Universities

Today’s ONS release will make pretty grim reading for students and recent graduates. It shows that the unemployment rate among recent graduates — those who graduated in the last six years — stands at 9.1 per cent, higher than the overall unemployment rate of 8.4 per cent. It’s even worse for those who graduated in the last two years — the unemployment rate among them is 18.9 per cent, up from 10 per cent before the recession. But there’s an even more worrying trend among those recent graduates who do find employment. In 2001, three-quarters of them were in ‘higher skill’ jobs — those requiring more than GCSEs. Now, less than two-thirds of them are: So what does this mean?

Siphoning the contents of two brains through one mouth and on to a single page will generally produce eclectic results. And that's certainly the case with David Willetts' interview with the Times (£) this morning. The universities minister manages to range across subjects that include Robert Falcon Scott, climate change, the Falklands and universities access. He even reheats one of his old theories about Feminism and social mobility in a way that (coupled with the interview's headline: ‘Moving on and up is very hard — and feminism is partly to blame’) makes it sound far more provocative than I think it's meant to be, and much weaker for it.

Michael Gove has said that ‘nothing is off the table’ when it comes to dealing with the revelations in today’s Telegraph that a chief examiner of the Welsh examination board, WJEC, steered teachers attending his board’s fee-paying advice session so flagrantly in the direction of what was likely to feature in the next examination, it amounted, as the man said, to ‘cheating’. The irony of the thing is that those teachers who did not pay £230 a session for his assistance are likely to do much better by their pupils: the obliging examiner was telling the teachers about the cycle of examination questions — in other words, which bit of the syllabus was not going to feature in the questions.

Fraser’s already commented on the welfare angle of Ed Miliband’s keynote speech to the Labour party; the welfare proposals are part of a broad analytical sweep that can be reduced to the catchphrase, ‘the something for something society’. Miliband’s vision of society will reward those who work and abide by the rules at the expense of those who do not – those who loot, who fiddle expenses, those who pursue short-termism in business. According to the Guardian, he will also emphasise the importance of social mobility and equality. To that end, he will encourage universities to take more people from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Coffee House has already touched on David Willetts’ interview with the Times (£), highlighting his view that the 50p tax rate is important to prove that "we’re all in this together". Willetts does not limit his words to the top rate of tax. In addition to his universities brief, he discusses equal pay issues, social reform and the recent riots. Willetts confesses to being a “muser”, never happier than when applying his renowned brain to the broad sweep of government policy. “I wouldn’t be able to function properly as a politician unless I was able to range across some of these wider issues. It just wouldn’t be worth it,” he says.

The Gap Year has been declared dead. It’s A-levels day today, and the annual scramble for university places has been intensified ahead of next year’s tuition fees rise. According to this morning’s Times (£), the last count had 669,956 pupils sprinting after 470,000 vacancies. An estimated 50,000 students with adequate grades will not enter higher education this year as many universities have raised entry requirements to manage increased demand. This means that competition during clearance will be even more stiff than usual, particularly as universities will offer many fewer clearing places according to various surveys. Needless to say, UCAS’ website appears to have collapsed under the weight of this unparalleled interest.

When I visited the US recently, I got talking to some American teenagers about university. They (like me) had just left school and were trying to decide where to go next. I explained that in the UK, the Government's plan to raise tuition fees to £9,000 a year had led to riots. Their jaws dropped. They couldn't understand what the fuss was about. In the US, fees can reach $40 000 a year for the private Ivy League colleges. The reaction in the UK seemed ridiculous to them. They felt we should be grateful that we didn't have to pay $40,000. [Although, to be fair, some state universities only charge around $5000].

Until now, the debate over universities has dwelt inevitably on how much students need to stump up in tuition fees. With the release of today's White Paper, the government will hope that the emphasis shifts to what students receive in return for that cash. Basically, it is all about fixing a subverted market by making it more transparent. With universities good, bad and indifferent rushing to charge the maximum possible amount for fees, the idea is that forcing them to release more information about their courses — about teaching standards, job prospects and the like — will help students decide which are offering value-for-money. Who knows? It might even shame one or two institutions into lowering their asking prices.

One new institution does not a revolution make. But there's still something a little revolutionary about the New College of the Humanities that is set to open, in London, in September 2012. Perhaps it's the idea behind it: a private university that charges fees of £18,000 a year (with bursaries available to those who can't afford that). Or perhaps it's the names who are fronting it: AC Grayling, Richard Dawkins, Niall Ferguson, etc. They will, apparently, be conducting tutorials themselves. The public academics, it seems, are pitching their tents on the private sector. Mary Beard lists some reasons no to get too excited here. This is, she says, little more than a US-style liberal arts college that won't offer science courses or post-graduate qualifications.

What a knotty problem David Willetts has created for himself today. Speaking to the Guardian this morning, he floated an idea to help the universities make a bit of cash: they could, he suggested, sell extra places to students who were prepared to pay exaggerated fees up front. This isn't yet government policy, and the students needn't do the paying themselves (they could be sponsored by charities or employers, for instance), but the Guardian pounced nevertheless. "Extra places at university for rich students," blared its front page headline. Not a good look for the coalition, at a time when access to university is such a general concern. Not a good look for David Willetts, who might have avoided the pitfall before him.