A-level results: a triumph for the Tories?

You may have missed it, said Fraser Nelson in The Daily Telegraph, but last week’s A-level results were proof of a “progressive triumph” for the Tories. Eight years ago, David Cameron launched a major overhaul of higher education, trebling permitted tuition fees to £9,000 and lifting the cap on student numbers. His grand plan “destroyed” Nick Clegg, his coalition partner, and left many Conservatives terrified of even mentioning tuition fees. But the changes are working. This year saw the largest share of students offered university places, with the biggest rise in “the most deprived communities”. The best courses are growing; the less-popular ones are shrinking, with even Exeter, Bristol, and other Russell Group big hitters having to fill hundreds of places through the clearing system. Clearly, Cameron’s “market reforms” are working exactly as intended – they’re creating a “buyer’s market” for students.

Well, sort of, said The Times. The reason top universities struggled to fill their places this year was because a dip in the number of 18-year-olds reduced the volume of applications to its lowest level since 2009 (even if the share increased). In reality, Cameron’s reforms haven’t created a “true market” at all. Universities were supposed to adjust their fees in line with demand, as discerning students “shopped around” for courses that offered the best value for money. Instead, almost every institution is charging full whack – on the basis that anything less makes them look second-rate to applicants – which has allowed Russell Group universities to rest on their laurels rather than improve standards. So desperate are universities for those juicy £9,000 fees, said Miranda Green in the FT, that almost a quarter of offers aren’t even dependent on the applicant attaining high grades. Teachers rightly worry that these unconditional offers encourage students to “take their foot off the gas”.

The whole system stinks, said Juliet Samuel in The Daily Telegraph. Sixth-formers don’t much care which universities offer them the best prospects: surveys show they are as interested in “the quality of local nightlife” as they are in how much graduates earn. Only about half will have professional jobs within three or four years of graduating, and many will never earn more than the £25,000-a-year threshold for repaying their loan – leaving a ballooning bill for taxpayers to pick up. The only ones benefiting from all this are the universities themselves: in England, their tuition fee income has more than doubled since the £9,000 maximum came in, with no obvious improvements in quality. Once a source of pride, our higher education system is now nothing short of a “national scandal”.