{"id":231,"date":"2020-07-23T14:49:33","date_gmt":"2020-07-23T13:49:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/?p=231"},"modified":"2020-07-24T14:13:46","modified_gmt":"2020-07-24T13:13:46","slug":"what-next-for-he-after-the-pandemic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/2020\/07\/23\/what-next-for-he-after-the-pandemic\/","title":{"rendered":"What next for HE (after the pandemic)?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This post by Jane Forster of Bournemouth University reuses material prepared for internal use and represents her own views and not those of BU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It focusses on HE policy specifically, and therefore doesn&#8217;t address the extremely important matters that are facing all organisations at the moment, such as the equality and diversity agenda including race, gender, disability and disadvantage, the environment and sustainability, and health and wellbeing, with mental health as well as the many issues arising from the pandemic being high on everyone&#8217;s priority list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Having put aside those (monumental) questions, here is the blog, which seeks to set out a brief summary of government and OfS positions on a long list of HE policy matters and to look forward to the Autumn, with some trepidation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Government focus on educational quality<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Although it is a slippery thing to prove, the\ngovernment are convinced that there are some poor quality institutions and some\ntruly dreadful individual courses out there.&nbsp;\n&nbsp;<\/li><li>This from the recent restructuring document is the\nbiggest warning yet \u201c<strong>Public funding for courses that do not deliver for\nstudents will be reassessed.<\/strong>\u201d<\/li><li>Measures of quality they are using consistently in all\nrecent announcements are <strong>graduate employment outcomes and continuation<\/strong>.&nbsp; Gavin Williamson recently said the only point\nof a degree was if it got you a good job.&nbsp;\nAnd on continuation, they are worried that drop-outs means they have\nwasted student loan subsidy and that they imply poor student experience and\ncourse quality.&nbsp; And interestingly they rarely\nmention any other metrics.&nbsp; <\/li><li>Everything is focussed on courses supporting economic\nand societal need, i.e. STEM and healthcare and teaching.&nbsp; Expect a strong anti-humanities feel in\npolicy developments.&nbsp; In their view these\ncourses do not \u201clead\u201d to productive careers in enough cases. &nbsp;Value for money now clearly defined in terms\nof the taxpayer.&nbsp; (Student value is\naddressed by looking at graduate outcomes).<\/li><li>They are concerned about duplication \u2013 they are willing\nto have courses replaced by lower level courses including provided by FE colleges\ninstead to replace university provision.<\/li><li>\u201c<em>it is probable that the sector in 2030 will not\nlook the same as it does now<\/em>\u201d<\/li><li>Oh \u2013 and just because they haven\u2019t mentioned it for a\nwhile, don\u2019t forget that degree outcomes data will be a stick to beat the sector\nwith if there is an on-going grade inflation story.&nbsp; This is not over. With new UUK guidance out\nin July this is a story that will run again soon, especially in the context of\nno detriment policies.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Government focus on technical\neducation <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>This big new agenda may mean that there is less money\navailable for universities, which may have implications for tuition fees and\nOfS grants.<\/li><li>There may be incentives for universities to do more\nlevel 4 and 5, especially in collaboration with colleges and schools. &nbsp;We should at least look at our partnerships.<\/li><li>Degree apprenticeships seem to have fallen out of\nfavour.<\/li><li>Part-time learning is back in vogue \u2013 the Minister\nhinted that in their response to Augar the government will look at funding\nbite-size learning and she also wants universities to provide more courses.<\/li><li>This sits alongside the big focus on jobs and skills in\nthe July mini-budget<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Government focus on the regions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>The new blue wall is of course a massive priority.&nbsp; But even outside the North they want\nuniversities to focus on local economic needs.<\/li><li>&nbsp;This is\nconsistent with the previous government\u2019s focus on \u201cplace\u201d in the Industrial\nStrategy (not something they talk about much now) but the principles are very\nsimilar.&nbsp; To deliver on jobs, productivity\nand \u201clevelling up\u201d, universities need to be strongly tied to their regions and\ndoing the things that make a difference there.&nbsp;\n<\/li><li>This from the restricting document is a clear policy\nstatement: \u201cProviders will need to examine whether they can enhance their\nregional focus.\u201d.&nbsp; And make no mistake,\nthat means technical education if that is what your region needs.<\/li><li>They are still worried about \u201ccold spots\u201d.&nbsp; They are also likely to worry about rural\nprovision and blended models offer a solution to this \u2013 is this an opportunity\nnow that we have tackled blended?<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Government focus on\n\u201chigh quality\u201d and \u201cstrategic\u201d research<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Linked to productivity and regional economic success,\nthere is a big focus on the \u201cright sort\u201d of research.&nbsp; We will continue to see a focus on industry\nled rather than university led projects and a downturn in funding for\nhumanities and social sciences research.<\/li><li>The R&amp;D roadmap announced in July 2020 repeats the\ncommitment to R&amp;D investment of 2.4% by 2027 and public investment will be\n\u00a322bn by 20204\/25 \u2013 the rest comes from industry.&nbsp; Lots of references to diversity, bureaucracy,\nunhealthy work cultures, over-dependence on the Golden Triangle.&nbsp; Oh, and \u201cmoonshots\u201d and an \u201cOffice for\nTalent\u201d. Linked to points mentioned above, there will be a new R&amp;D Place\nStrategy.&nbsp; ARPA also features. Promised\nreview of QR and a look at full economic cost.<\/li><li>The recent restructuring document suggests restructured\nuniversities would need to \u201cfocus resources on scientific research that is:\ninternationally excellent (\u2018three star\u2019) or higher, or else of direct and\ndemonstrable value to the national economy or to the local and regional\nbusiness community\u201d.&nbsp; This as with the\nrest of that document, sets the tone.<\/li><li>It looks less and less likely that the UK will be part\nof Horizon 2020 under Brexit arrangements.&nbsp;\nIf we won\u2019t the government will have a lot of money to spend within the\nUK but they will probably let it follow \u201cquality\u201d with a nod to regional\ndisparities.&nbsp; That means the North.&nbsp; They will almost certainly focus it on STEM,\nand it will also be influenced by who does well in the KEF.&nbsp; The KEF documentation is clear that it will\nin the future influence who gets the cash.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Government focus on levelling up\ndoes not mean increasing access to HE.&nbsp; <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Those students from disadvantaged groups who are at\nuniversity still have to be supported to succeed.<\/li><li>But we may see an abandonment of access targets \u2013 or we\nmay not.&nbsp; The statements are inconsistent\nand confusing.&nbsp; The government may be\nhappy to see the sector commit to and deliver access targets but may not\nmandate them or require the OfS to mandate them any more.&nbsp; Or they may continue to mandate targets but\ntargets to increase the proportion of disadvantaged students in overall lower\nor flat student numbers.<\/li><li>Worth noting in this context although it\u2019s a more\ngeneral points \u2013 student number controls may be here to stay.&nbsp; Given all the other rhetoric, there will be a\nstrong temptation to extend or replace the covid arrangements with something\nlonger lasting.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Government focus on fairness and\nchoice<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Consistent with the previous administration, there is\nan on-going focus on these things.&nbsp; However,\nthis government may go further by pushing hard on post-qualification admissions\nand using the issue of complaints linked to Covid-19 to push harder on student\nprotection, student rights to information, complaints and fee refunds.&nbsp; They do not like offer making practices, university\nmarketing or clearing and they are convinced that there is mis-selling.&nbsp; The OfS has declared war on unconditional\noffers, for similar reasons.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>And don\u2019t forget these other things\nthat have not gone away<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>The restructuring regime refers to <strong>senior executive pay and freedom of speech<\/strong> (an old chestnut, that).&nbsp; And has a <strong>dig about student unions <\/strong>(funding \u201cniche campaigns\u201d instead of working for all students). &nbsp;<\/li><li>The restructuring regime also makes a thing about <strong>bureaucracy and cost efficiency<\/strong>.&nbsp; <ul><li>The last time bureaucracy came up was when they attacked EU research bidding processes as part of the Brexit discussions, announced they were dropping impact statements in UK bidding and then quietly admitted they were just moving them to another bit of the form.&nbsp; <\/li><\/ul><ul><li>It is unclear what new bee they have in their bonnet but anyone applying for the restructuring funding may need to demonstrate the leanness of their professional services functions and internal processes, or at least show that they are willing to tackle them once restructured.&nbsp; <\/li><\/ul><ul><li>The bee may be marketing spend &#8211; the OfS have been very critical of marketing spend and it is also noted in recent ministerial speeches.&nbsp; We might expect some tough questions about marketing and recruitment costs specifically as well as general pressure on publishing our spend to students in an accessible way (remember that issue \u2013 hasn\u2019t gone away either).<\/li><\/ul><\/li><li>In this context it is also worth mentioning <strong>accelerated degrees<\/strong> because they haven\u2019t forgotten about those either and they could be part of a future \u201cefficiency\u201d drive.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>What\u2019s next:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>KEF \u2013 submissions due in October.<\/li><li>Conclusion of the Post-18 Review at the Spending Review this Autumn.&nbsp; Will it include differential fees?&nbsp; Will it include student number controls, either direct ones or indirect via limiting access to student loans for certain \u201clow value\u201d subjects, or for some \u201clow quality\u201d universities?&nbsp; Will they cap fees at \u201ccost\u201d as discussed in Augar to stop cross subsidisation by low cost subjects?<\/li><li>Outcome of the Pearce Review of the TEF.&nbsp; Expect subject level TEF to be firmly back on the agenda, and a new TEF to have teeth \u2013highly likely to be used (at subject level) in whatever the Post-18 review outcome is.&nbsp; <\/li><li>If the TEF doesn\u2019t do it, the OfS will through licence conditions \u2013 they announced a long time ago a plan for \u201ccontinuous improvement\u201d and \u201cmoving baselines\u201d \u2013 expect tougher steps from the OfS once the present distractions have been mitigated a bit.<\/li><li>OfS restarting their admissions review \u2013 either that or government green or white paper will pre-empt it (as it isn\u2019t really within the OfS\u2019s gift anyway).&nbsp; <\/li><li>Don\u2019t expect the OfS to go soft on APPs.&nbsp; And differential outcomes (as seen in the TEF data) will become even more important.&nbsp; And degree outcomes.&nbsp; So quality and consistency are key.<\/li><li>REF submissions next Spring.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Good luck everyone!  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This post by Jane Forster of Bournemouth University reuses material prepared for internal use and represents her own views and not those of BU. It focusses on HE policy specifically, and therefore doesn&#8217;t address the extremely important matters that are facing all organisations at the moment, such as the equality and diversity agenda including race, &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/2020\/07\/23\/what-next-for-he-after-the-pandemic\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;What next for HE (after the pandemic)?&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,2,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-231","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-he_general","category-policy","category-soapbox"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=231"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":233,"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231\/revisions\/233"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=231"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=231"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lighthousepolicygroup.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=231"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}