The Office for Students (OfS) has been under new leadership since yesterday as a review of its workings emerged with many recommendations in the pipeline. Both events make the OfS look like a ‘lame duck’, but it does not seem to be terminal at this point. No surprise then that the chair of the review, David Behan, has taken over at the OfS as ‘poacher turned gamekeeper’. This is a temporary appointment to act decisively in the face of major challenges for the sector. The emphasis will be on financial sustainability, so it’s timely that yesterday a report from Public First and Warwick University called for a huge loan scheme, Higher Education Enhancement and Transformation, to stop universities from failing. The challenge for the government is massive.
The two reports out yesterday represent a serious indictment of the record of the last government. It is now obvious that the experiment in free market reform and poorly regulated expansion of universities has failed badly. The much-anticipated Behan review of the Office for Students (OfS) ‘Fit for the future: higher education regulation towards 2035’ (pdf) was followed quickly by ‘Institution Overboard: Managing the Risk of Disorderly Market Exit in English Higher Education’ (pdf) from Public First and Warwick University. Taken together, both describe a stark landscape with many dangers ahead. They are a terrible indictment of a failed government and a failed experiment in higher education. Change was inevitable.
Recent trials of the OfS.
Last year brought considerable grief for the OfS. After months of detailed scrutiny, the final report (pdf) on the Office for Students (OfS) by the House of Lords Industry and Regulators Committee read like an end-of-term school report where the OfS appeared as an errant pupil who is disruptive and failing to learn lessons.
“It is vital that regulators not only act with an appropriate degree of independence from the Government, but that they are perceived as doing so. This is evidently not the case for the OfS”.
An overview from TEFS with ‘End of term report: the Office for Students must do better’ (5th October 2023) concluded,
“This must mean the end of the OfS an organisation that is not ‘fit for purpose’ and a new independent body must replace it as soon as possible. But it will probably be down to a new government next year to repair the damage as the current regime tries to paper over the cracks”.
It appears this is beginning to happen.
Fit for purpose?
Behan and his team have done an excellent and diplomatic job in reviewing the OfS. The verdict of the review , ‘Fit for the future: higher education regulation towards 2035’ simply emphasises how the OfS is not currently fit for purpose despite recent improvements. However, it is accepted that the OfS must not themselves take all of the blame as they were pulled from pillar to post by the previous government and found themselves in a confusion of misdirection.
The review, led by David Behan, who has extensive experience in regulation and how it should work, starts with a simple description of a virtuous policy cycle.
“Both the regulator and the sector want the same thing – high-quality education provided by an effective, efficient, and sustainable system that operates in the interests of students. This is the basis of the mature dialogue that can secure that common and shared purpose. Let it be the foundation of their future work together”
Behan, aided by his experts in higher education ‘Challenge panel members’ (see footnote) came to alarming conclusions. A caveat here for the government is that amongst the ten-strong panel members, university representation was from post-92 institutions only. There were none to represent older universities, particularly the influential Russell group. This could backfire in time.
Nevertheless, when considering the challenges of recent years,
“This has led to the observation that the ‘golden age’ of higher education is over”.
In its place, we should be,
“Looking to the future and the fourth education revolution, we should anticipate the continued impact of digital technology and artificial intelligence on teaching, a push for shorter courses and a move to lifelong learning, as well as more experiential learning”.
Instead of worrying too much about freedom of speech and other issues,
“The OfS should prioritise:
• Monitoring financial sustainability of individual providers and the sector
• Ensuring the quality of individual providers and the sector
• Protecting public money (and students’ fees)
• Regulating in the interests of students”
As a result, the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech Act) 2023 is likely to be repealed and put down as an unnecessary diversion for the OfS. Instead, a focus on fewer priorities will enable the OfS to be more effective whilst continuing to emphasise the importance of widening access and participation in higher education.
Widening access.
Widening access might have been lost in the melee. However, this was included and it was acknowledged that,
“The system will increasingly need to respond to the lifestyle choices of students who may more frequently be working and studying part-time or undertaking other less traditional and more innovative forms of education”.
Of course, over half of the students work in jobs part-time and the experience is not what it was years ago. The struggle of these students, and the inevitable mitigation by universities, means there has been a steady degradation of courses; mostly in contact hours and the quantity being taught. This is not addressed, but it should be a key component of quality and standards oversight (see TEFS 29th June 2023 ‘More students in jobs as fewer travel first class on the university experience train’).
Regulation of quality and standards.
This is a highly contentious issue that has been a thorn in the side of the OfS and the government since the announcement in 2022 that the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) could no longer assure quality in universities in England from 2023. It was a profound shock to find out they would no longer act as the Designated Quality Body (DQB) for the Office for Students (OfS). It is astounding that their position as the DQB for the OfS meant they could no longer comply with international standards and have been suspended from the European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR). Failure to involve students and a lack of openness by the OfS were at the root of the problem. This meant the OfS was rapidly heading in a direction that undermines the position of our universities globally (See TEFS 22nd July 2022 ‘QAA – ‘Questions And Answers: Quality assurance in England is creaking badly’).
In the deliberations of Behan, there is acceptance that the OfS would continue to do its own quality and standards assessment. This could be a big mistake.
Financial sustainability.
On financial sustainability, there was a clear steer on what the government will have to do, and it is expected,
“That government undertakes policy work to revisit and clarify its position on market exit, and whether the non-interventionist positioning is still the most appropriate for meeting the challenges of today”.
TEFS has also considered the imperative of avoiding university closures referred to as ‘market exit’. This is inevitable and the government will have to act as a guarantor for loans to allow restructuring. This means ‘cut backs’ and considerable pain for universities and staff redundancies. It will be messy.
Market exit blues and a sell off.
But now enters the other report of the day. Public First with Warwick University did not hold back with ‘Institution Overboard: Managing the Risk of Disorderly Market Exit in English Higher Education’ (pdf).
This set out the perilous situation that the government has inherited. The idea of guaranteeing loans and restructuring is brought into sharper focus.
The report called for:
“A rebalancing of the role of the OfS – with a new direction from the Secretary of State to prioritise collaboration within its existing duties under HERA, so that the regulator can take a more proactive approach managing and forecasting financial risk, and so that student protection plans can be strengthened”.
Added to this is the need for,
“The creation of a new £2.5bn Higher Education Enhancement and Transformation Scheme – to offer repayable loans to institutions that can make a compelling case for restructuring”.
This is an astonishing amount of money but with no clear explanation as to how the figure was arrived at. It would be overseen by the establishment of a ‘Higher Education Commissioner’ to manage the fund and its deployment.
There are also various options presented for ‘institutions’ in trouble. These include the old chestnuts of the closure of courses, mergers and restructuring. However, added is the alarming proposition of the ‘sale of an institution’. One wonders if Warwick University might have a vested interest in such a radical solution. However, privatisation was bound to rear its head again as it has done in the past (see TEFS 26th September 2021 ‘Privatisation storm looms for universities’).
Poacher turned gamekeeper.
TEFS concludes that restructuring and the launch of a new regulator are needed. Tinkering around with the existing Higher Education and Research Act 2017 (HERA) that set up the OfS may not be sufficient. This may explain why Behan is in an interim position to steady the ship.
The last word for the OfS is near the end of Behan’s report.
“That the OfS continues to pursue efficiency savings and enhanced productivity
as it considers the efficacy, accountability, and governance recommendations
of this review”.
In changing his role from poacher to game-keeper, Behan might want to consider if he is destined to ‘Inherit the wind’.
The author, Mike Larkin, retired from Queen’s University Belfast after 37 years teaching Microbiology, Biochemistry and Genetics. He remains optimistic and loves mixed metaphors.
FOOTNOTE.
Challenge Panel members
The panel was composed of individuals selected for their expertise in education, the public sector, consumer rights and regulation.
• Anne-Marie Canning – CEO of the Brilliant Club
• Dame Sally Dicketts – Chair of the Learning with Parents and the Education and Training Foundation
• Professor Lynn Dobbs – VC and Chief Executive of London Metropolitan University
• Christine Forde – CEO of Solihull Action through Advocacy and Council member at Which?
• Nick Hillman – Director of the Higher Education Policy Institute
• Professor Sir Chris Husbands – Former VC of Sheffield Hallam University
• John Latham – VC of Coventry University
• Cindy Rampersaud – Non-Executive Director at Sage Homes, Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee at the London Film School and Chair of Audit and Risk at the UK Health Security Agency
• David Wallace – Deputy Chief Executive of the Student Loans Company
• Professor Kieran Walshe – Professor of Health Policy and Management at Alliance Manchester Business School, Director of Health, and Care Research Wales