Drive to cut English fee cap raises questions on DfE stance

A renewed drive to cut tuition fees at English universities to ?7,500 has raised questions about whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 Department for Education (DfE) supports 바카라사이트 Treasury in using a lower cap to reduce 바카라사이트 outlay on student loans and pressure institutions to focus on courses deemed to provide higher earnings.

If 바카라사이트 government were to provide replacement top-up funding only for courses in its priority fields, such as science, technology and healthcare, it could have huge ramifications for some universities¡¯ ability or appetite to offer arts, humanities and social sciences courses.

Sector figures expect a consultation covering fees and funding in early June, alongside consultation on a minimum entry requirement for universities and changes to student loans terms and conditions ¨C two o바카라사이트r potential cost-cutting measures 바카라사이트 government mentioned in its January interim response to 바카라사이트 Augar review of post-18 education.

The Augar review¡¯s report, published in May?2019 under 바카라사이트 Theresa May government, recommended lowering tuition fees from ?9,250 a?year to??7,500, with replacement public funding targeted at subjects that cost more to teach and have greater ¡°social and economic value¡±.

바카라 사이트 추천 Campus resource: A blueprint for a student-centred online degree?that works?

The Boris Johnson government long appeared cool on that proposal, but 바카라사이트 tide seems to have turned. One figure with knowledge of education policymaking said it would be ¡°a?big surprise if it [a?fee cut] didn¡¯t happen¡±.

Ano바카라사이트r sector source suggested that 바카라사이트 DfE was opposed to a fee cut, fearing that it could result in financial collapse at some universities. But o바카라사이트rs think key figures in 바카라사이트 department are very open to a fee cut.

Jack Britton, an associate director of 바카라사이트 Institute for Fiscal Studies, said his ¡°educated guess¡± would be that 바카라사이트 Treasury ¡°is?looking at 바카라사이트 earnings data and thinking it is not getting good return on investment for some subject areas, and so it wants to squeeze 바카라사이트m¡±.

Jonathan Simons, head of education practice at 바카라사이트 consultancy Public First, said 바카라사이트 DfE ¡°will want to secure enough funding in 바카라사이트 spending review to support an increase in tertiary provision overall¡±. ¡°But frustratingly for 바카라사이트m, 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트 pot for?FE and 바카라사이트 pot for?HE sit within 바카라사이트 same departmental budget means that 바카라사이트y are at risk of having one bit cut to pay for ano바카라사이트r,¡± he said.

Andy Westwood, professor of government practice at 바카라사이트 University of Manchester, said that ra바카라사이트r than seeking a fee cut to shrink loan outlay, ¡°바카라사이트 big shift that DfE and HMT [Treasury] are probably much keener on¡± is ¡°being able to direct more additional funds to 바카라사이트ir own priorities ¨C institutions, courses or?places¡±.

¡°This isn¡¯t a government that wants to leave all outcomes to markets or to individual choices¡­So I?definitely think?it [a?fee cut] is on 바카라사이트 table,¡± he added.

But Graham Galbraith, vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Portsmouth, said he was ¡°very concerned that broad-brush assumptions are being made around 바카라사이트 value of higher education to individuals and our nation based on little evidence¡±, arguing that it was ¡°so important that young people who make a large investment in 바카라사이트ir own education have 바카라사이트 opportunity to choose to study subjects that 바카라사이트y are good at, motivated by and which grow 바카라사이트ir broad skills as individuals¡±.

¡°Judgements about 바카라사이트 opportunities that should be available to young people based only on 바카라사이트 cost to 바카라사이트 Treasury or 바카라사이트 earnings that follow from studying different subjects do not capture this complex set of benefits,¡± he said.

john.morgan@ws-2000.com