Click on the advert above to visit the company web site

Product category: Building Trade Associations and Institutes
News Release from: Institution of Civil Engineering Surveyors | Subject: Comments on Government White Paper
Edited by the Buildingtalk Editorial Team on 28 May 2003

The Future of Higher Education

Comment On The Department For Education And Skills White Paper, The Future Of Higher Education by Robin Jones Finstces from ICES

Late in January, the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, Charles Clarke, launched the government's white paper 'The Future of Higher Education' Such has been the furore created by the national press over the deregulation of fees that much of the rest of the paper has been ignored

Even though student funding is an important issue this white paper is not simply about tuition fees or the funding of higher education in general; its underlying purpose is to bring about reform to make universities more open to more people.

Whilst the government seems to consider it packed to the brim with new ideas which will lay the foundation for our future national success, to the casual observer the 'new' strategy contains little which is innovative.

Since the early 1960s, when only 6% of under 21s went to university, attitudes have completely changed.

Elitism in education has been outlawed at all levels and the whole education system has been refocused on what seem to be lowest rather than highest common denominators.

Having some years ago reduced the quality of secondary education to new and advanced levels of mediocrity through the introduction of the comprehensive system, this paper is indicative, in many respects, of the government's intention to subject tertiary education to exactly the same treatment.

Currently 43% of 18 to 30 year olds in England enter higher education and government policy is focussed on raising this to 50% by the end of the decade.

Notwithstanding governmental assurances to the contrary higher education is set to become an automatic third stage in the education chain.

It is very difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the concept of universities as finishing schools with the very real industrial, professional and business demand for people educated to high and demanding standards in specific disciplines.

Whilst the paper constitutes, in my view, a missed opportunity to reform a system and structure which is crying out for radical treatment it would be wrong to condemn it out of hand.

To blame the government for all the major ills of the system would be wrong.

If the actions of the current party in government, in structuring its education policy almost entirely on the basis of social injustice, are questionable, then the actions of its predecessor, in starving the sector of funds for 18 years, is unforgivable.

These financial pressures (funding per student in universities fell 36% between 1989 and 1997) and a parallel lack of investment have contributed significantly to a fall off in teaching quality, resource levels and a lowering of standards generally.

Whilst we may have a few world class faculties or departments, it is a matter of debate whether we currently have any truly world class universities.

It is difficult to see how this situation will be improved by the proposal to allow the 'University' title to be awarded on the basis of taught degree awarding powers, student numbers and the range of subjects offered.

As a solution, the government is promising an increase in funding (6% above inflation) for the next three years, better teaching through the establishment of new national professional standards and is proposing to designate the best teaching departments as Centres of Excellence with enhanced funding levels.

Whether these measures will have the desired result remains to be seen, but I can hear the sceptics' cries of 'too little, too late' all too clearly.

Notwithstanding its stance on social injustice, the government argues that an expansion of higher education is necessary to benefit the economy's need for higher level skills.

At the same time, it embraces the philosophy that the pace of social and technological change means that education, including higher education, can no longer be confined to the early years of life.

"Today's generation of students", it concludes, "will need to return to learning - full time or part time - on more than one occasion across their lifetime in order to refresh their knowledge, upgrade their skills and sustain their employability." Lifelong learning implies a fundamental shift from the traditional 'one visit' approach to higher education to a process of continuous personal and professional development.

Armed with further evidence that the skills gap is, or will be, most acute at associate professional or higher technician level, the government has decided that shorter, more work-focused courses are the answer.

As a result, the main thrust of the proposals in the white paper relates to two-year foundation degrees and in making them the main work-focused higher education qualification.

These degrees will become the standard two-year qualification and HNCs and HNDs will be incorporated in the foundation degree framework.

The government intends these degrees to be both 'ends in their own right' and 'part of a coherent ladder of progression' to an honours degree.

Following the work-focused theme, the government has also unveiled plans for the development of vocational learning in schools in England.

This new strategy will see the cutting back of the curriculum for 14 to 19 year olds to allow pupils to follow vocational lessons.

An engineering pathway is included.

A number of other initiatives have been announced including an inquiry into whether there should be a switch (in England) to a baccalaureate system in lieu of the traditional A level.

The paper contains a number of other proposals including some designed to strengthen links between universities and business, some designed to increase investment in research facilities and some to improve academic and teaching resource levels.

It would be tempting to spend another few hundred words on the detail of the paper or, indeed, the government's other plans for English education.

I could for example point out that the 'coherent ladder of progression' principle has been working well at Nottingham Trent University for years as good HND diplomats transfer into the final year of the honours degree course.

On the other hand, I could spend sometime reminding the government that the skills` shortage in our industry and its professions is not restricted to associate professional, higher technician or even craft levels but I've already tried that with at least one backbencher and, it seems, failed.

Taking issue with the paper hardly ties its strategies to our own business where we have a major professional resource crisis.

Regardless of its implications across the board, its impact on the future of our profession is of great importance and we must decide whether it offers us help or hindrance.

On the surface, there is little comfort but underneath there may just be one or two opportunities for the future.

But how will it affect the Institution? Will it cause a problem? The Institution's academic requirements for membership and the content and quality of its examination syllabus and accredited degree and diploma courses have all been established within national academic criteria as well as industrial and professional demands.

Changes in any of these will have an impact on our own thinking.

As a result, it very much looks as if the Institution's Education, Training and Membership Committee will be forced into another review of the Institution's academic baselines.

The Institution has always accepted cognate HNDs and HNCs as meeting part of the academic requirement for membership.

The replacement of these, on a like for like basis, by two-year cognate and nationally regulated foundation degrees would not be difficult.

The white paper, however, introduces three factors that will complicate matters.

These are: i.

The allowing of universities to decide the arrangements for progression from a foundation degree to an honours degree on a local level.

ii.

Foundation degrees to be 'work and business' focussed and to be designed in conjunction with employers.

iii.

The establishment of a new national network of universities - "Foundation Degree Forward" - to offer a dedicated validation service for foundation degrees and to liaise with sector skills councils and professional bodies.

The government is keen for colleges of further education to play a significant role in delivering foundation degrees.

This makes sense as they already provide 11% of higher education, most of which is in the form of two year programmes.

Nevertheless, leaving local colleges and universities to decide for themselves the transition criteria from foundation to honours level will mean greater precision and much more work in our accreditation procedures.

Similarly, lack of uniformity will lead to greater monitoring levels and an increase in our work as external examiners.

Whether the 'Foundation Degree Forward' initiative proves to be a positive or negative element remains to be seen but more of that later.

In changing the university title awarding criteria the government is promoting its vision of a higher education sector which recognises and values universities as having different core missions.

Hitherto, universities have been expected to award both taught and research degrees but the government now suggests that this is unreasonable.

As a consequence, the government will, in future, recognise the differences between universities as each is encouraged to define and implement its own particular mission.

It follows that some will become research intensive and others will concentrate on taught degrees.

Both missions will be given equal status, and funded equally by government.

Regardless of the government's view, it is almost inevitable that these differences will lead to discrimination between the teaching and the research-based universities.

It will be interesting to see how the market reacts and which universities end up as 'top dogs'.

Whilst the quality of teaching and, indeed, the facilities of the university departments teaching Institution accredited courses has always been important, teaching excellence is now going to become a priority.

Whilst this will cause the Institution more work in vetting departments it should lead to better standards and greater student satisfaction.

Teaching quality has always played second fiddle to research excellence in higher education and the government's expressed intention to underpin reform by supporting improvements in teaching quality is welcomed.

Of even more interest to the teachers, however, will be the promise of new funds for pay modernisation and to reward teaching excellence.

Is it a challenge? The most important challenge facing the Institution is growth.

Growth is dependent on the health of the industry, the need for our skills and qualities and attracting young people into the business.

In the last ten years the industry has changed significantly.

Even though work levels have remained fairly high, the business has been undergoing a major professional resource crisis.

We are currently producing less than half of the resources we need from home institutions and young people have little interest in developing a career in an industry which they regard, for all sorts of reasons, as beyond the pale.

As a consequence of this and a regime of tight funding, universities have reduced capacity and many engineering and other related vocational first-degree courses have been dropped.

In some cases whole departments have been closed.

Unable to find graduates, employers are turning to other solutions including importing resources from abroad and introducing or expanding competency, rather than academically, based in house training schemes.

In this climate, the white paper hardly presents a challenge.

Nor, regrettably, does it offer a solution.

The introduction of two-year foundation degrees for reasons of social justice will not, of itself, provide quality resources in the numbers needed.

Strangely enough though, the Minister for Higher Education, Margaret Hodge, has recently gone on record in confirming the government's concern at the demise of so many vocational honours degree courses.

The disappearance of those in physics and engineering is causing particular concern and the government is looking at ways of encouraging the universities to redress the balance through subsidy (from the additional tuition fees they can charge).

I won't be holding my breath.

Will you? Are there opportunities? Whether this white paper meets with full approval or not, it would be unwise for the Institution to discount it.

If the Institution is to grow it must remain relevant.

The Institution has always been close to both industry and the academic institutions.

Its first examination syllabus and its early degree courses reflected the skills demanded by industry rather than those dictated by the profession.

This policy still underwrites much of the Institution's education and training business.

Through its accreditation procedures the Institution monitors the performance of academic houses teaching the accredited courses and, as a consequence, has become especially close to one or two.

Several senior members of the Institution have served as external examiners or fulfilled other roles in a number of these universities and colleges.

During the past ten years or more, the training programmes of a number of major employers have been approved and representatives of several of those companies are fully active within the Institution.

Most recently, the Institution has opened its Technical Member grade and admits people to membership at NVQ level 3 or equivalent.

As we start the 21st century, we are moving away from strict academic achievement to competency and competencies.

The ability to pass examinations is no longer held to be indicative of likely success in the work place and for this industry, perhaps, this change in philosophy is likely to cut right across more traditional, professional values.

The industry must resolve its own difficulties and decide whether it needs to employ people from any background capable of producing high quality, innovative and good value work or people who have simply satisfied some purely academic criteria which may have little relevance to the job in hand.

Whilst we may not like the idea of two-year foundation degrees they are at the forefront of the government's strategy for higher education.

Working with and on behalf of industry, and with the universities forming 'Foundation Degree Forward', the paper presents an opportunity for the Institution to develop and accredit a national foundation degree course for both disciplines of civil engineering surveying in England.

There are other opportunities too.

At present, there are no nationally recognised standards for teachers in higher education.

Indeed, many of those who are teaching at this level have never received any formal training at all.

New national teaching standards are to be agreed by 2004 -2005 through the new teaching quality academy.

At the same time as the government is seeking improvement in teaching standards, the QAA, which has been the main assuring body for academic standards and teaching hitherto, has changed its role.

The new process requires the institutions themselves to have proper systems for assuring quality and standards.

These will be the subject of independent external review and institutions will be expected to publish details.

The government also intends to strengthen the role of external examiners not least by insisting that summaries of their judgements are published and that the examiners themselves are properly trained and supported.

External examiners carry out a critical role in advising institutions on the comparability of their standards and, in the government's eyes, they act as the 'guardians of the public purse and the reputation of the whole sector'.

A national development programme for external examiners will also be established.

Several members of the Institution already hold external examinerships and opportunities will arise for the Institution to widen its role.

The desire that higher education be delivered in colleges of further education will enhance the ability of some students to study locally.

The government is looking for structured partnerships between colleges and universities for the delivery of foundation degrees.

This should allow for wider relationships to be developed between our regional organisations and local colleges, particularly where they are teaching Institution accredited courses.

Much of the strategy covering links between higher education and business falls in the context of the exchange and development of knowledge and skills.

Knowledge sharing, the government argues, is fundamental to our economic competitiveness and to improvements in the quality of life.

Good business links, it says, should also play a part in tackling the low skill levels that hold back national productivity.

Although the Higher Education Innovation Fund and other specific schemes have already improved these links much more needs to be done.

To this end, the government is proposing that universities and colleges, on the basis that they are key economic and cultural drivers, should increasingly be imbedded in their regional economies and closely linked with their Regional Development Agencies.

In addition, the new Sector Skills Councils are being required to develop stronger alliances between business in their sectors and the appropriate departments in higher education institutions for course development and marketing purposes and to involve employers in the delivery of learning.

It is important that the Institution makes its presence felt in this new scheme of things.

Through its existing links with employers, the universities and the CITB (which is about to become the Construction Sector Skills Council) it can bring a lot to the party.

Food for thought? Fifteen years ago or so, the Institution established its very first bespoke degree and diploma courses.

We were very pleased with ourselves.

In those days, we had two narrowly based but parallel disciplines in which the respective skill requirements were relatively easy to define.

Since then the structure and nature of our industry has changed almost beyond recognition.

The Institution has grown in size and widened its base.

Universities have grown in size and many more have been created.

National vocational qualifications have arrived and the industry is currently implementing CSCS certification for the whole of its work force.

Regulation and legislation in all respects are increasing and all those working in the industry are learning new skills on a regular basis.

Nowadays, we offer membership to people from 14 specialisms within our two disciplines.

We have seven pathways to corporate membership, four academically based and three based on practical achievement.

We accredit 16 different first and second degree level courses in 14 different universities or colleges here and abroad? The Institution will accommodate the government's white paper - it has little choice - but the real challenge remains because whilst the strategies set down in this paper may hold the present, they are unlikely to secure the future.

Implementation of the strategy will begin in September 2003.

Reference: Department for Education and Skills: The Future of Higher Education.

• Institution of Civil Engineering Surveyors: contact details and other news
• Email this article to a colleague
• Register for the free Buildingtalk email newsletter
• Buildingtalk Home Page

Search the Pro-Talk network of sites

Put your news on Buildingtalk  |   Advertise  |   Get the free Buildingtalk newsletter  |   Buildingtalk Home
About Buildingtalk  |   Copyright © 2000-2008 Pro-Talk Ltd, UK