17 May 2010
million+ submission to Browne Fees Review
The university think-tank million+ has submitted a report to Lord Browne’s Fees Review which uses an economic modelling tool developed by the international consultancy firm London Economics to assess alternative fees and funding systems for universities in England. The think-tank has said that the modelling tool will be made available to the Review team, the Treasury, BIS, (the Department with responsibility for universities) and MPs.
Pam Tatlow Chief Executive of million+ said: “The future of fees and the funding of universities in England needs to be based on a clear understanding of the economics and the consequences for students, graduates and universities of the different options which are being considered. We will make this modelling tool available to the Review team as well as to the Treasury, BIS and MPs.
“Our analysis confirms that a unified system of student support and funding could be created in England which would ensure that part-time undergraduate students were no longer disadvantaged. This would ensure that university was genuinely free at the point of study for all undergraduate students who were studying for a first degree whether they studied full or part-time. It would put England on a par with other countries with well-developed systems of student support which do not make distinctions between students based on mode of study. A single unfiled system would also incentivise flexible forms of learning which are likely to promote social mobility, innovation and participation in the future.
“The modelling also suggests that the support available to students while they are studying is an important component of delivering successful completion and participation. Other than putting full-time and part-time students on the same page, we recommend that no changes are made to student support.
“The analysis suggests that the current statutory bursary scheme is economically inefficient. These bursaries could be removed and, to avoid students being disadvantaged, fees could be reduced with the savings made by the Exchequer reinvested in the teaching grant and in the creation of over 800 additional student places.
“The modelling also shows that highly differentiated market-based systems would use public funding to create inequity in the unit of resource and would transfer resources to institutions with the most socially exclusive full-time student profiles.
“However, in the current financial climate, any new system must deliver a win-win situation for the Treasury and the taxpayers.
“Based on a single unified system of student support, we have reviewed the equity effects on real-life graduate profiles of amending the graduate contribution scheme. So long as loans continued to be provided by the state and match the maximum fee charged, some careful adjustments to the graduate contribution period and a small real rate of interest could deliver savings to the Exchequer of up to £1 billion per annum. This would be sufficient to defray the £600 million reduction in higher education funding identified in the 2009 Pre-Budget Report, provide funding for additional student numbers and additional resources for teaching.
“Such a model is likely to produce a fairer funding system for students, universities and the Exchequer. However, the new Government will also need to recognise that investment in students and universities is good for the UK and that students and graduates alone cannot be expected to meet any shortfall in higher education funding without damaging social mobility, participation and the trans-national higher education partnerships promoted by all universities with countries of strategic and economic significance to the UK.”
ENDS
Notes to Editors