EDUCATION, LIFELONG LEARNING AND CULTURE COMMITTEE AGENDA. 9th Meeting, 2007 (Session 3) Wednesday 14 November 2007

Transcription

1 ELLC/S3/07/9/A EDUCATION, LIFELONG LEARNING AND CULTURE COMMITTEE AGENDA 9th Meeting, 2007 (Session 3) Wednesday 14 November 2007 The Committee will meet at am in Committee Room Decision on taking business in private: The Committee will consider whether to take item 4 in private. 2. Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill: The Committee will take evidence on the general principles of the Bill at Stage 1 from Peter Syme, Director, The Open University in Scotland; and then from James Alexander, President, National Union of Students Scotland; and Tom D'Ardenne, President, Coalition of Higher Education Students in Scotland. 3. Subordinate legislation: The Committee will consider the following negative instrument the Education (School and Placing Information) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2007 (SSI 2007/487). 4. Budget process (Stage 2): The Committee will consider its approach to the budget process Eugene Windsor Clerk to the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee Room T3.40 Tel: eugene.windsor@scottish.parliament.uk

2 ELLC/S3/07/9/A The following papers are attached for this meeting: Agenda item 2 Submission from The Open University in Scotland Submission from the National Union of Students Scotland Submission from the Coalition of Higher Education Students in Scotland ELLC/S3/07/9/1 ELLC/S3/07/9/2 ELLC/S3/07/9/3 Agenda item 3 SSI cover note The Education (School and Placing Information) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2007 (SSI 2007/487) ELLC/S3/07/9/4 (un-numbered) Agenda item 4 Private paper from the Clerk ELLC/S3/07/9/5 (P)

3 Agenda item 2 ELLC/S3/07/9/1 14 November 2007 EDUCATION, LIFELONG LEARNING AND CULTURE COMMITTEE Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill Written evidence from The Open University in Scotland 1. The Open University in Scotland welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee on the Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill. 2. The Open University is Scotland s largest provider of part-time higher education and we are committed to ensuring that the position of part-time higher education students is represented in all relevant policy developments. 3. This evidence is prepared in advance of the Scottish Government s announcement of its spending plans in and subsequent years, and of any associated statement on support for part-time learners. 4. As we highlighted in our response to the Scottish Government s consultation on the abolition of the graduate endowment fee in August 2007, a consequence of the abolition will be to widen further the gap which already exists between support for fulltime and part-time students in Scotland. 5. Higher education for full-time students will effectively be free, irrespective of individual students ability to pay. The majority of part-time higher education students, however, will continue to pay tuition fees, with only those on the very lowest incomes currently receiving any financial support. 6. In our view, this differing treatment is difficult to justify on objective grounds, is inequitable to individual students because it is not based on need, and is distorting the market in higher education. This is not only damaging for students and the higher education market, but also for the skill-set of Scotland and its prospects of sustained economic growth. General principles of the Bill 7. While The Open University in Scotland has no specific objection to the over-riding principle behind the abolition of the graduate endowment, we believe it is important that it is seen within the context of the wider higher education landscape. 8. In considering the general principles of the Bill therefore we would like to make four points: 1. The abolition of the graduate endowment will in effect be a relatively small step towards the goal outlined in Section 13 of the policy memorandum accompanying the Bill. 1

4 ELLC/S3/07/9/1 It is a step towards ensuring that in a modern Scotland everyone can gain economic, social and personal fulfilment to the fullest possible extent and that everyone who has the ability has the opportunity to be involved in the higher education experience by removing the barriers which may prevent them from doing so. Part-time students make up more than a third (38%) of the student body at Scottish higher education institutions. As the legislative changes will not affect them directly, a significant proportion of the student population will gain no benefit from the abolition. 2. The Scottish Government s skills strategy, Skills for Scotland, highlights the importance to Scotland s economic and social development of a system for learning and skills which meets the needs of people of all ages. The policy memorandum focuses on the position of young people which, while of undoubted importance, again only addresses the needs of one part of Scotland s potential learner base. Reducing the cost barrier for part-time students will also be essential if we are to meet the higher level skills needs of all sections of Scotland s working age population. 3. Section 14 of the policy memorandum cites evidence from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation on debt aversion as a disincentive to full-time education for young people. There is also a significant body of recent research evidence 1 which highlights that cost is a considerable barrier to engagement with part-time study for people of all ages, including many of those likely to benefit from it the most. 4. Section 16 of the policy memorandum states that Abolishing the GE is the first step for the Scottish Government towards its aspiration of having a higher education system in Scotland that is free for all. The Open University in Scotland believes strongly that in order to address the needs of all potential learners, the logical next step must be to improve the position of Scotland s part-time students. Policy memorandum and financial memorandum 9. Other than the comments above, we have no specific points to make on the policy and financial memoranda accompanying the Bill. Both provide a clear and helpful outline of the principles behind the Bill and the financial picture. Scottish Government s consultation on the abolition of the graduate endowment 10. We have no specific comments on the handling of the consultation. We were pleased to see however that the report analysing responses acknowledged that a number of respondents had highlighted the part-time student position. The Open University in Scotland 7 November See for example: Exploring the work/life/study balance: the experience of higher education students in a further education college, Janet Lowe and Vernon Gayle, Journal of Further and Higher Education Vol 31, No3, August 2007; and Looking to Learn: Investigating the Motivations to Learn and the Barriers Faced by Adults Wishing to Undertake Part-Time Study, Ralf St Clair, Scottish Executive social research, No 36/2006 2

5 Agenda item 2 ELLC/S3/07/9/2 14 November 2007 Introduction EDUCATION, LIFELONG LEARNING AND CULTURE COMMITTEE Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill Written evidence from the National Union of Students Scotland 1. NUS Scotland welcomes the proposed abolition of the Graduate Endowment. The announcement by the Cabinet Secretary in June 2007 to consult on this issue, and subsequent drafting of the Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill have been welcomed by NUS Scotland as important steps in the reduction of graduate debt. History 2. Following the publication of Student Finance: Fairness for the Future, NUS Scotland called on the Scottish Government to fully implement the Independent Committee of Inquiry into Student Finance report, and argued that the Graduate Endowment as it was introduced did not achieve what was set out in the Cubie Report 1. In fact, NUS Scotland campaigned against the introduction of the Graduate Endowment because the income threshold for payment did not reflect the financial benefit that graduates derived from their studies, nor did it provide funding back into student support to an adequate level to improve student funding. 3. NUS Scotland described our dissatisfaction with the Graduate Endowment in our Education Manifesto, published ahead of the Scottish Parliament elections in May We pointed out that over the past fifteen years, the student loans scheme has meant that the average graduate contribution to higher education costs has increased from zero (other than income tax and other taxes) to thousands of pounds per graduate, over and above the standard taxation The vast majority of students are forced to add the Graduate Endowment fee onto their total student loan debt, thus adding to the already crippling debt levels of graduates. The fact that just one third of the overall Graduate Endowment fee has been repaid and an additional graduate debt of 26.3M incurred 3 suggests that the plan to expand student support to the poorest students from the Graduate Endowment income has been poorly thought out. Recent evidence confirms that participation from the most deprived areas is still poor. In , people from the most advantaged areas were almost twice as likely to participate in further or higher education as people from the most deprived areas 4. 1 NUS Scotland Student Finance: Funding Futures August NUS Scotland Education Manifesto: Elections Statement by Fiona Hyslop, Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning to the Scottish Parliament, 13 June Scottish Funding Council Learning for All: Report on Measures of Success

6 ELLC/S3/07/9/2 5. Furthermore, recent evidence highlights the growing problem of graduate debt. NUS Scotland figures suggest that graduates leave university with a debt of 16,000. Of those at university, students who come from poorer backgrounds had 23% 5 more debt than those from the more wealthy backgrounds. Clearly the policy of better bursary provision from the income of the Graduate Endowment is not working to support those who it had intended to help. 6. These levels of debt prevent our graduates from buying their own home, starting a family or a pension. Ultimately, this prevents graduates from contributing to the economy and prevents Scotland from becoming a wealthier and fairer country. 7. NUS Scotland s represents 85% of students in higher education and 90% of students in further education. Through our democratic forums, our members have voted through policy to oppose student debt and hardship. Based on this and the above evidence, we fully support the abolition of the graduate endowment fee. Concerns 8. The Cabinet Secretary informed the Scottish Parliament that the Graduate Endowment fee has recouped nearly 13M in cash payments and loan repayments since it was introduced. It has always been the case that any income from the fee would be channelled back into student support funding for the purpose of student bursaries. With the loss of this income stream, NUS Scotland is concerned that student support payments will be affected. 9. We are seeking assurances from the Scottish Government that student support levels will not be affected by the loss of this income and that the shortfall will be met by other means. Furthermore, NUS Scotland is concerned that the necessary increase to the student support purse as a result of the lost Graduate Endowment income will reduce the political will for greater investment in student support. 10. NUS Scotland acknowledges the commitment the Scottish Government has made in tackling graduate debt, but we seek further commitment that it will tackle student hardship by investing more funds in student support. Although a welcome proposal, the removal of the Graduate Endowment is just a small step towards defeating hardship. How helpful do you find the policy memorandum and financial memorandum accompanying the Bill? 11. We acknowledge and support the view that the Graduate Endowment has failed to achieve its aims of promoting social inclusion by reducing barriers to widening access and participation. The figures and assessments contained within these memoranda closely support the views of NUS Scotland. The Graduate Endowment has increased the debt burden of graduates and has compounded issues affecting graduates because of their debt. 5 Scottish Executive Higher and Further Education Students Income, Expenditure and Debt in Scotland

7 ELLC/S3/07/9/2 Do you have any comments on the consultation the Scottish Government carried out prior to the introduction of the Bill? 12. The consultation process was straightforward and easily accessible. There were few issues of contention, as evidenced by all the supporting responses received by the Scottish Government. Conclusion 13. NUS Scotland would like to take this opportunity to welcome the proposed reduction to graduate debt, while emphasising that the loss of income to the student support purse and the general poor levels of student funding remain issues of concerns for us. We are pleased that the Scottish Government is taking steps to reduce the financial burden on students in Scotland but believe much more must be done to ensure that students are not forced into living below the poverty line. 14. NUS Scotland looks forward to working with the Scottish Government and the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee to ensure that lifelong learning becomes a reality in Scotland and that all students, no matter what their personal circumstances, are able to learn without facing hardship and poverty. Submitted by and on behalf of the Scottish Executive Committee November

8 Agenda item 2 ELLC/S3/07/9/3 14 November 2007 EDUCATION, LIFELONG LEARNING AND CULTURE COMMITTEE Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill Written evidence from the Coalition of Higher Education Students in Scotland (CHESS) 1. CHESS recognises that the question of funding Higher Education is difficult and expensive to answer. We do not pretend that we have all of the answers, however CHESS has compiled the following response to removing the Graduate Endowment while bearing in mind the opinions of the students at our institutions, as well remembering there is no easy solution to this issue. 2. The Graduate Endowment however is only one piece of a bigger puzzle; that of Higher Education funding. Education, like justice, health and the economy to name a few are vital to the goal of making Scotland the best country in the world. Higher Education, plays a key role- today s students are tomorrows economists and teachers, lawyers and doctors. Barriers to Entry 3. Universities are attempting to enrol the best and the brightest minds from Scotland, the UK and beyond. However, institutions actively seeking such students are singled out for failing to admit enough students from a particular type of background. CHESS would propose that it is not the Universities that are at fault but a combination of factors fear of student debt being the most pressing. 4. Student debt or the rising cost of being a student are now accepted phrases in the mindset of young people and their parents. The important question to ask is, how does this affect the decision making process of school leavers thinking about the option of Higher Education. For middle class families, attending University can sometimes be a social question; it s what is expected of me, but for a working class family it becomes a question of economics; can I afford it? Do I want to spend the rest of my working life trying to clear debts incurred because I chose to study? 5. With a government serious about a widening access agenda, more needs to be done to ensure this is a reality in Scottish education. Student Support is central to this. 6. Another concern is one of equity. Scottish and EU students find themselves exempt from tuition fees. This obviously is the ideal scenario for these groups but how do we treat students from the other side of the border. English, Welsh and Northern Irish students are required to pay fees of 1700 (or 2700 for medicine). This is unfair and a solution must be found to tackle this. 1

9 ELLC/S3/07/9/3 The Widening Access Agenda 7. There are countless mechanisms across the HE sector that institutions are using to encourage local school pupils, who might dismiss HE as an option, to think about it seriously. 8. Summer Schools, School visits, student shadowing and student tutor programmes to name a few. However, universities are right to accept students on the basis of academic merit. Ensuring that each and every school leaver is given the opportunity to progress and excel within the HE sector is important but under no circumstances would we propose or support social engineering within the university admission processes. The question should not be one of how can we make universities take more pupils from non-traditional backgrounds, but how can society encourage each and every young person to take the opportunities afford to them within their primary and secondary schooling and drive them onto success? In it for the long haul? 9. We want our institutions to be world-leading centres of excellence in the fields of teaching and research. This does not come without serious investment- significantly greater than the levels of funding available at present. While we cannot say that Higher Education should be prioritised over other specific areas of spending, if universities are to survive and prosper beyond the next 10 years additional funding needs to be found. We strongly believe that student s are not the only solution to the funding crisis. The main beneficiaries of degrees are not just the students, society and business gain skills and expertise from our graduates. 10. The Principal of the University of St Andrews, Dr Brian Lang has spoken out in the media recently and suggested a graduation tax, a means for graduates to repay society for providing the taxes that got them through university. They are the graduates who will work in the skilled professions society needs. They are the next generation of doctors and lawyers, economists and teachers. As graduates gain particular skills through their University education, they are able to partake in the economy at a higher level, therefore it is not only the graduate who gains from a degree, but the society as a whole, building a more successful Scotland. However, we should be careful not to impose over-taxation on graduates in case there is a decrease in new students and those graduates staying on in Scotland. 11. Dr Lang stated at the Funding for Success Higher Education and the Economy conference in May 2007, We compete in an international market for the best staff, the best students, for research grants and for donations towards building projects for those new labs and libraries Our young people deserve no less than the best and we should not compromise on that. But we need urgently to look for more effective ways of supporting students and research. The present structures and mechanisms carry a substantial risk of higher education in Scotland being left behind. Sentiments that we completely agree with, however the mechanism of graduate tax that Dr Lang voiced we do not agree with. The Knowledge Economy 12. We live in a society where knowledge is the key that opens many doors. The shape of that key, however, is changing. No longer do jobs require Highers or Standard 2

10 ELLC/S3/07/9/3 Grades, but Educated to degree level. In some cases, jobs are requesting candidates who have gone beyond degree level to masters and Ph.D. programmes. The myth that a degree will get you a high paid job has gone, students need more than just their honours degrees. Scotland should be ensuring that our students, our graduates, have the ability to reach their knowledge potential- not because they can pay for it, but because they have the ability to do it. Students wishing to study higher degrees or second degrees in subjects which will lead to a professional career, e.g. medicine, law should be supported and indeed encouraged by government. The barrier to this at present is funding. Conclusion 13. We support the abolition of the Graduate Endowment. However we do see three important goals for government. 1) Working to end student debt and encouraging non-traditional students to move into Higher Education with the result of no longer requiring a Widening Access Agenda 2) A review of University funding is required urgently. If we want our universities to excel and be world leaders they need greater financial resources. 3) Students embarking on professional courses or higher study need to be supported adequately at all times and procedures should be put in place to make sure this is happening. 14. These are exciting times in Scotland. The new Scottish executive has a huge opportunity to make a difference. Steve Savage and Mhairi Wilson CHESS 3

11 Agenda item 3 ELLC/S3/07/9/4 14 November 2007 EDUCATION, LIFELONG LEARNING AND CULTURE COMMITTEE Subordinate Legislation The Education (School and Placing Information) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2007 (SSI 2007/487) Background 1. The purpose of the instrument is to make consequential changes to the Education (School and Placing Information) (Scotland) Regulations 1982 (SSI 1982/950) following the passing of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Act These include changing and updating references in relation to Records of Needs, placing requests and School Boards. 2. The Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee is the lead committee for this instrument and should report to the Parliament by 3 December The Minister responsible is Maureen Watt, Minister for Schools and Skills. 3. Copies of the SSI, an explanatory note (which is not part of the Regulations) and the Executive Note are attached. 4. A note on procedure for considering SSIs is attached overleaf. This is a negative instrument. Subordinate Legislation Committee s consideration 5. The Subordinate Legislation Committee considered the SSI at its meeting on 6 November 2007 and determined that it did not need to draw the attention of the Parliament to the instrument on any of the grounds set out within Rule Action 6. The Committee is invited to CONSIDER whether it wishes to make any recommendation in relation to the instrument. The instrument is not subject to amendment. Andrew Proudfoot Assistant Clerk Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee 1

12 ELLC/S3/07/9/4 Procedural Note Standing Orders 1. The procedures for dealing with Scottish Statutory Instruments (SSIs) are covered by Chapter 10 of Standing Orders. SSIs are laid by being lodged with the chamber clerks, and are published in the Business Bulletin. They are referred to the Subordinate Legislation Committee, the appropriate subject committee (the lead committee ), and, where relevant, any other committee. SSIs subject to annulment: negative instruments 2. Where an SSI is subject to annulment, it comes into force on a specified date and then remains in force unless it is annulled by the Parliament. Any MSP may by motion propose to the lead committee that the committee recommend that nothing further is to be done under the instrument. Such motions are lodged with the chamber clerks. 3. The lead committee debates such a motion for no more than 90 minutes. 4. The lead committee reports to the Parliament, setting out its recommendations. If it recommends annulment, the Bureau will propose to the Parliament a motion that nothing further is to be done under the instrument. 5. All the above must take place within 40 days of the instrument being laid, excluding recesses of more than 4 days. 6. To date, no motion to annul SSI 2007/487 has been lodged with the chamber clerks. 2