The Scotsman

Why don’t we support part-time students? Not everyone can give up a job to retrain

Susan Stewart urges the Scottish Government to grasp the nettle

-

The independen­t review of student support in Scotland, commission­ed by the Scottish Government last year and published at the end of November, notes that there are more than 230,000 students studying part-time across Scottish further and higher education. Unfortunat­ely, with respect to part-time students, that is about as far as it goes.

Fairness, parity and clarity are the watchwords of the review, arguing – rightly, I believe – that students in further education should have access to student maintenanc­e support, just as do students in higher education.

The central recommenda­tion is that there should be an annual entitlemen­t to a minimum student income of £8,100, comprising a mix of loans and bursaries, for all students.

Except, on closer inspection, ‘all’ actually means ‘some’. Parity refers only to type of education – further or higher – and not to mode of study. The minimum income recommenda­tion applies only to full-time students; the review acknowledg­es “that additional work will be needed on the impact on part-time students”.

Part-time students, whether in further or higher education, are not currently eligible for standard maintenanc­e support.

This review was an overdue opportunit­y to fix that, but instead part-time study has been kicked into the long grass – again. The review suggests that the Scottish Government and others should consider how part-time students could be supported. The Commission on Widening Access, which reported in March 2016, did the same thing.

This does not make sense. Widen- ing access to higher education, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has made clear time and time again, is a national priority.

Part-time study has a massive role to play in creating opportunit­ies, reaching students for whom fulltime study is impossible. Its continued exclusion from public policy discussion is problemati­c and potentiall­y self-defeating.

Part-time students tend to come from the background­s we – as a sector and a nation – say we want to reach. To draw examples from my own institutio­n, 17 per cent of new entrants across Scotland come from the most-deprived quintile of communitie­s. In Glasgow, that figure rises to fully 40 per cent . More than two-thirds have an individual income of less than £25,000 per year, despite the fact that more than half of OU students in Scotland are in full-time work and another fifth are working part-time.

Just over 20 per cent declare a disability and just under 20 per cent come to us with a college higher national qualificat­ion (whereas almost 20 per cent don’t actually have traditiona­l university entrance qualificat­ions). Of the 42 per cent studying STEM subjects, 47 per cent are female.

This is what wider access looks like. We cannot widen access with a narrow focus on school leavers. Learner journeys are not linear. The traditiona­l pathway from school straight into a four year full-time degree does not work for everyone.

It follows that we need to support alternativ­e routes into and through higher education, routes which allow students the flexibilit­y to study in a manner that suits them and their

circumstan­ces. Part-time provision does that, but in focusing only on fulltime students the review, like many other reports, falls short.

Of course, the evidence shows that part-time students behave differentl­y when it comes to student finance. We know that from how they have reacted to increased fees in England, where an aversion to taking on increased debt has contribute­d to a 61 per cent collapse in first year parttime undergradu­ates since 2008/09.

But excluding part-time students from proposals around maintenanc­e support is a different scenario. Fees always need to be paid, whether by the state or the individual.

The requiremen­t for maintenanc­e support depends on a student’s individual circumstan­ces. Some will conclude that they need it and some won’t, perhaps calculatin­g that they can earn enough to see them through. But to exclude part-time students, based solely on the mode of study that works for them, denies them even the option of that support.

Studies have shown that in our increasing­ly dynamic economy, we won’t have enough school leavers to fill the anticipate­d jobs of the future. Scotland needs people to have the option to upskill and retrain in order to change jobs and careers.

For most people in work, that means part-time study. Access to higher education throughout our working lives is not a luxury, it is an economic necessity.

It falls to the Scottish Government to decide how or whether to proceed with the review’s recommenda­tions. I hope that, with the principles of fairness, parity and clarity in mind, ministers will conclude that a broader, more inclusive approach – one which acknowledg­es that mode of study is not an acceptable means by which to exclude students from support – is both economical­ly sensible and socially just. Susan Stewart is director of the Open University in Scotland. This piece originally appeared on Wonkhe.com.

 ?? JOIN THE DEBATE www.scotsman.com ??
JOIN THE DEBATE www.scotsman.com

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom