The likely inclusion of widening participation metrics in the teaching excellence framework is being shaped by ministers¡¯ drive to meet targets set by David Cameron and a fear of dropout rates rising after the scrapping of student number controls, sector observers have suggested.

As the government prepared to publish a Green Paper setting out plans on the TEF and other key issues, some in the sector also argued that plans to step up ¡°market entry and exit¡± in English higher education represent a ¡°reckless¡± gamble with the sector¡¯s reputation.

It was expected that the Green Paper, which will put out plans for consultation before a potential White Paper and bill, will be broken down into four key areas: the TEF, widening participation, market entry and exit, and reshaping the sector¡¯s regulatory framework.

Ministers are said to be surprised that the widening participation target set by Mr Cameron ¨C doubling the proportion of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds entering higher education from 13.6 per cent in 2009 to 28 per cent in 2020 ¨C has not received more attention from the media.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

Jo Johnson, the universities and science minister, said at a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester on 6 October that ¡°widening participation and access will be intimately linked to the TEF¡±.?

¡°One of the core metrics we envisage using in the TEF will be the progress and the value add [for] students from disadvantaged backgrounds, measuring it for example in terms of their retention and completion rates,¡± he added at the event, hosted by Million+ and the National Union of Students.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

Nick Hillman, the director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, has traced the origin of Mr Cameron¡¯s widening participation target back to a Conservative press release in April during the general election campaign, on guarantees for young people. The target is ¡°buried in the notes to editors¡±, he said.

¡®Exciting and necessary¡¯

Mr Hillman suggested that the inclusion of widening participation and retention metrics in the TEF is driven by the need to meet Mr Cameron¡¯s target, as well as by a fear that the abolition of student number controls could increase dropout rates, particularly for poorer students.

He said: ¡°I read that commitment to widening participation [in the TEF] as ¡®gosh we need a lever to deliver the prime minister¡¯s commitment. Secondly, we¡¯ve got to do something about no number caps because otherwise this policy will blow up in our faces.¡¯¡±

Mr Hillman argued that the TEF agenda was ¡°exciting and necessary¡±. But he also said: ¡°The more things you want the TEF to deliver, the harder it is going to be to operate. The TEF is a measure of teaching quality ¨C it¡¯s not actually a measure of how many poor kids are at a university and passing out of university at the end.¡± Although he added that it ¡°can be made such¡±.

At the Conservative Party conference fringe event, Mr Johnson also said that he wanted to ¡°not only have the capacity for more rapid market entry¡±, but to have ¡°the capacity for more rapid market share shifts between universities¡±.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

He added that where market share shifts and institutions withdraw from courses, or even withdraw from higher education altogether, ¡°we need to ensure there is proper provision for students so they can be taught out at other institutions if they are midway through their courses¡±.

Gill Evans, an emeritus professor at the University of Cambridge and an expert on higher education governance, said that was a ¡°reckless¡± move.

She added: ¡°The tradition which has built the high reputation of UK higher education is that a university is durable. Get a degree with its name on it and that degree will still have value throughout your career. In the new world, fly-by-night outfits may barely last long enough to award their first degrees.¡±

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

Pam Tatlow, chief executive of Million+, said the ¡°idea that English higher education should be operated on pure market principles with a government expectation of rapid market entry and exit is one that should be approached with extreme caution. Such a premise would raise questions about sector stability and reputation as well as the future of private investment and the student interest.¡±

Roger Brown, emeritus professor of higher education policy at Liverpool Hope University, said that the questions around institutional exits were ¡°a lot more complex than simply protecting the student¡±.

He also argued that ¡°the conditions for creating a market simply do not apply in higher education¡±.

Professor Brown suggested that supporters of the market view have not addressed the question of ¡°what the higher education market is a market in¡±, whether it is in ¡°degrees, student outcomes, reputation or student experience¡±.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

john.morgan@tesglobal.com