Higher Education and the General Election

It was debate number 2 this evening and it focussed on international affairs for at least some of the time.  Not much to do with education though the last debate had very little on it, as well.  Education policy in the UK seems to end at 18 when big public statements are made, leaving Higher Education (HE) somewhat out of the frame and International Education completely out of the frame unless it relates to immigration or Europe.  

Now, the education policies of each of the parties have been compared with passing references to universities.  The Conservatives and Labour have surprisingly close policies for HE: await the outcome of the Browne Review.  Lord Browne is looking at student finance and how universities will finance themselves; he's widely expected to recommend lifting the cap on tuition fees so that universities can increase what they charge to help balance the books when there is less governmental support.  In addition, revisions to student loans is expected (when to pay them back and how much) and adaptations to the scholarships schemes (who receives them and how much).  None of this has been sorted and there have been various calls for an announcement ahead of the election by each of the parties on tuition fees but I doubt one will appear.  That said, the Lib Dems have been discussing this and in his interview with Dermot O'Leary on BBC 3 discussed his plans to scrap tuition fees over 6 years and it was good to finally have a commitment to this even if it does fall slightly short of the immediate scrapping of all fees promised in 2005.  Nothing much was said of removing the target of getting 50% of 18 year olds into HE though this is partially the way of funding the ending of tuition fees; fewer people going to university so more money to spend on those that do.  Clegg did point out that this is a false claim by Labour saying this had been down-graded from attending to simply having an experience of Higher Education which could be as little as a couple of weeks. 

So not a hugely engaging start to a discussion on HE - nothing on reducing the grants to universities, research funding levels or a vision for the future of our universities.  The issue of immigration was discussed at the first leaders' debate and this affects HE more directly than many would think.  Now the Tories want to crack down on Student Visa Abuse which is fair enough (particularly when some students are conned into studying at the non-existent University of Kensington), Labour are asking all foreign nationals to have ID cards which seems an extension of the current visa (though why not make them carry their passports and visa - is that not enough proof?) and both the 'main' parties want to make English Language Testing harder.  I haven't forgotten the Lib Dems but they don't seem to focus on this as much.  The Tory and Labour policies follow on from the new points-based system which Labour introduced and the Tories would extend.  For HE, this moved the emphasis to them acting as the police at times and having to track student movement.  The harder regulations did result in a delay of some students' arrival.  The further hardening of entry requirements could make studying in the UK less attractive and at a time when International Students help 'balance the books' for universities, this could make the economic situation worse for them. 

Another possibility for such changes in UK immigration for Universities is where the student actually studies.  There has been a growing trend (as highlighted by the UK Council for International Student Affairs) for students to study for a UK qualification but to never set foot in the UK.  In 2007/8, 341,795 students came to the UK to study at a university (this number is before the new visa regulations so a drop is anticipated when figures are released) but 196,750 students studied for a UK qualification and never set foot in the UK.  This latter number is expected to grow and actually exceed the number of students who undertake 'physical' mobility to the UK, with students instead preferring 'virtual' mobility and still receiving a British Degree.  Now, some of this has been due to UK government support through the British Councils UKIERI and PMI2 schemes (which should feel threatened in any spending review) but much of it was happening anyway.  This could be the way forward for the funding of UK Universities if immigration policy changes after the election but needs continued investment from the government - and no-one seems to be talking about it. 

And what about Europe?  The EU funds a surprising amount of UK research and Education through its FP7 (research) programmes, the educational Lifelong Learning Programme (which includes the famous Erasmus Scheme) and, of course, Erasmus Mundus!  Now, we all know Labour would continue its relations with Europe (and supports its expansion), the Conservatives are more cautious (and would probably draw us to one side of the EU) and the Lib Dems are the most in favour of our participation in the EU.  With the volume of funding which comes from the EU and the academic richness which is borne out of relationships with other European HE Institutions, would this be something universities (or governments for that matter) would be prepared to lose?  But this evening's Leaders' Debate focussed on the Euro and socio-political discussions without actually looking at some of the close relationships we have with our nearest neighbours at an informal, extra-governmental level. 

As to the wider world, Higher Education has quite a role to play in international policy and diplomacy.  The variety of schemes funded by the British Council (including the UKIERI and PMI2 schemes mentioned earlier) are examples of where we are trying to use diplomacy and gradual education to change the world around us rather than force and tanks!  Joseph Nye (former Dean of the JFK School of Government at Harvard) has described this as 'soft power' which roughly equates to the over-used idea of winning 'hearts and minds'; higher education has the real possibility to change international relations.  Possibly not the driving force of any foreign policy but one which surely should be considered by all of the parties; instead of the large sums spent on defence, smaller and strategically aimed sums for global partnerships in Higher Education may be just as effective.  None of this featured in the debate; there was no real fundamental debate on a direction for international policy instead the leaders focussed on military issues. 

In a sense, education has featured in the discussions of this general election but not in a direct, concrete way.  Universities feature in the international economic, diplomatic and political relations of this country and aren't simple 'ivory towers' to educate Britain's teenagers.  The power of Higher Education may not have featured but each of the leaders in tonight's debate might want to consider their potential role in any future government. 

And how will I vote?  Well, the debates go on but as an individual voter I feel engaged in politics and policy in a way I have not felt before; there is a real  three-way choice this time and I am going to wait to make a decision.