tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/jo-johnson-16898/articlesJo Johnson – The Conversation2021-03-15T11:49:09Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1570102021-03-15T11:49:09Z2021-03-15T11:49:09ZChina-UK: new report reveals massive increase in research collaboration and dependence on Chinese students<p>A critical foreign policy challenge for a post-Brexit UK is its relationship with China – and a key pillar of this relationship is Britain’s higher education and research sector.</p>
<p>Our <a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/china-question.pdf">new research</a> demonstrates just how important the sector is for UK-China ties. Education was the UK’s largest service export in 2018 and in 2019, one in every nine UK academic papers involved collaboration between British and Chinese researchers. China has had a rapid rise among the rankings of the UK’s research partners – going from ninth to second place in less than a decade. China is now challenging the US for the number one spot, raising pressing questions for policymakers at a time of rising geopolitical tensions.</p>
<p>In the context of these tensions and domestic concerns over China’s role in the global economy, it is vital for policymakers and leaders in higher education to understand the depth of the sector’s relationship with China – the risks it creates, and the rewards it offers.</p>
<p>The study was led by former universities minister Jo Johnson, and published by the Policy Institute at King’s College London and the Harvard Kennedy School. It maps the UK-China relationship in terms of the flow of students between the two countries and collaboration on research, examining how this may be affected by China’s emergence as a global research and education superpower. </p>
<p>Our goal in producing the report was to provide new data and analysis, in a policy space often characterised by a lack of robust evidence, to help policymakers deal with the highly complex trade-offs of working with China in this area.</p>
<p>Most of the focus in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jul/23/uk-universities-accused-overreliance-fees-chinese-students">public commentary</a> and <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/call-to-ban-students-who-act-as-puppets-of-china-353gw3l9x">political debate</a> has (justifiably) focused on the implications of high numbers of Chinese students in the UK. But the most significant findings of our research concerned the extent to which UK research output is intertwined with that of China.</p>
<h2>Growing collaboration</h2>
<p>We found that collaboration on peer-reviewed academic papers between China and the UK has increased from less than 100 co-authored papers in 1990, to 16,267 papers in 2019. This amounts to about 11% of UK output. For comparison, US and German co-authorship is around 19% and 10.5% respectively. These trends reflect <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/497557a">a broader shift in R&D</a>, according to which critical intellectual property is rarely now wholly owned by any one country or institution and is more likely to be shared.</p>
<p>We also emphasise how a substantial proportion of this deep collaboration in research takes place in areas of strategically important areas. Examples include telecommunications, nanotechnology and biochemistry, all of which are likely to produce new, economically beneficial –– or potentially disruptive – technologies, products and services. </p>
<p>Although this picture of UK R&D integration with China may cause concerns, the report underlines the importance of collaboration and shared intellectual property and the benefit of collaboration with China to the UK’s research output.</p>
<h2>Destination: knowledge</h2>
<p>It is widely known that China is the UK’s <a href="https://www.hesa.ac.uk/news/16-01-2020/sb255-higher-education-student-statistics/location">single biggest provider of overseas students</a>, making 35% of the overall number of non-EU students in the UK, across all levels of study in 2018/19. </p>
<p>Public debate tends to focus on the risks associated with this level of student in-flow, from concerns over <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/security-services-fear-the-march-of-beijings-spies-on-universities-wf93f9vrq">Chinese state infiltration</a> and <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-54718434">freedom of speech</a> to worries that Chinese students “<a href="http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/85211/1/Machin_Paying%20out%20crowding%20out_2017.pdf">crowd-out</a>” domestic students.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A Chinese scientist examines a flask in a laboratory." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/389273/original/file-20210312-15-1261t18.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Collaboration between China and the UK has increased from fewer than 100 co-authored papers before 1990, to 16,267 papers in 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bo1982 via Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But our research sought to quantify its benefits. The UK’s Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) <a href="https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2018/01/11/new-figures-show-international-students-worth-22-7-billion-uk-cost-2-3-billion-net-gain-31-million-per-constituency-310-per-uk-resident/">estimates</a> that a typical non-EU student’s overall contribution to the UK economy was £102,000, based on 2015/16 prices (£115,640 at today’s prices).</p>
<p>Using HEPI’s model, which was developed by London Economics, and adjusting for inflation, our research estimated that the net value of UK HE exports from hosting full-time Chinese students <a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/china-question.pdf">was approximately</a> £3.7 billion in 2019. The overall export value of education to China, including part-time students from China in the UK, Chinese students at UK private schools and UK private schools operating in China, is likely to be far higher.</p>
<h2>Cost/benefit</h2>
<p>While concerns over the UK’s reliance on Chinese or overseas students cannot be overlooked, this analysis shows that any attempt to curb overseas students numbers, from China or elsewhere, must be cognisant of the economic cost of doing so. As China develops its own capacity as an education and research powerhouse by growing its domestic education base, the UK must continue to adapt to remain an attractive destination.</p>
<p>The benefits of international student mobility from China, and collaboration with Chinese institutions in scientific domains related to climate change and the achievement of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/moving-global-goals-for-education-from-quantity-to-quality-after-2015-41732">Sustainable Development Goals</a>, are substantial. </p>
<p>But as geopolitical tensions mount, the risk of a backlash is becoming increasingly real. Disorderly disengagement would damage the UK university system, with significant costs for tertiary education and the performance of the UK knowledge economy. A tension will always exist between the benefits and risks of collaboration. </p>
<p>Given the evident benefits of working with China and the clear value of people-to-people links created through international study, severing ties would be unwise. Instead, the UK must manage and mitigate the risks that come with these close ties – whether real or perceived. </p>
<p>Our report makes several recommendations for the UK government. These include reaffirming that there are no plans to introduce caps on the numbers of international students. Government must also ensure appropriate monitoring of the associated risks and the plans of individual institutions to mitigate those risks, including through recruitment diversification strategies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/157010/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new report co-authored with former universities minister Jo Johnson has revealed the depth of scientific collaboration between the UK and China.Vivienne L Moxham-Hall, Research Associate at the Policy Institute, King's College LondonNiall Sreenan, Impact Acceleration Account Manager, King's College LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/799362017-06-23T16:09:35Z2017-06-23T16:09:35ZUniversity rankings: good intentions, image polishing and more bureaucracy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175350/original/file-20170623-30721-gmg2jw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=41%2C41%2C5517%2C3586&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/group-students-sharing-ideas-on-campus-526892083?src=jDvKci_w2oMxZaDlAZ87Cw-1-0">PORTRAIT IMAGES ASIA BY NONWARIT/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Some UK universities will be cheering, some groaning, after the release of rankings under <a href="https://theconversation.com/tef-everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-university-rankings-79932?sr=1">the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF)</a>. My own university received a silver, so we’re shrugging. Despite all these reactions, we don’t know if we can expect any impact on the <a href="http://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ihe/article/download/9833/8615">quality of teaching</a>. What we do know, however, is that it will lead to a large-scale image polishing, the mushrooming of rankings-related bureaucracy, judicious gaming of the new rules, and cynicism amongst professors and lecturers. </p>
<p>When the universities minister, Jo Johnson, announced the <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/he-white-paper-tef-link-fees-stays-will-be-phased">TEF</a>, he had good intentions. He hoped to address the widely recognised problem that academics were rewarded for obscure research read by a handful of people. Teaching commitments were being neglected and Johnson worried this meant that students suffered. </p>
<p>Now, those students can see if their £9,000-a-year tuition fees are spent on gold, silver or bronze-rated universities. The government hopes this will create transparency and allow for more informed choices. Johnson also hoped that the rankings would also drive up teaching quality across the sector. I have spent much of my academic career studying how knowledge-intensive organisations, including universities, build reputations and respond to new challenges. I fear that Johnson may be disappointed.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175351/original/file-20170623-27880-jz8833.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How will Jo Johnson define success?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/biggin-hillukseptember-182016jo-johnson-mp-attends-492946312?src=jSQl2puDdnZB6zr5AbGY2Q-1-1">Keith Larby/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Quibbles</h2>
<p>Of course this isn’t the first rankings system. In 1910, James McKeen Cattell’s directory, <a href="https://archive.org/details/americanmenofsci01catt">American Men of Science</a>, ranked US institutions on the basis of the concentration of distinguished people. In 1983, the <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/09/13/princeton-tops-list-2017-best-college-ranking/90261588/">US News and World Report Best College Ranking</a> attempted a comprehensive national ranking. Since 2003, there has been a flowering of <a href="http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&context=cserart">global ranking systems</a>, including the Academic Ranking of World Universities, the THE-Thomson Reuters World University Ranking and QS World University Rankings. </p>
<p>There have always been quibbles over whether these are meaningful indicators of university quality. How reliable are they? Are the right questions being asked? How do they deal with missing information? How are different indicators weighted? How much should small differences affect relative ranking? The TEF now faces the same questions.</p>
<p>In truth though, rankings are more about perception than performance: more about PR than getting accurate information about how a university operates. The results will <a href="https://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/39802910.pdf">make it on to promotional material</a> one way or another – however the rankings come out. When the results of the most recent Research Excellence Framework was announced, I read an email from one disappointed dean who nevertheless saw cause to celebrate his achievement – of ensuring the school was ranked at the top of the list in the West Midlands. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/175352/original/file-20170623-27888-1x5l2u4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pulling in the punters.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/college-move-day-new-students-dorm-174731720?src=VUddyGkAcEqy9TCNYEMYmw-1-0">Sean Locke Photography</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These image-polishing activities are not in vain. <a href="https://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/39802910.pdf">An OECD study</a> found that students do indeed use rankings as a way to filter information about institutions. One US study found that <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FB%3ARIHE.0000032324.46716.f4?LI=true">rankings had a genuine effect</a> on the number of student applications.</p>
<h2>Impact assessment</h2>
<p>Aside from PR puffery, do rankings actually affect how universities operate? Well, yes. But that may not be a good thing. Generally speaking, as soon as you create a ranking system, you also create a whole system for gaming the rankings. </p>
<p>In some cases, this has involved outright lying as <a href="http://jsinclaironline.com/Admissions%20game.pdf">institutions have fabricated</a> statistics about various things including graduation rates, staff-student ratios and test scores. This is relatively rare. What is more common is known in US law schools as “<a href="https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=45+Conn.+L.+Rev.+1235&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=dc571cea7e6395ce4df609121e013558">jukin’ the stats</a>” – manipulating the results to get a favourable ranking.</p>
<p>Common tricks include <a href="https://www.stmarys-ca.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/files/rankings-and-reactivity-2007.pdf">bringing in students</a> who you know will perform well, will feel satisfied and go on to earn high salaries. This of course might boost your scores, but it can mean many “non-traditional” students face discrimination. </p>
<p>One effect of the gaming of the system is that universities <a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/50b3/d4c2dd8ca362740e35b398a50303d9e302c0.pdf">become increasingly standardised</a>. To fit in with rankings, universities can spend big on building up attributes and offerings which they hope will push them up the table. </p>
<p>We can see this effect from the creation of global systems such as the <a href="http://www.shanghairanking.com/">Shanghai rankings</a> have encouraged universities across the world to model themselves on large US science-intensive universities. The Finnish government ploughed tens of millions into merging three institutions in Helsinki to create a “<a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/17422041111103813">Nordic MIT</a>”, an exercise in reputation-building with the aim of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34902884">improving its standing in the rankings</a>. Of course, this may turn out to be a wonderful investment for the university and students alike, but you have to wonder about the fragile motivation behind it.</p>
<p>In other cases, it has led to universities putting on the appearance that they have changed. The French government recently formed a single research-intensive university in Paris by pushing together <a href="https://www.univ-psl.fr/fr">individual institutions in the region</a>. This changed little about how the institution operated. But it did create a new brand which could climb up the global rankings.</p>
<h2>Rankings rituals</h2>
<p>Rankings have also created vast bureaucracies. Many universities have whole offices entirely devoted to processing and dealing with the wide range of accreditation and ranking exercises in which they participate. Rankings often require academics and administrators to engage in shallow bureaucratic rituals. As a result, faculty time is taken up with tasks that do nothing to increase the quality of teaching or research, but simply grease the wheels of the rankings process. Academics might find themselves inputting data on fleeting interaction with students, laboriously documenting the most minor “teaching innovations” or attending poor-quality teacher training courses. </p>
<p>That’s where the cynicism sets in. In research on business schools, we found that academics would <a href="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/60766535/Alvesson%20and%20Spicer%2016.pdf">often be deeply cynical</a> about their role in producing the rankings, but would participate in the process anyway. Many talked about it as “playing the game”, helping to pull in the punters by whatever means necessary. </p>
<p>It is a possibility that the TEF will drive up teaching quality in UK universities, but the certainties are less benign. And it must be a concern that the troubling baggage of rankings systems – the gaming, the bureaucracy, the cynicism – will end up undermining that primary goal.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79936/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andre Spicer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Students can now see if their £9,000 a year fees are going to a ‘gold-standard’ school. But how cynical should they be?Andre Spicer, Professor of Organisational Behaviour, Cass Business School, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/708852017-01-06T12:09:42Z2017-01-06T12:09:42ZHigher education is being turned upside down at completely the wrong time<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151920/original/image-20170106-18641-uam2in.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The changing landscape of UK higher education.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>There is little doubt that the challenging, turbulent and uncertain times faced by the UK’s university sector in 2016 are set to continue well into 2017 – with the focus now swiftly turning to the Higher Education and Research Bill, <a href="http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2016-17/highereducationandresearch.html">which is currently before parliament</a>.</p>
<p>Under the new bill, alternative education providers would be able to gain degree-awarding powers and university titles more easily. And it is this seemingly full-scale “marketisation” of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/dec/31/lords-revolt-tory-plans-free-market-universities">higher education sector</a> that is causing concern for many. </p>
<p>The Higher Education Policy Institute’s <a href="http://www.hepi.ac.uk/2017/01/05/3762/">recent report</a> showed that three-quarters of these alternative providers – many of which are privately owned and overseas – will remain unregulated after the new bill becomes law. This is because students at these small overseas providers often do not receive financial support from the Student Loans Company – meaning that the institutions aren’t automatically registered as a higher education provider. This will mean that these types of institutions can easily slip through the net – as registration for them will be optional.</p>
<p>One of the report’s co-authors, John Fielden, concluded that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alternative providers are numerous and diverse, with over 700 institutions operating in England alone. Designing a regulatory system for both the traditional sector and the newcomers is a bed of nails.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, cautioned: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>As the higher education market continues to change shape, we must be vigilant in ensuring bad apples do not contaminate the sector as a whole. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This suggests that higher education markets are currently not efficient or tight enough on regulatory matters. And a <a href="http://www.researchcghe.org/perch/resources/publications/ppreport.pdf">recent report by University College London</a> confirms this. It found that most private higher education providers outside the UK are teaching only institutions – so they don’t undertake their own research – and are less prestigious and less innovative than public sector providers.</p>
<p>But universities minister Jo Johnson argues that the success of UK universities on the world stage is in part due to their independence and autonomy to decide how and what to teach and research. And <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/higher-education-and-research-bill-its-matter-trus">Johnson believes</a> that the bill will in fact “enshrine those values in legislation”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151921/original/image-20170106-29222-sp9pbb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It’s hard to know what the future of UK education will truly look like.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Under the bill, the future of research is also feared. Currently there are ten UK institutions <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2016/oct/18/higher-education-research-Bill-needs-amended">ranked among the top 50 worldwide</a> in terms of their research. High quality university research is vital for the lifeblood of a civilised nation and should not be undermined. </p>
<p>But this could all be about to change as the new <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-research-and-innovation-business-case">UK Research and Innovation</a> body will integrate the seven current research councils with Innovate UK. Never before has one organisation been responsible for the distribution of that volume of money – and the impact this will have on higher education is as yet unclear. </p>
<h2>The point of the bill</h2>
<p>It is easy then to see why so many in the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2016/oct/18/higher-education-research-bill-needs-amended">sector are up in arms</a> about the drastic new proposals. </p>
<p>But as supporters of the bill claim, the main aim of these reforms is to provide greater choice for students. Arguably, these are the people who really matter in all of this. And the government has claimed that greater transparency around university rankings is one way this “choice” can be achieved.</p>
<p>The introduction of the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teaching-excellence-framework-year-2-specification">Teaching Excellence Framework</a> (TEF) will see English universities ranked gold, silver or bronze depending on the quality of their learning and teaching. A bronze rating will mean “significantly below” benchmark standards in some areas. And from 2018, these ratings will determine which universities can raise tuition fees by the rate of inflation. </p>
<p>This could well be a game-changer for UK higher education – with the <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/teaching-excellence-score-key-applicants-choices">2016 Student Experience Survey</a> revealing that 84% of university applicants would consider the TEF score when choosing a university. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151922/original/image-20170106-18641-1xxzvab.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Student experience is said to be at the heart of these changes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the TEF could also cause more than a few problems. Take for example London Business School <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/ft-global-mba-ranking-2016-london-business-school-retains-uk-top-spot">which is top in the world</a> in the Financial Times Global MBA rankings – above Harvard. Yet it actually has the lowest number of <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/news/uk-universities-most-qualified-academic-staff">faculty members with teaching qualifications</a> in the UK – which is a component of the TEF. So under the new system, this world-class business school could effectively be rated as “significantly below benchmark standards”.</p>
<h2>Fears for the future</h2>
<p>It is questionable then how “bronze” institutions will market themselves to potential students. Plus there are also concerns that <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/uk-higher-education-system-works-so-why-overhaul-it">graduates from these institutions</a> may find marketing themselves to potential employers increasingly difficult.</p>
<p>And, of course, measuring teaching quality through TEF types of metrics is questionable. As Phil Baty, the Times Higher rankings editor, <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/mock-teaching-excellence-framework-tef-results-revealed-a-new-hierarchy-emerges.">pointed out</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Many would argue that the best university teaching involves making students feel challenged and even uncomfortable; something that cannot always be associated with satisfaction.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Government claims that the changes will help to boost social mobility, life chances and opportunities may also prove untenable. This is because for many poorer students the location of a university is a key factor in their choice of where to study. So these students may well end up having to attend a low ranked university as it is simply closer to home.</p>
<p>But while the true nature of many of the reforms are still unclear, what is for certain is that if things continue as they are, by mid 2018, the UK’s higher education system will look remarkably different from the one we know today. And only time will tell whether this is a good or a bad thing.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70885/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julie Davies receives funding from the EU for an Erasmus Plus project.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joanne Blake does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Higher Education and Research Bill is well overdue, but is now really the right time to make huge changes to the sector?Julie Davies, HR Subject Group Leader, University of HuddersfieldJoanne Blake, Senior Lecturer Department of Managment, University of HuddersfieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/503232015-11-06T17:18:39Z2015-11-06T17:18:39ZHow the Teaching Excellence Framework will work<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/101096/original/image-20151106-16263-1vnoq19.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The best teachers will now be highly sought after. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Monkey Business Images/www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The details of how the government proposes to introduce a Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) to monitor the quality of teaching at universities have been revealed in a new green paper on higher education.</p>
<p>The paper, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/474227/BIS-15-623-fulfilling-our-potential-teaching-excellence-social-mobility-and-student-choice.pdf">Fulfilling our Potential: Teaching Excellence, Social Mobility and Student Choice</a>, sets out how those universities which provide excellent teaching, and give the best employment prospects to their graduates, will be able to raise their fees higher than the current maximum of £9,000, in line with inflation. </p>
<p>Alongside the Teaching Excellence Framework, the paper launches a consultation on a range of issues including efforts to raise the number of disadvantaged students attending university and the processes for establishing new universities. It also proposes the merger of two existing bodies – the <a href="http://www.hefce.ac.uk/">Higher Education Funding Council</a> (HEFCE) and the <a href="https://www.offa.org.uk/">Office for Fair Access</a> – to create a new Office for Students. </p>
<p>As this is a green paper, rather than a white paper, there will still be scope for revision before these changes appear in an expected Higher Education Bill in the next parliamentary session. </p>
<p>Launching the green paper, the universities minister Jo Johnson <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/student-choice-at-the-heart-of-new-higher-education-reforms">said</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Our ambition is to drive up the quality of teaching in our universities to ensure students and taxpayers get value for money and employers get graduates with the skills they need.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Different levels of excellence</h2>
<p>The government seeks to do this through creating stronger incentives for excellent teaching and providing students with more information about their courses, through the new TEF. This will evolve throughout the life of the current parliament, becoming more sophisticated as it progresses. </p>
<p>The first year of the TEF, which will launch in 2016-17, will be a streamlined approach based on a quality assessment review resulting in the award of “TEF Level 1”. This will be used to inform tuition fee rises for the following year, for students starting in September 2017. </p>
<p>This “pilot” TEF is not a high hurdle to jump which means most of the sector would be eligible to raise fees in line with inflation from 2017-18, indicating the government is now more relaxed than it had been <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-universities-will-have-to-pay-more-attention-to-the-quality-of-their-teaching-47186">previously</a> about controlling the number of universities allowed to raise fees.</p>
<p>From the second year onward, higher TEF Levels of 2, 3 and 4 will be available for universities to apply for. A technical consultation will take place in 2016 to work out the detail of these levels. </p>
<p>The green paper defines teaching excellence as: teaching quality, learning environment, student outcomes and learning gain. The TEF will therefore provide applicants with two types of information: not only on the type of teaching and learning experience they can expect on the course, but also their likely career paths after graduation. To achieve this, the TEF will need to involve a range of measures that span assessment of student satisfaction, their dropout rates from courses and their job prospects.</p>
<h2>Breaking teaching down by subject</h2>
<p>The assessment of all this will involve expert panels who will review the metrics and evidence supplied by the institution and make a judgement as to which TEF level to award. The panels will include academics, students and employer representatives. </p>
<p>Initially, the TEF results will only be institution wide – not broken down by departments. This limitation means the TEF will not appreciate the differentiation both between and within institutions. To address this, the green paper proposes the eventual creation of panels for each discipline area (similar to the units of assessment in the <a href="http://www.ref.ac.uk/">Research Excellence Framework</a>, which assess academic research) which would allow comparisons to be made between subject areas and courses at different universities. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/101097/original/image-20151106-16273-1lgwxl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">What jobs graduates get will become even more important to universities.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/134017849@N04/19516003308/sizes/l">QMULsed/www.flickr.com</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The TEF will also be used to encourage universities to issue Grade Point Average (GPA) scores alongside the traditional degree classifications of a first or 2:1. The government is encouraging GPAs – to be awarded through a 13-point scale – as it says they provide employers more granular information on the performance of graduates across their degree, rather than just in final exams.</p>
<h2>Could fees go higher?</h2>
<p>Universities who apply and obtain the highest TEF levels would be rewarded with being allowed to further raise their fees – in line with inflation – in future years. </p>
<p>But considering the current low <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-panic-uk-deflation-is-nothing-more-than-a-blip-42059">inflation rate in the UK</a>, we are not talking about large increases. This may lead to pressure to allow fees to rise above inflation to give universities more of an incentive to take part in the TEF. The current Conservative government has remained silent on ruling out fee rises above inflation during this parliament. </p>
<p>The green paper does propose giving the secretary of state a new “power to set tuition fee caps”. The undergraduate fee level of a maximum £9,000 per year is currently decided by a vote in parliament so transferring this to ministers would make it easier for governments to raise fees in the future.</p>
<p>The TEF is just one of a raft of changes to the higher education architecture the government has proposed, and the sector will no doubt be vocal in its dialogue with the government during the consultation period, which ends on January 15.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/50323/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Gunn receives funding from Worldwide Universities Network, the British Council, the UK Higher Education Academy and the UK Quality Assurance Agency.</span></em></p>The government has unveiled proposals for a new system to reward universities for excellent teaching.Andrew Gunn, Researcher in Higher Education Policy, University of LeedsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/471862015-09-10T10:09:36Z2015-09-10T10:09:36ZWhy universities will have to pay more attention to the quality of their teaching<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94282/original/image-20150909-18637-mgwgy3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Rewarding the best teaching. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ucentralarkansas/4535060043/sizes/l">University of Central Arkansas</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Conservative government is moving fast to fulfil its <a href="https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/manifesto2015/ConservativeManifesto2015.pdf">manifesto pledge</a> to recognise those universities that offer the highest quality teaching. In July, the higher education minister Jo Johnson <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/teaching-at-the-heart-of-the-system">proposed</a> that a new Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) would be created to sit alongside the existing system that recognises research excellence at universities. </p>
<p>In a speech at the Universities UK annual conference on September 9, Johnson <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/higher-education-fulfilling-our-potential">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This patchiness in the student experience within and between institutions cannot continue. There is extraordinary teaching that deserves greater recognition. And there is lamentable teaching that must be driven out of our system.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ongoing consultations on the way the TEF will be delivered will lead the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills to publish a green paper this autumn and decision-making on the framework as early as next spring. This short timeframe means the TEF can’t spend long on the drawing board in Whitehall before it is implemented.</p>
<h2>Giving students the choice</h2>
<p>As well as driving up the quality of teaching and enhancing its status within the university, a main driver of the TEF is to provide future undergraduate applicants with better information to help them make a decision on what and where to study. This is part of a Conservative party view of higher education policy where it is the role of government to foster more market-like characteristics in the system of undergraduate education.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=431&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/94286/original/image-20150909-18669-klhbp9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=541&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Informing their choices.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Students via Andresr/www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This involves ensuring that student consumers have information to make an informed choice. The government argues that we need to know where teaching excellence is, because we need to be able tell potential students where they can find it, and they will make decisions about where to study accordingly.</p>
<p>To identify teaching excellence requires not just defining it, but also finding a way to measure it. Within the TEF, teaching refers to the whole “teaching function” of the university, encompassing the wider undergraduate education experience. A bundle of performance indicators focused on the outcomes of higher education will have to be selected to capture and convey teaching excellence. These could include contact time, staff-student ratios and student satisfaction. Whatever measures are used, critics will point to the problems of reducing down a higher education learning experience to a couple of indicators or metrics.</p>
<p>Creating a TEF to meet the ministers requirements, particularly in such a short space of time, will be challenging and there are a range of potential policy pitfalls. The minister has said he wants the TEF to be “proportionate and light touch, not big, bossy and bureaucratic”. However, a light-touch system may not produce sufficient robust information for applicants. And the burden for academics of even a light-touch system will be high, as universities are likely to make preparing for the TEF a priority to ensure they do well.</p>
<h2>Raising fees</h2>
<p>The stakes for universities will be high. If the TEF works as intended it will influence student demand. But there are also wider consequences for reputations and the TEF data will be crunched and used in league tables that determine university rankings. </p>
<p>However, the implications of the TEF go further than this. In his July budget the chancellor, George Osborne, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/summer-budget-2015/summer-budget-2015">announced</a> that TEF scores should be used to determine which universities would be allowed to raise their undergraduate fees above the current £9,000 cap in line with inflation. Teaching excellence then featured in the governments productivity plan, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/443898/Productivity_Plan_web.pdf">Fixing the Foundations</a>, also published in July, which reaffirmed the commitment to link TEF results to future fee increases as early as 2017. </p>
<p>My understanding, from conversations I’ve had as part of my ongoing research on the TEF, is that it’s likely that from the 2017-18 academic year, only a small number of universities – those with the best results in the TEF – would be allowed to adjust their fees upwards in line with inflation. The exact number of universities or courses will be decided nearer the time. </p>
<p>This may produce some unforeseen consequences as higher education policy would be entering uncharted waters. The universities which may perform best in an evaluation of teaching may not be the same as those established players that always perform best in evaluations of research, such as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/qanda-what-is-the-ref-and-how-is-the-quality-of-university-research-measured-35529">Research Excellence Framework</a>. Not letting established research universities raise their undergraduate fees, while other universities do, could be politically very difficult for the universities minister of the day.</p>
<p>The TEF may be used in other ways too. Speaking to Universities UK in September, Johnson indicated that the TEF could play a possible role in rewarding universities that succeed in graduating more students from disadvantaged backgrounds. This is linked to <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/higher-education-fulfilling-our-potential">a government target</a> to increase the number of black and minority ethnic students going to university by 20% by 2020 and similar targets for them to graduate and enter work. </p>
<p>The politics of the TEF – to have a performance measure for teaching and to link success in this to any tuition fee rises – are now settling into place. This creates the immediate policy challenge of deciding what teaching excellence actually is and how to measure it: no small undertaking.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47186/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Gunn receives funding from Worldwide Universities Network and the UK Higher Education Academy.</span></em></p>Universities are keenly awaiting more detail on the government’s planned Teaching Excellence Framework.Andrew Gunn, Researcher in Higher Education Policy, University of LeedsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/416492015-05-12T13:24:52Z2015-05-12T13:24:52ZThe battles ahead for Nicky Morgan and Jo Johnson’s Tory education reforms<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81394/original/image-20150512-22571-1fz46bq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1%2C0%2C1022%2C533&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Back to school for Nicky Morgan. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/number10gov/15356754893/sizes/l">The Prime Minister's Office/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the <a href="http://www.naht.org.uk/">annual conference of headteachers</a> just days before the general election, the buzz was clear: Nicky Morgan was making her first appearance at the event as secretary of state for education, and it could be her last.</p>
<p>Now the wholly unexpected Conservative majority, <a href="https://www.tes.co.uk/news/school-news/breaking-news/nicky-morgan-confirmed-education-secretary">and her subsequent swift reappointment</a>, instead send a clear signal that Morgan is trusted in the brief and has the opportunity to implement the <a href="https://theconversation.com/manifesto-check-conservatives-hold-the-course-with-schools-plan-40192">manifesto policies</a> for which her party has gained a mandate.</p>
<p>Morgan is well-suited to the task. Having had a chance to find her feet, she has been a more congenial education secretary to many in the profession than her predecessor Michael Gove, notwithstanding the predictable lament from <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/teachers-speak-out-over-nicky-morgans-reappointment-as-education-secretary-10239170.html">elements of the Twittersphere</a>. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"597152901056884736"}"></div></p>
<p>Morgan has, according to union leaders, at least to some extent drawn out the sting associated with Gove’s fast-paced reforms while still engaging with the profession in a substantive way. That she intends to continue in similar vein was reflected in her initial comments on her reappointment: “<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-32697243">it’s about listening</a>”</p>
<p>As Steve Besley, head of policy at education company Pearson, has shown, one major challenge facing Morgan will be <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xwm4BgAAQBAJ&pg=PA129&lpg=PA129&dq=Steve+Besley+Gove+Legacy&source=bl&ots=g6yeoLlCm9&sig=ZvwGOkw77jrEPpSOh9Yn8TFK6Q8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gcFRVYqoOMPeUciIgJAM&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Steve%20Besley%20Gove%20Legacy&f=false">vocational education and skills policy</a>. Gove made under-appreciated strides in this area, notably enacting the recommendations of the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/180504/DFE-00031-2011.pdf">2011 Wolf Report</a>. </p>
<p>Yet in Besley’s words, the “woeful state of careers advice” has not been appropriately addressed, there remains a “lack of a coherent transition route from school to work or further training” and there is a “lack of support, guidance and opportunities for the most vulnerable”. These are knotty problems which will require significant political investment for Morgan to make headway on – not least with the different categories of institution operating to educate 14 to 19-year-olds. </p>
<h2>Tight belts for schools</h2>
<p>Another huge challenge will simply be money. Gove – along with colleagues across government – <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01078.pdf">did well to keep education spending at around £90 billion</a>. As the UCL Institute of Education <a href="https://theconversation.com/conservative-victory-means-englands-school-system-will-look-like-few-others-in-the-world-41553">director Chris Husbands has noted</a>, the Conservatives did not opt to guarantee spending for further education and there will be continuing pressure in relation to salaries. </p>
<p>Staffing also remains an issue. The introduction of the School Direct route into teaching and the continuing focus on schools-based initial teacher education did not in itself trigger a recruitment crisis, but “exacerbated” it, in the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/jan/19/school-direct-is-choking-university-teacher-training-courses">words of former head of Ofsted, David Bell</a>. Morgan will remain at the forefront of a battle to make the profession more attractive to graduates.</p>
<p>There will also be the question of the Department for Education’s (DfE) relationship with <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11485893/Government-backs-plans-for-College-of-Teaching.html">the new College of Teaching</a>. This initiative is intended to raise the status of the profession by giving it a self-governing apparatus which will allow it to “professionalise itself”. </p>
<p>However, some of the pre-election rhetoric emerging from the DfE implied that the college on its own might be enough by itself to raise the status of the teaching profession. The profession <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-teachers-should-be-sceptical-of-a-new-college-of-teaching-35280">remains unconvinced</a> and Morgan has work to do to convince teachers that she is both willing and able to invest political capital in addressing their needs. Particularly at a time when the squeeze, both financially and in terms of personnel, has seldom been tighter.</p>
<h2>Jo Johnson new universities minister</h2>
<p>Within higher education, turbulent years lie ahead. <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/jo-johnson-is-new-minister-covering-higher-education/2020168.article">Jo Johnson, newly-appointed as minister for universities and science</a>, and brother of London mayor Boris, has the credibility within and outside of government to be a success in the post. However, he will have to deal with a sector which already feels bruised after the 2010-2015 coalition.</p>
<p>The government retains high ambitions for higher education (“world-leading” is a phrase that persists in its literature), but its manifesto contained contradictory policies on <a href="https://theconversation.com/manifesto-check-conservatives-talk-tough-but-bring-nothing-new-on-immigration-40336">Europe</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/manifesto-check-conservatives-talk-tough-but-bring-nothing-new-on-immigration-40336">immigration</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-next-government-hold-for-higher-education-40588">higher education</a>. Johnson will be forced to reconcile these, or steer the choice between them. Given that he has written about the virtues of foreign students and their significance to UK higher education <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cdec9fa0-9d1b-11e1-aa39-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3Zua9kNNB">in his past life at the Financial Times</a>, it will be interesting to see how he addresses the ongoing issue of student visas, especially since the manifesto also announced a clampdown on universities elsewhere in the UK opening new campuses in London.</p>
<h2>Teaching REF will raise hackles</h2>
<p>The commitment to <a href="https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/manifesto2015/ConservativeManifesto2015.pdf">a formal mechanism for assessing teaching quality between institutions</a> – in parallel to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/research-excellence-framework">Research Excellence Framework</a> for research quality – is likely to generate significant resistance. This is primarily due to the existence of the annual National Student Survey which already drives teaching quality assessment in many, if not most, institutions. </p>
<p>Academic staff are now routinely appraised on teaching quality, and subjected to regular questionnaires and focus group feedback to senior management from students. Capability procedures on issues of performance are also increasingly favoured across the sector. So the idea of a teaching REF in addition to the existing one will likely be met with fury – and will pose a challenge not just to the minister but to the lecturers’ own union, UCU. </p>
<p>The new government’s policy in higher education represents the continuing purchase of “marketisation”. <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JedKE9adlrIC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false">As my colleague Roger Brown notes</a>, this has ensured that even as the state has nominally-withdrawn it has gained yet more power over the priorities of the sector through “steering” mechanisms. </p>
<p>The privatisation of the Quality Assurance Agency, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-29521363">slated for 2017, will now go ahead</a>, and it may be that its successor is rather more like Ofsted. The Social Market Foundation, a right-leaning think-tank <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/comment/opinion/degree-standards-time-to-call-time-on-the-monopolists/2017652.article">has also called for universities to be subject to exam boards</a>. If, as Husbands claims, the Cameron years will leave Britain with a school system unlike many others in the world, this will be still more true of higher education. </p>
<h2>Tuition fee question still looms</h2>
<p>The biggest question remains: will a Conservative government allow fees to rise above £9,000, a natural evolution of marketisation in this area? Under pressure from vice-chancellors, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/tuition-fees-could-rise-past-9000-under-new-government-plans-9636322.html">it’s likely that such plans will remain under consideration</a>. What the journalist Andrew McGettigan calls <a href="http://www.plutobooks.com/display.asp?K=9780745332932">the “great university gamble”</a> seems set to continue.</p>
<p>Across education, the coalition achieved a great deal in purely policy terms, though opinion differs on its legacy. The Conservatives’ majority now offers them the opportunity to pursue their ambitions further in the sector – but ministers will need to build bridges with both the schools and higher education sectors if they are to achieve their aims in the new parliament.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41649/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Finn is a member of the Labour Party, the Co-Operative Party and the University and Colleges Union.</span></em></p>From a College of Teaching to vocational education, international students and whether to raise tuition fees, there is a lot in the ministers’ inboxes.Mike Finn, Director of Centre for Education Policy Analysis, Liverpool Hope UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.