Proceeding contribution from Rob Wilson (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 21 May 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Further Education and Training Bill [Lords].
Further Education and Training Bill [Lords]
That is not the main thrust of my argument. As I continue my speech, my direction will become much clearer. Will the proposal be worth while? Will the Government achieve the growth in the number of students taking foundation degrees as a result? We heard from the Secretary of State this afternoon that the Government hope for an increase to 100,000 by 2010. I am not sure that that will be achievable. Foundation degrees are a new type of qualification, and were introduced only in 2001. Since then, they have begun to build a reputation with students and employers, and the number taking them has increased from about 4,000 to nearly 60,000 in the past academic year. One of the reasons that students have chosen to study this new qualification is that universities have awarded them. They are not full degrees. They are often taught in further education colleges that provide them on behalf of the university, which remains responsible for their content and quality. They were intended as a ““stepping stone”” qualification. As such, they acted as a bridge between further and higher education for people who might not otherwise have had the confidence to consider going to university. University heads describe foundation degrees as a valuable tool in efforts to widen participation and, clearly, they are. The Higher Education Funding Council did an analysis of entrants to foundation degrees and found that most were female, most were over 21 when they started their degrees and were more likely to come from lower socio-economic backgrounds, and the take-up among ethnic minority groups was much higher. They have been a resounding success in attracting hard-to-reach socio-economic groups. The old saying, ““If it ain’t broke, why fix it?”” applies particularly in this case. Foundation degrees have also provided a catalyst for extensive collaboration between universities and colleges, creating pathways for learners to progress from one course to another. They work—59 per cent. of foundation degree graduates go on to further study, often at honours degree level, and often combined with work. The measures in the Bill risk breaking up those partnerships and disrupting the progression pathways for students. What incentive will universities have to collaborate with colleges, when those colleges are their direct competitors? Will students want to study degrees awarded by further education colleges? I have my doubts. I followed closely the debate on the Bill in the other place, and I am grateful that Lord Adonis has listened to some of the concerns that have been expressed about this part of the Bill. The provision that the Privy Council can grant FE colleges foundation degree-awarding powers for an initial six-year probationary period, without the right to authorise other institutions to deliver the degrees, is a big improvement, which I welcome. After those six years, however, an FE college can apply for full powers, which allow a college unlimited ability to authorise other providers to award its foundation degrees. The Minister can deny or confirm that in summing up later. I also thank Lord Adonis for some of the amendments that he has accepted to the draft criteria for foundation degree-awarding powers, which were helpful in getting consensus. Despite all that, I remain concerned by the prospect of FE colleges franchising foundation degrees, even after the probationary six-year period. There is a risk to quality, as the QAA has recognised. FE colleges will be taking on responsibility for the quality and standards of their own foundation degrees for the first time. That is a big change, which has lacked consultation. The Government risk producing the opposite effect to the one that they intend: instead of encouraging more people to study for foundation degrees, they may end up reducing the opportunities and the incentives to choose that qualification. If we are to go ahead and give colleges degree-awarding powers, we will need to be sure that they can offer the same quality that our universities currently guarantee. Therefore, colleges must be subject to the same arrangements that ensure that our universities maintain high standards. If that does not happen, the foundation degree, despite its early success, will suffer from accusations that it is ““only an FE qualification””, and by extension the degree brand itself will be damaged.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 460 c1045-6
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Costs Bureaucracy Devolution Apprentices Class sizes Adult education Finance Graduates Governing bodies Further education Higher education Learning and Skills Council for England Educational institutions Qualifications National Assembly for Wales Managers Lifelong education Standards Wales Teachers Special educational needs Training Young people Small businesses Skilled workers Vocational education Termination of employment Sixth form education Skills in the UK Independent Review Basic skills Foundation degrees Academies
- Legislation
- Further Education and Training Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-06-22 10:58:27 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398449
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398449
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398449