The Labour conference finished today with an upbeat mood. However, the departing delegates in Liverpool have started to come to terms with the mountain the government must climb. Meanwhile, the universities ship was slowly sinking in full view in the dock. The old mantra of ‘Education, Education, Education’ sounded hollow in the main conference business with muffled sounds only coming from around the fringes. It is truly a shame that a coordinated aspiration of a solid education policy base across all levels of education was not evident. Young people are crying out for education from school to college and university to be fixed asap. Instead, they are met by a wall of silence and promises for the generation coming after them. Pre-school and early years will get the immediate support many current students do not see.
I deliberately chose to stay at the grand old Adelphi Hotel for my short stay in Liverpool. Dubbed the ‘worst hotel in England’, I was pleasantly surprised. From my experience, it is definitely not the worst by a long way. Instead, it seems some clients are more affected by perception and unrealistic expectations. For me, the hotel and its guests quickly became a metaphor for the ‘state of the nation’. A pale ghost of its former glory, it is declining slowly due to a lack of investment from the owners and poor management. But the staff are great and deserve more credit. Like the UK, it needs nurturing, investment and new management to become one of the best hotels in England.
Some priorities emerged.
The education priorities at the top table emerged as more support for pre-school and early years education, then more apprenticeships. This is good and appears to herald a longer-term plan for young post-Covid children that will develop during their lives. The skills agenda means more support to get students into apprenticeships post-sixteen. But there still remains serious problems for the current generation of students that must be addressed urgently. The role of education in driving social mobility appears of lesser priority despite the rhetoric.
The Post-Covid effects continue.
A fringe meeting that addressed the longer-term effects of the Covid lockdowns set off very loud alarm bells. The impact on school attendance and rising levels of adverse mental health were just two of the impacts that should be addressed over a longer term. The question was asked, what happened to the National Tutoring Programme? It was a surprise to find that the National Tutoring Programme officially ended in August 2024, after four years of providing ring-fenced tuition funds to schools. But parents with greater resources are filling the gap in tutoring and in turn widening the attainment gap. Its a recipe for reversing the small social mobility gains of the last ten years or so.
Post-sixteen education.
The provision at this level is crucial to providing opportunity. At one fringe meeting, Sam Freedman, a former advisor to Michael Gove, stressed that BTECs were of such importance that they must not be abandoned. This received huge applause from a packed room of experienced educators. One panel member of the curriculum and assessment review was in the room and he surely must pass on the reaction. T-levels are not functioning and BTECs remain popular. Alongside A-levels, BTECs are a route to higher education and remain the gateway to upward social mobility.
Boiling the frog.
There was universal recognition amongst university leaders at the conference that the funding model for universities was not sustainable. This covers running costs for degree courses, capital infrastructure, and research funding that adds more to university costs. But there is a suspicion that the government is deliberately raising the temperature and letting it play out like ‘boiling the frog’.
This was probably the most apt metaphor deployed by Vivienne Stern, CEO of Universities UK to describe our universities at a fringe meeting. With the temperature rising slowly, the university ‘frog’ doesn’t notice the danger until it is too late. With the financial stress increasing slowly over several years, it seems most universities are adapting to less income by cutting the offer to students under the banner of greater efficiency. One question posed by a leading journalist about universities being more efficient, and considering possible mergers ,as met with some alarm by two VCs in the room. We learned that mergers are unlikely to resolve the problems, however, the idea of using fewer permanent staff and more fixed-term contract staff is gaining ground. It’s hardly a bright future.
Chinks of light through the policy wall.
Many education concerns popped up in multiple fringe meetings. Inadequate finance and student support appeared often and should not be ignored. Universities cannot be expected to provide all of the student support needed. Skills Minister, Jacqui Smith (aka Baroness Smith of Malvern) also covers universities in her remit and she attended a small fringe meeting. In an over packed room, she suggested that means tested maintenance grants would return. Hurrah, but when?
Attendees at a UCU run event were hoping for more light from the Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson, who was invited. She would have been alongside the UCU general Secretary, leaders of other education unions and the president of the NUS. Instead, she was empty-chaired. She opted for an interview with Katy Balls of the Spectator elsewhere. This decision alone sends out a powerful message and is a bad sign.
University funding.
When all of the issues of higher education and improved widening participation are distilled down, it leaves the recalcitrant residue of core funding. It appears that there are two schools of thought about this. Some think that there should not be a ‘knee jerk reaction’ and more time is needed to resolve the situation. Others are worried and see that some universities are in danger. TEFS also sees the situation as urgent and there should be a resolution before the 2025/26 academic year before the crisis leads to a domino effect of failures.
Avoiding names, some MPs said the government was considering many options but did not say more. However, one stated that they were considering differential fees and repayments. It seems the idea of higher fees for higher cost degrees (STEM and Medicine) has not been abandoned and those earning more should pay more. This is countered by universities calling for higher fees of around at least £12,500 pa across the board. Neither is likely to be imposed. UCU called for a levy tax on graduate employers to cover all of the cost of a degree, but this too seems unlikely. Instead, TEFS has called for a shared approach whereby those who benefit the most share the costs (see TEFS last week, ‘University crisis as balloon bursts: Radical old ideas for funding needed’). The simplest way to achieve this is to add a graduate levy to National Insurance for graduates and their employers. The fund would be ringfenced for universities, be progressive and protect against inflation over time. It’s an old idea going back to the last Labour government. Unfortunately, it fell alongside a graduate tax.
On funding for students and universities, there appears to be a lot of ideas being floated and it comes as a surprise that Labour had not been in a better position by the election. The lack of urgency is baffling. However, some are still suspicious that there is a solidified plan and the government does not want to show their hand yet.
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.