The Blueprint will break the consensus that top-up fees are the only way of funding higher education. Going into the 2009 funding review we want the terms of reference to be broader than ‘how high the cap’ and we want to talk about how we can make the funding system fairer.
Last year we produced Broke and Broken: A critique of the higher education funding system to expose the regressive, unsustainable and damaging, flaws of the current funding.
What you said
We also ran a broad consultation with students’ unions and students to further investigate what a fairer funding system would look like. Following the consultation we produced a report to illustrate the faults of the current system and the experiences that students have had as a result.
This was one of hundreds of comments collected during the consultation:
"As a student who pays more then £3,000 a year for tuition fees I think the idea of making people pay even more then that is disgusting. I understand that the money needs to come from somewhere but at the end of the day nobody should have to choose between an education and a debt which would be impossible to pay off."
The responses from the consultation were developed into Five Foundations for an alternative higher education funding system for England:
- Financial support is overcomplicated and unfair. Financial support should be based on how much a student needs, not where they study. Students financial support should cover their living costs alone and not pay for course costs.
- The system generates unnecessary debt because fees are up front - higher education should be free at the point of use for all students. Graduates would contribute while they are working. The amount paid by graduates would depend on how much they are benefitting financially from their own use of the higher education system.
- The system is unflexible and penalises those who have accumulated academic credit but didn’t get to complete their course. We believe that more use should be made of flexible units of academic credit. Benefitting those who drop out. Part-time students would also benefit from more flexible forms of learning.
- The government is generating unnecessary and cover their interest by lending so much money to students in order for them to pay their fees. NUS believes that an alternative funding system should avoid such inefficiencies, so that maximum resources can be put into teaching, learning and student support.
- If individuals should contribute to higher education because they are beneficiaries then so too should the government and businesses. NUS believes that the government and businesses should make a greater contribution to higher education.
These foundations have framed the development of the Blueprint. This Blueprint has also been costed by economists to demonstrate that it is a credible alternative.
The report will be launched on the website on Wednesday 10 June. Watch this space for more news of the launch.
