An article published today in the Guardian has highlighted the real challenge the Government and the HE sector face in ensuring continued access to HE. Whatever your opinion on the politics around HE funding, and indeed whatever the new ‘HE market’ landscape will look like in 2012, we are faced with the fact that fees will be higher across the sector.
But articles like the one published today, and the rhetoric of debt in constant use by anti-cuts protestors and indeed Her Majesty’s Opposition are having a real impact on prospective students and parents in lower-income families. Of course those of us involved in Higher Education know that this perception is wrong – paying graduate contributions does not represent a debt in the same way as that of a credit card, for example it won’t affect mortgage applications etc, and indeed higher education will be free at the point of use in terms of fees.
The real financial challenge for students and those who support them during their time at university will be managing the ever-increasing cost of living, not tuition fees. We will therefore need to ensure students are aware of all the options open to them in terms of financial support, and make this clear to them. This, of course, will be a key consideration in shaping the new Access Agreements and the National Scholarship Programme – fee waivers may be better for the Treasury, but for individual students it will be bursaries and scholarships that make a real financial difference.
Don’t get me wrong – I think what the Coalition Government is doing to HE is a shambles. But we will soon have to accept our situation, and as a sector we have a responsibility to ensure all prospective students and their parents have accurate information about the new fees system and how it will affect them, so that they can make an informed decision about whether or not to apply to university.
The real challenge: providing accurate information as a sector, and reshaping public opinion (especially among those from lower-income backgrounds) before applications for 2012 open.
Really good post James, completely agree with you.
This is why the rumoured preference of fee waivers over bursaries by the government makes no sense. That said, finance isn’t just the answer.
I think the engagement process needs to be seriously considered as well. The regular attacks at Oxbridge don’t always add up as many young students don’t realise what is on offer. This means that they may end up not applying despite being qualified.
I know some of the work Oxford is doing to widen participation and think that the events they run and the engagement policy they have should be considered just as beneficial a WP measure as the financial packages.
Agree with you on the perception issue James – a well written point!
As ever, the biggest obstacle facing social mobility is not the actual finances but the views of parents who have not been to university and young people who are in fear of colossal debt due to opposition and activist rhetoric.
Regardless of your view on fees, you are absolutely right, there comes a time when we need to accept the situation and move on.
Newell is also right in his challenge on WP activities – how they are scrutinised and assessed for impact by OFFA will prove crucial in helping to lure scared potential applicants back into the system.
James – great post. The difficulty for people against the reforms is to articulate their opposition without undermining widening participation (if they support WP that is). I’m not in that position, but for those that are, perhaps they should be trying to bring together a coalition of people to argue for stronger central Government support in advance of the next spending review, whilst at the same time advocating the benefits of the student support system.