Don’t base fee policy on narrow definition of ‘elite’, says v-c

Allowing certain universities to charge more in tuition fees will undermine the importance of teaching-focused institutions, according to a vice-chancellor.

The leader of Birmingham City University (BCU), which emphasises “practice-based learning” aligned with employment and skills, has criticised an intervention by Russell Group chief executive Libby Hackett, who last month suggested it was not “fair” for students to pay the same amount for every course at every university.

Speaking at a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference, David Mba suggested such interventions were based on a narrow definition of which universities should be considered “elite”.

“I think we are elite in this region and we are absolutely making [a] difference to this region,” he said.

Mba cited figures showing a third of new midwives in the West Midlands Combined Authority had trained at BCU and pointed to the university’s freshly inked 10-year partnership with the BBC.

That partnership will see BCU and the BBC work together to deliver specialist creative skills training at the Tea Factory in Digbeth, the corporation’s new Midlands headquarters.

Mba said it was crucial to “fund and recognise” different organisations’ “missions”. “Let us not choose one part of the sector as a template for the rest,” he added.

The University of Birmingham’s provost and vice-principal Nick Vaughan-Williams said he was “not a spokesperson for the Russell Group” despite his institution’s membership, but said it was important to “understand different institutions perform different functions”, adding: “Clearly, status alone should not be the basis on which fees are charged.”

The event, organised by the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi), also discussed the potential for further consolidation in the sector, following the finalisation of the Kent-Greenwich merger this summer.

Mba suggested the sector may not be “moving enough in that direction” when it comes to considering consolidation opportunities and having “honest conversations” about how universities could team up to weather tough financial headwinds.

“If we don’t do it ourselves, we’ll be forced to do it,” he argued.

But Vaughan-Williams was less convinced. “It’s unlikely that there will be any state funding support to enable that sort of consolidation to take place,” he said, suggesting that in countries where it had, like Australia, a “lot of public money has gone into making those consolidations work”.

Vaughan-Williams also asked whether universities really ought to “consider consolidation under conditions of duress”.

“Frankly, there is little incentive for a university that is financially strong to take on a university that is financially weak,” he said.

Shadow minister for education and member of the House of Lords Joanne Cash accused Jacqui Smith, minister for skills at the Department for Education (DfE), of failing to present a “satisfactory answer” to what would happen should a university go under.

Citing a recommendation made by the House of Commons Education Select Committee earlier this year calling for the creation of an “early warning system” to identify the risk of a higher education provider becoming insolvent, Cash said she thought it was a “disgrace that the government hasn’t made a pledge to support any of the distressed institutions that may sadly go under”. She called for a “body or system to catch who may get lost” as some institutions fail.

“I will keep fighting for that because it’s too awful to contemplate thousands of young people who suffer as a result of consistent failure,” the shadow education minister added.

georgia.luckhurst@timeshighereducation.com