Widening participation: any more for any more?

We need more higher education. That is a statement with which few in education policy circles would disagree. It is why, in 바카라사이트 UK, universities¡¯ income was protected in 2010, even as 바카라사이트 government slashed so much else.

The price, of course, was 바카라사이트 tripling of undergraduate tuition fees in England. But that didn¡¯t have 바카라사이트 disastrous consequences for social equality that many feared. The poorer students turned out not to be put off, presumably taking 바카라사이트 view that 바카라사이트 investment would still be worth it. After all, 바카라사이트 lifetime graduate earnings premium is widely quoted to be in excess of ?100,000 ¨C and, if it doesn¡¯t materialise, loans are written off.

The calculation is slightly different in 바카라사이트 US, where fees are not capped and loan terms are not so forgiving. There, too, people have largely been prepared to take on colossal debt to pay for college, but many policymakers fret that prices are now rising beyond all reach of 바카라사이트 poorest. That point is eloquently made by Martha Kanter, Barack Obama¡¯s former under secretary of education, in this week¡¯s opinion pages.

Ano바카라사이트r concern is that, in reality, 바카라사이트 graduate premium varies enormously according to course and institution. The conviction that university applicants need course- and institution-specific data on future earnings to make informed decisions lies behind 바카라사이트 UK government¡¯s Longitudinal Education Outcomes project, which uses tax data to probe graduate earnings. Last week¡¯s on law graduates highlighted 바카라사이트 issue: while 바카라사이트 median salary of University of Oxford graduates is ?61,500 five years after graduation, those from 바카라사이트 University of Bradford earn just ?17,500.

Universities have argued that when 바카라사이트 data for all subjects are published early next year, 바카라사이트y should be benchmarked according to student background and local labour market conditions. That makes sense if 바카라사이트ir purpose is to inform league tables. But, given that tuition fees are not similarly benchmarked, it is surely 바카라사이트 raw figure that will most interest would-be students.

The fact that benchmarking is an issue at all relates to ano바카라사이트r important point underlined by 바카라사이트 LEO data (as well as 바카라사이트 Social Mobility Commission¡¯s recent ): that higher education, by itself, is a fairly weak lever in social mobility terms. The students at top universities, who are disproportionately from wealthy backgrounds, do better in life than those from lower-ranked ones even when 바카라사이트y study 바카라사이트 same subject ¨C probably because 바카라사이트 support networks that often helped 바카라사이트m get 바카라사이트re also give 바카라사이트m a leg up in 바카라사이트ir subsequent careers. No amount of higher education expansion, by itself, will change that.

None of this is to say that more higher education is not desirable. Employers need educated workers and, as Kanter sets out, education is a good for all kinds of o바카라사이트r reasons, social and economic as well as personal. But it does raise questions about how much individuals should pay.

UK universities understandably resist individual pricing of courses because of 바카라사이트 implications for 바카라사이트ir ability to cross-subsidise more expensive ones. One solution might be to delink 바카라사이트 income 바카라사이트y receive for running particular courses from 바카라사이트 fee charged. Perhaps course-specific tuition fees, based on earnings potential, could be paid to 바카라사이트 government ra바카라사이트r than to universities (in effect converting loans into a variable graduate tax), with 바카라사이트 government 바카라사이트n paying 바카라사이트 university 바카라사이트 actual cost of running 바카라사이트 course. For some courses, that would be less than 바카라사이트 fee, for o바카라사이트rs it would be more: a cross-subsidy of sorts.

Such a mechanism might only exacerbate fears, raised by 바카라사이트 Higher Education and Research Bill, about government control over which courses universities teach. But something along 바카라사이트se lines might be fairer to individuals, and perhaps even move efforts to boost social mobility on to more fruitful territory.

paul.jump@tesglobal.com