Many of the complaints that the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) sees have arisen because a student’s personal circumstances meant that they couldn’t fully engage with their studies within the confines of an academic year.
We believe that more flexible routes, including Lifelong Learning Entitlement (LLE), could reduce some of the challenges students experience and the complaints which stem from them. We know that many students who might need to change their plans once they have begun a course of study don’t bring a complaint to the OIA.
But every year we also receive a small number of complaints from students who have experienced a difficult transfer process. Today we have published ten case summaries and a casework note on “student transfer” highlighting some of the issues students have faced. They illustrate the personal factors that may be relevant to whether a student can make use of a transfer opportunity.
We have seen that a student’s ability to change study location, even if the alternative location is a comparatively small distance away, can depend on the availability of public transport, any additional travel costs they may incur or their need to minimise travel time because of caring or employment responsibilities. Relocating further afield can throw up additional challenges around exiting an accommodation contract or finding somewhere new to live.
Clear information is essential
When a student has made an individual decision to change their planned route of study, it is important that their current provider offers them appropriate advice and guidance, enabling them to make as informed a choice as possible. We have seen complaints from students who have not realised until too late that transferring will have a significant impact on their access to loan funding or bursaries or affect how an existing fee debt is managed.
The current provider also has a role to play in providing accurate and timely information that a receiving provider needs, for example to enable reasonable adjustments and personal support to be put in place or to properly advise the student about any recognition of prior learning (RPL).
In our experience, the terminology and processes around RPL can be confusing, and not all providers’ regulations currently allow for it. Some of the complaints we review have arisen because students, and those who advise them, assumed that all potential receiving providers would follow the same decision-making processes as their current provider. Providers may wish to consider whether their current practice is consistently applied, clearly documented and easy to explain to prospective students. This may be particularly important for providers working in partnerships who should be the first port of call for students if this partnership ends.
We often see that students need to make decisions about transfer in a short timescale and may need help in managing the stress this may cause. Student representative bodies can be a valuable source of independent support. In addition, the impact on student wellbeing is likely to be greater where the transfer is not something they initiated.
Smooth transfers require careful planning
In discussions about the current financial climate and market exit scenarios it’s often suggested that students will simply “transfer” to another provider at speed as the only alternative to continue their studies. Our casework to date, as well as our experience of the closure of GSM, indicates that even the process of identifying options for transfer that might suit the majority of students is not straightforward.
Course mapping, ensuring academic records are up to date and working through RPL processes under the pressure of a market exit, is a lengthier, more resource-intensive and more complicated process than is always anticipated. Providers facilitating transfers of this nature will need to pay careful attention to students’ rights as consumers, both in terms of what they originally expected to receive, and in terms of the obligation to provide clear information about what they are now being offered as a transfer opportunity.
We understand that following the OfS’ call for “bold and transformative action” many providers are considering a range of plans which may include a managed course closure or teach out.
We have addressed some of these issues and points to consider in our specific resources for closure of courses, campus or provider. In common with our general approach to casework and remedy, our view is that students should not be left in a less favourable position because of something a provider has done or not done, that was not what the student had reasonably been led to expect would happen. Where providers have chosen to close a course before their current cohorts have reached the expected end, we will take a holistic view of the impact on the student in any complaints we receive. We welcome conversations with providers considering these options to explore how to address students’ concerns.
Resourcing student support
We have significant concerns about the quality of support and guidance that may be available to students in the event of a whole provider closure. For example, where a provider becomes insolvent, the duty on administrators is to maximise the value of the company’s assets while protecting the interests of creditors, not to address the support needs of students. As we have previously written about, most large providers would not have the option of an administration and will go straight into liquidation leaving even fewer options for students.
We hope our case summaries and casework note will help inform discussions around the development of policy and practicalities in respect of LLE and market exit. We think an increased focus on flexibility and clear processes for transfer necessary for the implementation of LLE will ultimately benefit students.
In the meantime, we remain of the view that there should be some funding available to allow students to continue their studies without being disadvantaged in the event of a closure. The process of identifying and arranging transfer opportunities, and providing accurate, timely and customised advice for students requires resource. Where a provider becomes insolvent it’s unclear where, without funding, that would come from.
