inside this issue - hecsu · global mba and european business schools ... hec paris remains at the...

Information and research into graduate employment and careers

spring 2011

Exclusive interview with AGR CEO, Carl Gilleard

Informed Choices: Demystifying Russell group entry

FE to HE Transitions

Real Prospects 2011

Higher Education at the age of austerity: New Policy Exchange research findings

1994 Group exclusive: ‘Not a crisis but an opportunity’

market trends

gmtgraduate

Inside this issue:

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

2

GMTAutumn

gmt

A very warm welcome to the Spring 2011

edition of Graduate Market Trends.

As I write this note, the sun is bleaching the

city pavements outside, yet the clouds move in

at any moment. In keeping with British springtime

weather the content of the present issue highlights the

challenges facing our sectors, but also promises

brighter days for the future

We begin with our exclusive interview: AGR’s Chief

Executive, Carl Gilleard forecasts the graduate labour

market for 2011. His message is clear: graduate

employers are ready to ride the revolution. Next,

following intense media scrutiny over its distinction

between ‘hard’ and ’soft’ AS-Level subjects in gaining

Russell Group entry, author of ‘Informed Choices in

post-16 education’ Andy Gardner is on a mission to

clarify the guide’s original agenda.

We also bring you the latest research in vocational

learners’ progression into the graduate labour market

with Wayne Clarke’s FE to HE Transitions, a fascinating

qualitative research project by the University of

Westminster.

I am very pleased to include in this issue the latest

from the Real Prospects Project. HECSU Senior

Researcher Holly Higgins takes data from this year’s

survey straight out of the spreadsheet and brings us a

‘taster’ of this year’s key themes and messages.

Next, in ‘Plugging the gaps’, Policy Exchange’s

Alexander Massey outlines the positive findings of

the think tank’s recent two-part report series,

Higher Education in the Age of Austerity. In the same vein,

the 1994 Group’s Research Director, Rachel Winzer,

explains the reasons behind the mission group’s

optimism in the face of deep changes in the sector.

The online edition of GMT has an additional feature.

In ‘Equality in Higher Education’, the Equality

Challenge Unit’s (ECU) Head of Policy Gary Locke

identifies the three key equality and diversity issues in

the UK HE sector that must now be addressed as a

matter of urgency.

I do hope you enjoy this edition of GMT. As ever, I

need not say how invaluable your comments and

contributions are, so do keep them coming

Aphrodite Papadatou

Post note: We also owe an apology to last issue’s contributor,

Dr David Rae, for the surname spelling error, in our

summary to his article, ‘Higher Education and graduate

enterprise in the new era’.

Note from the editor

News in brief

Graduate recruitment 2011Carl Gilleard: the revolutionary road

Informed choices inpost-16 educationHelping young people gain Russell Group entryAndy Gardner

Making transitions?Researching vocational learner progression into the graduate labour marketWayne Clark

4

2

3

7

9

12

15

17

in t

his

issu

e

Note from the editor

Real Prospects 2011What makes for a good graduate job?Holly Higgins

Plugging the gaps:Higher education in the age of austerityAlexander Massey

Not a crisis, but an opportunity:The changing student experienceRachel Winzer

To subscribe to the Graduate Market Trends e-newsletter go to: www.prospects.ac.uk/gmtregister

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

GMTAutumn

33

GMT Spring 2011

• £100 million to be invested in skills: BIS’ newly

launched Growth and Innovation Fund (GIF) will

boost investment in training and help businesses

grow.

It is designed to: deliver new training to boost

innovation and productivity; enable industries set

new professional standards; support new or

extended National Skills Academies. (March)

www.bis.gov.uk

• The Financial Times launches its annualGlobal MBA and European Business SchoolsRankings for 2011:Their message is clear: In these challenging times, it

is time to innovate the traditional business school

model. HEC Paris remains at the top. (March)

www.ft.com

• The Universities of Edinburgh and Bangoropen international offices:The University of Edinburgh’s new Mumbai liaison

office is aimed to simplify communication and

collaboration between the university and partners in

Indian education, business and government;

The University of Bangor’s new Beijing branch is

tooled for international student recruitment. (March)

www.ed.ac.uk www.bangor.ac.uk

• Latest UUK publications:Universities UK response to the student immigration system

- a consultation, sets out UUK’s concerns in relation

to the potential impact of the Government’s

proposals on the university sector. (February)

Freedom of speech on campus: rights and responsibilities in

UK universities, considers the role of universities in

promoting academic freedom and freedom of

speech. (March)

www.universitiesuk.ac.uk

• This quarter’s roundup of key BIS reports:Employer perspectives on part time students in UK Higher

Education (January)

Evaluation of the Graduate Talent Pool Internships Scheme

(January)

STEM graduates in non STEM jobs (March)

www.bis.gov.uk

• The Higher Education Academy publishes anew guide to work based learning:Compiled by the UK Physical Sciences Centre, An

introduction to work-based learning is a practice guide

designed specifically for its disciplines. (March)

www.heacademy.ac.uk

• HEPI Report on Higher Education supply anddemand to 2020:The most recent in a series HEPI has produced

looking at the question of demand for higher

education. (February)

www.hepi.ac.uk

• The Department of Education publishes theWolf Report:Prof Alison Wolf ’s much anticipated review

contextualises vocational education for

14 to 19-year-olds and considers how it can be

improved in order to promote successful

progression into the labour market and into higher

level education and training routes. (March)

www.education.gov.uk

• New OECD Report - Off to a good start? Jobs for youth:It analyses the situation of youth employment and

unemployment in the context of the jobs crisis and

beyond and identifies successful policy measures in

OECD countries. (March)

www.oecd.org

In brief


GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

4

GMTAutumn

4

GMT Spring 2011


In the wake of the Association of GraduateRecruiters’ Winter 2011 Graduate RecruitmentSurvey, AGR CEO Carl Gilleard talks exclusivelyto Aphrodite Papadatou about his forecasts for2011. The message is clear: graduate employersare preparing themselves to ride the revolution,wherever this may take them.

AP: What are the key messages that we should draw

from the latest AGR Graduate Recruitment Survey?

CG: There are two key messages.

Firstly, in 2010 we turned a corner. The Association

of Graduate Recruiters’ Summer 2010 Graduate

Recruitment Survey predicted that that the market

would contract. Yet our data now shows that in the last

quarter of 2009/10 the market picked up; in fact, far

from contracting the market accelerated and grew.

This is welcome news. Our evidence also shows the

market to be a volatile and dynamic domain. Last year

businesses upped their numbers and this trend is

predicted to continue in 2011, although graduate

salary levels are not set to change. On the flip side

these are only predictions; a small economic crisis can

change trends quickly and to great affect.

Secondly, our latest survey shows that whilst the

vacancies have increased the same cannot be said for

graduate salaries. This is the third consecutive year

that starting salaries have remained static. This trend is

a new phenomenon; I certainly have not come across

it in my time in graduate recruitment research. For

example, even during the early 1990s recession when

we witnessed huge cut backs in the number of jobs,

starting graduate salaries continued to modestly grow.

This observation is an important dimension of the

survey, especially when seen in the light of recent

discussions about the future of student investment in

Higher Education; no doubt school leavers will soon

start taking this into account. Saying this however,

£25,000 is a good graduate starting salary so it should

not put people off from applying! Competition for

graduate level vacancies will be fierce despite the

negative salary trends.

AP: Are there any signs, in the post-recession period

that graduate recruitment is going to permanently

alter?

CG: This is a very ‘big’ and interesting theme which

demands discussion. For our purposes here, I can only

say that the graduate market is forever changing and

therefore recruitment practices and the conditions we

are working in are also changing. Whether this change

will be evolutionary or revolutionary in nature, we are

yet to find out. Businesses will no doubt start looking

for new ways of recruiting talent, for example through

school leaver programmes and other vocational

schemes. This will complement rather than replace

the existing model of graduate recruitment. The new

trend is now visible: some large multinational

employers are already offering school leaver

programmes alongside their traditional graduate

recruitment schemes.

In short, we will see an increase in companies

recruiting young people at 18 (and even younger) but

this will run in parallel to graduate recruitment. My

opinion is that, for many reasons, this is a welcome

change. For example it could address social mobility

issues. Indeed I believe – and in this I am by far not

alone – that there shouldn’t just be one model of

recruiting young bright talent to top graduate level

jobs.

AP: What do you think is the future of the social

media in graduate recruitment?

CG: It is here, and it is here to stay; but like other

recruitment practices it is not a panacea. Tucked into

the latest AGR report is the following observation:

Graduaterecruitment 2011Carl Gilleard: The revolutionary road

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

GMTAutumn

GMT Spring 2011

5


The majority of graduate employers realise the need

to retain the practice of face-to-face interaction with

students. Indeed, we witness the relative increase of

companies’ recruitment investment in ensuring a

robust graduate fair presence, vis a vis other practices.

However, it is also evident that employers need to

constantly monitor the networking and information

sharing tools potential candidates use in their daily

lives. As such, the use of social media in graduate

recruitment is welcome.

All employers and careers advisers know that using

facebook and twitter for recruitment purposes is no

adequate replacement for traditional, more resource

intensive, practices. Saying this, a lot of businesses

have had their recruitment resources slashed alongside

their budget, and therefore for these it is a case of

doing more with less – and being smarter with it. In

short, the use of the social media fits only in parallel

with more traditional recruitment practices.

AP: Do you envisage that relationships between

employers and Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)

will change? If so, in what ways?

CG: Again, this is a huge topic of debate – the

question posed is not an easy one to answer in brief

(so I do hope I get a First after this!). Presently we are

watching nothing short of a revolution taking place in

UK Higher Education. As with all revolutions, the

resulting outcomes are not clear straight away – there

are many competing forces that shape trajectories in

the revolutionary aftermath, and usually a less

contested model takes years to shape up. In this

revolution too, many issues are yet to be resolved;

however only a fool would imagine that UK Higher

Education would not look to other sources of funding

in the future. At the very top of universities there is an

increasing realisation that what their graduates go on

to do will impact significantly their own institutional

reputation. Thus, for their own good, institutions will

actively seek to forge links with employers so that they

can provide their students with the best outcomes.

Our latest report shows clearly that, so far, graduate

employers are not responding in relation to the

growing student debts. Time will tell whether these

employers will start investing in funding strategic

courses. Personally, I cannot see any other alternative

in the future than a great increase in smart (and

creative) cooperation between UK HEIs and business.

Employer engagement is the name of the game!

AP: A recent Demos think tank report, ‘The Class

of 2010’1, recommended that HE careers advisory

services should take on the role of graduate

recruitment agencies, in a bid to counterbalance

the financial effects of the funding cuts. What do

you believe employers expect of HE career advisory

services?

CG: I did see this report and immediately I thought,

‘another of Carl’s good ideas being nicked’! On a

more serious note, I always wondered why our HEIs

never went for this model. Although some institutions

have set up Jobshops etc, the practice is far from

universal.

One concern is that it takes expertise and ‘know-how’

to set up a recruitment service and this is business

knowledge that careers advisers don’t necessarily have.

However if HE career advisory services remove their

‘blinkers’, so to speak, and realise that they can provide

effective employment placement services and

recruitment management without tarnishing guidance,

then effective resource-based cooperation can begin

between these and graduate recruiters. All that is

needed is imaginative thinking; good luck indeed to

all those who decide to go down that route.

From our point of view, what employers want is for

careers advisory services to have the adequate

institutional status that will enable them to positively

affect the application process and guide students in

producing quality applications. In terms of the

employability agenda, graduate employers want careers

advisory services to be at the top of their game, put

theory in practice, and guide students through the

maze. I don’t think that employers will have given any

thought on the theory behind what is good and what

is bad for careers advisory services to do. This is not

their remit, nor are they interested in it. What they

want is effective, informed, and efficient recruitment.

Careers advisers must listen to these needs.

AP: What is your view on school leaver entry

programmes? Why might these be attractive to some

employers?

CG: What employers find attractive is the targeting of

young talented people at an early stage, so that they

can easily mould them into what they want them to

be. There is also the financial aspect of it since

employers understand the importance of the student

1 The report is available on line at: http://www.endsleigh.co.uk

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

6

GMT Spring 2011


premium. This is especially significant in the case of

future cohorts of heavily indebted graduates.

Here I would like to highlight the following point: the

importance of schools investing in quality careers

advisory services. Guidance in this context needs to be

effective at an early stage, since a pupil will need to

have concrete knowledge on different education and

employment routes and outcomes – ‘Shall I go onto

HE, or follow a more vocational path?’. These

questions need to be informed, expertly and

impartially. Presently I don’t have huge trust on school

career advisory practices: in some schools it is

excellent, but in others it is poor. A lot needs to be

done. Equally, the current situation in UK Higher

Education must surely be a wake-up call. It is

compounded by the recent ‘hot topic’ of pupil A-level

choices, posing the question: ‘Which A-level choices

are the best?’2

All this needs to be addressed as soon as possible. We

need to increase the status of career advisory services

in schools. These services will need to effectively

explain different Further/ Higher Education options,

including providing expert guidance on school leaver

programmes.

AP: Is Higher Education in the UK doing enough to

prepare graduates for ‘global careers’?

CG: This is another very good question. AGR is in

fact about to start a research project into the ‘global

graduate’. The concept is becoming very important

now. I don’t think as a nation we are doing enough to

develop our graduates for the global economy. The

reasons are partly historic – we simply never ‘needed’

to; however things are now very different. Some

universities have already woken up to that, for

example I have just visited the University of

Nottingham’s Ningbo campus in China and seen at

first hand the exciting pioneering work being

undertaken there to the benefit of students,

employers, UK/Chinese relations and the university

itself. One must also not forget the Erasmus

programme, which offers EU students university and

work placements within the European Union.

Interestingly research shows that there is an increase

in the number of school leavers going abroad for first

degree study – more often than not targeting North

American institutions. The ‘global graduate’ however

is something to be taken seriously, and not just to be

seen as a ‘trendy’ venture. The global economy is a

reality, and a lot of thought and strategic planning has

to go into facilitating the creation of universal

structures that will nurture truly ‘global graduates’.

This is the issue that our current research project at

AGR will be addressing, in much detail. The research

is a three-way partnership between ourselves, the

Centre for Industry & Higher Education and CFE,

our research partner. The ground work is already

underway and we hope to launch the findings of

Phase 1 this summer.

2 On 4th February 2011 The Russell Group of 20 leading UK universities published its first ever guide to post-16 subject choices. Informed Choices was produced in collaboration with the

Institute of Career Guidance. At the point of the present interview, the report was a ‘hot’ news item. Informed Choices co-author, Andy Gardner, explains the intentions and theory behindthe guide on p7.

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

GMT Spring 2011

7


Andy Gardner is co-author of the recent RussellGroup publication, Informed Choices, the group’sfirst ever guide to post-16 course choice making.1

Aimed at pupils with a Russell Group institutionin mind, the guide was immediately targeted bythe press. The distinction it staked out between‘hard’ and ‘soft’ AS-level subjects became a hottopic of debate. In this exclusive GMT article theauthor clarifies the guide’s original agenda.

The ‘post-16 choices conversation’, covering a wide

range of post-16 options, has become a regular event

in schools throughout the UK. However, a well

seasoned career adviser knows that behind many of

these conversations lies the aspiration to guide pupils

into making decisions that are vital for gaining entry

into prestigious universities and courses. This is when

the said ‘post-16 choices conversation’, and the

underlying decision-making processes it assumes,

becomes a means to a specific end: gaining Russell

Group entry.

One can draw on an array of examples of the

importance of good ‘post-16’ course guidance. Take,

for instance, a Year 11 pupil choosing Media Studies at

AS-level, but who is keen to proceed and study Law at

university. Should this pupil be advised to choose a

more traditional subject instead? This is a difficult

question and, as every careers professional knows, its

answer should be based on facts.

The process of producing fact-based answers to such

dilemmas is further complicated when we consider

the institutional locus of each such conversation.

Indeed, the institutional context could significantly

alter the answer to a given question. Staff working in

a school with little history of sending pupils to Russell

Group or 1994 Group universities may give

significantly different post-16 guidance to that of a

colleague who works in a school with similar pupil

quality, but which has an established tradition of

supplying students to these groups. The latter could

be more likely to push pupils into making only

‘traditional’ subject choices, whilst the first would

most likely let students chose on their own accord.

From our point of view, these strategies lack a factual

basis; they are uninformed, and as such they produce

flawed advice to the detriment of the pupils.

The idea of the guide was initiated by the Institute of

Career Guidance. The aim was to disseminate a more

integrated methodology in post-16 course advice,

based on the facts present in information published by

universities in their prospectuses. It was produced to

target pupils but the intention was to also reach school

staff and the pupils’ parents. The guide was produced

by the Institute of Career Advice’s Jane Garland,

Richard Longson and myself in collaboration with the

Russell Group. We wanted to summarise the issues

that young people should consider when making these

institution-specific post-16 choices. Thus a joint

working group comprising of ourselves, Russell

Group Admissions Chair Angela Milln, UCL Head

of Admissions Bella Mallins and Kings College

London’s Senior Assistant Registrar Martyn Annis,

produced a working document which, with the

finishing touches of Russell Group’s Alex Thompson

and Pippa Cox, became Informed Choices.

In aiming to rationalise the considerable amount of

misinformation present in the area (especially so

around AS-level choice making), we came up with the

idea of three specific ‘known knowns’. This idea

structured our working document. I would like to

emphasise here, however, that these statements, or

‘known knowns’, can only structure advice, since each

‘conversation’ is imbued with complexities that can

often extend beyond a careers professional’s factual

knowledge.

We thus rationalised post-16 decision making in the

following three factual statements:

• If a pupil knows in advance the discipline they want

to study at university, then there may be essential

subjects that must be taken at AS-level.

Informed choicesin post-16 educationHelping young people gain Russell Group entry

1 Andy Gardner is member of the Institute of Career Guidance, and Careers And HE Adviser at JFS School, Brent and La Sainte Union Catholic School, Camden, London

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

8

GMT Spring 2011


• If the pupil does not know what they want to study

at the time of making their post-16 choice, then they

should make decisions in consideration of a list of

facilitating subjects. Choosing a range of facilitating

subjects will leave more options open for when the

pupil decides what to study.

• Some universities and undergraduate courses have

either a non-preferred or a preferred list of subjects.

Consider the first ‘known known’. Lets take the

example of an adviser who is involved in a

conversation with a 16-year-old pupil wanting to

eventually study Economics at university; it would be

wrong to assume that the said professional would

know of every relevant fact to process, and produce

‘the right’ advice for the specific situation. Different

universities have different nuances and entry

requirements for each of their courses. The data is

simply too vast. We could argue that this is a ‘known

unkown’.

Our methodology in Informed Choices would rationalise

the facts that are ‘known’, and those that are

‘unknown’, and produce the following advice:

AS-level Maths may be essential for entry into most

‘prestigious’ Economics courses, whereas AS-level

Economics itself may be useful but not essential.

We turn now to the second ‘known known’. In our

working group discussions we discovered, from our

own professional experiences, that large numbers of

pupils either did not know what to do at university, or

changed their minds at various points during their AS

studies. Experience would also tell us to advise these

pupils that certain AS-level subjects are required by

the top higher education institutions significantly

more so often than others. As advisers we know that,

for example, a pupil taking AS-levels in Chemistry,

Maths, Physics and French is going to have more

course and university options open to them than a

pupil taking AS-levels in Economics, Politics,

Philosophy and Film Studies.

It is therefore these professional experiences that we

sought to rationalise with the second statement.

Nonetheless, and contrary to recent media reports, in

Informed Choices we also emphasise that first and

foremost pupils should choose subjects that they will

do well in. The media have also accused us of creating

a binary divide between AS-level subjects. This is not

so. Our methodology is much more subtle. To take

the above stated example, Informed Choices emphasises

that the pupil taking the latter ‘post-16’ decision will

still have a range of higher education options at their

disposal, although they will need to be aware of what

other options would close down by default.

The last consideration takes us to the final ‘known

known’. This caused the most controversy in the

media, and it relates to preferred and non-preferred

lists of AS-level subjects. Indeed, after much

deliberation we decided to use the terms ‘hard’ and

‘soft’ when describing the comparable weight of

qualifications vis a vis higher education option

openings. Though we fully admitted that there is no

universal definition, we defined ‘soft’ subjects as those

that have prominent practical or vocational elements

built into them.

We felt we had to do this because of the explicit

‘preferred’ and ‘non-preferred’ subject lists used in

the admissions processes of top higher education

institutions. Deciding to chose more than two ‘soft’

subjects in the first year of AS study will close options

for an able pupil; even when we consider that

university admission processes look at other evidence

too to prove ability, achievement and potential when

making decisions (GCSE results, personal statement,

references, extra curricular activities etc). On the other

hand, our professional experience tells us that a

student will not usually encounter problems with the

admissions of the top institutions when taking one

‘soft’ subject option in their final year of A-level study.

Informed Choices includes many examples to illustrate

how choosing different AS-level subjects can affect

entry to top higher education institutions.

It cannot be seen as a universal guide but we are

confident that we have developed a fact-based

methodology that can guide pupils into making the

right choices.

Finally, the guide also includes much useful

information for students considering Btec Nationals,

International Baccalaureate, Advanced Diploma,

Scottish Highers, and other non AS-level

qualifications. We have also included comprehensive

advice for younger students considering GCSE

(standard or equivalent qualifications). You can

download Informed Choices at: www.russellgroup.ac.uk

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

GMT Spring 2011

9


Wayne Clark reports on FE to HE Transitions,a qualitative research project by University ofWestminster examining the learning experiences,career aspirations, and employment trajectoriesof graduates who entered university from non-traditional or vocational backgrounds.1 How dothese learners develop career plans and makecareer related decisions? Do they experienceuniversity differently to traditional A-levelentrants? And what happens when they progressbeyond university into the graduate labourmarket?

Since the election of the coalition government,

transitions into and out of Higher Education by non-

traditional learners has once again become a hot topic

especially in light of the withdrawal of funding for the

Aim Higher scheme. FE to HE Transitions is a new

piece of qualitative educational research examining the

experiences and aspirations of learners making the

transition from Level Three study to degree-level

study, and then into the world of work.

Focusing on how learners manage key educational

and employment transitions before, during and after

university, our research is designed to contribute to

debates over the changing role of higher education is

supporting ‘lifelong learning’ (Schuller & Watson

2010). Integral to this project has been an effort to

promote vocational learner success stories, as well as

a pedagogic interest in identifying and understanding

barriers to vocational leaner progression. The present

article draws upon semi-structured interviews in

which graduates were asked to reflect on their

motivations for entering Higher Education, their

learning experiences at university, their use of careers

guidance, and finally the relationship between their

studies and their career development.

These graduates include young people who have

studied qualifications such as HNC, HND or NVQ

at further education colleges or adult learners who are

entering through Access to HE, or undertaking

continuing professional development as part of their

job. Listed below are summaries of our findings,

including a case study examination of the three routes

through which these adult learners have been able to

change their future prospects.

1. Motivations for entering Higher Education

The reasons given by the graduates for originally

applying to university were closely bound up with

career aspirations. A desire to improve personal career

prospects or even change career direction completely

by improving both skills and knowledge was common.

One graduate, for example, ‘just thought I could do

so much more than this’. Another, ‘knew I had to

re-train so I went about doing that and knew I had

to get a degree so that I could at least make more

money’.

Interestingly these perspectives contrast with the

further education students interviewed for this

research. For them, the opportunity to progress to

university was – in the words of one prospective

university entrant – about wanting to, ‘give something

back to society and be a positive role model’.

Makingtransitions?Researching vocational learner progressioninto the graduate labour market

1Dr Wayne Clark is Senior Manager for Research and Development at the University of Westminster’s Career Development Centre.

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

10

GMT Spring 2011


2. Learning experiences

For the graduates, degree-level study was initially

experienced as a substantial culture shock.

Interviewees described university life in the first year

as ‘very demanding’. Learning styles were experienced

as quite different from Further Education, with the

new demands of independent learning as being

particular challenging: ‘It is the transition from being

spoon fed to having to do [one’s] own research and

self motivate [one]self ’.

One graduate recalled their first lecture experience of

university as, ‘very intense’, specifically, ‘when the

lecturer was going through what the requirements of

the module were and what we had to produce… I was

doubtful that I would be able to do it’.

The issue of workload was raised as particularly

challenging: ‘the workload was immense… there was

a lot of work all the time’; and for those undertaking

a degree as part of their continuing professional

development, the work/life balance seemed especially

problematic. Assessment was also highlighted as

difficult for those coming from backgrounds other

than A-levels. University work was described as ‘more

formal’ and ‘much stricter’ than college-level

assessment. In fact, two of the four graduates recalled

other vocational entrants on their courses withdrawing

from university because they ‘couldn’t cope’.

3. Self identify

In order to overcome these challenges the graduates

referred to a need to ‘work hard’ in response to the

difference in learning styles between Further and

Higher Education. This discourse of self-reliance was

closely entwined with the feeling of making progress

and gaining confidence. ‘It gave me a lot of

confidence,’ reflected one graduate, ‘being able to see

the finished article and knowing that I produced it and

had given it my best shot. That gave me a lot of

satisfaction.’

When asked to recall their sense of identity as learners

whilst at university, these graduates identified a deep

seated demarcation between themselves and traditional

university entrants. They all referred to a general

perception that A-level entrants were better equipped

to study at university. As one graduate observed:

‘There is still a stigma attached to people who are

doing the vocational qualification route. In my

opinion they are not seen as elite as A-level students

so I think there is a difference there.’

This perspective was supported by the guidance

practitioners interviewed for this project who felt that

non A-level students often view themselves in a

negative way: ‘They’re already under the feeling that

they are second class… in fact some of them feel that

they can’t go on to university.’

4. Using information, advice and guidance

The majority of Higher Education students and

graduates interviewed for this research said that

although they were aware of the information, advice

and guidance services offered at university they did

not see themselves as potential users of such support.

As one graduate put it, student support ‘wasn’t really

relevant to me’. Another remarked that ‘I didn’t need

to look for it’. The research found that vocational

entrants to university generally identified themselves

as learners who preferred to rely on ‘working hard’

and ‘being committed’. Drawing upon personal

resources in this way, rather than using support

services, was seen as desirable, and indeed necessary,

to be a successful non-traditional entrant in the

university environment.

5. Doing ‘career’

Amongst the graduates, there was a general sense that

pursuing the route into Higher Education had been a

highly worthwhile experience that had prepared them

for the labour market or for future study/training.

Interviewees again referred to the importance of

gaining confidence: ‘I felt that I learnt so much and

felt confident to go and apply my skills and knowledge

in the labour market’.

6. Case Studies:

Route 1: Continuing professional development

Frank studied at a Further Education college and then

at university as part of his continuing professional

development. His job as a surveyor meant that he was

able to undertake BTEC and HNC courses at college

alongside his full-time job. Whilst at college, he

considered doing a degree but it was a few years later

after advice from college staff that he decided to re-

enter the world of education and enrolled on a part-

time day release degree at university in 2004. Looking

back on his degree, Frank recalled the difficulties and

challenges of balancing work and study but also

recognised the value of doing a degree: ‘It was quite

difficult working and doing a degree but at the same

time I found it to be the best thing I have ever done’.

He went on to say that his courses have ‘helped an

awful lot in the job’ and he highlighted in particular

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

GMT Spring 2011

11


the confidence that he has gained. Frank works as a

Surveyor for a local authority.

Route 2: Career change

David did not attend a Further Education college or

take any A-levels. He decided to apply to university

having finished a career in entertainment and deciding

to re-train in the languages field. At first, David found

the degree course ‘very demanding’ but he became

more settled into the course in part due to the fact that

the lecturers made him ‘very comfortable – they really

mapped it out’. Having graduated, David went on to

successfully study for a PGCE at post-graduate level.

David now works as a language teacher in a secondary

school.

Route 3: Mature study

After coming to the UK from Uganda, Joan enrolled

on an Access to HE course in Business and Finance at

a Further Education college. She soon realised that she

wanted to continue her studies at university and

having spoken to her lecturers and tutors at college

(which she said were ‘a great help’), she started her

degree in 2005. Joan told us that she felt ‘well

prepared’ for university having been in college for a

year, and she found the shift to Higher Education to

be a ‘nice transition’. She had to make some difficult

choices along the way about which modules to study

and she actually changed her degree before the second

year. She found the second year the most challenging

but she felt well supported by her lecturers. And as

she put it herself: ‘I dealt with the challenges as I went

along’. Joan is now studying full-time for a Masters

degree.

7. Looking forward

FE to HE Transitions shows that formal education at

Level Four and above can still play a key role in

supporting leaner progression outside of A-level entry

routes. The research has also highlighted the ways in

which these graduates felt that their skills development

and career options were enhanced by the university

experience. Qualitative research of this type is also

notable for capturing the impact of education and

guidance on an individual in a way which is generally

not possible in statistical measures of graduate

destinations such as the Destinations of Leavers from

Higher Education (DLHE) survey. It is clear from the

testimony of these graduates that their progression is

deeply inscribed into their personal lives and their

self-identity as active learners. There is also a sense in

which the distance travelled by these learners from

pre-entry to the labour market is perhaps more

demanding than the progression experienced by

A-level entrants. However, despite the high levels

of self-efficacy demonstrated by the graduates

interviewed for this research, it is also the case that

non-traditional entrants to Higher Education grapple

with a number of educational and personal challenges

when committing to degree level study. The

reluctance to engage with student support and

guidance as part of a strategy of self-reliance is

particularly significant in this regard.

Further research in the area of student transitions will

improve our understandings of the various ways in

which differing educational progression routes are

bound up with career and personal development.

These issues are likely to become increasingly

important to those interested in lifelong learning as

Higher Education in the UK undergoes fundamental

change over the next few years.

The full report and case studies can be found at the

project website fe2he: www.westminster.ac.uk/fe2he and

at www.linkinglondon.ac.uk

The FE to HE Transitions project was funded by Linking

London Lifelong Learning Network

ReferencesSchuller, T. & Watson, D, Learning through life:

Inquiry into the future for lifelong learning

(Leicester, NIACE/IFLL) (2009)

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

12

GMT Winter 2010/11

Real Prospects analyst Holly Higgins gives us ataster of this year’s larger-than-ever survey’sthought provoking key themes and messages.1

The full insights will be published with the mainReal Prospects 2011 report, due out in thesummer.2

The Real Prospects ProjectGraduates looking for their first job need more than

just labour market information, they also need to

know how the labour market operates. Unfortunately

information about graduate labour market experience

is often difficult to find and expensive to collect. The

Real Prospects project aims to plug this information

gap by working with employers, universities and

graduate employees to find out how previous

generations of graduates have succeeded in negotiating

the graduate labour market.

Earlier this year HECSU and Graduate Prospects

launched the 2011 Real Prospects survey, an online

questionnaire which asks employed and self-employed

graduates to share their experiences of the world of

work. This year we’re exploring how employees

managed the transition between higher education and

employment and asking graduates what more they

think universities could do to help students prepare

for working life. We’re also examining how they feel

about their current job and asking what they would

like to see employers offering in terms of career

development support.

What makes for a good graduate job?We asked the 8,294 respondents who were employed

on full-time fixed-term or permanent contracts what

they like about their current job. The following

themes became evident:

1. Autonomy ‘I like that I am not micro-managed – I am trusted to manage

my own workload’

Some graduates are given the freedom to manage their

own workload, while others are only expected to

manage their time during the day. What they all value

is the opportunity to have some control over their

working life. Most graduates actively dislike being

micro-managed because they feel they should be

trusted to get on with their job. Graduates accept that

an employee’s autonomy is necessarily shaped by the

needs and nature of the employer, but think that it is

important that graduates are encouraged to take

ownership of their work and able to have some

control over their working life.

2. Responsibility‘I like that I am given real responsibility and that my opinion

is valued’

Graduates like to be given responsibility because they

feel it demonstrates that their employer thinks they are

capable and reliable. They are also more inclined to

invest time and effort in the business because they feel

that their employer values their work and their

opinions. However, it is important to recognise that

graduates are not always looking for management

responsibility; in some roles they are simply seeking

opportunities to take ownership of a particular task or

take responsibility for keeping abreast of the

developments in their sector. Rewarding graduates

with additional responsibility can also be a great way

of developing their job role. Whether they are an

accountant keeping on top of changes in legislation, a

marketing executive keeping an eye on trends in social

media or a psychologist keeping tabs on emerging

areas of research, giving an employee responsibility for

Real Prospects2011What makes for a good graduate job?

1 Holly Higgins is Senior Researcher at the Higher Education Careers Service Unit (HECSU)2 All Real Prospects 2011 reports will be available to download from the HECSU website in autumn 2011

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

GMT Winter2010/11

13

keeping up to date with a particular issue gives them a

welcome opportunity to broaden their professional

knowledge and experience.

In their own words...

‘I particularly enjoy working in the area that I live in, I can

see change happening and my town becoming a better place

due to the work of my department. I enjoy working as part of

a large team and I love the variety of the work that I am faced

with’

(Regeneration Project Manager, Sociology)

‘I enjoy the freedom of directing my own day-to-day work and

I like working for a good cause’

(Scientist, Pathology)

‘This unique field of engineering allows me to be

creative…this allows me to use my own imagination as

opposed to sticking to strict guidelines at all times. I also

appreciate the impact that my work can have over the

company and I love the people I work with’

(Systems Engineer, Engineering)

‘I enjoy managing projects from start to finish, seeing the end

result on TV and the interaction with lots of different people’

(Advertising Professional, Modern Languages)

‘I enjoy building productive commercial relationships and the

fact that no two days are the same. I like that I have the

autonomy to manage my territory’

(Account Manager, Business Studies)

‘I love my current role. I love that the organisation are

incredibly supportive and keen to help you develop. I love that

I’m kept busy with a variety of tasks. I love that I’m given just

the right amount of responsibility and that I feel like I’m

learning and progressing in the field’

(Market Researcher, Politics)

3. Contribution‘I like knowing that I can help make a difference in my team

or department by bringing fresh ideas’

Knowing that they are making a contribution to their

organisation, sector or wider community gives

graduates a great deal of professional satisfaction.

Whether they are developing a process that will help

other colleagues within their company, conducting

research that will contribute to their sector’s

knowledge of a particular issue, or helping a client to

design a business plan, graduates find their jobs much

more rewarding when they can see why their work is

valuable.

4. Impact‘I like managing projects from start to finish and seeing the end

result on television’

Graduates like to feel that they are making a

contribution in a broader sense, but they also derive

satisfaction from seeing a tangible outcome for their

work. For advertising professionals this might be

seeing their advert on the television; for business

analysts this might be delivering a report to the senior

management team. District nurses like to see an

improvement in their patient’s health and civil

engineers can look to the structures they’ve designed.

However, in some roles it can be more difficult to see

the outcome of your work, particularly if you’re part

of a very big team or only involved in one stage of a

multi-stage project or process. Graduates in these

kinds of roles depend on their employers to show

them how their work is contributing to the continued

success of the company, its clients or the local

community.

5. Creativity ‘I love the fact that I can be creative and let my imagination

run wild’

Real Prospects respondents believe that graduates can

be creative in almost any sphere of their working life.

Whether they are planning their company’s marketing

strategy or thinking of ways to improve their

company’s business processes, graduates thrive when

they are given the opportunity to think and flex their

creative muscle. One of the graduates who responded

to the Real Prospects survey was a tax adviser who

studied economics at university. For him, creativity

goes hand-in-hand with commercial success,

particularly when it comes to managing client

relationships and competing for business. Whatever

their role, graduates are looking for a job which

demands that they think critically about their work

and think creatively about ways of improving it. For

many this is the reason they went to university in the

first place.

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

14

GMTAutumn

14

GMT Spring 2011


Key messagesStudents and universities

One of the reasons sixth formers apply to university is

because they hope to secure a challenging and

fulfilling job when they leave, but most graduates

often don’t know what kind of job they want (or don’t

want) until they are actually in it. Finding out a bit

more about the kinds of things current employees

value about their jobs can be a really useful way of

helping students to identify what they would like in

their own ‘ideal’ job.

Employers

Graduates make motivated and hard-working

employees, but if you’re going to make the most of

this energy you need to give your graduate employees

as many opportunities to use their skills as you can.

Not every organisation can offer a job where no two

days are the same, but most can offer their employees

some responsibility, a reasonable level of autonomy

and a little variety in their work – it’s just a matter of

working out how it can be done.

In their own words...

‘I enjoy the challenge of solving problems - my job is engaging

and keeps me thinking. I don’t like the fact that everything is

justified in terms of business value, I miss the academic ideals

of university. Much of the software ands up being ‘good

enough to sell’ rather than excellent software’

(Software Engineer, Mathematics and ComputerScience)

‘I enjoy the mental challenge of the work, but I dislike the fact

that it is rather artificial. It’s a transactional role, which means

there is nothing tangible to show for my work at the end of the

day’

(Commercial Solicitor, History and Politics)

‘I enjoy the challenge of my job and the working environment,

but I dislike not having any control over my own schedule’

(Macroeconomist, Economics)

‘I enjoy the autonomy and opportunity to work with different

people, but would like my work to be more diverse’

(Assistant Psychologist, Philosophy)

‘I love the fast-paced, trend-driven environment. It is

interesting, exciting, and I love seeing the products we buy do

well in store’

(Trainee fashion buyer, Psychology)

‘I enjoy the creative side to the marketing role, and working for

a company that distributes exciting brands. My only dislike is

being at the bottom of the ranks, so not always taken seriously’

(Marketing Assistant, Graphic Design)

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

Policy Exchange’s Alexander Massey1 outlines thefindings of the think tank’s recent two-partreport series, Higher Education in the Age ofAusterity.2 In addressing the impact of the recentfunding cuts, the series focuses on identifyingways in which English and Welsh HigherEducation Institutions (HEIs) can, and alreadydo, collaborate with the private sector to plugthe emerging gaps. Here the author concludesthat, at the dawn of the new era, HEIs shouldembrace these policy and market developmentsat all costs.

It is clear that the coming changes to the way that

HEIs in England are funded will have wide-ranging

ramifications for the sector as a whole. The reliance of

universities on tuition fees for the bulk of their

income will likely produce a much more market-

oriented sector, with a stronger focus on the quality of

the student experience and on employability outcomes

for graduates. In addition, we can expect to see a

greater degree of engagement with the private sector

by these institutions, driven by both a desire to access

private sources of funding where possible, and a need

for greater efficiency in order to stay competitive.

This could lead to greater private sector involvement

in the management of universities’ non-core

functions, as well as a rise in the number of private

sector institutions providing higher education directly.

Policy Exchange examined some of these trends in our

recent Higher Education in the Age of Austerity reports.

Our findings, below, are summarised under the

following main headings: 1. Managing the physical

estate, and, 2. Outsourcing non-core services. They

are followed by our conclusion.

1. Managing the physical estate

Research

One area of universities' operations in which we

expect to see increased private sector involvement in

the coming years is the provision of student

accommodation and estate management. Estate

maintenance costs in the Higher Education sector

rose by over a third in the five years between 2003-4

and 2007-8,3 and in 2010/11 expenditure on

administration, premises, residences and catering

accounted for 19.2% of total annual expenditure

across the sector.4

Despite these levels of investment, HEFCE has

estimated that one third of the 25.6 million square

metres of UK Higher Education estate is unsuitable

for the needs of its users. It was also estimated that

addressing this situation could require in excess of

£3.8 billion in maintenance expenditure, with a

further £2.2 billion required in capital expenditure.5

Given the steep falls in capital funding that are

expected over the next few years, universities cannot

expect the cost of all construction and renovation

work to be covered by public funding in the future.

Instead, they should look to the private sector to

provide alternative models of funding for the

redevelopment of the physical estate.

Developing existing models

A number of universities across the country have

already been able to access private capital for the

redevelopment or renovation of the physical estate,

in particular student accommodation, through varied

business arrangements with private firms.

One model used by accommodation providers such

as UPP, which currently provides over 20,000 student

rooms across 11 universities in the UK, allows

universities to receive a large capital sum up-front,

as well as significant additional investment into the

quality of facilities. In exchange, management of the

institution’s accommodation passes to the private-

sector partner for the duration of a long-term contract

of up to 50 years.

GMTAutumn

1515

GMT Spring 2011


Plugging the gaps:Higher education in the age of austerity

1 Alexander Massey is Research Fellow at Policy Exchange’s Education Unit.2 You can access the full report at www.policyexchange.org.uk3 HEFCE, Performance in Higher Education Estates: EMS Annual Report 2007, April 2010, available at: www.opdems.ac.uk 4 Higher Education Financial Yearbook 2010/115 HEFCE, Performance in Higher Education Estates: EMS Annual Report 2007, April 2010, available at : www.opdems.ac.uk

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

16

GMT Spring 2011


Although the university thereby loses the ongoing

revenue stream of student rental income for the

duration of the contract, the level of investment into

facilities has made this an increasingly attractive option

for a number of universities. For example, an

arrangement of this type with the University of Exeter

saw £133 million worth of private capital invested into

the university. In addition, the risk and responsibility

of redeveloping Exeter's student accommodation was

borne entirely by the private-sector partner.

Indeed such arrangements allow universities to

concentrate resources on academic investment, whilst

also being able to improve and increase their student

accommodation stock.

2. Outsourcing non-core services

Public sector benefits

We also expect to see greater numbers of universities

exploring the possibility of outsourcing certain non-

core services in order to focus more staff time and

funds on the key functions of teaching and research.

Services such as student and staff email systems, for

example, are strong candidates for provision through

the private sector.

Although the traditional model of provision of IT

services in the Higher Education sector is one in

which individual institutions own, operate and provide

IT services at all levels, this model looks increasingly

unsustainable in the face of ever greater pressure on

funds. With companies such as Google and Microsoft

now offering student email services free of charge,

universities can make significant savings by adopting

their services. In addition, it negates the need for

expensive, power-hungry servers to be maintained on-

site all year round.

The benefits of equitable regulation

If the reforms to Higher Education funding are likely

to encourage more universities to examine the

possibility of outsourcing more non-core services to

the private sector, they will also have an impact on

private providers offering Higher Education services

directly to students. If, as is expected, the Government

extends tuition loans to all students studying at private

HEIs (as recommended in the Browne Review), they

are likely to become more attractive to a large

proportion of applicants.

A number of private providers operate in the UK,

often offering degrees validated through established

universities. However, they currently operate in a

restrictive and inequitable regulatory environment.

Unlike traditional universities, private providers with

their own degree-awarding powers must renew them

every six years; additionally, with the notable exception

of the University of Buckingham, they are barred

from acquiring full university status. It is difficult to

understand why this inequitable regulatory regime

exists, particularly when many private institutions

offer courses of excellent quality; Buckingham, for

example, has topped the National Student Satisfaction

Survey for the past five years in a row.

3. Conclusion

In our report Higher Education in the Age of Austerity

we argue that the coming transition to a more

competitive, market-oriented sector is an inevitable

development which universities should seek to

embrace, rather than resist. Both HEIs themselves

and the Government have a part to play in this change.

A stronger private presence in the Higher Education

market would help instill greater competitiveness and

efficiency within the sector, and the Government

should seek to address the regulatory and funding

issues that prevent private Higher Education providers

from competing on an equal footing with their public

counterparts.

In addition, universities themselves should explore

ways in which they can focus more closely on the core

functions of teaching and research – the most

significant factors determining an institution's ability

to attract and retain students. Often, this can best be

achieved through closer engagement with private-

sector service providers.

Universities should ensure that they have given

sufficient consideration to the potential benefits of

private sector collaboration, or risk being left behind

in the new race for competitiveness.

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

17

GMT Spring 2011


The 1994 Group’s Rachel Winzer explains thereasons behind the group’s optimism in the faceof deep sectoral changes.1 The author outlinesthree areas of development, directly concerningstudents, where institutional intervention willprove vital. Institutions should see the task ofmaking these interventions as a uniquedevelopment opportunity. The 1994 Group’smembers are ready to take on this challenge.

As Albert Einstein said, ‘in the middle of difficulty lies

opportunity’. With UK Higher Education

experiencing a period of robust change, Einstein’s

words encourage us to look to the future. The new

system of graduate contributions and subsidised loans

will have a wide-ranging impact on how future

students will experience their higher education, and

although there are challenges ahead, claims of a crisis

have been greatly exaggerated. We are instead

presented with an exciting opportunity to reform and

continuously improve the student experience and

ensure that the sector maintains its strong position at

the heart of the social and economic future of the UK.

After Parliament’s decision in December to increase

the level of tuition fees universities can charge to

between £6,000 and £9,000 per year, debate over the

future of Higher Education has been fierce. The

scenes in Trafalgar Square embodied the passion felt

by many towards the issue.

The 1994 Group decided to support proposals to

increase tuition fee levels for two reasons. First, due to

the severe government spending cuts conflicting with

the need for increased university funding, it became

inevitable in our eyes that raising graduate

contributions was the only viable option to sustain the

sector. Second, and of critical concern to the 1994

Group and its members, is our belief that the overall

package is fair, with no upfront fees and affordable

loan repayment requirements only applicable to those

graduates earning £21,000 and over. Yet, there are

tough challenges that need to be met head on in

order to satisfy future students and justify reforms.

Chiefly, we need to further open up access routes

and ensure that the holistic student experience is of

sufficient quality to match the raised expectations

created by increased fees. This can be achieved at

three distinct stages:

1. Ensuring fair access

This first such stage comes upon application. Due

to concerns that prospective students may be deterred

from Higher Education, increased efforts are

required to ensure that it is open to those from all

socioeconomic backgrounds. Encouragingly, Office

for Fair Access (OFFA) guidance has emphasised the

need for individual targeted community outreach

programmes to precipitate the widening of

participation. These programmes need to be

independent and flexible so as to have the ability to

identify and meet the needs and requirements of each

institution and their local community. It would not be

suitable to ignore the diversity of each institution that

has unique history and culture by implementing

national guidelines. 1994 Group institutions can be

proud of their existing efforts to widen participation:

in 2010 our members collectively invested over £43

million in outreach and student support programmes.

Such success needs to be maintained to ensure that

Higher Education is enjoyed by all across society, and

that universities themselves benefit from a diverse and

vibrant student body.

2. Informing choices

Let’s now turn to the second stage. It is important

that universities increase transparency by supplying

enhanced information, guidance and advice to aid

prospective students with their choices.

Straightforward course details that outline exactly

what students can expect are a minimum obligation.

For example, Lancaster University has a reciprocal

partnership between itself and its students in the form

Not a crisis, but an opportunity:The changing student experience

1 Rachel Winzer is The 1994 Group’s Director of Research. You can find more information about the group’s projects by visiting www.1994group.co.uk

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

18

GMT Spring 2011


of a charter, which outlines class sizes, contact hours

and the available facilities, as well as student

responsibilities, expectations and commitments.

However, this alone may not convince those who are

unsure about entering Higher Education about the

important future value of a degree. Detailed

information on graduate employment and earnings

potential will encourage prospective students by

presenting course information in relevance to future

career possibilities and aspirations.

Currently, there is not enough done at this level.

Notably, the existing Destinations of Leavers from

Higher Education (DLHE) survey pays little attention

to data obtained three and a half years following

graduation, with emphasis placed on the

overwhelmingly more popular variant taken only six

months after leaving the institution. By increasing the

scope and response rate of the longitudinal version it

will be possible to better inform students of their

realistic prospects following graduation. Further, with

postgraduate and part-time students largely absent

from the wider debate about Higher Education, it is

essential not to neglect the responsibility of providing

improved and substantial information for these

courses as well.

3. Enhancing university life

Another crucial part of the student experience is

university life itself. Enjoyment in academia is

cherished forever; institutions must be mindful that

dissatisfied graduates risk the reputation of excellence

that initially attracts students. Whether it is being

intellectually fulfilled in the lecture theatre or being

part of a warm social community on campus, ensuring

student happiness is a key part of a university’s

mission.

Sustaining satisfaction1994 Group institutions share the core focus of

delivering an outstanding student experience, and our

record is a testament to this. Our members are

regularly among the highest scoring universities on

the annual National Satisfaction Survey, with their

aggregate performance comfortably exceeding the rest

of the sector. However, it is pivotal that universities

refute complacency, and continue to focus on

sustaining academic enjoyment. Institutions cannot

underestimate the broad diversity of the student body:

they have the responsibility to ensure that they are

flexible, understanding and responsive to meet the

needs of students from all walks of life.

Students paying higher tuition fees will now

understandably scrutinise institutions further with

increased expectations about academic quality and

facilities. Fundamentally, all students should benefit

from experiencing the very highest academic

standards. To further improve the student

experience,universities will also need to make

enduring efforts to make physical infrastructure more

student friendly across the sector. Despite reduction in

HEFCE revenue capital allocation squeezing budgets,

institutions must use increased fee revenue to improve

accessibility to facilities that are designed to directly

support and respond to students.

Enhancing stakeholder communicationThe 1994 Group is also aware of concerns that the

perceived marketisation of Higher Education will lead

to many viewing a university place as little more than

a service to be purchased. As universities consist of a

partnership of both staff and students, a mature

reciprocal working relationship can be formed

between the NUS, local students’ unions and senior

university staff to allow for constructive debate,

ensuring plurality in the decision making process and

increasing campus democracy.

Enhancing the link between students andemployersThere also needs to be more work to improve the

student experience at graduate level. Universities act

as a mechanism to facilitate students to flourish

throughout their future lives and careers. Enhancing

the link between students and business would help

graduates, employers and the economy itself. In an

increasingly competitive employment market,

universities need to adequately equip students for life

in the workplace by teaching them transferable skills

to aid their future potential. For example, if employers

were encouraged to be involved in recognised co-

curricular activity and awards that run in parallel to

degree programmes then students would benefit as it

would increase their future employability and career

prospects.

Not a crisis, but an opportunity…There has never been a more important time to

ensure that the main challenges facing Higher

Education – namely ensuring fair access and

improving student experience – are met effectively.

It would be wrong to view the current environment

in Higher Education as a crisis. We are faced with

all-encompassing opportunities to reform the sector

and to secure a better future for institutions and

students alike.

GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm


GMT3 11/4/11 1:58 pm

inside this issue - hecsu · global mba and european business schools ... hec paris remains at the...

Documents