I welcome the prime minister's review of university funding because, amid the sound and fury of party politics, the real casualty of the 2012 higher education shake-up has gone largely unnoticed – the impact on the economy and society of the decline in mature and part-time learners.
It is no exaggeration to say that "earning while learning" is in crisis in England. The roots lie in Labour's reforms but the accelerator was the UK coalition government's decision to slash grants and treble student tuition fees. In the past six years numbers of new part-time students in England have fallen by an extraordinary 56 per cent.
I was impressed by some of the arguments made by Theresa May in her Conservative conference speech, but I disagree with her on where the focus of funding reform should be.
Mrs May said the State should intervene where the free market was "broken". Yes. And she said that students are required to "take on a huge amount of debt". Yes.
But the market that is most clearly broken is part-time and adult learning in England, not that for younger full-time students, which is booming. And the students who have been most deterred from study by that huge potential debt are not "young students" whom the prime minister championed, but older, especially disadvantaged students.
Figures for full-time students from disadvantaged backgrounds going to university have risen by a welcome 7 per cent since higher fees. But that increase is dwarfed by a simultaneous 47 per cent fall in part-time students from those same areas. So the overall number from deprived areas entering higher education in England is down 15 per cent on 2011/2012.
If Jeremy Corbyn had been more precise in his election campaign claims, fact checkers and Conservative critics might have found it more difficult to attack him.
Jeremy, don't say "higher fees have put young people from deprived backgrounds off studying at university"; do say "higher fees have put people from deprived backgrounds off studying at university".
The reasons for the decline are easy to understand if you know part-time students. They are not a homogenous group. They are people in work, with family responsibilities, mortgages and competing demands on their time; many have disabilities which mean they can only study through part-time distance learning.
Or they are people in work who want a new high quality skill to improve their circumstances. But they can't get a government loan for a short course and can't afford to fund themselves. People like these think far harder than younger students before taking on debt, so high fees and inflexible loans rules are a major barrier.
The clearest evidence that affordability has hit the English part-time market comes from Scotland, which has not experienced the same funding changes. There, Open University (OU) student numbers have been stable, while England's have plummeted – the OU has more than twice the number of students per head of population in Scotland than in England. That means Scotland's businesses get better access to workers who have improved their skills than those in England.
No wonder that business leaders from the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the Institute of Directors (IoD) and the British Chambers of Commerce have all told me they are desperate to tackle the skills of the existing workforce, including through part-time higher education study.
So why, given the clear business need to let workers earn and learn, is the political will to tackle this lagging? Partly, this is because too many politicians and commentators are conditioned by their own experience of full-time university. But, even after the fall in part-time, only 42 per cent of higher education study in England involves 18 and 19 year-olds studying full-time.
There should be no political embarrassment in fixing a system that is broken and there should be minimal political cost for changing tack on this aspect.
There is no shortage of potential solutions. The Taylor Review, Bright Blue, Higher Education Policy Institute, Universities UK, University Alliance, Learning and Work Institute, Association of Colleges, National Union of Students (NUS), the CBI, IoD and the HE Commission – to name a few – have produced a torrent of practical and cost-effective suggestions. In coming weeks the OU will be co-operating with business, the NUS, FE colleges and other higher education institutions committed to part-time study to develop and promote these ideas to the funding review. If you'd like to get involved, please contact me.
I am 53 years old, in full time employment, and successfully gained a BSc Hons Open Degree First Class this year with the OU under Transitional Funding arrangements. I would not have been able to do this had I been paying full fees, and am unlikely to be able to continue my studies at post-graduate levels if I am required to pay the current fees. I am happy for my story to be used to argue for a change in the funding models for earn and learn
The culture of lifelong learning which was fostered and harnessed during the 70s, 80s and 90s has been sadly eroded during the 21st century. Numerous initiatives targeted at adult learners followed the establishment of the OU, including the adult literacy campaign, a UK-wide network of educational guidance services for adults and a robust access to HE movement. I worked on all of these initiatives over a period of 30 years, at local and national level, and latterly with UUK and university consortia on employability projects, so it is with profound regret I contemplate the rapid dismantling of access routes for adult learners of all backgrounds. I note that my generation of first in family graduates had ready access to part-time post grad study for career enhancement. Our adult children are rarely able to take up the same kind of opportunity. The still large cohort of adults who left school at 15 or 16 are now faced with working until their late 60s with no possibility of substantial learning for career change or advancement, and few sources of help and advice. The OU was instrumental in setting up and supporting the first pioneering education advice services for adults in the UK. With the demise of NIACE and other exclusively adult learning-focused bodies it is vital that the OU now takes the lead on a national campaign to reverse the decline of second chance learning opportunities for adults.
Totally agree Peter. Without the lucky inclusion of transitional fee arrangements, I would have very likely abandoned my study part way through and been unable to complete my degree with the OU. I would love to consider extending that study further to include a Masters but just cannot justify the cost. I hope the UK government, and opposition parties reading this, take your advice.
I was put off from studying with the Open University in 2012 when tuition fees were trebled by the last Coalition government. How do you, and the present government, plan to fix the "broken system"of higher education study. What do these practical and cost-effective suggestions involve? Surely, the most important thing is to fix the funding situation. It is unfair that OU students in Scotland pay far less than OU students in England for their courses. This is one of the things that put me off studying with the OU in 2012. I seriously considered moving to Scotland, just so that I could pay less fees! This is a crazy situation, which does nothing to help social mobility. Something Nick Clegg used to believe in?!Remember him - I wonder what he is doing now! Probably not an OU degree! It just means a lot of people, with potential, get stuck in situations with no means of escape, apart from taking out a massive loan/debt to help change their situation. I hope the Open University's funding system and other universities funding systems will be included in the government's review of higher education, with a particular focus on why so many talented people have had to give up part-time study in the last 6 years. Unless the Open University and other higher education institutions change their policy on tuition fees and funding for part-time learners, more and more of these institutions will go out of business in the future. Which will be a great shame, especially for an institution, which once prided itself on accessible education for all.