Search Results

Total expenditure per student on tertiary educational institutions is increasing in OECD countries. Although tertiary educational institutions across OECD countries are mainly funded from public sources, private expenditure (including public-to-private transfers) remains a significant source of funding. Reliance on private funding by tertiary educational institutions has been growing. On average in OECD countries, private sources account for a significant share of investment in tertiary educational institutions. Private expenditure on tertiary educational institutions increased faster than public expenditure between 2010 and 2016 on average across OECD countries, although this varies from country to country. Participation in tertiary education is not correlated to the funding model in tertiary institutions and high levels of private expenditure at tertiary education are not necessarily associated with lower enrolment. Financial support mechanisms in the form of grants or loans help alleviate the financial burden to households, particularly in countries where private spending on tertiary education is high.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This paper is one of a series of policy discussion papers presented by the LH Martin Institute. The aim is to contribute to the debate the Institute sees as necessary to reform and invigorate the tertiary education sector, in particular vocational education and TAFE. The series covers a range of topical issues, from policy settings, governance, funding, competency based training, social inequality and training markets.

VET FEE-HELP was promoted widely by the Australian Government as an equity measure, allowing anyone, including those on low income and disadvantaged learners, to participate in high-level fee-for-service vocational courses, without upfront fees and financial barriers. Loans for VET students would also facilitate the marketisation of vocational education, to allow students to move to private providers if they chose. This paper explains the inception of VET FEE-HELP and how the design of the system enabled an environment where VET fees increased, unscrupulous providers flourished, students were burdened with debt without commensurate outcomes, and budgets of government were drained. Concluding reflections touch on regulation of the VET market, future funding, and the reputation of the sector.

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

This report examines the private financing of vocational education and training (VET). Private financing comprises company investment in the education and training of their employees as well as the contributions made privately by individuals towards the cost of their education and training. Government expenditure is no longer adequate to maintain socially desirable levels of national investment in human capital in order to ensure international competitiveness and national economic growth. Governments are therefore becoming concerned with private investment in the development of human capital because employers and private individuals may tend to under-provide and under-finance skills development. However, governments can intervene through a wide range of legal and fiscal measures designed to maintain the national training investment at the socially desirable levels. The report covers the following aspects of private financing of training: (1) arguments for government intervention in private financing of training; (2) government training incentives for private individuals; (3) fiscal and legal incentives for enterprise training investment; (4) enterprise training obligations; and (5) improving private financing of training. Show less

The degree to which students are able to make adequate repayments on their student loans and avoid default is of special concern for colleges. If too many former students go into default, the college will face sanctions by the federal government and lose eligibility to provide currently enrolled students federal financial aid, such as the Pell grant. To avoid these sanctions, some colleges have chosen not to participate in federal loan programs by excluding loans from students' financial aid packages. In this article, [the author] investigates the student-level impacts associated with the decision of community colleges to opt out of the Stafford loan program. Utilizing administrative records from over 50 community colleges located in a single state, [the author] estimates the within-college differences in outcomes for Pell-eligible students before and after an institution opts out of the federal loan program. [The author] finds that Pell-eligible students enrolling when the community college offered federal loans were 7.6 percentage points more likely to borrow than Pell-eligible students who enrolled when the institutions opted out. Overall, borrowing also increased by 368 US dollars a year. [The author] also finds that students borrowing a loan attempted 19 additional credits in their first year of enrollment and were more likely to attempt and complete math and science courses than non-borrowers.

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

On February 17, 2009, President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act [ARRA], better known as the economic stimulus plan. Congress and the Obama Administration acted in the wake of an economic crisis spurred by a deepening recession. Among its aims in passing the ARRA, Congress moved to help states and local jurisdictions reduce growing fiscal shortfalls that threaten the work of community leaders across the nation. Yet the intent of Congress went beyond acting to stabilize state and local budgets and create jobs: it also uses this one-time, unprecedented appropriation to lay the groundwork for long-term economic growth. The act dedicates funding for innovation in and the expansion of many federal investments. This document summarizes selected ARRA funding streams for struggling students and disconnected youth. Funds authorized under ARRA will flow quickly to states and localities. This summary is designed to help community leaders who seek to maintain and advance efforts to create pathways for struggling students and disconnected youth. It addresses what is known of the intent, the allocation process, and the most relevant sections of ARRA. However, beyond the legislative language and the accompanying House-Senate conference report, there is little information on how ARRA funds will be dispersed and how states may access them. In the coming weeks, executive branch departments will provide guidance and, where applicable, application procedures for accessing the funds.

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

The European Commission's White Paper 'Growth, competitiveness and employment', released in 1994, refers to the use of a system of 'training credits' which would provide young people with training vouchers to be spent throughout their working lives to gain new knowledge and update their existing skills. This report is the result of a pilot study to assess the use of vouchers to fund different types of training within the European Union (EU). The focus is on post-compulsory secondary level education (initial and continuing training both work and non-work related) rather than compulsory or higher education. The report discusses issues related to the use of vouchers and similar mechanisms to fund or partially fund individual participation in vocational education and training (VET). Show less

Since the beginning of the Great Recession, many community colleges have experienced significant declines in state revenue, increases in enrollment, higher tuition, and flat or declining state student aid. These conditions have also occurred in an environment of heightened accountability with pressure to advance a student success agenda and to meet workforce training needs. Findings from the annual survey of state community college directors conducted by the Education Policy Center at the University of Alabama, in partnership with Iowa State University and The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, show that the majority of state directors feel states are moving toward a privatized model of higher education and that structural deficits exist in state budgets disadvantaging community colleges. The concern is that these and other related findings demonstrate a situation that may not improve as the nation climbs out of recession; this situation is creating a new norm in community college funding.

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

This report presents the outcomes of modelling of the potential costs of an income contingent loan (ICL) that would form a core element of a tertiary education entitlement, as proposed in the Mitchell Institute paper 'Financing tertiary education in Australia: the reform imperative and rethinking student entitlements' (Noonan and Pilcher 2015). The tertiary education entitlement is intended to be a coherent and practical Australia-wide system that provides guaranteed funding support for tertiary education to a particular qualification level through course subsidies and access to an income contingent loan. As outlined in the Noonan and Pilcher paper, the entitlement would have two core funding elements: (1) a direct subsidy - paid by either a state/territory government and/or the Commonwealth government, and based on eligibility to the entitlement; and (2) student contributions - initially paid by the Commonwealth to the provider with students taking out an ICL with the Commonwealth. In this report, the authors consider ICL design options and associated cost implications of a single universal ICL scheme that could apply to tertiary qualifications which, importantly, includes Certificate III and IV. The report examines the sharing of tertiary costs between students and all taxpayers, with a particular emphasis on ICL subsidies.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This report focuses on adult education and training in Europe. It investigates current approaches to promoting lifelong learning, with a particular emphasis on policies and measures supporting adults with low levels of skills and qualifications to access learning opportunities. Starting with a range of quantitative indicators related to adult education and training (Chapter 1), the report examines national arrangements for coordinating adult learning policies and measures (Chapter 2). It then provides a cross-country overview of publicly subsidised programmes that seek to provide opportunities for adults to upgrade their skills and qualifications (Chapter 3). The report also addresses the question of financial support, paying particular attention to the financial incentives for groups with low qualification levels (Chapter 4). Approaches to achieving flexible learning pathways constitute another area of investigation (Chapter 5). This is followed by an analysis of arrangements for the recognition and validation of non-formal and informal learning (Chapter 6). The report finally looks at the extent to which awareness-raising and outreach actions (Chapter 7) and guidance services (Chapter 8) underpin the available learning provision. The report's prime source is the policy information collected from Eurydice National Units, representing 42 education and training systems across 37 European countries. These data have been complemented with qualitative and quantitative data provided by other organisations, including Cedefop, Eurostat and the OECD.

Published abstract. Show less

Post-16 education is at the heart of the current government's plans for economic recovery and its wider 'levelling up' agenda. Significant change is on the way, highlighted by the Skills for Jobs White Paper [available in VOCEDplus at TD/TNC 143.263] and the Skills and Post-16 Education Bill. Within this context we wanted to understand the impact of the coming reforms. What could they mean for learners, providers, higher education institutions, and employers across England? We also sought to understand the impact of these changes in the context of the unprecedented challenges the country faces in maintaining jobs, boosting productivity, and economic growth. The four papers focus on the following key areas of post-16 policy: (1) 16-19 qualifications; (2) Higher Technical Education; (3) Lifetime Skills Guarantee; and (4) Lifelong Loan Entitlement. The papers draw upon desk research, policy roundtables (with employers, education establishments, representative bodies, and politicians), and public polling over the last six months. This report sets out findings and recommendations from this research.

Key recommendations include: (1) The post-16 system risks misalignment with the demands of the labour market and needs to be more agile to respond to shifting skills and employment patterns. The level 3 reforms could exacerbate this by removing high quality qualifications that are recognised and valued by employers; (2) Extending training funding to those looking to reskill, not just upskill, will help meet the rapidly changing needs of firms in a particular region; (3) Currently only those without a level 3 (A level equivalent) qualification can have access to the funding entitlement to take a level 3 course - this needs to change so that those already with a level 3 qualification can also have the opportunity to reskill; and (4) Giving local leaders more say over the allocation of funding will support the education and training system in better meeting the needs of employers and jobseekers in regions across England.

Edited excerpt from publisher's website. Show less