‘Failing’ institutions will not be fined

Proposal for financial penalties to maintain standards is rejected following sector-wide consultation

April 9, 2015

Universities have rejected the idea of fining institutions that fail to meet basic academic standards, a conference has heard.

Summarising responses to a sector-wide consultation on potential changes to quality assurance, Steve Egan, deputy chief executive of the Higher Education Funding Council for England, said that higher education institutions of all types had opposed fines for those who failed to maintain standards.

“That [idea] got universal rejection as it would lead to students suffering,” said Mr Egan at an event in London on 30 March to discuss the regulation of higher education.

Hefce is currently consulting on a “risk-based, proportionate, affordable and low-burden” quality-assurance system that it hopes to implement from 2017.

It says that a new system is required as the sector is “undergoing rapid change” and the work now carried out by the Quality Assurance Agency may be put out to tender. As a result, parts of the QAA’s work may be parcelled out to a variety of bodies.

The review may also lead to penalties for institutions that fail to meet expectations. One punishment under consideration is the removal of degree-awarding powers, the control of which is set to be transferred from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills to Hefce.

Mr Egan said that only a small number of the 187 respondents to the consultation had supported the use of this “nuclear option”.

Madeleine Atkins, Hefce’s chief executive, told the conference that “the sector is asking for a risk-based approach” to quality assurance, “not a heavy-handed one”. But there was division about whether a quality-assurance system should explicitly seek to encourage improvement at all levels or simply “get out of the way” once standards had been met, Professor Atkins said.

Hefce, which has held 13 roundtable events and two plenary sessions across the UK since it announced its review in October, is due to publish its draft plans for quality assurance after the general election. A second stage of consultation will then take place ahead of a decision in September.

jack.grove@tesglobal.com

Times Higher Education free 30-day trial

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

Laurel and Hardy sawing a plank of wood

Working with other academics can be tricky so follow some key rules, say Kevin O'Gorman and Robert MacIntosh

Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford will host a homeopathy conference next month

Charity says Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford is ‘naive’ to hire out its premises for event

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations