The future size and shape of HE - Universities UK

More documents

Recommendations

Info

127 Twelve sets of issues were identified with whichwe have incorporated three others as being ofparticular relevance – the degree of governmentregulation; the maintenance of quality in the faceof reduced demand; and increased cost pressuresthrough the divergence of costs and income. Wehave also grouped the issues in a slightly differentfashion to bring out the strong interconnectionsbetween them, which were incorporated in thescenarios. The full revised list of issues togetherwith the associated axes of uncertainty, whichprovide a measure of the range of possibleoutcomes, is set out in Table 11.Table 11Key areas of uncertainty and axes of uncertaintyDriverAxes of uncertaintyLevel of economic growth High levels of economic growth across the period enable high levels of public and private investment in highereducation to be sustained.Overall historically low level of economic growth over the next twenty years with two significant periods of recessionslead to a reduced level of public and private investment in higher education.Public funding of higher Maintenance of status quo with current degree of regulation of fees.educationReducing public contribution with greater targeting of public funding on key groups, increased private contributions.Government regulation Government regulation is reduced.of fees and quality Government regulation is increased.Cost pressures on Costs outstrip income, threatening sustainability.institutionsCosts are brought more into line with prospective income.Quality of provision Institutions reduce quality to sustain demand and/or reduce costs.Institutions sustain quality of provision.Changes in pre-18 Increased propensity to enter higher education – higher proportion of age group achieve level 3 and choose to entereducation and training higher education.Lower propensity to enter traditional higher education because of development of a more prestigious vocational routethrough Foundation degrees offered in further education colleges – similarities with historic Scottish position.Student and employer UK higher education remains individually driven.demandUK higher education becomes more employer driven.Changing aspirations Three markets – 18+, people in work (or seeking to re-enter the workforce) and the retired; greater or lesserdevelopment of these markets.Internationalisation International demand dependent on reputation and quality. UK sustains its position in the international market.With the exception of a limited number of high prestige institutions UK higher education institutions lose substantialmarket share. An increasing proportion of UK students attend overseas higher education institutions. Incrementalincreases in transnational provision but remaining modest.Impact of technology Revolutionary – global, online independent study with little or variable institutional affiliation.on learningEvolutionary – increased use of information and communications technology in delivery and learning management butwithout threatening institutional pattern.Levels of flexibility The full-time three/four year undergraduate degree remains the norm.Learning becomes entirely personalised and flexible regarding time and place with more widespread recognition ofpart qualifications.The nature of the higher Inflexible system of national pay bargaining with few links to business and performance.education workforce and A flexible dynamic higher education labour market with rewards linked to performance and movement betweenhuman resources academia and other sectors coupled with increased flexibility and casualisation.managementThe future of higher Much more diverse (like the United States only more so).education institutions Less diverse – more homogeneous, merging missions.as we know themDivergence of four Increasing diversification and competition between the four nations (and perhaps increasingly between differentUK systemsEnglish regions) with real impact on student behaviour.Systems become more similar under similar external pressures.30
7The scenariosCommon assumptions128 All the scenarios start from the baselinedemographic projections to 2026 set out in ourfirst report. These are further elucidated above(see sections 4 and 5) in terms of the 2019minimum in the projection of 18- to 20-year-oldsin the population and the variations in the size ofthe decline across the English regions as well asthe four countries of the UK. All also recognisethe uncertainty in those projections arising fromthe forecast of net inward migration to the UK.This demographic pattern and howgovernments, employers and institutions mightrespond to it in the period from now until 2019will be key determinants of the size and shape ofthe sector in 2027.129 All the scenarios also incorporate the projecteddecline in the number of 18- to 20-year-olds inthe other countries of the EU between now and2027. They all also assume that the Bolognaagreement will have a continuing effect throughthe development of a comparable range ofqualifications across the EU. This coupled withthe more widespread use of English as themedium of delivery in other European countrieswill lead to increased competition between EUcountries in the international student market.130 As with the demographic projections all thescenarios also assume that the British Council’sprojections of global student demand, issued in2004, are a sound starting point. However, weare aware that the British Council is undertakinga further series of reviews on a country-bycountrybasis working with the EconomistIntelligence Unit. The first of the reports fromthese studies on China has already beenlaunched. Each of the scenarios assumes avariation around the British Council figurerelated to developments within the UK highereducation system.131 While each of the scenarios assumes a differentitinerary for the UK economy over the nexttwenty years, none assumes any real increase inthe level of public funding support for teachingand learning in higher education (see paragraph117). This is principally because of the pressuresfor increased public expenditure in other areasarising mainly from the ageing population.132 All the scenarios assume that, even with thepossibility of successive changes of government,a broad commitment to high levels ofparticipation will be maintained. However, thethree scenarios are distinctive in the level ofregulation of degree awarding powers and feesthat are assumed. Furthermore as noted insection 5 some of the current policies that giverise to uncertainties over future numbers may bechanged or abandoned with a change ofgovernment.133 All three scenarios assume that the delivery ofhigher education will change significantly inresponse to developments in the digital andcommunications technologies and the changingexpectations of young people in how theycommunicate and engage with learning. Inparticular, this will involve the exploitation of thepotential of wireless connection through theinternet for remote communication withindividual students and groups of students. It willalso involve the use of the internet for themanaged delivery of learning materials. This allimplies changes in the way academic staffengage with students and will, therefore, requiresignificant re-skilling. It also implies significantre-thinking of how the university plant is usedand developed.134 However, it remains the case that for somestudents and some aspects of learning face-tofaceteaching and learning assessment willcontinue to be the preferred approach.Furthermore, where virtual learning is the mainmode, students will almost certainly needadditional support in taking key decisions abouttheir learning programmes.135 Each of the three scenarios assumes a differenttrajectory for the development oftechnologically-based learning across the nexttwenty years with consequential differentimpacts in each of the scenarios.136 Increased employer engagement, although indifferent forms and to different degrees in thethree scenarios, is also a common theme (seeparagraph 123).137 All assume a different pace of development ofincreased competition from non-traditionalproviders of higher education, includingoverseas providers and for-profit providers.138 The different combinations of these factorswhich form the basis of the three scenarios willlead to significant, but different in each case,change in the pattern of higher educationinstitutions in the UK.Universities UK The future size and shape of HE 31
Page 5: Index of tables6 Table 1 Demographi
Page 8 and 9: 6 This analysis incorporates an ass
Page 10 and 11: Factoring in current trends and pol
Page 12 and 13: Table 2Key areas of uncertainty and
Page 14 and 15: 34 The third scenario, ‘employer-
Page 16 and 17: 1Introduction44 This is the second
Page 18 and 19: 3Methodological approach52 Our appr
Page 20 and 21: Table 4Demographic-based projection
Page 22 and 23: Sources of uncertainty74 There are
Page 24 and 25: Table 8Full-time undergraduateenrol
Page 26 and 27: 98 As these are all market-driven p
Page 28 and 29: 6Scenario planningIntroduction109 I
Page 30 and 31: 28119 For institutions the impact o
Page 34 and 35: 32139 All the scenarios assume impl
Page 36 and 37: Scenario 2: market-driven and compe
Page 38 and 39: Scenario 3: employer-driven flexibl
Page 40 and 41: Comparing the scenarios176 In seeki
Page 42 and 43: Threats and opportunitiesScenario 1
Page 44 and 45: p extreme stratification of the hig
Page 46 and 47: 193 These assessments of the level
Page 48 and 49: 208 Home and EU part-time postgradu
Page 50 and 51: Table 17Summary of projectedinterna
Page 52 and 53: 10Institutions’ responses to the
Page 54 and 55: Notes1 As a starting point for the
Page 56: About Universities UKThis publicati

The future size and shape of HE - Universities UK

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?