By Joe Rukin
Whilst undergraduates are showing an average of 82% continuing their studies each year, participation rates at Britains top universities are still way below where the government want them. Participation is set to become a hot-potato in the funding debate, with Charles like likely to allow universities to charge top-up fees at the price of having a "access regulator" to ensure that universities meet their obligations to take more youngsters from disadvantaged backgrounds.
A better 'mix' of classes became a big part of the education 'plan' a few weeks ago when Charles Clarke said it was more important than hitting their much touted 50% target. Strangely, Clarke does not think that the proposal to charge the most disadvantaged 40% of students fees, where they do not have to pay them now, will be a disincentive even if the pay after graduation, nor evidently giving top universities the option to charge them an extra three grand a year. Clarke has however realized that upfront fees deter poorer students. Hang on, the poorest 40% don't pay any fees, so what the hell is he on about here?;
"It is the up-front fee that is the most serious disincentive to people from poor backgrounds coming in to universities. The question of whether paying at all further down the line is also a disincentive is a less clear-cut issue."
Well who knows but he does evidently think that paying nothing is less of an incentive than paying top-up fees;
" I don't think variable fees as such is a disincentive for people from poorer backgrounds unless the level of fee that is created in some institutions is so high that the debt effect starts to become serious."
Well there's a man who knows what he's talking about. A man who thinks that the real reason students decide they can't afford to go to a rich university is the attitudes of universities, which are often a "big barrier" to less well-off students entering higher education. Anyway the plan is that universities will be allowed to set their own fees, letting the Russell Group charge premium rates- well upto £3k/year extra it seems at the moment. The thing is that these Universities are only going to able to charge extra fees if they satisfy the "access regulator" that they are doing their best to find more students from working class backgrounds. Unless this were to be by the universities not charging them top-up fees or through bursaries pay their normal fees that doesn't sound like an achievable goal.
Currently working class entries to elite universities have stayed low despite the drive by government to widen access to higher education. Of the 19 institutions in the Russell Group, only eight increased their percentage of students from the families of skilled manual, semi-skilled or unskilled workers in 2000-01, with none of them touching the national average of 25% working class students.
Further bad news for Clarke on this score is a survey from Unite housing which comes out tommorrow. According to them one in three students say they would not have opted for their first choice university if it had charged top-up fees. In all, 72% would have rethought their decision to some degree. The support for what seem to be the current proposals was virtually non-existent, with 7% wanting graduate tax,t 5% wanting higher tuition fees for all and 4% wanting all universities to charge top-up fees.
It is rumoured that the decision to include an "access regulator" is a move to appease chancellor Gordon Brown. Who had wanted to block the plans for top-up fees until universities has proved they are providing better access for working-class students. Brown is determined to enforce modernisation on the universities, including better management practices and financial controls. He does not believe the universities can cope with a big injection of cash which might be "frittered away" on pay.
Universities will have to apply to the regulator for permission to increase fees, which will only be allowed if they presenting a strategy for improving access. Mr Clarke said the regulator would force some universities to "change their behaviour significantly".
The Tories have blasted the plan for a regulator, with Shadow Education Secretary, Damian Green saying
"It cuts away at academic freedom. Universities are supposed to be independent institutions and it’s unfair. There will be children who work hard for their A levels expecting to get to university who are the told by the regulator that their face does not fit."
Funding Special
Top-Up fees via Grad Tax, what a surprise!
Not to say we told you so!
Another 'Huge Victory'- NUS
No Postgrads- coming soon to a uni near you
Participation watchdog to come
Why not GATS?
Mature Students want balanced funding
Straw Strikes Back
NUS National Demo against something....
Step up the offensive
Has NUS acknowledged Graduate Tax?
Other Links
Telegraph, Graduates 'could face 30 years debt'
Times,
Plans to control university access 'a disgrace'
Times, Pricing out the poor student
Guardian, Top-up fees 'will alter choices of university'
Guardian, Figures show student growth down by half
Guardian, Clarke tones down pledge on university entrants
Guardian, Clarke promises entrance regulator for universities
Guardian, Brown veto on plan for top-up fees
Guardian, Universities could set own fees, says Clarke
Guardian, Top universities still failing working class
BBC, State school pupils in university
IC Liverpool, Universities must take more poorer students, warns Clarke
Independent, PM overrules Brown to allow top-up student fees
