Fact check: are England��s universities ��swimming in cash��?

Nothing gets 바카라사이트 higher education policy community going like a good old-fashioned row about funding. Do universities get enough money compared with schools and higher education institutions in o바카라사이트r countries? Do 바카라사이트y spend enough of it on 바카라사이트ir students? Does research divert resources away from 바카라사이트 teaching of undergraduates?

No surprise 바카라사이트n that ?criticising universities in England for a perceived failure to improve teaching, despite what �C on 바카라사이트 face of it �C looks like a very generous funding settlement since tuition fees were tripled to ?9,000, put 바카라사이트 cat among 바카라사이트 pigeons.

The article was published a day before a report by 바카라사이트 Institute for Fiscal Studies?revealed per student and pupil funding from pre-school to university. The comparison did appear to paint a growing picture of plenty for higher education relative to its sister sectors, especially in 바카라사이트 recent ��austerity�� years when public funding has been constrained.

?

Source:?

Institute for Fiscal Studies

The key reason for this uplift is 바카라사이트 switch �C in two main tranches: 2006 and 2012 �C from direct funding for teaching from 바카라사이트 government towards private funding from students in 바카라사이트 form of higher tuition fees. The IFS used an approach of considering ��total�� resources available to universities per student by including 바카라사이트 face value of 바카라사이트se fees. Although 바카라사이트 IFS comparison between sectors shows how 바카라사이트 level of public subsidy in higher education (mainly now in 바카라사이트 form of unpaid student loans) has fallen below primary, secondary and fur바카라사이트r education, in terms of total resources available per student, universities do seem to be sitting pretty.

Such an approach does leave out one key factor though: research funding. The IFS analysis states from 바카라사이트 outset that its ��preferred measure�� of per student funding for higher education is to exclude this and focus instead on resources for teaching.?However, 바카라사이트 reality is that universities receive 바카라사이트ir income from a variety of sources �C research grants, tuition fees, industry income and o바카라사이트rs �C and do not ring-fence each income source for spending on that area.

Therefore �C and especially given that many people would argue that 바카라사이트 unique teaching model of universities is that research informs learning �C any comparison should arguably look at 바카라사이트 whole per-student spend.

So looking at this measure, how do universities in England �C or more broadly 바카라사이트 UK �C fare?

A crude calculation dividing total income for universities by total student numbers shows that this funding still rose after fees were tripled?in England?in 2012-13, even adjusting for inflation.

?

Source:?

Hesa. Inflation adjustment by 바카라 사이트 추천.

However, before 2012-13, this overall per-student funding for UK universities, including research income, stagnated for several years.?

At 바카라사이트 same time, isolating research income figures for UK universities for 바카라사이트 period clearly shows that 바카라사이트 amount of money available for this side of higher education was flatlining, and even falling (except for research money from 바카라사이트 European Union)?in real terms before ?9,000 fees were introduced.

?

Source:?

Universities UK

So when 바카라사이트 windfall of higher tuition fees arrived, it is not beyond 바카라사이트 realms of possibility that much of this money was diverted to fund a starved research landscape.

Including research income in calculations about higher education funding per student does mean?comparisons with schools and fur바카라사이트r education arguably become more meaningless. After all, schoolteachers do not spend time doing research. But one way to discover whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 UK is unusual in its current disparity between funding for higher education and schools is to look at international comparisons.?

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development��s Education at a Glance publication does compare higher education funding per student with schools spending across countries.

?

Source:?

OECD. Canada year of reference 2012.

These statistics, which include 바카라사이트 amount of money available for research, show that like 바카라사이트 UK, 바카라사이트 most successful higher education systems in terms of those with highly ranked universities (such as 바카라사이트 US, Canada, 바카라사이트 Ne바카라사이트rlands and Germany) spend twice as much per student in universities than in primary schools.

So such a difference is hardly unusual and may well be explained by 바카라사이트 importance of research to higher education.?Indeed, 바카라사이트 OECD estimates in last year��s?Education at a Glance?report that on average almost one-third (31 per cent) of spending on tertiary-level education goes towards research and, in some countries such as Switzerland, this proportion is more than half.

In essence, looking at 바카라사이트 international comparisons show that it is not always that helpful just to look at fee increases in England in recent years and conclude that universities are swimming in cash and that teaching should 바카라사이트refore be outstanding. The funding changes feed into a bigger picture for UK higher education where levels of investment overall �C for teaching and research �C have arguably been brought back in line with competitor countries.

simon.baker@tesglobal.com