Who gets the higher education grant?

The Irish Independent has an interesting piece on the socio-economic background of higher education grant recipients. In particular it documents how a significant number from professional & employer backgrounds receive the grants, more in fact than from semi- & unskilled backgrounds.

Irish Policy Options for New Student Contributions in Higher Education

Readers may or may not be aware of this report to the Irish Minister for Education and Science: "Policy Options for New Student Contributions in Higher Education". The report dates from July 2009 but I have just found it on the website of the recently re-branded Department of Education and Skills. It is not clear whether this report is connected to the National Strategy for Higher Education in Ireland, recently discussed by Kevin on this blog.

In any event, the report outlines a number of issues in it summary, which are relevant to the potential introduction of a student contribution in Ireland. These include:

(i) Affordability considerations: "It is proposed that the level of any new student contribution should be related to current fee levels for Irish/EU students who do not qualify for free fees."

(ii) Top-up Fees: "Consideration could also be given to providing for a premium or ‘top-up’ range within which individual institutions would be free to increase charges for particular programmes. This would allow individual institutions to incentivise participation on particular programmes or to generate additional revenue according to their ability to compete for students. Such an arrangement could have the benefits of promoting competition and quality within the system."

(iii) Transition: "In transitioning to new fee arrangements, it would be important to avoid any potential for immediate shortfalls in institutional budgets by pitching fees at levels that do not match current ‘free fee’ contribution rates."

(iv) Collection of loan repayments: "The involvement of the national tax collection agency has been identified as being a critical success factor for a number of income contingent student loan facility models that operate internationally... It is recognised, however, that there are significant operational pressures on the Revenue Commissioners in the current Irish context which would limit their capacity to take on a role of direct collection agent for an income contingent loan scheme."

(v) Public finance: "In the current economic circumstances, it would be important that the introduction of a student loan facility would be designed to minimise any impact on the General Government Balance (GGB) or on General Government Debt (GGD)."

(vi) Upfront payment and tax relief: "In the context of any introduction of a loan system, continuing tax relief for students who pay fees upfront would amount to a form of discount for upfront payment. From an equity perspective, this would need to be factored into any consideration of the appropriate rate of surcharge on those availing of a loan rather than paying upfront."

(vii) Communicating complex issues: "Any policy change in this area will impact on significant numbers of students or potential students. A number of the options being considered are complex in nature and would give rise to very significant demands for information and clarification. An information strategy will need to be in place to communicate the details of any changes and to provide user friendly access to relevant detail on how the changes impact on individuals."

Deferred fees for universities:a UK proposal

The issue of university fees and financial support for students is both complex and divisive. The need for some original but well-thought-through ideas has never been greater. The UK is also re-assessing its system of student financing. A recent proposal by Neil Shephard (Oxford University) is worth looking at. Its recommendations are below:

1. Make student financial support available to cover all tuition and a modest cost of living.
2. Allow graduates to repay according to earnings with protection for poorer graduates.
3. Call HEFCE teaching grants “scholarships” and make students aware of their value.
4. Cap the level of funded fees plus HEFCE grant at the current level.
5. Allow universities to charge deferred fees.

• When they are paid the money goes to the student’s university not to the state. These
• fees have no fiscal implications.
• Bring some of the cash flow from deferred fees forward by working with a bank.

6. In the long-run move to making the cost of living support simpler by

• Providing more realistic cost of living support for all students.
• Removing means-tested university bursaries for cost of living expenses.
• Removing means-tested grants to students provided by the state.