Search Results

In February 2018, a wide-ranging review of post-18 education and funding was announced [review report available in VOCEDplus at TD/TNC 136.666]. Post-18 education funding and student finance has undergone a period of substantial policy change since 2012 including the raising of undergraduate tuition fees to £9,250 per year, the removal of maintenance grants and changes to interest rates on student loans. During the period of higher education reforms, the further education sector had also experienced difficult times due to a sustained period of funding reductions. These reforms have led to increased debate about the cost and value of higher education and intensified scrutiny of the funding system. The review therefore aimed to create a joined up post-18 education that would work for students and taxpayers. An earlier briefing paper, 'The forthcoming review of post-education and funding' [available in VOCEDplus at TD/TNC 136.934], discussed the review process and analysed possible options for reform and their impact.

The review was guided by several principles: (1) post-18 education benefits society, the economy, and individuals; (2) everyone should have the opportunity to be educated after the age of 18; (3) the decline in numbers of those getting post-18 education needs to be reversed; (4) the cost of post-18 education should be shared between taxpayers, employers and learners; (5) organisations providing education and training must be accountable for the public subsidy they receive; (6) government has a responsibility to ensure that its investment in tertiary education is appropriately spent and directed; (7) post-18 education cannot be left entirely to market forces; and (8) post-18 education needs to be forward looking.

The review made recommendations in nine key areas relating to funding and educational organisation which are designed to create a lifelong learning system that is affordable and accessible to all: (1) strengthening technical education (the report recommends improved funding, a better maintenance offer, and a more coherent suite of higher technical and professional qualifications to help level the playing field with degrees and drive up both the supply of and demand for such courses); (2) increasing opportunities for everyone; (3) reforming and refunding the further education (FE) college network; (4) bearing down on low value higher education; (5) addressing higher education funding; (6) increasing flexibility and lifetime learning; (7) supporting disadvantaged students; (8) ensuring those who benefit from higher education contribute fairly; and (9) improving the apprenticeship offer.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This chapter integrates current Chinese education reform into the unique socioeconomic context of China in a transitional time and explores the complexity of education decentralization in China through an in-depth analysis on changes in education finance, administration, and curriculum development. Mark Hanson’s theory of education decentralization is cited to build a conceptual framework for examining education decentralization in China. Previous studies, government documents, laws, and regulations related to the current wave of Chinese education reform are reviewed to capture a true picture of education decentralization in China. In investigating the background, actual actions, and motive of the current Chinese education reform, the chapter demonstrates that the on-going Chinese education reform is moving toward a centralized decentralization. Linking education with the unified national goal of economic modernization, the paradoxical mixture of centralization and decentralization is a strategic means to avoid loss of centralized control. Literature on decentralization reform in Chinese education primarily concentrates on changed Chinese education policies in the reform. This chapter places the focus on the contextual factors that shape the decentralization trend in current reform.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

Australia's Higher Degree by Research (HDR) training system is critical to Australia's future economic strength. It provides a highly qualified research workforce, enabling research and innovation across the academic, industry, government and not-for-profit sectors, as well as contributing substantially to Australia's and the world's body of knowledge. This review has engaged widely with stakeholders, including higher education and research institutes, HDR candidates and graduates, peak bodies, industry, business groups, government agencies, experts, and not-for-profit organisations in order to deliver evidence-based findings which identify opportunities to improve Australia's HDR training system.

There was broad agreement from stakeholders that Australia's HDR training system currently performs well in the areas of academic outputs. Other strengths identified include: a rich variety of choices in pathways; flexible entry requirements with provision for academic equivalence assessment; an independent, high quality examination process; and an emphasis on high quality disciplinary research and the development of associated research skills. Nevertheless Australia's performance in the area of industry-research collaboration is amongst the lowest when measured against OECD competitor countries. This situation is extremely concerning for a nation that strives to develop a vibrant knowledge based economy. Evidence suggests that there is significant room for improvement across a range of important areas relevant to HDR training.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

The Australian National Training Authority's Research Advisory Council (ANTARAC) called for expressions of interest in vocational education and training research grants. This article covers the council's priority areas for research in 1994. Show less

The main purpose of the OECD's 'Thematic review of tertiary education' is to provide policy makers with information and analysis to assist them in formulating and implementing policies to achieve national social and economic objectives through tertiary education. Its key objectives are to: synthesise research-based evidence on the impact of tertiary education policies and disseminate this knowledge among participating countries; identify innovative and successful policy initiatives and practices; facilitate exchanges of lessons and experiences among countries; and identify future policy options. The review, which involved 24 countries (Australia, Belgium - Flemish Community, Chile, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Japan, Mexico, Korea, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom), 'examines how the organisation, management and delivery of tertiary education can help countries achieve their economic and social objectives'. As part of the review, each of the participating countries was asked to prepare a country background report. This document is the country background report for Norway. Its contents are: Executive summary; The national context of tertiary education; Overall description of the tertiary education system; Higher education and the labour market; The regional dimension in Norwegian higher education; The role of higher education in research and innovation; Equity in and through tertiary education; Resourcing higher education; Planning, governing and regulating the system; Assuring and improving the quality of tertiary education; Internationalisation and globalisation of tertiary education; Conclusion.

Documents from this thematic review are indexed from TD/TNC 89.551 to TD/TNC 89.585. Show less

The 'Higher education policy statement and reform consultation' was launched on 24 February 2022 with responses required by 6 May 2022. This online consultation included 16 closed questions (which have been analysed quantitatively), and 29 open text boxes (which have been analysed qualitatively and the frequency of themes summarised quantitatively). The consultation was designed to gain views on proposals for higher education reform in relation to student number controls (SNCs), minimum eligibility requirements (MERs), maximum fee and loan limits for foundation years, eligibility for a state scholarship, and growing high-quality level 4 and 5 provision. This report sets out the analysis of the responses completed by York Consulting.

Edited excerpts from publication and publisher's website. Show less

Career Development Loans (CDLs) are unsecured, deferred-repayment loans for vocational education and training courses of between two weeks and two years in length. The aim of this research was to explore the views and attitudes towards CDLs among training providers, and in particular to assess the ways in which CDLs could be used more widely within specific groups of providers. It looked at a number of areas including the characteristics of different groups of training providers, whether training providers were involved, or not involved, in CDLs and their reasons for this, finding out more about training providers' experiences with CDLs, understanding more about types of course that training providers provide, exploring training providers' views on the funding of training via CDLs, exploring whether training providers promote sources of funding other than CDLs and examining training providers' future role in relation to CDLs. Show less

In this publication, the author suggests that, in developing countries, vocational training is crucial for enhancing productivity and economic competitiveness and alleviating poverty. However, training provision in many of these countries is underfinanced and government funding mechanisms are constrained by other pressures. New sources of financing are required to support skill development. In addition, financing mechanisms can influence the effectiveness and efficiency of skill development systems. The publication emphasises the key role of financing strategies in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of training systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. It describes the emerging consensus on best practice in the financing of training, using the experiences of Latin America and Asia to test this consensus against findings from Sub-Saharan Africa. A case for financing interventions by governments is outlined. The role and effectiveness of national training agencies, payroll levies and alternative transfer mechanisms for institutional funding are investigated. The discussion is based on the experiences of Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. Show less

The Leitch Review of Skills [report indexed at TD/IRD 88.157] has highlighted the need to up-skill the adult workforce if the UK is to remain economically competitive. Given the UK’s ageing population, the need to focus policy and funding on adult learners is greater than ever. ‘Adult training: focus and funding in the context of changing UK demographics’ presents the views of a range of key stakeholders on how this goal might best be achieved. The findings were gathered from a series of interviews and a roundtable discussion with experts including MPs [Members of Parliament], peers, civil servants, academics, employers, business representatives, skills agencies, learning providers, NGOs [non-government organisations] and unions. Participants evaluated existing provision for adult learners, identifying the major areas of concern, and proposed recommendations for change. [The following is a summary of the participants’ main comments:] Future skills gaps will be at level 3. This requires greater contributions now from employers and adult learners. Current funding targets are too ‘top-down’ and ‘blanket’ in nature, particularly the level 2 entitlement and emphasis on learners completing ‘full fat’ qualifications. Learner Accounts are a good vehicle for tripartite funding and should include: capacity for state contribution; ability for learners to save advantageously; opportunities for learners to borrow; and provision for employers to contribute to their employees’ training costs. There is a case for more public investment in apprenticeships for adults to up-skill or change career, but this must be preceded by a ‘sharper debate’ about the structure, purpose and outcomes of apprenticeships for adults. Low interest income contingent loan for adults would encourage take-up of higher level vocational courses and move some way towards parity with higher education. This should be preceded by research into returns on investment in high level vocational education and by assurances of the quality of training undertaken. More employers still need to engage in workplace training. Skills passports (portable documents which record all types of training) enable learners to assess their skill levels, identify areas for development and help foster a culture of lifelong, personalised learning. Skills policy and welfare to work policies are not sufficiently joined up. Up-skilling the older workforce (over 50s) is important given the ageing population and delayed retirement age. Current mechanisms for learners over 50 are insufficient as level 2 qualifications decay over time and do not always take into account prior work experience. Teacher training for older learners also needs revising. The Skills for Life programme must not lose its momentum, particularly in light of the impact of migrant workers in areas with a low skills base. The new Qualification and Credit Framework (QCF) will cater well for adult learners, providing greater flexibility and the ability to build up qualifications incrementally. Current vocational qualifications are too narrow and insufficiently responsive to employer needs. Current Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) provision for adults is inadequate and fails to address the lifelong learning perspective.

Excerpts from executive summary reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

This publication forms part of a series studying the application of the medium-term expenditure framework (MTEF) in financial planning in the education sector in Asia. The studies were initiated and their implementation co-ordinated by the Education Policy and Reform (EPR) Unit at UNESCO Bangkok. MTEFs have been used in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries for a while, but their history of use in developing countries is more recent, having started in the late 1990s. Over the past decade, however, donor support has provided for MTEFs aimed at strengthening the link between policy, planning and budgeting in many developing countries. In Asia, a number of countries have introduced or are planning to introduce MTEFs, but no studies had been conducted nor any attempts made to document the experiences that countries have had in using MTEFs until this research. Thus, these country case studies are an attempt to address this knowledge gap. They look at Asian experiences with MTEFs, and thereby contribute to understanding the diverse practical aspects of introducing MTEFs, in general, and for the education sector, in particular. The education sector MTEF in the Republic of Korea is a five-year plan, formulated within the [medium-term fiscal framework] MTFF. Priorities of the 2007-2011 MTEF for the education sector respond to the need for action in specific areas. The process of formulating the MTEF for education raises several issues for future consideration.

Excerpts from publication. Show less