Leader: Recruiting free-for-all will bring instability

February 14, 2003

Top-up fees and restrictions on research funds represent the public face of the government's proposed higher education "market". But student enrolment figures published this week show that fissures are already emerging in the system. Last autumn for the first time in almost a decade, admissions officers were free to recruit as many students as they wanted, and the impact was dramatic: some civic universities increased their intake by up to 1,000 students, while further education colleges and some new universities saw numbers drop.

The losers in this initial free-for-all were not as numerous or as wounded as commentators had predicted - even where there had been a dip in applications, recruitment targets were usually met. But the signs for the future remain ominous for those that struggled. Some have seen a further slump in applications for 2003, begging questions about the pool of candidates from which places will be filled. Unless academically weak recruits receive the additional support they need, they run the risk of adding to dropout rates.

With demand for higher education relatively flat even before fees are increased, the share of the market going to its big names seems certain to rise. To some extent, this was what was intended when recruitment limits were abolished, but it is bound to add to the instability that other white paper proposals will produce. Some institutions, including leading lights in widening participation, are going to need support, not brickbats, in the next few years.

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns