Ministers have told the English regulator that the government “would expect a?significant number of?investigations” to?arise through controversial new quality baselines, with “priorities for?investigation” including “larger” universities below the thresholds.
In a to the Office for Students setting out strategic priorities for 2022-23, education secretary Nadhim Zahawi and universities minister Michelle Donelan also say the government wants to mount “on-site inspection of 10-15 providers next year” to check on priorities such as online learning not being used inappropriately.
The letter will bring fears that the government is infringing on universities’ autonomy by dictating the detail of regulation to the OfS, which is chaired by Conservative peer Lord Wharton, and asking it to investigate particular universities. The OfS has less distance from government than its predecessor organisation, the 黑料吃瓜网 Funding Council for England.
And it will deepen universities’ concerns over the planned new quality baselines, to be used as the basis for regulating higher education institutions.
Under the plans for absolute baselines, still being consulted on by the OfS, there will be numerical thresholds for the proportions of each course’s graduates going into “managerial or professional” employment or further study and for continuation and completion rates.
Institutions falling short face the prospect of improvement notices, fines or – the ultimate threat – being stripped of access to student loan funding or of university title.
The ministerial letter appears to signal dissatisfaction with the OfS for agreeing to consider institutions’ “context” if they fall below baselines, including variation in outcomes “for different types of students and courses” – which came after universities expressed concerns that absolute baselines would penalise the recruitment of disadvantaged students.
“We recognise that the OfS has discretion and needs to exercise judgement to determine which providers and types of provision should be subject to scrutiny,” Mr Zahawi and Ms Donelan write in the letter to Lord Wharton. “However, it is our clear and firm expectation that the OfS will use the new outcome thresholds to identify providers with unacceptable levels of performance and challenge them…
“Given the number of providers currently with performance below the proposed numerical thresholds that the OfS is consulting on, we would expect a?significant number of investigations to be initiated as a result of the B3?condition in due course.”
The government’s “priorities for investigation” include “larger providers with university title which are below proposed numerical thresholds either for the whole provider, or multiple subject areas”, say Mr Zahawi and Ms Donelan.
Other “priorities for investigation” for the government, they continue, are “a?set of investigations focused on a major subject grouping with large numbers of students and high variation in outcomes, such as computer science or law, with the intention to drive up the quality of those courses across the sector as a whole”; and “providers where OfS has longstanding concerns about quality which are confirmed or strengthened by numerical data on student outcomes”.
“In each case, investigations should be followed by robust regulatory action if appropriate,” Mr Zahawi and Ms Donelan add.
They continue: “The OfS also receives information from students and others that may point to concerns about quality. Our expectation is that the OfS should deploy this regulatory intelligence to implement a visible and effective inspections regime against the other B?(quality) conditions of registration, that will involve on-site inspection of 10-15 providers next year, that will root out pockets of poor provision and will result in regulatory action where appropriate.”
Via these on-site inspections, the government “would expect the OfS to focus on” ensuring “that online learning should be used to complement and enhance a student’s learning experience, not to detract from it”; “the provision of sufficient contact hours, particularly where this has been flagged by intelligence from students; and “the importance of maintaining rigour in assessment, including appropriate technical proficiency in English necessary to secure a good outcome for all or some students”.
