As the independent regulator, it is the role of the Office for Students to monitor and assess registered providers’ compliance with all of its conditions of registration, including those relating to freedom of speech and academic freedom, and to take regulatory action where they have been breached. This includes theological colleges.

All higher education (HE) providers have longstanding duties to secure freedom of speech and academic freedom within the law which they must comply with. My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Education will shortly be making regulations to commence the expanded duties on HE providers in the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023. This will include new duties to promote freedom of speech and academic freedom, to put in place a free speech code of practice and a ban on non-disclosure agreements.

With the greatest respect to the noble Lord, I really do not follow the logic of how the EBacc is damaging the flow to our universities. Humanities and modern foreign languages are absolutely central and at the heart of the EBacc, but we are building on that with our higher technical qualifications and T-levels in areas such art and design, which will be introduced this year. I remind the House that bursaries and scholarships for, say, modern foreign language teachers are at the same level as for physics teachers.

Private colleges offering higher education degrees can participate in the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) if they meet the eligibility requirements. From the 2019-20 academic year, TEF will be a condition of registration for providers with more than 500 students on higher education courses. Smaller providers, for whom the cost of participation might be disproportionate, may participate on a voluntary basis if they meet the eligibility criteria.

The Higher Education Degree Datacheck (HEDD) system represents 103 universities. It is run by Prospects, the commercial branch of the Higher Education Careers Service Unit – an agency of sector bodies Universities UK and Guild HE.

The department has not evaluated the HEDD system.

All higher education providers are autonomous and privately run. This includes Higher Education Funding Council for England funded higher education institutions and alternative providers, which can be designated for student support purposes by the department. At the same time, some privately run institutions may be subject to obligations imposed on public authorities (e.g. the Freedom of Information Act 2000). As a result of the Higher Education and Research Act 2017, the Office for Students will regulate all registered English higher education providers through its regulatory framework, which is currently being consulted on.

It is for individual higher education providers to determine their own enrolment processes and minimum criteria for entry onto their courses. However, the UK Quality Code for Higher Education sets out the expectations that all providers of UK higher education are required to meet. It sets out the following expectations about recruitment, selection and admission to higher education:

“Recruitment, selection, and admission policies and procedures adhere to the principles of fair admission. They are transparent, reliable, valid, inclusive and underpinned by appropriate organisational structures and processes. They support higher education providers in the selection of students who are able to complete their programme.”

Following the passage of the Higher Education and Research Act (HERA), the Office for Students (OfS) will be established formally in January 2018. It will provide, for the first time, a single regulator for higher education (HE) providers regardless of how they are funded. The OfS will have powers to assess the quality of, and standards applied to, all English HE provision. Quality will be built into every stage of the new regulatory system, the details of which are currently being consulted on. There will continue to be tough and rigorous tests for providers who want to enter the system and enable students from all backgrounds to receive funding.

Under the OfS, all HE providers in receipt of public funding will have to demonstrate their commitment to widening participation. They will be required to have either an access and participation plan approved by the OfS (for those in the “Approved (fee cap)” category of registration wishing to charge higher level tuition fees), or an access and participation statement (for those in the “Approved (fee cap)” category only charging fees at the basic level).

Degree awarding bodies are ultimately responsible for the academic standards of any awards granted in their name and the quality of learning opportunities, regardless of where these are delivered or who provides them.

In addition, all designated Alternative Providers are currently subject to a rigorous, risk-based approach to quality assurance in line with the UK Quality Code for Higher Education, which applies across all UK providers of Higher Education (HE). Where an Alternative Provider is delivering validated HE provision, the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) will consider how these collaborative working arrangements are effectively managed.

A successful Higher Education Review (Alternative Providers) by the QAA is a pre-requisite for designation for student support for Alternative Providers, which are also expected to undergo annual monitoring visits from QAA.

In October 2017 the National Audit Office published a report concluding progress has been made in strengthening the oversight of the Alternative Provider sector.

All higher education providers are autonomous and privately run. This includes Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) funded higher education institutions and alternative providers, which can be designated for student support purposes by the department. At the same time, some privately run institutions may be subject to obligations imposed on public authorities (e.g. the Freedom of Information Act 2000). As a result of the Higher Education and Research Act 2017, the Office for Students will regulate all registered English higher education providers through its regulatory framework, which is currently being consulted on.

69 concerns have been raised about higher education providers through the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Concerns Scheme since 2014-15. 23 have so far led to full investigations which subsequently required action by the provider (see attached table).

Since 1 August 2016, concerns about publicly funded higher education providers in England are subject to the Unsatisfactory Quality Scheme managed by HEFCE. Therefore, the figures from 2016-17 onwards only relate to Alternative Providers which continue to be covered by QAA’s Concerns Scheme.

Higher education institutions are independent and autonomous. As autonomous organisations, higher education providers are responsible for their own admissions policies and procedures. Decisions on who to admit are a matter for individual institutions, and the Government does not have the right to intervene in these internal processes. Higher education providers are best placed to determine their entry requirements, and to decide who has the ability and the potential to succeed on a particular course.

Providers wishing to charge above the basic fee amount must have an access agreement, agreed by the independent Director for Fair Access, which sets out the measures they will put in place to support access to, and participation in, higher education by disadvantaged students and under-represented groups. The Director for Fair Access issues annual guidance to institutions on strategic priorities for access agreements. The Director for Fair Access must have regard to guidance issued by the Government setting out its expectations on the areas that institutions should focus on. In 2017/18, institutions plan to spend £833 million through their access agreements.

The Higher Education and Research Bill, which is currently undergoing scrutiny in this House, will introduce a single regulatory system administered by a new body, the Office for Students. This will replace the current fragmented, complex and outdated system and will regulate all higher education providers, including private providers, by the same standards and conditions proportionate to their risk. While the Bill progresses through Parliament, we remain committed to strengthening the current alternative provider system.

I note what the noble Lord says but the recruitment practices and academic performance of alternative providers, including available progression rates, are all taken into account by the department and, as he will know, by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. We can and do take action when these fall below acceptable standards. Validation agreements are different for every provider but the degree-awarding body is ultimately responsible for the quality of the learning programme. Under our planned reforms we will give the Office for Students enabling powers to improve validation agreements, including regular monitoring.

It is for individual higher education providers to determine the minimum criteria for entry onto their courses.

However, private providers must meet a number of conditions to gain designation for student support. These include having a successful Quality Assurance Agency Higher Education Review (Alternative Providers), which tests providers’ recruitment, selection and admission policies and procedures, as well as ensuring that all students recruited onto courses designated for student support meet a minimum English Language requirement.

The Department monitors whether providers comply with the conditions of designation to ensure providers are held accountable and to protect the student and public interest. If at any point the Department determines that the conditions have not been met, it could put in place a range of sanctions, including the removal of course designation.

The UK Quality Code, which the Quality Assurance Agency’s Higher Education Review (Alternative Providers) uses to assess private providers, sets out the following expectations about recruitment, selection and admission to higher education:

“Recruitment, selection, and admission policies and procedures adhere to the principles of fair admission. They are transparent, reliable, valid, inclusive and underpinned by appropriate organisational structures and processes. They support higher education providers in the selection of students who are able to complete their programme.”

It is a condition of designation for student support that private providers maintain successful outcomes from these QAA reviews and annual monitoring. QAA's Concerns Scheme investigates specific concerns about the management of academic quality and standards, including recruitment, selection and admissions.

We remain an EU member until the time we complete successful exit negotiations, with all the rights and obligations that derive from this. The UK has, and will continue to have, a world-class education system that attracts students from across the world including the EU.

Higher education institutions have discretion to charge a student who is not eligible for home fee status whatever fee they deem appropriate, including the same fee as they charge students who have home fee status.

The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) allocates funding to HE institutions, to cover some of the teaching costs of students who are eligible for home fees status and studying high cost subjects. The Council monitors the student number data of all institutions, to ensure they receive only the funding to which they are entitled. HEFCE has powers to withhold funding from any institution which has received funding for which it is not eligible.

Student Finance England is responsible for assessing students’ eligibility for financial support. It can only award support to students who satisfy the eligibility criteria in full. The fee a student is paying is not considered in this assessment.

The Tier 4 Register of Sponsors which is available via the link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/register-of-licensed-sponsors-students shows active sponsors.

No information is routinely published regarding sponsors found not to be compliant.

In January 2015 data was published showing Tier 4 sponsors whose status appeared as revoked from 2010 to 2014. This information is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tier-4-sponsors-whose-status-appeared-as-revoked-from-2010-to-2014

Publicly funded higher education providers are currently reviewed by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). These reviews look at the adequacy of a provider’s system to maintain academic standards and ensure quality across all its provision; irrespective of where it is delivered. The reviews check that expectations set out in the UK Quality Code for Higher Education are being met.

In addition, QAA have been leading sector work on how to strengthen the assurance of UK higher education delivered overseas. They have recently published a report detailing

how external quality assurance processes can be adapted to support UK higher education institutions in both maintaining their reputation in delivering high quality education overseas and in growing their provision. The report can be found on the QAA website at

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/publications/information-and-guidance/publication?PubID=2978#.VfKp1fnF98E

This is a matter for UCAS, (University and Colleges Admissions Service) as a body formed by the universities themselves independent from the Government. UCAS have said that the new service will provide extra choice for students and UCAS' rigorous scrutiny of European Universities applying to use the service will ensure they demonstrate that they meet equivalent standards to those in the UK. Many home students already choose to study abroad by applying directly to particular universities.

Data from UCAS for 2014 showed that applications to higher education in England are at an all-time high. Record numbers of students were accepted for entry: for the first time ever over half a million applicants were placed in higher education. The percentage of 18 year olds who were accepted for entry to higher education in England is the highest ever at 30.4%.

The consequences for Scottish universities are matters for the Scottish parliament.

The Government has not conducted a formal assessment of the impact of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs).