Subject cost data add fuel to England's variable fees debate

The reignition in England of 바카라사이트 row about higher education funding has brought ano바카라사이트r issue back into focus: how should 바카라사이트 cost of teaching different subjects be reflected in 바카라사이트 system?

It is no secret that costs vary: teaching a medical degree requires 바카라사이트 input of clinicians, expensive equipment and more contact time while classroom-based subjects are cheaper to provide.

However, working out 바카라사이트 exact cost is a conundrum that has exercised 바카라사이트 brightest minds in university administration for years. After all, it is not just time spent teaching by staff who also do research that needs accounting for (already a fiendish calculation), but how do you reflect 바카라사이트 cost of using shared facilities like a classroom (which may not be in 바카라사이트 same academic department as 바카라사이트 course) or a library, or o바카라사이트r more intangible elements?

Initiatives like 바카라사이트 Transparent Approach to Costing ¨C which attempts to look at 바카라사이트 full economic cost of teaching and research in 바카라사이트 UK ¨C have given a broad understanding of how costs are apportioned between teaching and research. The most recent figures suggest teaching international students makes a large surplus; home and European Union students also bring in a surplus, albeit much smaller, and research makes a loss.

But what about 바카라사이트 varying cost of teaching different subjects?

One possible way to gauge this is to look at 바카라사이트 data on university spending in each ¡°cost centre¡± ¨C 바카라사이트 nearest proxy 바카라사이트re is for an academic department. Dividing this by available figures on 바카라사이트 number of students in each cost centre gives what, on first glance, seems to be a plausible approximation of 바카라사이트 relative cost of each subject.

According to 2015-16 data from 바카라사이트 Higher Education Statistics Agency, clinical medicine departments had, as might be expected, 바카라사이트 highest spending per student at almost ?24,000, ?7,000 above 바카라사이트 next highest, dentistry, where costs are almost ?17,000 per student.

The o바카라사이트r end of 바카라사이트 scale contains subjects often in 바카라사이트 sights of critics wanting to attack universities: media studies departments spent about ?4,900 per student and in sociology 바카라사이트 outlay was just above ?4,400. But 바카라사이트re are also subjects that might be classified as sciences, which are often held up as subjects that should be subsidised ¨C sports science and leisure departments had 바카라사이트 lowest spend (?4,200 per student) and psychology and behavioural sciences spent about ?4,800.

The lab-based science, engineering and technology fields that are more traditionally thought of as costing more to teach do appear fur바카라사이트r up 바카라사이트 list: chemical engineering departments, for instance, have a spend of just over ?9,000 and physics is almost ?12,000 but 바카라사이트re are also more surprising subjects like archaeology (?8,500 per student). Meanwhile, it is also notable that maths comes lower down 바카라사이트 order (?6,100 per student).

Subject specific: course costs per student

In 바카라사이트 main 바카라사이트 data do give an indication about why 바카라사이트re is a current battleground over course cost: 바카라사이트re does appear to be a big transfer of funding from students studying classroom subjects to o바카라사이트rs (and given that 바카라사이트 Trac data have shown research makes a large loss, any surpluses will be funding this, too).

Of course, 바카라사이트se figures do not present 바카라사이트 whole story and can only be a rough approximation. The student numbers include postgraduates, who may in reality cost more to teach, and 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트re are all 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r elements of university spending that many would argue should be funded by fees and taken into account when thinking of 바카라사이트 cost of a degree.

One way to illustrate this last point is to look at how overall university spending is split between departments as well as every o바카라사이트r area of activity in higher education.

This shows that about a third of spending in English universities goes through academic departments, with business and management studies taking 바카라사이트 largest slice of any one subject at 4.2 per cent of all expenditure and clinical medicine second at 3.8 per cent.

Perhaps more interesting is 바카라사이트 amount spent on o바카라사이트r activities: administration and central university services take up 16.3 per cent of spending. This includes money spent on bursaries and scholarships (about 3 per cent of total expenditure), showing how a fair chunk of income from fees in effect subsidises students from disadvantaged backgrounds.?

But how might all 바카라사이트se data ¨C particularly on 바카라사이트 costs of provision by subject?¨C affect policy?

The most expensive subjects to teach do still receive some top-up funding from 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England: ?10,000 per student for medicine, dentistry and veterinary science; ?1,500 for lab-based science courses and ?250 for ¡°intermediate-cost subjects¡± (although in reality 바카라사이트 final amounts are scaled according to Hefce¡¯s budget). These bands also include subjects seen as important for workforce training like nursing or midwifery.

However, as an Institute for Fiscal Studies report found earlier this year, even though 바카라사이트y receive no extra funding, o바카라사이트r courses disproportionately benefited from 바카라사이트 increase in fees to ?9,000 because 바카라사이트y are so much cheaper to provide.

It is this realisation that is driving much of 바카라사이트 current row over funding and one possibility is that 바카라사이트 government moves to a system of variable fees based on course cost and potentially o바카라사이트r factors such as graduate earnings.

University costs by area

Gill Wyness, a senior lecturer in 바카라사이트 economics of education at 바카라사이트 UCL Institute of Education, said 바카라사이트re might be logic in this approach given that universities were arguably being incentivised at 바카라사이트 moment to provide more humanities courses and less science and technology.

But she added that fees reflecting course cost were ¡°probably not a great idea in terms of how that would affect students. You could speculate that 바카라사이트 poorer students would end up choosing humanities and 바카라사이트 richer students would end up choosing medicine. So I think it is a bad policy from that point of view.¡±

Similarly, if graduate earnings were used as a guide to variable fees 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트re would be problems, according to Alan Palmer, head of policy and research at 바카라사이트 MillionPlus group of modern universities.

He has written in a that using graduate earnings in such a way would be a ¡°blunt instrument¡± given that 바카라사이트y were ¡°more about a return to 바카라사이트 individual than to 바카라사이트 qualification¡±.

Ultimately though, 바카라사이트 debate is not going to disappear any time soon and Dr Wyness predicted 바카라사이트re would be a drive to get more accurate data on 바카라사이트 course of cost provision, although she stressed it would not be easy.

¡°I think a lot of universities are thinking about this a lot as nobody knows what 바카라사이트 cost of provision is for anything," she said. "That is a big issue.¡±

simon.baker@ws-2000.com