved? The overwhelming majority of student representatives are still drawn from a narrow pool.

Nationally, the same accusations can be made. The political parties and the higher education sector waxed lyrical about the importance of student engagement when the groundwork was being laid to increase tuition fees. But there was more than a whiff of double standards when formal student representation was left off the terms of reference for the Browne Review.

And while sector bodies such as the Quality Assurance Agency and the UK funding councils have made huge strides in recent years – many adding student members to their boards – the documents and reports they produce remain impenetrable to those who are not higher education policy experts.

Will the changes being introduced next autumn really lead to a more “student-focused” higher education system? The answer here is perhaps the most dispiriting. I do not believe for one second that the title of the higher education White Paper means what it says – unless you think that being at the “heart of the system” means giving students a bit more information (not provided by the government, of course, but left to others) while demanding a hugely increased financial contribution from them.

Universities must do more to open up their books and to involve students in decision-making and strategic planning. It is great to see that the University of Exeter has created a budget scrutiny committee jointly chaired by the university’s registrar and its Students’ Guild president. This committee will oversee where Exeter’s additional tuition-fee money will be spent. It actually grants real decision-making power to students, rather than giving them leave to offer views that may or may not be taken on board.

After all, the only way we can make the reformed system work – and truly place students at the heart of the system – is if universities and students’ unions work together. The responsibility lies at the door of both organisations to ensure that students’ diverse voices are heard. Excuses to ignore them are wearing thin.

Thur 11 Aug: First or Fail – Newcastle College Group & New College Durham and Carol Vorderman August 11, 2011

Posted by AaronPorter in First or Fail, Higher Education.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

First or Fail: Newcastle College Group & New College Durham and Carol Vorderman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2011/aug/11/newcastle-durham-college-carol-vorderman

Carol Vorderman

Could this be Carol Vorderman’s first Fail? Vorderman’s new maths taskforce has launched to little fanfare and some criticism. Photograph: Karla Cote/PA

Aaron Porter gives his verdict on who has had a good week (heading for a first) and who has had a bad week (heading for a fail).

Heading for a First… Newcastle College Group and New College Durham

Both the Newcastle College Group (NCG) and New College Durham got the thumbs up from the Quality Assurance Agency this week to start awarding their own foundation degrees, which is just a step away from full taught degree awarding powers.

In an environment where increasingly discerning prospective students will be pickier than ever before, particularly toward the bulk of institutions that have raced to £9,000 per year, more competition at the lower end of the price spectrum will be welcomed by many students, and, of course, the treasury. Students now face greater competition for both the types of institution on offer, but also a broader range of prices. As for the treasury, it will desperately cling to the hope that new providers from the further education and private sectors will enter to offer degrees significantly below the current average price – otherwise the £1bn blackhole still looms ahead.

NCG’s higher education tuition fees are set at £5,800 from 2012, which is likely to look appealing compared with many institutions that have headed straight for £9,000. Of course, the idea that some students may now feel forced to choose their higher education institution by price may be exactly what the government intended all along, but surely the choice of what and where to study should be based on academic content and the student experience, not a price tag.

Heading for a Fail… Carol Vorderman

She is no longer the numbers whiz on Countdown, or the face of much-maligned debt consolidation company First Plus. In fact, this week Carol Vorderman’s taskforce on mathematics teaching, commissioned by the Conservatives, was greeted with little fanfare, and indeed criticism from some quarters. While other news this week understandably drowned most of the press coverage she may otherwise have anticipated, it was also a lack of credible solutions for improving maths standards in the UK.

Her main recommendations included the introduction of two new GCSEs; one to focus on basic numeracy, and a second to focus on more complex mathematics. She also wanted maths education to be compulsory through to age 18, and for higher education institutions to make greater demands on entry requirements for maths and other STEM subjects. While some in the maths community welcomed the report, those in other disciplines said it failed to make the case for why maths should be given precedence over literacy, IT skills or a language.

So far the recommendation to raise the age of compulsory maths education to 18 has been dismissed by education secretary Michael Gove, but the other recommendations are still under consideration.

Sadly, like so many other commissions, I suspect this will be another that is kicked deep into the long grass. At least if Vorderman were a contestant on Countdown, she’d have got a consolation goodie prize.