House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills Committee The Future of Higher Education This is a volume of submissions relevant to the inquiry ‘The Future of Higher Education, which have been reported to the House. Only those submissions written specifically for the Committee have been included. List of written evidence 1 Alliance of Sector Skills Council 2 Association of Colleges 3 Association of Colleges: Supplementary written evidence 4 Association of Teachers and Lecturers 5 British Accreditation Council 6 British Accreditation Council: Supplementary written evidence 7 Campaign for the Public University 8 Chartered Society of Designers 9 Dr Mike Clugston 10 Craft Council 11 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills 12 Economics Network, Bristol University 13 Economics Network, Bristol University: Further written evidence 14 Edge Foundation 15 ESRI UK Ltd 16 Geological Society of London 17 GuildeHE 18 Higher Education Academy 19 Institute of Physics 20 Lifelong Learning Networks 21 London Economics 22 London School of Business & Finance 23 Lord Browne of Madingley 24 Million+ Million+ − Supplementary 25 Mixed Economy Group 26 Mixed Economy Group and 157 Group: Supplementary written evidence 27 National Union of Students (NUS) 28 National Union of Students (NUS): Supplementary written evidence 29 Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education in England and Wales (OIA) 30 Open College of the Arts 31 Open University 32 Open University: Further written evidence 33 Oxford University Campaign for Higher Education 34 Professor Nicholas Barr 35 Professor Nicholas Barr: Supplementary written evidence 36 Professor Roger Brown 37 Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 38 Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education: Supplementary written evidence 39 RealWorld Push 40 Research Councils UK 41 Royal Geographical Society 42 Royal Society of Chemistry 43 Russell Group of Universities 44 Skill: National Bureau for Students with Disabilities 45 Skillset 46 Society of Biology 47 Dr Margot Stocker 48 The Sutton Trust 49 The 1994 Group 50 The Bridge Group 51 The British Academy 52 The British Dental Association 53 The British Medical Association 54 The Built Environment Skills Alliance 55 The UNITE Group 56 UNISON 57 Unite the Union 58 Unite the Union: Supplementary written evidence 59 Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) 60 Universities UK 61 Universities Alliance 62 Universities Alliance: Supplementary written evidence 63 University and College Union 64 University and College Union: Supplementary written evidence 65 University Council of Modern Languages (UCML) 66 University of Bolton 67 University of Buckingham 68 University of Central Lancashire 69 University of East London 70 University of Hertfordshire Written evidence from Alliance of Sector Skills Council Executive Summary 1. This submission is from the Alliance of Sector Skills Councils. The Alliance is the collective voice of Sector Skills Councils, the employer-led organisations on skills for sectors across the UK economy. 2. The Alliance welcomes the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee’s inquiry into the future of Higher Education. The Alliance welcomed the Browne Review’s ambition to match what Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) provide to what students want and the skills needed by employers and the economy. However the Alliance would like to highlight the concern from employers about the unintended consequences that changes to Higher Education may have on higher level skills needs in sectors. 3. The Alliance wishes to make the following key points: • A constructive approach to employer engagement and employability is needed, as involvement of industry is key • SSCs are a recognised representation of employers and a reliable key route to industry as higher level skills are important in a range of sectors • Action is required for high cost subjects that exceed tuition fees • High quality subject benchmark statements that employers can engage in and add the employability element to are needed • In a market for Higher Education it is vital that students have access to good information and SSCs should have a role in providing this so individuals can make informed consumer choices • Higher Education policy and funding must ensure high quality, fit for purpose flexible education and training • Thought needs to be given to cross UK nation border finance issues Funding: a shared responsibility Funding regime 4. Browne’s proposals for England on Higher Education funding and the increased competition which should associate with these proposals when implemented should result in higher quality and more efficient and responsive courses. However there will be situations where this is not the case. For example where the true cost of particular courses exceeds the tuition fees payable. In this situation, HEIs could be expected to support successful delivery of these higher cost courses with income generated elsewhere in the Institution, including by higher volume, lower cost courses. But HEIs being willing and able to do this appears to require that all subject costs are as accurate as possible. There may also be relatively small number of cases where the true costs of courses are so high that the assumption of HEIs supporting them internally without some additional external funding ceases to be reasonable. 5. SSCs should be able to influence the QAA benchmarking statements and the costing assumptions behind these, where this is relevant to their occupational areas and especially where there are legislative or regulation requirements. SSCs should also take sufficiently active part in any Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) led mediation which may commence in the lead up to the White Paper relating to subjects where costs of courses exceed tuition fees. This is especially important in response to Growth Reviews where high cost courses will need employer engagement. Employer influence 6. The Alliance recognises that investment in skills at all levels is a joint responsibility between the Government, individuals and employers. It is important to note that employers currently invest a significant amount in skills development (£39bn a year1) and employers do invest in Higher Education and in Research and Development with HEIs. The Alliance recognises that in the future employers will need to take more responsibility for investing in the skills of their workforce. With this greater investment (co-funding, sponsorship or placement/internship provision) comes the need for greater employer involvement in informing and influencing the funding regime and provision of Higher Education. Employers would be able to invest more within the higher education sector if HEIs were more responsive to their needs. 7. In growth sectors and for specific skills requirements it is important that there is a collective employer response to investment. This could take a number of forms, including employer sponsorship of courses or direct involvement in course implementation (work placements, secondments etc). Where employers have identified the need for collective action there may need to be different approaches due to the differing nature and requirements of sectors and it is important that consensus can be secured within an industry. Thought needs to be given on how to encourage SSCs/employers to work as a community. 8. ConstructionSkills is considering how the Construction Industry Training Board levy-grant system may best articulate with the new funding system in England. This could provide a clear and early example of how employers can share responsibility for Higher Education within the changed arrangements 9. More information is needed about how employers can articulate their needs to the Higher Education sector and influence provision. More information is also needed about how employers will be able to feed into and influence quality levels to ensure courses are fit for purpose. SSCs are well placed to manage employer input to Higher Education through their strong links to employers, and are able to work with Higher Education to increase employer 1 National Employer Skills Survey 2007, LSC involvement in Higher Education provision. The Alliance would welcome further discussion on how this could be taken further, possibly through a pilot scheme. 10. Employers should be able to shape content to be flexible and responsive and change the balance between full time and part time study. It is important that employers are able to influence and focus on increased vocational relevance as it is likely that prospective students may in future be more interested in the employability promised by a course and HEI (including well paid employment) in making their choice, because they will be paying more. This seems particularly pertinent to full time undergraduate courses, but probably applies to other higher education provision to some extent. A fair society Information for students 11. In a market for Higher Education it is vital that students have access to good information. SSCs should have a key role in providing information so that students/parents etc can make informed consumer choices. One set of information currently not available is what employers collectively think about courses/suitability for employment. 12. Proposals from HEFCE indicate that if there is professional body accreditation for higher education courses, then this must be made clear to students and if courses in these particular subject areas have not received accreditation then this should also be