This discussion has been locked.

You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

University in need of repair

Former Community Member over 7 years ago

https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/09/15/rebuilding-british-higher-educations-most-unusual-institution

Rebuilding British higher education’s most unusual institution .

Parents

0 Roy Bowdler over 7 years ago

As I was driving to work yesterday there was a report on the radio stating that “at least three UK Universities were at risk of bankruptcy”. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-46059457 . It didn’t seem that the OU was one of these, but It seems that there is a pattern, where more highly ranked universities are competing for students by accepting 18 year olds with lower A level examination results than previously, responding to a demographic decline in that age group and restrictions on overseas students. Others seen as less “prestigious” or in less attractive locations, or located close to a stronger competitor, are struggling to compete and losing income.

A potential solution, especially for long-established former Polytechnics is to do what many of them always did extremely well, support the needs of employers in their region or as a specialist centres of excellence in particular industries. A large proportion of this market is part-time, often supported by employers, or full-time students who weren’t so successful in the school system, but subsequently gather momentum perhaps through college, often showing good potential once they find a pathway and developing successful careers. A good proportion of Engineers and Technicians fall into this category and the majority were prepared through college and pre-1992 Polytechnics, now Universities.

Unfortunately it seems that the current fees regime has choked-off much of the part-time market.

As any regular reader of these forums will understand, the apprenticeship model is very close to my heart. Absolutely essential to that is the provision of technical knowledge and vocational skills by colleges and universities. Government policy seeking to revitalise apprenticeships provides financial incentives for employers , although most of that incentive will typically be “spent” in college and university services https://www.instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/ Employers and individuals self-funding have to make return-on-investment appraisals. For employers this inevitably includes the cost of red-tape associated with government initiatives. Clearly self-funded students such as those drawn towards the OU, have been hugely deterred by tuition fee hikes. If I consider the Degree Apprenticeship that I led some years ago, probably the only way to gain positive ROI, would have been to cut trainee salaries, with the risk of other employers hovering with better offers once the trainee becomes productive. An apprentice cannot be “bound to serve their master” as was historically the case, nor in practice restrained in any other way, although most will wish to complete their training.

This isn’t the best place for a public policy debate about higher education generally, although it has become in recent decades one of our most important “industries”. However, in the context of developing Engineers and Technicians, any further diminution of part-time vocational programmes, closely linked to employment skills could be catastrophic. A market favouring those universities who are most successful in attracting 18 year old full-time undergraduate students , may seem to be a rational one. However, if this means that an employed person cannot readily access appropriate higher education, at a price that offers a likely positive return on investment, then there are many potentially damaging consequences.

I received last week (not for the first time) a “begging letter” from the OU, because I’m on their MBA alumni list. I couldn’t make a useful difference in that respect and have higher priorities for my charitable contributions, but I do want our profession to make a very strong case to government about in-career learning. I’m confident that the IET will seek do that; but is there unity of purpose across the profession (as defined by Engineering Council affiliation)? Many among us are only interested in a model that attracts a fraction of the most mathematical 18 years old students onto Chartered Engineer accredited full-time undergraduate courses. Some wouldn’t be interested in the loss of a “less prestigious" university unless it was in their backyard. Therefore, “the engineering establishment” consisting only of the highest status chartered engineers, may not see the issue as overly important. Hopefully, employers and their representatives will keep banging the door of government https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/07/one-year-infrastructure-levy-working-yet/
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Roy Bowdler over 7 years ago

As I was driving to work yesterday there was a report on the radio stating that “at least three UK Universities were at risk of bankruptcy”. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-46059457 . It didn’t seem that the OU was one of these, but It seems that there is a pattern, where more highly ranked universities are competing for students by accepting 18 year olds with lower A level examination results than previously, responding to a demographic decline in that age group and restrictions on overseas students. Others seen as less “prestigious” or in less attractive locations, or located close to a stronger competitor, are struggling to compete and losing income.

A potential solution, especially for long-established former Polytechnics is to do what many of them always did extremely well, support the needs of employers in their region or as a specialist centres of excellence in particular industries. A large proportion of this market is part-time, often supported by employers, or full-time students who weren’t so successful in the school system, but subsequently gather momentum perhaps through college, often showing good potential once they find a pathway and developing successful careers. A good proportion of Engineers and Technicians fall into this category and the majority were prepared through college and pre-1992 Polytechnics, now Universities.

Unfortunately it seems that the current fees regime has choked-off much of the part-time market.

As any regular reader of these forums will understand, the apprenticeship model is very close to my heart. Absolutely essential to that is the provision of technical knowledge and vocational skills by colleges and universities. Government policy seeking to revitalise apprenticeships provides financial incentives for employers , although most of that incentive will typically be “spent” in college and university services https://www.instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/ Employers and individuals self-funding have to make return-on-investment appraisals. For employers this inevitably includes the cost of red-tape associated with government initiatives. Clearly self-funded students such as those drawn towards the OU, have been hugely deterred by tuition fee hikes. If I consider the Degree Apprenticeship that I led some years ago, probably the only way to gain positive ROI, would have been to cut trainee salaries, with the risk of other employers hovering with better offers once the trainee becomes productive. An apprentice cannot be “bound to serve their master” as was historically the case, nor in practice restrained in any other way, although most will wish to complete their training.

This isn’t the best place for a public policy debate about higher education generally, although it has become in recent decades one of our most important “industries”. However, in the context of developing Engineers and Technicians, any further diminution of part-time vocational programmes, closely linked to employment skills could be catastrophic. A market favouring those universities who are most successful in attracting 18 year old full-time undergraduate students , may seem to be a rational one. However, if this means that an employed person cannot readily access appropriate higher education, at a price that offers a likely positive return on investment, then there are many potentially damaging consequences.

I received last week (not for the first time) a “begging letter” from the OU, because I’m on their MBA alumni list. I couldn’t make a useful difference in that respect and have higher priorities for my charitable contributions, but I do want our profession to make a very strong case to government about in-career learning. I’m confident that the IET will seek do that; but is there unity of purpose across the profession (as defined by Engineering Council affiliation)? Many among us are only interested in a model that attracts a fraction of the most mathematical 18 years old students onto Chartered Engineer accredited full-time undergraduate courses. Some wouldn’t be interested in the loss of a “less prestigious" university unless it was in their backyard. Therefore, “the engineering establishment” consisting only of the highest status chartered engineers, may not see the issue as overly important. Hopefully, employers and their representatives will keep banging the door of government https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/04/07/one-year-infrastructure-levy-working-yet/
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

University in need of repair

Community Rules & Guidelines