The £9k exception norm

Today’s headlines on tuition fees are promising large rises. I’m about to discuss the fees announcement. But don’t be alarmed by the numbers.

MoneySavingExpert has a guide to understanding the new fees and loans system for 2012/13 and it’s worth checking that rather than worry about the figures in isolation.

The figures sound scary, but the reality is different. Whether you agree with it or not is a different matter.

There are underlying issues that could arise due to the government selling off loans in the future, but hopefully it won’t be something we need to cover. If you do want to read more about the sale of student loans, check out Part 3 of Andrew McGettigan’s report, “False Accounting? Why the government’s Higher Education reforms don’t add up” [PDF]. It’s also worth reading McGettigan’s recent post on finances at his blog, Critical Education.

Now on to the fees announcement.

photo by Leo Reynolds

The Office for Fair Access (OFFA) has published details of university fees for 2013/14. The fees are even closer to the £9,000 cap than they already were for 2012/13, when the new fees come into play. FT’s data blog lists the full 2012/13 fees.

After financial support from all areas is taken into consideration, the estimated average fee for 2013/14 is set to be £7,898.

That’s once everything is taken into account. A potential difference of £1,102 between the adjusted average and the absolute maximum fee. Not exactly the suggested ‘market’ that was touted.

A yearly fee above £6,000 was supposed to be the exception. Many HE commentators weren’t convinced. In November 2010, I suggested that we should “expect to see the cap become the price“. It hasn’t taken long.

In March 2011, I acknowledged that finances and access agreements cannot be worked out in any short-term plan:

“It seems that, even without any changes to the proposed fees system in coming years, it’s going to take a couple of runs through the process before we get a true picture of what’s happening.” [Source]

The new fees regime for 2012/13 hasn’t even begun and the next year of fees has been set. Clearing doesn’t start for a couple of weeks, and that’s set to be different to previous years. Salford VC, Martin Hall, says that clearing is “no longer a mopping-up opportunity for those who didn’t get their expected grades to find a spare place”.

This is just the start.

It’s understandable that fees have long been the big talking point surrounding higher education since the changes were announced. Sadly, that’s been to the detriment of other HE discussions. Postgraduates, institutional diversity, student engagement, the loans system and its future, public perceptions and engagement with HE…There is so much to talk about. It’s as if fees talk got in the way of other conversations. Well, unless you were more directly involved or particularly keen on HE policy and wonk-talk!

For applicants, there is still little reason to limit choices based on tuition fees other than the occasional exception. In general, the slight differences are less important than other considerations. The new fees system was billed to give students greater choice. People would vote with their feet and not accept unreasonably high fees as a matter of course.

With fees set so close to the cap, where will those feet tread?

Many considerations are needed when making university choices. It depends on each person and why they wish to attend (including whether or not to attend at all). I’ve got a list of 50 things to think about for uni decisions. It’s not exhaustive, because that’s not possible.

Fees may not be so important in choices right now, but bursaries are still worth researching. Bursaries make an immediate impact, unlike fee waivers, because the money goes directly to the student. Prospective students should make sure they know what bursaries are available to them.

Some institutions may find new reasons to set very different fees once we’re a year or two into the new system. There’s no way to accurately foretell this because there are no direct comparisons. Also, any additional policy changes change the situation once more. And there’s still a lot of room for that to happen.

However, as things currently stand, it’s clear that fees are sitting firmly around that £9k cap. Who’da thunk it?

Win a Kindle with your favourite reading places [Giveaway]

How’s this for a fab Summer giveaway?

TheUniversityBlog has teamed up with 360 feedback provider ETS to give away three Amazon Kindles!

The Kindle is an eReader, letting you read books, papers, and other content as if you’re reading it on paper. You probably know what the Kindle is already, but if you want to know more, Wikipedia is your friend.

I want to make this giveaway as simple as possible for you. For a chance to win one of 3 Kindle Touch devices, send a comment below and let us know the following:

Because the Kindle is portable, you can take it just about anywhere. What places do you most like to go to read?

Comment on or before 1st August 2012 to be in with a chance [UPDATE: THIS GIVEAWAY HAS NOW ENDED. Check the winners.]. I’ll then use a random choice generator to pick three winners out and announce those winners on 2nd August. Comments after 1st August cannot be added to the draw (mainly because it will have already finished!).

That’s it! Just tell us your favourite places you like to read. You’ll give other readers inspiration on where they can find a brilliant place to sit back and relax with a book. Well, maybe an ebook. 😉

A couple of things to point out:

The draw is open to entries from UK & Ireland only (sorry about that.);
You need to use a valid contact email address in the email field, otherwise we won’t be able to contact you if you’re picked! [The email field is not published here on the site]

Good luck. I look forward to hearing about your favourite reading places.

photo by amsfrank

Why you need to use references and citations

You’re told to give references in coursework, but do you know why they are so important?

A friend asked me if references were mainly for respect and ego purposes. They wondered if the point of citing the work of others was a bit like tipping your hat to them, or saying “Well done, kudos for the great academic work you published”.

Academic work has references for very different reasons, even though I’m sure many people would love to see their work being used elsewhere.

photo by Nick Sherman

The real reasons for referencing/citation include:

Showing how widely you’ve read around the subject;
Demonstrating your understanding of the context and research up to this point;
Highlighting points of view that differ to yours;
Backing up your own points of view.

Another great explanation of why we reference is offered by Monash University:

“Referencing helps create a map of knowledge, a web of pathways in knowledge; and each researcher helps extend that knowledge. It means that we don’t have to find out everything for ourselves all over again; we don’t have to reinvent the wheel. In effect, referencing multiplies knowledge exponentially.
“But scholarship depends not only on the sharing of knowledge but also on the questioning of knowledge. It relies on both the acknowledgement and critique of the work of other scholars.”

My friend was concerned that all these references felt like collusion. They asked, “If you reference too much, where is your own work?”

Using the work of others in coursework is not collusion. Think of it more as collaboration. You recognise what has gone before and give that work credit as you extend upon it or put it in a different context.

photo by Horia Varlan

None of this has anything to do with plagiarism. Plagiarism is completely different. You plagiarise when you copy something word for word. You plagiarise when you take other people’s work and reword it as your own. You plagiarise when you don’t give the credit for an idea that doesn’t originate from you.

If I’d reworded the Monash explanation as my own in an academic essay, that would be plagiarism. If, instead, I talked about referencing creating a map of knowledge and gave a footnote to the Monash piece, that would be fine.

There’s no need to reference when the facts or theories are fairly common knowledge. The dates of major historical events, for instance, can be used as a given…Unless they are widely disputed or you are trying to dispute the dates yourself!

Instead of worrying that too many citations make it look as if you’ve done nothing yourself, be confident that a number of well-placed references will give more relevance to your work.

References are your friend. I didn’t realise this enough myself when it mattered and it sounds like there are other students out there in a similar position.

Remember the need to cite this way: You’re adding sources to support your own content, not someone else’s ego.

Higher Ed and Continuing to Look Into the Future(s)

Is X the future of higher education?

No. No it’s not.

Whatever you choose X to be, it isn’t the future of HE.

Why? Because the answer is so singular. Higher education already appears in different guises. Nobody can say that HE is simple to define, because it means so much. The concept covers so much ground.

Similarities…Differences…All Directions… (photo by solidether)

New websites that make learning available to a massive audience are great. There have been so many advances in recent months and I’ve loved taking a look at sites like Coursera and Udacity with their new approaches of bringing courses to an online population. It’s telling that many universities have been placing academic material on the Internet for years now. With MIT and Harvard starting edX, large institutions are attempting to see the future of education and tap into what’s possible.

But none of this is *the* future. These services are playing a small part in the current landscape. They are experimenting.

In the future, they may play a bigger part, with more on offer and more official recognition in one way or another. No matter how successful these services and institutions become, they won’t be the singular future.

Other questions are far more useful. Questions like:

“How important are these movements?”;
“What improvements could these services bring to the world (locally, nationally, internationally…)?”;
“Will new initiatives manage to open up learning to more people and with greater relevance?”;
“Can any of this help provide a more equal chance of getting the necessary help to the people who want it?”;
“Can these services identify and assist those people who don’t realise how beneficial this learning could be for them?”;
“Do these initiatives offer anything to enhance, alter, or perhaps even fundamentally change more traditional offerings?”;
“What, if anything, can traditional methods and services learn from new, disruptive technologies, in order to remain equally important and relevant?”

These are just some questions off the top of my head. They won’t have single answers. They’re not meant to.

The question “Is X the future of higher education?” is merely a starting point to allow other questions such as these to be asked.

A CNN piece that asks if Udacity is the future of higher education ends with a beginning:

“I asked [Sebastian] Thrun [founder of Udacity] whether his enterprise and others like it will be the end of higher education as we know it — exclusive enclaves for a limited number of students at high tuitions? ‘I think it’s the beginning of higher education,’ Thrun replied. ‘It’s the beginning of higher education for everybody.’
“Much of traditional American higher education prides itself on a false promotion of diversity, opportunity and excellence. But to my knowledge, with one class alone, Thrun has provided a level of diversity, opportunity and academic rigor not seen before. People from any country, any background and any income level can receive an elite education at virtually no cost. We have been talking about equal educational opportunity for years. What is going on here may be its true advent.”

Higher education has been necessarily disruptive since its inception. The word ‘higher’ is a clue. ‘Higher’ shouldn’t mean ‘exclusive’ or ‘elitist’. The term ‘higher’ should be seen as looking beyond the fundamentals. Perhaps even looking beyond the furthest point currently studied (PhD folks, I’m looking at you especially here!).

HE for everyone is fantastic, so long as everyone wants it and will genuinely benefit from it. Nobody can guarantee that someone will benefit, which further highlights the lack of one, single answer. Neither can everyone agree what ‘benefit’ implies, because we want different things and see things from many perspectives.

No matter how higher education develops, equal educational opportunity is in the sights of many. No single offering can solve the problem of inequality. If we take the conclusion of the CNN piece as a major driving force behind the desire to change the future of HE, the next question should not be “Is X the future of higher education?”

A better question would be: “Can X help bring greater equality in future educational provision and, if so, how?”

I don’t think Udacity has cracked that yet. But that shouldn’t stop them searching. It’s early days. As usual, questions are followed with more questions, followed by yet more questions. It’s non-stop. Just as you’d expect!

Possible answers are great. I’m happy that so many startups and established institutions want to provide them.

But I don’t see this as the start, or a ‘true advent’. I see this as a continuation.

Keep asking questions. Keep seeking answers. It’s important to keep going, even if no absolute and single solution is found. If everything was so simple, we would never need to be challenged again.

When that time comes, X really will be the future of higher education. And it will eat itself in the process. Omnomnom.