Kingston SU
 
Want to advertise through our media?
Kingston University Students Union has various student marketing and student advertising tools that can promote your services direct to our students. For all our student marketing & advertising opportunities click the media pack button.

Student Marketing Specialists






popular searches:
■ elections
■ AGM
■ societies

Help

Chat with a company Representative

► KUSU Twitter

Contact Details

Kingston University Students’ Union,
Penrhyn Road,
Kingston upon Thames,
Surrey,
KT1 2EE

Tel: 020 8417 2868
Fax: 020 8417 2862

► University Blogs

Non-completion rates

We asked Peter Scott, Vice Chancellor his views on the subject...

What is your reaction to this under-reporting and the possible financial loss?

 

The University has not be over-reporting student numbers [I think you mean over-reporting not under-reporting]. That is accepted by HEFCE. The issue is a different one – whether the University has been over-estimating the number of students who have ‘completed’ the year according to HEFCE’s very narrow interpretation. To ‘complete’ a student has to take all the required assessments ‘at the first instance’ (They don’t have to pass to count as having completed, just to take all the assessments). So all students who take re-sits, and all students for whom ‘extenuating circumstances’ are taken into account, are regarded by HEFCE as ‘non-completions’ (and the University gets no funding for them).  

 

How and why were the university's figures so wrong?

 

The University’s figures were not wrong. But our student records system is designed to track the academic progress of students – and, in particular, record which students are entitled to progress into the next year. That all works fine. The system is not designed to record ‘non-completions’, many of whom of course are actually doing fine and able to progress. Universities are required to estimate the number of ‘non-completions’ according to HEFCE’s interpretation. The audit found that, for last year (2007-08), our estimate was too low – that is all.


What impact do you think the loss of £1m would have on the university and our students?

 

The University will not lose £1m – that was a worst-case prediction. In fact the University will suffer a one-off loss of £500K in its 2007-08 grant from HEFCE; there will be no reduction this year. To put this in perspective the University made an overall surplus of £8m in 2007-08. So the effect is that, instead of being £8m, the surplus will be £7.5m. So the financial impact on the University and students will be very limited. No plans for improvements will be cancelled or even delayed.


And what are you putting in place to ensure this does not happen again?

 

The major thing we are doing is trying to get the message across to students that, if they fail to turn up for a single exam, they are shooting themselves in the foot because the University stands to lose all the funding it receives for them from HEFCE. So we are urging students to at least attempt all exams (and other assessments) – or, if for whatever reason (and it needs to be a good one) they can’t, they need to give as much notice of this as possible. We are hoping KUSU will support us in this awareness-raising campaign. Another thing we are doing is trying to persuade HEFCE to adopt a more sensible interpretation of ‘non-completions’ (and a fairer one because in universities like Oxford and Cambridge where there are often no exams between the first year and finals students just have to ‘attend’ to be counted as having completed). And, of course, we are doing everything we can to make sure our estimates of ‘non-completions’ are more accurate.

Broke and Broken

 

NUS (National Union of Students) have recently launched their ‘Broke and Broken’ campaign which looks at how Higher Education is currently funded and critiquing the current approach.  The findings of the campaign should allow NUS to present a possible, better funding model.  The Government could be likely to review the current £3000 cap on top-up fees for home students this year.  KUSU wanted to ask our very own Vice Chancellor, Sir Peter Scott, a few questions about his thoughts and stance on top-up fees and student expectations:

 

Are you in favour of the current top-up fees system?

 

I was one of the few vice-chancellors who opposed the introduction of top-up fees – and I haven't seen any reason to change my mind. I dislike top-up fees for two reasons. First, I believe that students already have enough to cope without having to worry even more about debt – and I'm particularly concerned that students from poorer homes (or whose parents don't support them) may actually be put off coming to university entirely – which would widen the gap between the educationally advantaged and the educationally disadvantaged still more (and make it more difficult for them to find decent jobs. Secondly, I believe top-up fees send all the wrong signals. They imply going to university is like going to a supermarket; we, the University, have products and services for 'sale' which you, the students, 'buy' from us. But higher education is not like that; it's about learning and exploring questions and issues (together) and about improving people's fundamental life-chances.

 

Are you in favour of the cap being lifted, potentially allowing Universities to charge what they like?

 

I am certainly not in favour of raising the cap because it would make things worse. I suspect the Government is not too keen either because, under the current system, all students (even the best off) are entitled to receive loans from the Student Loans Company, i.e. The Government, to pay their fees. So, in the short run (which is all most politicians are interested in, raising the cap would cost the Government a lot of money as well as increasing student debt. But, very sadly, I suspect that, once the principle of top-up fees has been accepted, it is difficult to argue against raising the cap. So my guess is that it might go up to £5,000 in the next three or four years.

 

Do you agree that raising costs of Education means Student Expectations of their University will also increase?

 

I agree that by highlighting the direct contribution that students now have to make to the cost of their university education it inevitably raises expectations. Very reasonably, students react to having to pay more by demanding more in return. But it's important to remember that students have always paid for the cost of their higher education – but as future taxpayers, strictly according to their means (which, in my opinion is much the fairest way). Universities aren't necessarily much better off as a result of top-up fees because public expenditure on higher education as been squeezed – and will be squeezed more in the future. Kingston University got extra money when top-up fees were first introduced – but the benefit is being rapidly eroded by higher costs for which we are not being properly reimbursed by the Government.

 

Do you feel that Kingston University are meeting these expectations, if so, what steps have been taken to achieve this?

 

I believe that Kingston has done everything it can to meet these higher expectations – but not just because of top-up fees; the only reason the University exists is its students (however higher education is funded – fees or taxes). Kingston has been very successful at increasing its income – partly by increasing student numbers, which I know is not popular with everyone but which you will never get me to apologise for because I believe that nearly everyone has a right to a higher education provided they are prepared to put in the necessary effort. We have used this extra money in a number of ways that directly benefit students – by hiring more lecturers, by improving support services, by extending library opening hours, by buying more equipment. We are also committed to spending another £45 million on new buildings (a new Business School at Kingston Hill, and the major refurbishment of Knights Park); on top of the more than £50 million we have spent in the last 10 years. But there is still a lot to be done, particularly by providing more student accommodation (although the obstacle there is usually not money but the availability of sites and planning issues). 

 

 

For more information about the NUS ‘Broke and Broken’ campaign please visit: http://www.nus.org.uk/en/Campaigns/Broke-and-Broken/

 

Bookmark and Share