IPPN

Published: 20 March 2009

Source: independent.ie

By Richard Layte, Selina McCoy and Philip J O'Connell

Friday March 20 2009

THE debate on third-level fees has emerged again. Much of the discussion so far has focussed on the impact of fees on the ability of low-income students to enter third-level education.

This is certainly an important issue, but it ignores several wider problems faced by students from lower-income backgrounds and the absence of policies to address these.

First, participation rates of academically-able students from low-income families would have risen much more in the 1990s were fees the only entry deterrent.

ESRI research shows that since children from lower-income families are much less likely than their middle-class counterparts to complete second-level education, many are simply not in a position to apply for college.

Furthermore, Irish and US research suggests investment in primary education can be more effective at getting poorer students into third-level education than eliminating fees.

Despite this, OECD data shows Irish government spending on primary and secondary education in Ireland continues to be relatively low.

Burden

Second, since fees represent a small part of the financial burden of college students, what really matters for poorer students is the value of means-tested maintenance grants.

However, the proportion of young people receiving these supports has decreased and their relative value has deteriorated over time.

This has affected participation levels in certain groups, such as students whose parents work in personal services, sales and clerical jobs. These groups are at the margin of income thresholds in relation to fee exemptions, suggesting that a tapering of fee payments rather than a single threshold could address this issue.

The relative value of grant payments has also deteriorated compared, for example, to social welfare unemployment assistance, so students are more likely to have to borrow to support themselves.

Debt is a concern to any prospective student and international research shows that working-class individuals are more averse to debt because of the greater uncertainties and risks that they face.

So even if low-income students are eligible for grants, the low level of support creates a serious disincentive to entering college.

Third, research shows that young people from working-class backgrounds are far more likely to drop out of college, partly because of financial constraints, partly through academic difficulties and partly because of the general difficulty and loneliness of the whole experience. To overcome this, policy needs to provide appropriate supports to help their transition into this new, and sometimes alien, environment.

In sum, if the objective is to increase participation by low-income students, college fees are a minor part of the story.

In this context, Minister Batt O'Keeffe's appointment of an expert group to develop a new national strategy on higher education represents an opportunity to plan the scale and shape of higher education over the next decade and beyond.

The review should be solidly based on the analysis of evidence relating to the current performance of the system, comparisons of Ireland's higher education system with those of other relevant countries, and how the system should seek to meet future challenges, taking on board the changes proposed in other countries.

The expert group can build on the OECD's Review of Higher Education in Ireland, published in 2004.

Among other recommendations, it suggested further investment in pre-school and primary education, improved guidance and counselling and financial incentives to encourage colleges to recruit and retain low-income students.

Given funding constraints, and recognising the large personal gains for beneficiaries of higher education, it also identified fees as one source of additional funds.

The fees debate needs to be set in this wider context.

Enrolments

A recent study published by 'Universities UK' showed that the introduction of variable top-up fees was followed by a 9pc increase in applicants for undergraduate places, a 4pc fall in UK-domiciled enrolments, and no significant change in the social class composition of the student intake in 2006/07.

While it is, perhaps, too early to judge the long-run impact of this change, the issue needs to be explored more fully.

What is the appropriate balance between fees and direct income from government, particularly when government finances are under severe pressure? In looking at the possible re-introduction of fees, we need to recognise that fees would not represent a serious barrier if an adequate grants system were developed with a fair and rigorous system of means testing.

Richard Layte and Philip O'Connell are Research Professors and Selina McCoy is a Senior Research Officer at the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI)

- Richard Layte, Selina McCoy and Philip J O'Connell