UUK update on student number controls Jovan Luzajic Senior policy and data analyst Universities UK

Outline 1.Student number controls in England for Current understanding of outcomes for Thoughts on proposals for SNCs in and

Student number controls in

UUK position Need for greater dynamism in SNCs as consequence of funding reforms, but recognise that SNCs still play a role in avoiding unplanned increases in the student support budget Changes to SNCs in should ensure that institutional autonomy is upheld and supported Potential impact on wider social policy goals, including increasing social mobility, and provision of skills in SIVS for example Tight timescales for introduction of changes represent exceptional challenges for institutions in effective implementation of proposals

UUK position Concerns regarding reduction in availability of overall university places due to core and margin policy. Further changes should be based on assessment of outcomes and impact of factors such as diversity of the sector

Impact of SNC proposals on HEIs in

Assessment of Impact of change in deferral behaviour on UK/EU acceptances to English HEIs Acceptances within the student number control arrangements decreased by 48,500 for entry in More 18 year olds entering through preferred choice Greater concentration of offers No real change in participation of disadvantaged groups No significant sensitivity to price

Outcomes of : AAB+ A level achievements at AAB or above: students in England aged 16 to 18, and Entry rates for English 18 year old population by entry qualification group 79,500 AAB+ entrants in Two-year average for overall AAB+ acceptances broadly in line with historic trends, and close to the 85,000 projected by HEFCE for 2012–13. Decrease in proportion of AAB+ students with A-levels (66.2% to 64.9% in 2012).

Outcomes for : Core and margin Numbers of unfilled margin places in % of margin places at HEIs unfilled compared to 27% at FECs Not clear however what impact offsetting of over-recruitment in previous years is Roughly 95% of over- recruitment in was at HEIs

Outcomes of

Outcomes for Combination of factors lead to overall drop in those entering in : Changes in the behaviour of those applying in relation to deferral of entry Restrictive nature of student number controls on recruitment strategies of some institutions Institutions concentrating offers on smaller group of students A smaller pool of 18-year olds eligible to apply to university, due to demographic change Changes in the behaviour of mature students, greater decreases seen in acceptances for this group

SNC policy Move in high grades threshold to ABB+ and equivalent qualifications HEFCE to use central estimate for assessing ABB+ numbers, previous estimates of 120,000 ABB+ students in Due to atypical nature of recruitment in and , HEFCE will use to determine ABB+ population. Cambridge Pre U and Access to HE qualifications added to exemptions list Students topping up to an honours degree from a FT FD or HND also included in exemptions list

SNC policy Introduction of flexibility of +3% of total recruitment of HEFCE funded students in Based on data represents additional 10,000 extra places, though likely to be lower for due to lower recruitment in Applies to all institutions including specialist HEIs which have opted out of ABB+ and margin policy in Margin of 5,000 places, Additional places provided by government Provisional allocations suggest that as in just under half of these places will go to HEIs

SNC policy Penalties for over-recruitment above +3% flexibility threshold should be assumed to be similar to levels for For institutions charging fees net of waivers of £6,000 or less  £5,000 For institutions charging fees net of waivers of more than £6,000  £1,000 below average fee net of waivers Overall should be considered an over-allocation of numbers against government plans Will be kept under review, not clear if some of the proposals may be withdrawn after if demand picks up Should address some of the concerns from and help towards strategic aims such as widening participation

SNC policy Further liberalisation of student places in Flexibility to be linked to institutional recruitment patterns in Those institutions increasing numbers in will be offered greater flexibility for growth in No indication either way on whether there will further movement of grade threshold (e.g. BBB) Temporary nature of these proposals due to lower level of demand in

UUK thoughts on future changes to SNCs Concerns regarding incomplete understanding of impact of current reforms Difficulties in moving the high grade threshold further due to greater range of equivalent qualifications, and latent unrealised demand (e.g. from BTEC students) Overall number of places must be maintained going forward. Any underspend on student support should in the short term, be used to: –relax student number controls –Reduce penalties for over-recruitment –Remove or reduce the impact of margin exercises Not clear where places for increased flexibility would come from if demand returns or increases

Next steps UUK monitoring report on impact of wider reforms in , to be published in spring 2013 Continued monitoring of the 2013 cycle Focus on communicating student finance system to part time and mature students and review of part time and mature provision HEFCE consultation in spring 2013 on implementation of controls for

Your thoughts Opportunity to feed into UUK response to upcoming consultation on student number controls for HEFCE guidance (from HEFCE circular 32/2012) ‘….The exemptions list in no way provides an exhaustive assessment of students’ prior attainment. We would not expect institutions to use this list to inform decisions about the quality of students’ qualifications, the admission of individual applicants, or students’ eligibility for institutions’ own scholarship, bursary or fee waiver schemes. The list is not intended to influence the determination of individual applicants’ suitability for admission, where the autonomy of institutions is always paramount.’ Are the proposals for adequate in addressing difficulties institutions faced in recruitment cycle What could we propose for that would help?

Questions and comments Jovan Luzajic