Chapter 1
1 A reference to the Committee under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins, which reported in 1963.

2 Oral Evidence from the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales

Chapter 2
None

Chapter 3
1 Department for Education and Employment (DfEE)

2 Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA)

3 Socio-economic group refers to the Standard Occupational Classification published by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS). The groups are: I – Professional; II – Managerial and technical occupations; IIIn – Skilled occupations, non-manual; IIIm – Skilled occupations – manual; IV – Partly skilled occupations; V – Unskilled occupations.

4 HESA

5 DfEE. The ‘points score’ is an aggregate measure of an individual’s A level grades. Points allocated are:
E-2; D-4; C-6; B-8; A-10.

6 School Curriculum and Assessment Authority, (1996) Standards in Public Examinations 1975 to 1995, London

7 HESA

8

9 HESA

10 DfEE

11 We were fortunate that while undertaking a study for the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals (CVCP) on the economic impact of higher education, Professor Iain McNicholl conducted a survey of higher education institutions which included details of their workforce in 1996/97. We are grateful to the CVCP and Professor McNicholl for giving us access to his findings.

12 Committee on Higher Education (1963), Higher Education Report of the Committee appointed by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins 1961-1963, London, HMSO

13 Enterprise in Higher Education was a programme funded by the former Employment Department.

14 Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), Scottish Higher Education Funding Counci (SHEFC), Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW), Department of Education, Northern Ireland (DENI) (1993), Joint Funding Councils’ Libraries Review Group: Report, Bristol

15 Edexcel was formerly the Business and Technology Education Council (BTEC). The Scottish Qualifications Authority was formed through a merger of the Scottish Vocational Education Council and the Scottish Examination Board.

16 Robbins (1963) op cit

17 Office of Science and Technology (1997) The quality of the UK science base, Department of Trade and Industry, London

18 PREST, CASR and the University of Manchester (1996) Survey of research equipment in United Kingdom universities for CVCP, HEFCE, HEFCW, SHEFC

19 HESA

20 HESA

21 OECD (1997): Thematic Review of the First Years of Tertiary Education, United Kingdom: (Unpublished Study)

Chapter 4
1 Nottingham Skills and Enterprise Network (1994) Labour Market and Skill Trends 1995/96, Nottingham

2 Nottingham Skills and Enterprise Network (1996) Labour Market and Skill Trends 1996/97, Nottingham

3 DTI (1996) Small Firms in Britain 1996, London

4 Nottingham Skills and Enterprise Network (1996), op cit

5 Evidence from the seminars with small and medium sized enterprises organised for the Inquiry

6 DTI (1996) Small and Medium Enterprises Statistics for the UK 1994

7 Council for Industy and Higher Education (1997) SMEs and Higher Educaction: Higher Education A Framework for Future Policy (Unpublished draft)

8 HMSO (1996) Social Trends 1996, London

9 The 1996 Chatham House Forum Report (1996) Unsettled Times, The Royal Institute of International Affairs London

10 Potter D (1996), Paper for the Committee

11 Potter D (1996), Paper for the Committee

12 The independent, (20 March 1997), quoting a study by McKinsey and Co

13 Social Trends 1996 op cit

14 Committee on Higher Education (1963), Higher Education Report of the Committee appointed by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins 1961-1963, London, HMSO

15 HMSO (1985), The Development of Higher Education into the 1990s, Cmnd 9524, London

16 Toyne, Professor Peter, (1993), Environmental Responsibility, HMSO, London

17 Ali Khan, Shirley (1996) Environmental Responsibility A Review of the 1993 Toyne Report, HMSO, London

18 DfEE (1997) Projections of Demand for Higher Education in Great Britain, unpublished paper sumitted to the Committee by Analytical Services Higher Education Division

Chapter 5
1 Committee on Higher Education (1963), Higher Education Report of the Committee appointed by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins 1961-1963, London, HMSO

2 Department for Education and Employment, the Scottish Office, the Welsh Office and the Department of Education for Northern Ireland, (1996) Purposes of Higher Education. Unpublished evidence submitted to the Committee. Copies can be obtained from the Government Departments concerned

3 Belfield et al (1997), Mapping the Careers of Highly Qualified Workers, Birmingham, University of Birmingham

4 The Development of Higher Education into the 1990s, (1985), Cmnd 9254, HMSO, London

5 Enterprise in Higher Education was a programme funded by the former Employment Department

Chapter 6
1 This evidence included: a seminar for economists organised by the Committee and the Department for Education and Employment (1996) which discussed aspects of the labour market and ways of measuring the economic impact of higher education;
Report 7, The contribution of graduates to the economy: rates of return;
Report 8, Externalities to higher education: a review of the new growth literature

2 International comparisons about participation in higher education are difficult because of the differences in the way countries classify their provision at different levels, but see, for example, Department for Education and Employment, Cabinet Office (1996) The Skills Audit para 1.8, and OECD (1997) Thematic Review of Higher Education (unpublished)

3 OECD (1997), op cit

4 Confederation of British Industry (1996) Input to the National Committee of Inquiry into higher education: Enhancing higher education, p.2

5 Institute for Employment Research (1995) Future employment prospects for the highly qualified, sections 3.4–3.5

6 Social and Community Planning Research (SCPR) (1997) Utilisation of graduate skills in the labour force

7 Mason, G (1996) New graduate supply shock. Recruitment and utilisation of graduates in British Industry National Institute of Economic and Social Research, London, pviii-ix

8 Appendix 4, Consultation with employers, paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2

9 NUTEK (1996) Towards flexible organisations

10 Court L, Connor H (1994) The US labour market for new graduates, Institute for Employment Studies.
This finding was also confirmed in our visit to the USA (Appendix 5 section 8)

11 Harvey, L et al (1997) Graduates’ work, University of Central England Centre for Research into Quality, for the Association of Graduate Recruiters, p.1 (para 3) and p.35

12 Meeting with other officials at the Department of Health and NHS executive, 17 March 1997

13 Appendix 4, Consultation with employers

14 We also consider Belfield, CR et al (1997) Mapping the careers of highly qualified workers University of Birmingham. This studies two cohorts of those obtaining higer education qualifications in 1985 and 1990. We do not draw on this evidence here because the comparator groups used to calculate pay premia are drawn more widely than the other two pieces of research, and therefore the findings are not directly comparable with the research from IFS and Analytical Services.

15 Lissenburgh, S et al, Policy Studies Institute (1996) The returns to graduation: how the labour market experience of recent graduates compares with non-graduates report for the Department for Eduacation and Employment

16 Blundell, R et al (1997) Higher education, employment and earnings in Britain, Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS)

17 Court L, Connor H (1994) op cit, para 3.33

18 Report 7, The contribution of graduates to the economy: rates of return

19 The return to society as a whole differs from that for individuals in three ways. First government currently picks up many of the costs of higher education through free tuition and contributions to maintenance. These are components of society’s investment, but the cost in not borne by the the individual. Secondly, society benefits from higher education to the extent that a graduate pays higher taxes, as well as earning a greater amount post-tax, the relevant return to society is thus the difference between the pre-tax incomees of a graduate and otherwise equivalent non-graduate. Thirdly, graduates may enhance the productivity of other people in ways not captured in their own incomes (one aspect of so-called externalities). See Report 8 summary

20 Report 7 paragraphs 3.23–3.34

21 Report 8, summary, 3rd bullet point

22 Report 8, paragraph summary, 10th bullet point

23 Report 8, paragraph summary, 12th bullet point

24 Analytical Services Higher Education Division, Department for Education and Employment (date), Scenarios for demand in the longer term (unpublished)

25 Institute for Employment Studies (1996) University Challenge: student choices in the 21st centry A report to the CVCP

26 Institute for Employment Studies (1996) op cit

27 Analytical Services, Scenarios, op cit (unpublished)

28 CVCP (1996) ‘Our Unversities Our Future’ Evidence to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education

29 Appendix 4, op cit Tables 14, 17 and 19

30 HEFCE, CVCP, SCOP (1996) Review of Postgraduate Eduation, HEFCE, CVCP, SCOP

31 Analytical Services, Scenarios, op cit (unpublished)

32 Confederation of British Industry (1996) Input to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Eduacation: Enhancing higher education

33 Appendix 4, op cit paragraph 2.16

34 OECD (1997), op cit

Chapter 7
1 Patterson, L (1997) Trends in higher education in Scotland, Higher Education Quarterly, Vol 51, No1, p44, quoted in Report 5, para 6, Widening participation in higher education by ethnic minorities, women and alternative students

2 See in particular Report 5, op cit. and Report 6, Widening participation in higher education for students from lower socio-economic groups and students with disabilities

3 See end note 3 to Chapter 3 in this annex for an explanation of socio-economic groups.

4 Oliver Fulton, paper for the widening participation seminar, 27 March 1997 (unpublished)

5 Equal Opportunities Commission, (1996) Women and Men in Britain 1995: The Life Cycle of Inequality, quoted in its evidence to the Committee, November 1996

6 Report 5, op cit, para 2.5

7 Institute for Employment Research, (1997) The Participation of Non-Traditional Students in Higher Education, The University of Warwick, Table IV.10

8 Metcalf, H (1997), Class and Higher Education: the participation of young people from lower socio-economic groups, Policy Studies Institute, Table 2 and p.5

9 Steedman H and Green A (1996) Widening participation in Further Education and Training: A survey of the Issues, Centre for Economic Performance, para 1.31

10 Higher Education Funding Council for England (1997) The participation in higher education of geodemographic groups, pp.2–3

11 Higher Education Statistics Agency (1996) Students in higher education institutions 1994/95, Table 11 records around 593,000 students on the first year of a programme, of whom around 16,000 (2.6%) are known to have a disability

12 Report 6, op cit, para 4.2

13 FEFC (1996) Inclusive Learning, p.6

14 Institute for Employment Research (1997) op cit, pp.146–148

15 Report 10, Teacher education and training: a study

16 Institute of Employment Research (1997) op cit, Table IV.10

17 Dr Gaie Davidson-Burnet, paper for the widening participation seminar, 27 March 1997 (unpublished)

18 David Raffe, paper for the widening participation seminar, 27 March 1997 (unpublished)

19 See, for example, evidence from various studies of successive sweeps of the Youth Cohort Study; (Gray, Jesson, Tranmer (1993), Ashford, Gray and Tranmer (1993) and Payne (1995) the Economic and Social Research Council’s 16–19 Initiative; cited in Steedman & Green op cit, para 2.2.1–2.2.5

20 Steedman and Green op cit para 2.0–2.13

21 Stephen McNair, paper for the widening participation seminar, 27 March 1997 (unpublished)

22 Higher Education and Employment Division (1996) Living with Diversity. This paper summarises issues from the Guidance and Learner Autonomy Programme

23 Smith, Bocock and Scott (1996) Standard systems, non-standard students: experiences of progression from Further to Higher Education, Policy Studies in Education, University of Leeds

24 Smith, Bocock and Scott op cit, page ii

25 Report 6, op cit, para 3.26

26 Ursula Howard, paper for the widening participation seminar 27 March 1997 (unpublished)

27 Institute of Employment Research (1997) op cit, pxiii

28 Callender and Kempson (1996) Student finances, p.51

29 Including from Skill – National Bureau for Students with Disabilities (1996), evidence to the Committee

30 HEFCE (1996) Widening Access to Higher Education, para 3(b)

31 FEFC, op cit, The Inclusive Learning report commissioned for the FEFC may be a useful precedent

Chapter 8
1 Boyer, E (1990) Scholarship reconsidered, New Jersey, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, p.24

2 HEQC (1994) Learning from audit, London, HEQC
HEQC (1996) Learning from audit, London, HEQC

3 HEFCE (1997) The impact of the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise on higher education institutions in England, Bristol, HEFCE

4 Gibbs, G et al (1996) Class size and student performance: 1984–1994, Studies in higher education, Volume 21, No. 3

5 Report 4, Administrative and support staff in higher education, (pp.261–273)

6 Entwistle N (1996) Improving university teaching through research on student learning, University of Edinburgh, Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction

7 Entwistle N, Presentation to Learning Seminar on 5, March 1997

8 House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (1996) Information society: Agenda for action in the UK, London, HMSO

9 Coopers & Lybrand, Institute of Education, Tavistock Institute (1996) Evaluation of TLTP, HEFCE, DENI, SHEFC, WHEFC

10 Seminar on Admissions, 29 April 1997

11 CVCP (1997) A summary of the work of the admissions review steering group, London, CVCP

12 HEQC Evidence to the Committee (unpublished)

13 HEQC (1994), op cit
HEQC (1996), op cit

14 Watts AG and Hawthorn R (1992) Careers education and the curriculum in higher education, Cambridge, Careers Research Advisory Centre

Chapter 9
1 Purcell, K & Pitcher, J (1996) Great expectations: the new diversity of graduate skills and aspirations, University of Warwick Institute of Employment Research

2 Committee on higher education (1963) Higher Education report of the Committee appointed by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins 1961–1963, London, HMSO, p91

3 Dearing R (1996) Review of qualifications for 16–19 year olds, Middlesex, SCAA Publications

4 CIHE (1996) A learning nation, Evidence to the National Committee of Inquiry

5 Harvey, L Moon, S Geall, V (1997) Graduates’ work: organisational change and students’ attributes, Centre for Research into Quality and the Association of Graduate Recruiters

6 Dearing, R (1996) op cit

7 Hodginson, L (1996) Changing the higher education curriculum towards a systematic approach to skills development, The Open University Vocational Qualifications Centre

8 CVCP (1997) CVCP Key skills survey – a brief analysis of questionnaire repsonses, CVCP (unpublished)

9 Harvey, L Moon, S Geall, V (1997) op cit, p.2

10 Westhead P (1997) Students in small business: an assessment of the 1994 STEP student placement scheme, Small Business Research Trust

11 Boud D Keynote speech at SEDA conference on assessment, May 1994

12 Brown S and Saunders D (1995) The Challenges of modularisation, Innovations in Education and Training International, Vol 32 (2) pp.96–195

13 McDowell, L (1995) Managing Assessment in a modular curriculum: issues, perceptions, responses and opportunities, Modular higher education in the UK, London HEQC

14 HEQC (1997) Assessment in higher education, London HEQC

15 Eds Hounsell D et al, 1996, The ASSHE Inventory, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment, University of Edinburgh

16 Higher Education Quality Council (1996) Graduate Standards Programme Draft Report, HEQC, London

17 National Record of Achievement Review (1997) p.1 Report of the Steering Group

Chapter 10
1 HEFCE, SCOP, CVCP (1996) Review of postgraduate education, HEFCE, SCOP, CVCP

2 The Royal Society (1993) Higher Education Futures, London, The Royal Society

3 Dearing, R (1996) Review of qualifications for 16-19 year olds, SCAA Publications

4 CVCP (1996) Our universities our future, Evidence to the National Committee

5 NCVQ (1995) GNVQs at higher levels: a consultation paper, London, National Council for Vocational Qualifications

6 NCVQ (1996) GNVQs at Higher Levels: Response to Consultation, London, NCVQ

7 Harvey L, Moon S, Geall V (1996) Graduates’ work: organisational change and students, The University of Central England, Centre for Research into Quality

8 HEQC (1994) Choosing to Change: the report of the HEQC CAT Development Project, London, HEQC

9 National Union of Students, Evidence to the Committee, cited in Report 1

10 HEQC (1994) op cit

11 HEQC (1995) Choosing to Change: Outcomes of the Consultation, London, HEQC

12 SACCA is a joint body of the Committee of the Scottish Principals and the HEQC through its Scottish Office

13 HEQC (1996) Inter-institutional variability of degree results: and analysis in selected subjects, London, HEQC

14 HEQC Graduate Standards Programme Interim report (1996) HEQC, p.6

15 HEQC Evidence – paragraph 9.3

16 CBI (1996) Evidence to the Committee of Inquiry, Enhancing higher education, cited in Report 1

17 HEQC (1995) Learning from Collaborative Audit, London, HEQC

18 HEQC (1996) Quality assurance of overseas partnerships, London, HEQC

19 Joint Planning Group for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (1996) Final report, London, CVCP

Chapter 11
1 The term ‘infrastructure’ refers to buildings, equipment and facilities required to support research, such as information technology, library facilities and support services.

2 Office of Science and Technology (1997) The quality of the UK science base, Department of Trade and Industry

3 National Academies Policy Advisory Group, (1996) Research Capability of the University system, London, The Royal Society

4 Segal Quince Wicksteed (SWQ) Ltd (1996) A study of selectivity, Bristol, HEFCE

5 SWQ (1997) Review of the dual support funding, CVCP

6 The overhead contribution from the Research Councils cannot represent the actual indirect costs associated with a research project because:

a. there are other indirect costs, such as premises costs, which remain the responsibility of the institutions, (which are funded through the Funding body);

b. the overhead figure is allocated on the basis of funded staff costs and hence may not adequately take account of indirect costs associated with non-staff costs;

c. the overhead figure is an average (calculated on the basis of statistical returns) and as such does not take account of differences in indirect costs which may be associated with:

i) the costs of different subjects;

ii) different types of grant;

iii) different institutions.

7 Coopers & Lybrand (1995) Review of the dual support transfer, The Office of Science and Technology

8 House of Commons Education Science and Arts Committee (1990) Report of Science Policy and the European Dimension, London, HMSO

9 The RAE measures the quality of research in ‘Units of Assessment’. These may, or may not, match with the departmental structure of institutions of higher education. Throughout this chapter, the term ‘department’ is used as shorthand for ‘Unit of Assessement’

10 NAPAG (1996) op cit

11 PREST, CASR and the University of Manchester (1996) Survey of research equipment in United Kingdom Universities, CVCP, HEFCE, HEFCW, SHEFC

12 The Forum was established in 1996 and includes representatives of the CVCP, the Medical Research Charities, the British Pharmaceutical Industry, the Higher Education Funding Council for England and the Chairman of the Foresight Panel on Health and Life Science.

13 Council for Science and Technology (1996) Evidence to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education

14 Joint Information Systems Committee (1996) Five year strategy 1996-2001, JISC

15 House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (1996) Information Society: Agenda for Action in the UK, London, HMSO

16 House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (1996) op cit

17 Frayling, C (1993/4) Research in art and design, Royal College of Art Research Papers, Vol 1, No 1

18 Frayling, C (1993/4) op cit

19 McNay I (1997) The impact of the 1992 RAE on Institutional and Individual in English Higher Education: the evidence from a research project, Centre for Higher Education Management, Anglia Polytechnic University

20 SQW (1996) op cit

21 The RAE grades the quality of departments on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 5* (highest).

22 1995-96 HESA data

23 National Science Foundation (1996) Science and Engineering Indicators – 1996, Washington D.C., US Government Printing Office

24 Office of Science and Technology (1996) Science, Engineering and Technology Statistics 1996, London, HMSO

25 HEFCE (1997) The impact of the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise on higher education institutions in England, Bristol, HEFCE

26 Comments made during institutional visits

27 DTI (1996) UK R&D Scoreboard, 1996 Edinburgh, Company Reporting Ltd

28 OST(1997) The Research Master’s Pilot, Office of Science and Technology

29 House of Lords (1996) Academic research careers for graduate scientists, House of Lords Session 1994-95 4th report

Chapter 12
1 Reich R (1991) The Work of Nations: A Blueprint for the Future

2 see, for example, Goddard J (1994) Universities and Communities, CVCP

3 Hill S (1997) The Impact of the Higher Education Sector on the Welsh Economy: Measurement, Analysis and Enhancement

4 Goddard J (1994) op cit

5 Florida R (1995) Toward the learning region, Futures Vol 27 No 5

6 Segal Quince Wicksteed Ltd (1990) The Cambridge Phenomenon

7 note by Dr John Bridge (Chairman, Northern Development Company) for Economic Role Working Group (unpublished)

8 Kanter R (1995) Thriving Locally in the Global Economy, Harvard Business Review September – October 1995

9 Kanter R (1995) op cit

10 Westhead P (1997) Students in small business: an assessment of the 1994 STEP student placement scheme, Small Business Research Trust

11 Goddard J (1994) op cit

12 HEFCE (1996) Institutions’ Strategic Plans: Analysis of 1996 Submissions

13 Labour Party (1996) A new voice for England’s Regions

Chapter 13
1 We have broadly interpreted the term ‘Communications and Information Technology’ to comprise those technologies which enable the processing, storage and transmission of both live and recorded information by electronic means

2 MacFarlane A, Presentation to the Scottish Committee, 16th September 1996

3 These costs have been provided by Dr Malcolm Read, Secretary of the Joint Information Systems Committee, and are based on a sample of medium and large institutions. They break down as follows:
Central Initiatives: Central expenditure on C&IT such as JISC, TLTP, MANs, CTI, the SHEFC LTDI and UMI, and elements of related initiative expenditure such as Technology Foresight.
HEI Central Spend: Expenditure by Computer Centre Departments. These figures have been provided by Computer Centre managers and are in line with HESA figures.
HEI Departmental Spend: Estimated by Computer Centre Directors to amount to two or three times the Central spend
HEI Overheads: C&IT-based central services such as libraries, and overheads costs such as space
HEI Courseware: Courseware developed by institutions themselves and not part of any central initiative

4 An "Intranet" is the application of Internet technology inside an organisation. It can be made available across the Internet. The users of an extended Intranet form a closed user group or virtual private network and Internet users outside this group cannot gain access

5 Read, Slater et al visit to Harvard Business School, April 1997, Appendix 5

6 Read, Slater et al visit to Harvard Business School, April 1997, Appendix 5

7 E-mail correspondence between Dr Malcolm Read and Secretariat, 18/3/97

8 Joint Information Systems Committee (1996) Five-year Strategy 1996–2001, page 21 (JISC). Updated by Dr Malcolm Read, 1997

9 House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (1996) Information Society: Agenda for Action in the UK, HMSO, p.88

10 Deloitte & Touche (1996), JISC: JANET Value for Money Study. (Deloitte and Touche), p.6

11 MANs are usually restricted to urban areas. MANs are already in place in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, the St Andrews Dundee area, Wales, Manchester, London and the East Midlands. MANs in Bristol and South West England will be up and running in 1997

12 Super JANET is the name of the broadband, or highspeed part of JANET. SuperJANET is envisaged as a network of networks, complemented by a number of Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs) serving areas where several higher education institutions are located closely together. Today, more than 120 higher eduction institutions have broadband access

13 Committee of Scottish Higher Education Principals (COSHEP) (1996) Submission to the Dearing Inquiry, p.7

14 Kemp P, Letter to the Principal of the University of Strathclyde, 30th April 1997

15 The UK pilot Site Licence Initiative is an attempt to help both institutions and publishers break out of the vicious circle of rising prices. The Funding Bodies pay an overall licence fee and the institutions receive the journals produced by the participating publishers free or at a small additional premium

16 Joint Information Systems Committee (1996) Background Paper to NCIHE, p.14

17 Further Education Funding Council (1996), pp.31 and 42, Report of the Learning and Technology Committee

18 Multi-service networking is the ability to mix video, voice, images, text and data on a single network link

19 As noted earlier we would recommend the extension of MANs only where technically and financially sensible. MANs must be cost-effective against other means of network provision and provide richer functionality. This is not possible in all parts of the UK as MANs tend to be provided by cable companies or utilities whose coverage is patchy. The costs given here are start-up costs, which tend to be high compared with recurrent costs; the latter would be met by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the institutions as appropriate

20 This proposed extension of JANET to further education colleges is costed at a basic level

21 Cooper R (1996) Networking – the Key to Exploiting the Full Potential of Information Technology in Higher Education (unpublished), p.5; Potter D (1996) Information Technology and Higher Education: A Twenty Year View (unpublished), p.2

22 In February 1996 David Jinkinson, Head of Computing Services at Sheffield Hallam University, released the results of a snap survey of directors of the Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association (UCISA). Responses were received from 31 institutions, with ratios varying between 5:1 (in one institution) and 100:1 (in one institution). The average across all responding institutions was just under 15:1, and slightly better in pre-1992 universities than in other institutions

23 To get to a ratio of 8:1 would require another 75,000 workstations, which we have estimated, including network costs, peripherals and overheads, at c. 2,800 each – amounting to 210 million
To get to 5:1 would take another 55,000 workstations on top of this, amounting to 154 million.
We have spread this expenditure over four years

24 In 1998–99 we have assumed 40,000 students need computers at about 500 each, whereas by 2001–2002, 300,000 students will need computers at 500 each

Chapter 14
1 University of Birmingham Stress Survey, Autumn 1996

2 House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, Academic Research Careers for Graduate Scientists, HMSO, 1995

Chapter 15
1 National Audit Office (1997), Submission by the National Audit Office to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, part 4

2 National Audit Office (1997), Submission by the National Audit Office to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, p.16

3 Report 1, Report on national consultation (1997), Chapter 11

4 National Audit Office (1997), Submission by the National Audit Office to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, p.25

5 National Audit Office (1997), Submission by the National Audit Office to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, p.23

6 National Audit Office (1996) The Management of Space in Higher Education Institutions in Wales, HMSO, p.3

7 Evidence to the Staff and Cost Effectiveness Working Group received from Association of University Directors of Estates of the United Kingdom (AUDE) Dec 96

8 The Review of the Academic Year, A Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the organisation of the academic year, (1993) HEFCE

9 Final Report – Scotland, Review of the Academic Year, Scottish Advisory Group on the Academic Year SHEFC/COSHEP, Nov 1993

10 Treasury Management Value for Money, National Report (1996), HEFCE, p.17

11 Procurement Strategy for Higher Education (1996), HEFCE p.1

12 CVCP evidence submitted to the Staff and Cost Effectiveness Working Group (unpublished)

13 Energy Management Study in the Higher Education Sector National Report (1996), HEFCE p.5

14 National Audit Office (1994) The Financial Health of Higher Education Institutions in England HMSO HC 13 Session 1994–95

15 National Audit Office (1997) Submission by the National Audit Office to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, p.23

16 HEFCE, Undergraduate Teaching in Higher Education: A Comparative Study to be published by HEFCE Summer 1997

17 Unpublished survey by the Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association for the Committee

18 Committee of University Chairmen (1995) Guide for Members of Governing Bodies of Universities and Colleges in England and Wales, p.3

19 National Audit Office (1997), Submission by the National Audit Office to the National Committee of Inquiry, para. 1.22

20 Second Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (1996) Local Public Spending Bodies, Cm 3270 HMSO, p.24

21 Committee of University Chairmen (1995) Guide for Members of Governing Bodies of Universities and Colleges in England and Wales

22 Chairmen of Scottish University Courts and Councils, Chairmen of the conference of the Scottish Centrally-Funded Colleges in association with the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (undated) Guide for Members of Governing Bodies

23 Report 1, Report on national consultation (1997), para 8.30

24 Second Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (May 1996) Local Spending Bodies, Cm 3270 HMSO, p.30 recommendation 3

25 Second Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (May 1996) Local Public Spending Bodies, Cm 3270 HMSO p.32

26 Committee of University Chairmen (1995) Guide for members of Governing Bodies of Universities and Colleges in England and Wales, p.24

27 Report 1, Report on national consultation (1997)

28 For example following Cadbury (1992) The financial Aspects of Corporate Governance chaired by Sir Adrian Cadbury and Greenbury (1995) Directors’ Remuneration – Report of a Study Group chaired by Sir Richard Greenbury

29 Seminar organised by Beachcroft Stanley’s solicitors – 1997 (proceedings unpublished)

30 Surveys commissioned by HEQC, Research Project on Student Compaints by Dennis Farringdon (unpublished)

31 Opportunity, diversity and partnership – the student agenda for Higher Education (1997), NUS evidence to the Committee

32 Education Reform Act 1988, section 202(2)

33 Tight M (ed) (1988) Academic Freedom and Responsibility, The Society for Research into Higher Education, Open University Press, p.125

34 Second Report of the Committee on Standard in Public Life (May 1996) Local Public Spending Bodies, Cm 3270 HMSO, p.34

35 Report 1, Report on national consultation (1997), para 8.34

36 Second Report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (May 1996), Local Public Spending Bodies, Cm 3270 HMSO, p.37

Chapter 16
1 including those in the higher and further education sectors; private providers and some commercial organisations offering what they referred to as their own industry-specific ‘university;’ legal advice about the status of institutions; and international experience; and a seminar for the Structure and Governance Working Group.

2 Committee on Higher Education (1963) Higher Education Report of the Committee appointed by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins 1961–63, para 460

3 University of Middlesex evidence to the Inquiry, quoted in Report, Report on National Consultation, p.60

4 Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Thematic Review of the First Years of Tertiary Education, (unpublished)

5 Ewart Keep, paper for the widening participation seminar, 27 March 1997 (unpublished)

6 Professor Brian Fender (14 May 1997) correspondence with Sir Ron Dearing,

7 OECD op. cit

8 Martin Cave, (1996) The Impact on Higher Education of Funding Changes and Increasing Competition, Higher Education and Lifelong Learning Conference, July 1996, p.84

9 Higher Education Quality Council submission to the Committee, p.20

10 OECD op cit

11 CVCP, (1996) Our Universities Our Future, submission to the Committee, p.14

12 Brian Fender, Chief Executive of the Higher Education Funding Council for England, (January 1997) paper for the Structure and Governance Working Group, (unpublished)

13 CVCP Collaboration in Higher Education, (forthcoming)

Chapter 17
1 HEFCE Circular 15/96, ‘Analysis of 1996 Finacial Forecasts’, para. 22.
Compared to the 78 institutions projecting deficits in 1999–2000, 26 actually recorded a deficit in 1994–95 and 48 were forecasting deficits in 1995–96

2 The expenditure on higher education programmes in 1995–96 in FE colleges, other than those franchised by higher education instituitions is estimated as follows:

    million
England HEFCE grant 53.5a
  FEFC Funds 85.0b
  Mandatory Award Fees 58.0c
Scotland SOIED 75.0d
  Mandatory Award Fees 25.0e
Wales HEFCW grants 1.1f
  Mandatory Award Fees 0.6
Total   298.2

a HEFCE actual (FEFC academic year estimate was 59 million)
b FEFC based on 1995–96 units of funding for 80,000 students
c FEFC estimate from financial forecasts
d Derived from the higher education share (31.9%) of the total Scottish Office Education and Industry Department funding units to FE colleges
e Estimate based on number of full-time higher education numbers
f HEFCW grant on 500 full-time and 50 part-time higher education students in FE colleges

3 The mandatory award figures are taken from local eduction authority 503G return to the DfEE in England, from Student Awards Agency for Scotland and from the Department of Education, Northern Ireland

4 The figures include:

in England
(i) all higher eduction in higher education institutions
(ii) prescribed programmes of higher education in FE colleges
(iii) mandatory awards tuition fees

in Scotland
(i) SHEFC grants to higher education institutions in Scotland and mandatory award fees in Wales
(i) HEFCW grants to higher education institutions in Wales and to prescribed courses in two FE colleges
(ii) mandatory award fees

in Northern Ireland
(i) DENI grant to the two universities in Northern Ireland
(ii) mandatory award fees

5 The proportion of research expenditure from the total of the funding in Table 17.1 has been calculated as follows:
Identified research grant plus identified teaching grant in 1995/96 (academic year) was 3,722 million to HE institutions.
Of this 803 million was for research (21.6 per cent). It is assumed that capital and other grants are distributed in the same proportion. This gives a total research grant of 950 million
Total public funding for higher education in 1995-96 academic year is two-thirds of financial year 1995-96 (3,873 million) plus one-third of financial year 1996-97 (1,898 million) see Table 17.3. This gives a total of 5,771 million. 950 million is 16.5%, which has been rounded to 17%.

6 International comparisons of costs of teaching in higher education, JM Consultancy, March 1997. The costs: of non-medical undergraduate teaching in English institutions lie between the highest (Netherlands and USA) and the lowest, Australia

7 Williams G, Institute of Eduations, ‘Resources for higher education in OECD countries’ (1996), Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE)

8 The HEFCE’s estimate of the annual requirement for capital investment based on an institution’s costs and financial forecasts, is about 750 million in England made up of
400 million for refurbishment of the non-residential estate
200 million to replace the existing stock of equipment
100 million to make good the backlog of equipment identified in recent surveys (see end notes 16 and 17)
50 million to enhance Communication and Information Technology provision
The HEFCE estimate that funding of some 550 million is potentially available to meet these costs made up of:
250 million from research council and funding body capital contributions
100 million from new borrowings
200 million from cash flow
New borrowings are assumed to be limited by ablility to repay from operating cash flows. The more general contribution from the cash flow for operating activities assumes the relaxation in the planned reduction in funding levels in 1998–99 and 1999–2000 which we have suggested is required. The UK figures have been obtained by grossing up

9 This assumes that there is complete overlap with the requirements covered by end note7

10 These are financial year figures. In 1998–99 it is assumed that only two-thirds of the full-year expenditure will be incurred

11 The assumptions underlying the figures in this scenario will be available on publication of the report in a technical working paper from the DfEE: ‘Projection of demand to study in higher education in Great Britain (GB) over the longer term; Tracy Spencer, and Christine Anderton, Higher Education Division Analytical Services, Department for Education and Employment

12 This is a GB actual figure and is slightly higher than the UK planned figure for 1995-96

13 Based on current year average grant plus loan for all eligible students (including those who recieve no grant and/or take up no loan)

14 ‘Costs structures in higher education’, Report commissioned jointly by the Committee and HEFCE from Coopers and Lybrand (forthcoming)

15 Assumes that ultimately up to 50,000 part-time undergraduate students may be eligible for fee remission

16 PSI, Report 2, Full and part-time students in higher education: their experiences and expectations

17 Georgiou L, Halfpenny P, Nevada M, Evans J and Linder S, Survey of research equipment in United Kingdom universities, CVCP, June 1996

18 Georgiou L et al, Survey of teaching equipment in English and Welsh higher education institutions, to be published

19 Callender C and Kempson E, ‘Student finances, income and expenditure and take-up of student loans, PSI, November 1996, Table 5.1

20 The rate has remained broadly constant since 1990 at about 18 per cent

21 Callender C and Kempson E Ibid (November 1996) Chapter 2 pp.35-38 and Table 2.13 and 2.14

Chapter 18
1 Evidence from the sample of students surveyed in Callender and Kempson (1996) Student Finances: Income, Expenditure and Take-Up of Student Loans, Policy Studies Institute, London suggests that the average sum received from parents/spouse was 874. Grossing this up suggests a total contribution of some 800 million, 100 million more than the assessed figure

2 This total is made up of 10.7 billion expenditure by higher education institutions, 2.1 billion public expenditure in support of students’ living costs, 800 million parental contributions less an estimated 800 million to allow for double counting as a result of student maintenance support being spent in higher education institutions, giving a total of 12.8 billion. In addition, there is some 300 million expenditure on higher education in further education colleges.

3 US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (1996) The Condition of Education 1996, NCES 96-304, by Thomas Smith, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC

4 There is some evidence to suggest that post-higher education earnings are lower for non-traditional students, although they still enjoy higher salaries than those without such qualifications (see Table 2.10, Report 6, ‘Widening participation in higher education by students from lower socio-economic groups and students with disabilities’) but research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies suggests that the returns to higher education qualifications do not vary according to background or ability (IFS (1997) Higher Education: Employment and Earnings in Britain)

Chapter 19
1 PCFC/UFC (1992), Capital Funding and Estate Management in Higher Education

2 Bates M, Review of PFI (Public/Private Partnerships) HM Treasury June 1997

3 The Joint DfEE/Higher Education Sector Working Group (1996), PFI in Higher Education: Report to the Secretary of State

Chapter 20
1 As at 31 March 1997. Repayments first fall due in the April after the borrower graduates or drops out of his or her course. Repayments can then be deferred for a year at a time if the borrower’s income is below the repayment threshold

2 National Commission on Education (1993) Learning to Succeed, Heinemann, London

Chapter 21
1 Conceptual issues and the Australian Experience with Income Contingent charges for Higher Education, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Discussion Paper 350 ANA, September 1996

2 In particular Dr Nicholas Barr and Mr Iain Crawford of the London School of Economics since 1988

3 In particular in various papers by Dr Nicholas Barr et al at the London School of Economics

4 Age 60 for those aged 40 or over when they took out their last loan

5 Student Loans Company Customer Satisfaction Survey, Martin Hamblin Research, September 1996

6 Submission to the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education from Dr Nicholas Barr and Mr Iain Crawford, November 1996

7 Ibid

8 Existing student loans made by the Student Loans Company are within scope of the Consumer Credit Act 1974: this imposes specific duties on the lender to provide specific information to the borrower at specific times (Sections 75–78)

9 At present, when an employer defaults on payment, the employee is credited with the tax that the employer should have deducted from pay (whether it has been deducted or not). The employer is pursued for the liability. It is for consideration whether similar rules would apply in the case of loan repayments collected through the tax system

10 Report of the Commission on Social Justice, 1994

11 The Learning Bank: towards a strategy for investment in post-compulsory education and training, David Robertson, November 1995

12 Individual Lifetime Learning Accounts. A new infrastructure for the UK (to be published) J Smith and A Spurling. This provides an assessment both of policy and technical feasibility of establishing a system of learning accounts to promote lifelong learning

13 Student Finance Income and Expenditure and take up of student loans Callender C, and Kempson E. Table 2.10 indicates that gifts to students average about 450 in 1995–96

14 Called to Account, are compulsory individual learning accounts a wheeze or a nightmare? Mark Corney and Peter Robinson The Unemployment Unit, 322 St John Street, London EC1V 2NT (January 1996)

15 Lifetime Learning Accounts and Training Services: Issues for UK training policy. A report for the Institute of Personnel and Development (February 1997) Mark Corney (MCConsultancy) (unpublished)

Chapter 22
1 OECD (1997) Thematic review of the first years of tertiary education: United Kingdom (unpublished)

2 OECD (1997) Thematic review of the first years of tertiary education: United Kingdom (unpublished)

3 OECD (1997) Thematic review of the first years of tertiary education: United Kingdom (unpublished)

4 CVCP (1996) Our Universities Our Future, Submission to the Inquiry

5 SHEFC (1996) Submission of Evidence from the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council

Chapter 23
1 Figures from the Welsh Office show that in 1994 manufacturing represented 27 per cent of Welsh GDP, compared with 21 per cent for the UK as a whole. Their figures also show that VAT-registered companies with a turnover of less than 250,000 represented 82 per cent of all companies in Wales, compared with 77 per cent in the UK.

Chapter 24
None