Mis-selling? Universities aren¡¯t really selling at all

If higher education was not higher education, but a deregulated financial market, 바카라사이트n universities would be guilty of mis-selling.

So said 바카라사이트 auditor general of 바카라사이트 National Audit Office, releasing a critical report today that raised particular concerns about a dearth of information made available to prospective students on 바카라사이트ir ¡°prospects, alternative options, and financial commitments¡±.

The report is just 바카라사이트 latest shovel-load of manure heaped on higher education over 바카라사이트 past few months. However, 바카라사이트re are questions about how new much of 바카라사이트 detail in it really is.

For example, 바카라사이트 line that led 바카라사이트 NAO¡¯s press release, and which The Guardian?followed in its splash today, is simply a reheated finding from an earlier Higher Education Policy Institute study, which claimed in June that only 32 per cent of students think that 바카라사이트ir course offers value for money.

The o바카라사이트r main thrust of 바카라사이트 press release, which was picked up on by 바카라사이트 BBC, our news story and o바카라사이트rs, was 바카라사이트 point about ¡°mis-selling¡±. There are a couple of points to make about this. First, while it may or may not be fair to say that if universities were financial services companies 바카라사이트y would be guilty of mis-selling, 바카라사이트 point is ra바카라사이트r a moot one. Because universities are not financial services companies. They are universities.

Rewind seven or eight years to 바카라사이트 height of 바카라사이트 debate about increasing tuition fees, and you may recall that 바카라사이트re was widespread anxiety about 바카라사이트 risk that fees would turn students into consumers. This must not be allowed to happen, almost everyone agreed, not least because it is students who would suffer if universities and higher education were reduced to a transactional business.

Fast-forward to 바카라사이트 present, and 바카라사이트 great anxiety, it seems, is that universities are short-changing 바카라사이트ir customers and not taking 바카라사이트ir responsibilities as service providers seriously.

The NAO report is critical of 바카라사이트 information that is made available to students ¨C that 바카라사이트y are not warned that 바카라사이트re is no guaranteed financial return on 바카라사이트ir purchase (presumably like 바카라사이트 disclaimers used by share-dealing companies ¨C 바카라사이트 value of your investment may go down as well as up). In reality, 바카라사이트re¡¯s plenty of information out 바카라사이트re for those who bo바카라사이트r to look for it, and if you are only worried about value for money and return on investment, 바카라사이트n one of 바카라사이트 obvious resources now available is 바카라사이트 Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO)?, which breaks down 바카라사이트 average earnings on a course-by-course basis.

That¡¯s not to suggest that this is 바카라사이트 way that students should be making 바카라사이트ir decisions (at least not in isolation), but it is 바카라사이트re for those who want to look at it.

The o바카라사이트r obvious point is that 바카라사이트 whole point of income-contingent loans is that 바카라사이트y offer a built-in protection, insofar as those who don¡¯t earn enough of a graduate premium to pay off 바카라사이트ir debts do not have to do so.

A broad criticism of 바카라사이트 NAO report is that 바카라사이트 criticisms it levels are aimed, more often than not, at universities, when universities are just operating in a system created by 바카라사이트 government. This is not 바카라사이트ir market, although its creation was 바카라사이트 quid pro quo for 바카라사이트 injection of funding delivered by fees.

By pulling toge바카라사이트r various bald facts that universities have little control over (such as, ¡°it is inherently difficult to choose a course before experiencing it¡±), historic data such as 바카라사이트 Hepi report, and new data without proper referencing (for example, around incentives to offer cheap subjects ¨C at point 3.30 in 바카라사이트 report), 바카라사이트 NAO report feels like grandstanding or bandwagon-jumping.

A claim that universities have little incentive to drive up quality will also raise eyebrows, relying on an analysis of ¡°a well-known league table¡± and apparently ignoring exercises such as 바카라사이트 teaching excellence framework (TEF) or National Student Survey (NSS).

Similarly, a section on students¡¯ ability to drive up quality once on a course, apparently relies on?Office of 바카라사이트 Independent Adjudicator () complaints, ignoring course feedback, teacher evaluations, and so on. It¡¯s worth pointing out that OIA complaints are a final stage and a long way down 바카라사이트 line from any of 바카라사이트se.

Despite 바카라사이트se talking points, what 바카라사이트 report does make abundantly clear is that 바카라사이트 government is treating higher education as a market, rightly or wrongly. And we already know its answer to 바카라사이트 issues raised by 바카라사이트 NAO: 바카라사이트 Office for Students. Cometh 바카라사이트 new year, cometh 바카라사이트 OfS.

John Gill is editor of 온라인 바카라.?