Skip to main content

Scottish Government Statement on Student Support: Good in Parts.


The announcement today is broadly welcome as a step in the right direction.

But the ‘sting in the tail’ is that the changes will only kick in from 2019/2020.





The Scottish Government finally responded to the independent report for the Scottish Government: “A New Social Contract for Students - Fairness, Parity and Clarity” [1] that was delivered to them in November of last year.  Since then, the Scottish Government has come under increasing pressure to produce a response.

This afternoon, Shirley-Anne Sommerville, Scotland Minister for Further Education, Higher Education and Science finally presented a statement on ‘Student support’ to the Scottish Parliament. This was scheduled in at a late stage.

The full statement is here (15 minutes):


TEFS welcomed the independent report “A New Social Contract for Students - Fairness, Parity and Clarity” back in 2017 as a step in the right direction [2]. This is because it set out the basic needs of an individual student. That being at least £8,100 per year. It also made no distinction with regard to support for the individual between Higher and Further Education.

The statement today at least goes some way to acknowledging the recommendations. Increasing the minimum household income for bursary support is long overdue and will help many.  The full support for students with a care background is also welcome. But it is still likely to be the case that many of these people will never reach a university. It would be interesting to see some details of the overall cost it is expected to be.

The recommendation of the report that those in receipt of benefits should not lose out if transferring to full time education was kicked into the long grass and will be subject to further review.

The Minister stressed indicated that £8,100 per year that would be offered – as a bursary to students from a care background and a mixture of bursary and loan for others – on the basis of the living wage in Scotland.  The review last year calculated this on the basis of £8.45 per hour that was the figure in October 2017. Now it is £8.75 per hour and it seems that the Minister failed to recalculate.   There is an assumption in the original report that students will work up to 10 hours per week to make up a deficit. This was not indicated today but if the support remains static then only the number of hours worked can increase from 10 hours.

This might give some the impression that this statement was rushed out with reluctance. Questions that reminded them that the situation was still worse than when they formed the government stung somewhat.

The ‘sting in the tail’ is that the changes will only kick in from 2019/2020.

This is very disappointing and it leaves room for backsliding next year.  It is the case that many students need more help now.  Indeed, it might not be too late for some students to contact their university to seek to defer their entry to next year to take advantage of a better situation then.  I hope those that do this are not disappointed ultimately.

Mike Larkin, retired from Queen's University Belfast after 37 years  teaching Microbiology, Biochemistry and Genetics.

References

[1] The independent report for the Scottish Government: “A New Social Contract for Students - Fairness, Parity and Clarity”
http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0052/00527875.pdf

[2] TEFS Blog Wednesday, 22 November 2017
Can Scotland afford to be brave with student support and fees?
https://studentequality.tefs.info/2017/11/can-scotland-afford-to-be-brave-with.html


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bristol University student death: Inquest raises many concerns

The inquest into the tragic death of Bristol University Student, Ben Murray, took place this week; almost 12 months since he took his own life.* The coroner recorded a verdict of suicide earlier today but warned the University that it should make detailed inquiries after each death (BBC News ‘University of Bristol told to learn lessons after Ben Murray's suicide’ ). The anniversary of his death is this Sunday the 5th of May. Spring comes as a time of hope for most people but for others it can be a time of considerable anxiety and stress. This is especially the case for students approaching the examination period. As a close colleague of mine often pointed out, “they are all someone’s child”. Our hearts go out to the family of Ben Murray and friends as the inquest goes over again the events of a year ago. The pain is further exacerbated by media reports that he had little or no support in what was his first year at university. The BBC reported that ‘Bristol University studen

A radical overhaul of examinations is needed as soon as possible: UPDATE

UPDATE 23rd March 2021 Since this idea was posted in January, there has been considerable thought across the sector about what would be best for the future. These are very well laid out in a collection of short essays reported last week by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI). The twelve essays, from different authors and different perspectives, in  ‘Where next for university admissions? ’ are edited by Rachel Hewitt  who sets out the many pitfalls surrounding examinations and university admissions. It seems there are those in favour of post qualification admission (PQA) to university as it should help the least advantaged students. However, arguments against this are presented that means caution must be taken. A powerful response to the HEPI report by the  'The Fair Access Coalition: 10 requirements for a fair admissions process' adds further to the debate. The suggestions are sensible but falls short on demanding adequate resources for students throughout their studi

Higher Education and the ‘intelligent plumbers’ theory

A common tactic when found out is to divert attention elsewhere. The release of student data from 2018/19 by the Department for Education (DfE) yesterday, ‘Widening participation in higher education: 2020’ and ‘Statistics: further education and skills’ tells the same sorry tale of a wide gap in access to universities between the most and least advantaged students. To divert attention from these stark facts in advance, the government used a diversionary tactic by attacking the effectiveness of universities and thus pointing the blame for poor social mobility someplace else. Advocating improvements in further education, something cut back by the same regime for years, hides the real intention. It seems that class divisions will be further exacerbated and any concession to universities fuelling improved social mobility has been abandoned. But the flawed theory is that at least the elite rulers will get access to intelligent plumbers . Three years ago, I heard a leading ‘You