Tuition fees and access to higher education

John Rushforth

Deputy Director

HE in England

78 Universities

14 General HE colleges

39 Specialist HE colleges

198 FE colleges providing HE courses

Participation Rate Is Relatively Low)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

NewZealand

Sw eden Australia Iceland Korea3 UnitedKingdom

Italy2 Japan3 Austria Germany2

Country Net entry rates to tertiary type A (1st degree or equivalent

Source OECD Education at a Glance 2003

En

try r

ate

998,000 FTEs

Postgraduatepart-time 6%

Undergraduate full-time 74%

Postgraduate full-time 5%

Undergraduatepart-time 15%

Social Class Gap Is Wide and Persistent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2001

More Affluent social classes Less Affluent social classes All Classes

From 2006-07

• No up-front tuition fees• Government pays the tuition fee to the

HE institution initially• Government recovers the fee after

graduation • Tuition fees can vary from £0 to £3,000

Repayments

• Tuition fees repaid alongside any maintenance loan

• Student maintenance loans – to £4000• Collected through the payroll, like tax

• Salary threshold increased to £15,000 from 2005-06

• Repayment rate: 9% of excess income

• Zero real rate of interest

• Students from low income families get £2700 grant

Why do all this?

• Put more income into HE• Fairer sharing of the cost between

graduate, graduate’s family and the taxpayer

• Increase influence of student demand on teaching quality

• Put more control with institutions

Why OFFA

• Risk that potential students will – Be concerned about debt– Perceive that higher education is not affordable

• Something needed to safeguard and promote access

• An expectation that some variable fees will be invested in financial support for students

What is OFFA for

• Regulate the charging of higher tuition fees (but only FT UG)

• Promote and safeguard fair access to HE

• Identify good practice in the promotion of equality of access to higher education

• But mustn’t interfere with academic freedom

OFFA’s levers

• Access agreement –– Bursaries– Outreach– Financial Information – Objectives– Public documents

• Advice • Publicity• Fines• Prohibition

OFFA Requirements

• Expect more from those with furthest to go• Additionality• Ambitious milestones • Collaborative outreach• Monitoring• Communication

HEI fee limits from 2006

92.92%

1.77% 2.65% 0.88% 0.88% 0.88%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

£3,000 £2,700 £2,500 £2,250 £2,000 variableThis is based on 109 HEIs

Bursary levels for students eligible for full state support from 2006

£0

£500

£1,000

£1,500

£2,000

£2,500

£3,000

£3,500

Bu

rsar

y le

vel

This represents the minimum that insitutions w il be offering to students on full state support, many w ill offer more through additional criteria, scholarships etc

What will impact of fees be

• There is data on the fear of debt• More generous student support package• More places • More communication • More outreach• Data on the initial introduction of tuition fees, and

on the international experience, is encouraging

Introduction of fees did not affect entry choices

Will this deliver fair access

• Once prior attainment is sufficiently-well taken into account socio-economic background does not have an independent effect on HE participation.

• The substantial social class inequality in HE occurs largely as a result of inequalities earlier in the education system.

Participation in HE at age 18 by A-level point score and parents’ SEG

76

60

32

74

63

36

0 20 40 60 80 100

25+

13-24

1-12

A-l

evel

po

int

sco

re

Percent

lower SEG

higher SEG

Source: DfES. Calculated from Youth Cohort Study data.

Key Elements for Widening Participation

• Increased supply • Effective outreach programme• New modes of delivery• Maintain retention rates• Institutional strategies for widening participation• Fair admissions• Increased investment

Funding

• £282 million to institutions in 2005-06:– £51 million outreach– £11 million for disabled students– £220 million for retention

• Distributed on the basis of risk• £72 M for Aimhigher

Summary

• English HE faces a long term complex problem • We have put in place a system which tries to

balance the contributions of the state, students and parents

• OFFA has provided assurance • We have a lot more to do before the profile of

the HE student body fully reflects that of society at large