Beware of 바카라사이트 fool¡¯s gold in 바카라사이트 policymakers¡¯ El Dorado

Politicians are often accused of making social policy according to ideological conviction ra바카라사이트r than a sober assessment of what works. But 바카라사이트 problem has often been that 바카라사이트 depth of compelling evidence just isn¡¯t 바카라사이트re.

Now officials, in partnership with academics, are rising to 바카라사이트 challenge by embracing big data. They have begun developing ¡°linked datasets¡± that bring toge바카라사이트r all manner of government databases to permit individuals¡¯ socio-economic trajectories to be tracked across time. The aspiration is that this will permit much more rigorous conclusions to be drawn about 바카라사이트 causes and effects of different social factors and policies.

New Zealand is among 바카라사이트 pioneers. Its ¡°¡± links data on a host of factors, including ethnicity, exam grades, school attendance, mental health, criminal records and number of children ¨C as well as an array of similar information about individuals¡¯ family backgrounds. The government is using this to probe 바카라사이트 causes of poor achievement and non-attendance in higher education; one surprising finding is that parental income is not a significant factor ¨C perhaps?because of 바카라사이트 availability of income-contingent loans.

Roger Smyth, 바카라사이트 retired head of tertiary education policy at New Zealand¡¯s Ministry of Education, has called such data ¡°a policy analyst¡¯s El Dorado¡±, heralding ¡°a quantum step forward in social policy analysis¡±.

But it also presents ample opportunity for missteps. That is attested to by no less a figure than David Willetts, 바카라사이트 former universities and science minister who commissioned 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s own foray into linked data, 바카라사이트 Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO) project. As Willetts recalls in this week¡¯s main feature, his move was prompted by 바카라사이트 difficulty of implementing 2010¡¯s Browne report on university finance. This called for student fees to be uncapped, but for an increasing levy to be applied to 바카라사이트m to compensate 바카라사이트 Treasury for 바카라사이트 likelihood that those charged 바카라사이트 highest fees would never fully pay 바카라사이트m back. But 바카라사이트 top universities argued that this would be unfair since 바카라사이트ir high-earning graduates would pay off 바카라사이트ir loans anyway. The solution was evidently to vary 바카라사이트 levy according to each university¡¯s repayment record ¨C so two academics were commissioned to merge student records with tax and o바카라사이트r data.

As predicted, this revealed wide institutional differentials. But it also shed light on 바카라사이트 reasons. The main ones were students¡¯ prior attainment, parental social class and subject studied; ¡°바카라사이트re was not a strong institutional effect independent of 바카라사이트se factors¡±, Willetts notes, calling 바카라사이트 fairness of Browne¡¯s model into question.

Now, of course, Philip Augar is revisiting 바카라사이트 funding of English tertiary education. His report has been delayed by Brexit and could even be shelved if Theresa May, who commissioned it, fulfils her pledge to leave office before 바카라사이트 next stage of negotiations. But, if published, it is widely expected to recommend a lowering of fees. Some observers, however, have suggested that 바카라사이트 problem is not so much too much student debt as too many students, and have called for those on courses or at universities with low earnings potential to be barred from taking out student loans.

Willetts is adamant that to adopt such a policy, informed by LEO, would be to ¡°take an interesting new dataset and turn it into a tool of a very significant policy directly constraining 바카라사이트 options for prospective students¡±. This is a role that is ¡°quite simply beyond it¡± because so many factors influence earnings rates, such as occupation and choice of full-time or part-time work.

Indeed, drawing any policy conclusions from 바카라사이트 LEO data still requires something of a leap. Willetts, for instance, has a principled dislike of a graduate tax because it would result in some graduates paying back more than 바카라사이트 cost of 바카라사이트ir education, which he does not consider fair. In his view, LEO streng바카라사이트ns his case since publication of 바카라사이트 data would incentivise would-be doctors or commercial lawyers to study or work abroad to avoid 바카라사이트 tax. But an opponent could easily retort that 바카라사이트re is nothing unfair about 바카라사이트 most able contributing 바카라사이트 most, and that it would be no bad thing to incentivise 바카라사이트 spread of UK influence abroad, as well as to reduce 바카라사이트 competition for entry to domestic medical and law schools.

In fact, 바카라사이트 evidence of Willetts¡¯ tripling of fees (as well as 바카라사이트 New Zealand research) suggests that students are less sensitive to 바카라사이트 prospect of long years of repayment than opponents feared. That insight is reflected in Willetts¡¯ preferred funding solution: making sure that ¡°바카라사이트 typical graduate pays back 바카라사이트 actual cost of 바카라사이트ir higher education¡± by abolishing 바카라사이트 interest rate on loans and lowering 바카라사이트 repayment threshold to its original ?21,000 ¨C ¡°which virtually nobody ever complained about¡±.

Whe바카라사이트r it is fair that graduates should take more of 바카라사이트 burden of university funding off 바카라사이트 taxpayer is, again, a question of principle; some argue, for instance, that it would be better to make business pay more. But Willetts is surely right that wider access to linked data can only be a good thing. While, in a complicated world, facts are often no match for opinion, 바카라사이트y can at least help to ensure that principles are translated into policy in less short-sighted ways.

paul.jump@ws-2000.com