Ask most people to describe a typical student and the picture they’ll give you will be swift and clear: an 18 to 20 year old, fresh out of sixth form or a gap year, finishing their education through a full time course of study. In reality, though, two out of every five students in higher education are adults studying part time.
The fact that a large minority of students are older, and maybe studying at the same time as trying to hold down a job or bring up a family, is often overlooked – including, it seems, by the government.
Thus, while part-time students will not be directly affected by the government’s higher education reforms, they will not particularly benefit from them, either. And, in a number of respects, these reforms will place part-time students at a significant disadvantage to their full-time counterparts.
First, under the current bill, part time students will continue to have to pay their tuition fees upfront. In contrast, full-time students will be able to defer payment until after they have completed their course.
Second, whereas top-up fees for full-time students will be capped at £3,000, fees for part time students will continue to be determined by an unregulated market.
Third, institutions that specialise in the provision of part-time higher education, such as the Open University, stand to gain nothing from the extra
£1 billion that will be released into the higher education system as a result of the reforms. The status of further education colleges in relation to the bill, where the majority of students are part time, is also uncertain.
This is not to say that part-time students have nothing to gain from the proposals. For the first time, the government will introduce a statutory entitlement to a fee grant of £575 and £250 maintenance grant for
the poorest part-time students. However, while welcome, this it is not ‘new money’‚ committed under the bill – the DFES announced the grants in July last year.
The bill misses the opportunity to address some of the unnecessary differences in the way in which part-time and full-time students are treated. There is a view that extra provision would be wasted on part-time students. One assumption behind this is that, as most part time students work, the costs of study can be met through their existing income.
However, completing a part-time course requires a significant financial commitment. As well as having to pay their fees upfront, many part-time students experience a substantial drop in income during their course, as they have to reduce the number of hours they work in order to have enough time to study. Therefore, without help, financing a part-time course is likely to be beyond the means of the least well off.
Another argument against extra provision is based on the assumption that many part time students receive help with the costs of study from their employer. However, research conducted by Professor Claire Callender shows that only one in five part-time students receive help towards their study costs. These are most likely to include men, people in professional jobs, and those pursuing a vocational qualification. Women, those most disadvantaged in the labour market, and individuals pursuing substantial non-vocational courses are least likely to receive help.
At the very least, then, the government ought to extend the benefits of deferral to part-time students earning less than £15,000 who are without employer support. It is hard to see, therefore, how the government’s current position fits with its commitment to widen access to higher education for people from non-traditional backgrounds, especially given the contribution made by institutions such as the Open University to widening access. As the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education highlights: ‘A good measure of a university’s commitment to widening access and participation is how it treats people who do not conform to the profile of a teenager with good A levels or Scottish Highers wishing to study, full time, for an honour degree.’
There are some signs of movement on the issue. During the debate on the bill the government emphasised its commitment to promoting access to higher education for part-time and mature students and promised to consult on how the funding system might give more support to part-time students. However, as yet it is unclear what the timetable for consultation will be, and how the process will be conducted.
The part-time route represents a valuable opportunity for many people who might not otherwise have had the chance to go to university. The government should acknowledge this. It is not too late for them to put part time students on a more equal footing with their full-time counterparts.