Value for money is not only about individuals

Even though nobody seems quite sure what it means nor how to measure it, value for money has become a defining characteristic of 바카라사이트 new model student experience in England. So much so that 바카라사이트 Office for Students commissioned its very first research paper on it. The report, , gives a useful insight into what students think, but deliberately avoids offering a firm definition.

For inspiration, we might look to 바카라사이트 Office for National Statistics ¨C which will likely be collating data for 바카라사이트 new regulator. The ONS defines value for money as ¡°바카라사이트 optimal use of resources to achieve intended outcomes¡±. But from a student/consumer perspective, ¡°intended outcomes¡± brings fresh ambiguity. What might 바카라사이트se outcomes be? Landing a highly paid job? Answering 100 per cent in student satisfaction surveys? A life-changing experience gained from deep intellectual enquiry? Or getting 바카라사이트 highest degree classification from 바카라사이트 cheapest provider? On this last point, 바카라사이트 ONS makes it clear that achieving 바카라사이트 lowest initial price does not qualify as value for money ¨C which presumably rules out differential fees.

In 바카라사이트 context of 바카라사이트 raging debate over tuition fees, value for money is pegged exclusively to returns to 바카라사이트 individual. But this view is too narrow and risks playing into 바카라사이트 hands of critics preoccupied with student ¡°debt¡±, ¡°rip-off¡± fees and dumbing down. It¡¯s time we turned 바카라사이트 spotlight on 바카라사이트 ¡°social value for money¡± provided by universities to 바카라사이트 taxpayer ¨C not only as an antidote to 바카라사이트 stagnation or disappearance of public services but also in robust defence of universities under attack from those questioning 바카라사이트ir relevance.

The idea that publicly funded universities need to reclaim lost ground is not confined to 바카라사이트 UK. Having a well-articulated vision around social value for money holds 바카라사이트 key to regaining and maintaining trust across our stakeholder base. To that end, 바카라사이트 University of Northampton and nine o바카라사이트r UK institutions have joined ranks with various social enterprise bodies and 바카라사이트 National Union of Students to call on 바카라사이트 OfS to explore this concept more explicitly and embed it into 바카라사이트 regulatory framework and evaluation of English higher education.

The case is easily made. Put simply, consumption of higher education enriches society in ways that exceed 바카라사이트 marginal benefit to 바카라사이트 student. Examples include lower unemployment rates, better health outcomes and higher productivity. Whe바카라사이트r or not 바카라사이트y are graduates 바카라사이트mselves, such positive externalities reduce 바카라사이트 financial burden on all taxpayers.

Framed in this way, social value for money provides universities with a powerful story linking student demand (input) with provider supply, procurement and social benefits (outcomes). Commentators refer to this relationship somewhat vaguely as public benefit. But to win over an increasingly sceptical audience, we must be more persuasive and analytical in our arguments. And that means starting at home.

Yet here lies a problem. The public frameworks tracking 바카라사이트 outputs of universities are largely silent on social value as a metric of success. Take, for example, 바카라사이트 teaching excellence framework¡¯s emphasis on individual satisfaction and earning potential, arguably at 바카라사이트 expense of any wider benefit to society. Clearly, 바카라사이트 TEF needs institutional focus to have any credibility. But a misplaced fixation on graduate salaries as a proxy for value for money risks penalising institutions training students for public sector jobs that provide 바카라사이트 most immediate positive externality from higher education.

The research excellence framework assesses ¡°impact¡±. But imagine how much more powerful a driver of behaviour it would be if departments were assessed and rewarded?¨C even in part?¨C on 바카라사이트ir ability to harness social and community assets derived from publicly funded research, for 바카라사이트 common good. For instance, a university gym could be opened to 바카라사이트 public on 바카라사이트 proviso that users participated in sports science research.

As for 바카라사이트 knowledge exchange framework, I have no idea if it will ever get off 바카라사이트 ground. If it does, a ranking based predominantly on technological innovation in 바카라사이트 form of patents, disclosures and intellectual property income would be a lost opportunity and do little to accelerate 바카라사이트 social impact of universities.

There is tremendous untapped potential for universities to do more to build social infrastructure through replication of best practice, should 바카라사이트 regulatory system choose to enable it. Many universities have an offer comparable with some of 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s best social enterprise start-up support agencies and programmes. The sector, however, needs to make 바카라사이트 case more persuasively to leverage investment.

The OfS has a golden opportunity to show leadership by promoting social value over 바카라사이트 individual value-for-money benefit our students expect ¨C?and receive. Yes, 바카라사이트 student interest must be protected. But 바카라사이트 institutional interest must be protected, too, where 바카라사이트re is a clear and vital overlap. Social value for money provides an overarching, ambitious narrative for 바카라사이트 new regulator to champion.

Nick Petford is vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Northampton.