Tag: Scotland

  • Scotland’s “sleeping giant” looks to international recruitment

    Scotland’s “sleeping giant” looks to international recruitment

    Although the history of the institution dates back over 100 years, it only achieved degree-awarding powers last year. Specialising in agriculture and life sciences, SRUC hopes to become an increasingly attractive choice for international students.

    “For many years, SRUC’s been a sleeping giant,” SRUC’s principal and chief executive Wayne Powell told The PIE News. “Now we’ve awoken and we can see huge amount of potential in what we can offer here in Scotland.”

    Offering international masters programs including international food and agriculture business, business consultancy and project management, Powell said the institution is “creating a future which is much more aligned to what students for the future will want to do” – with international recruitment efforts largely looking to students from India, Pakistan, Nigeria and other parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

    With six campuses located around Scotland, SRUC’s Edinburgh campus launched a £1.8 million vertical farming innovation centre in January, making it the first Scottish higher education institution in Scotland to create a commercial-sized vertical farm to help address global and local food production challenges.

    “Some of the things that we work on are at the nexus of the most important challenges facing society. So how do we feed a growing world?” explained Powell. “How do we support environmental sustainability?”

    He continued: “We are interested in attracting students that have an identity and an interest in sustainability and how the sustainability will play out over their lifetimes”.

    But while sustainability is undeniably a focus for the institution, Powell stressed that prospective students are also being enticed by curriculums focussing on business – especially as SRUC runs its own “successful consultancy business”.

    Now we’ve awoken and we can see huge amount of potential in what we can offer here in Scotland
    Wayne Powell, SRUC

    Learning about international agriculture, food and business in tandem is also a focus for programs, “particularly the potential for acquiring those business skills as part of a green economy”, Powell said.

    “And our location in Edinburgh [creates] a fantastic opportunity to come and live and work and study in a great city,” he added.

    “There’s something here which is going to be attractive and we’re keen to market that in the right way and creating the first cohort of students coming into something really special.”

    It comes as Scotland has taken steps to position itself as an attractive destination for international students. In late January, the country’s universities were encouraged to take “collective action” to promote Scotland as a study destination.

    In the same week, Scotland’s first minister John Swinney made the case for a bespoke visa for skilled international students graduating from the country’s colleges and universities. However, it is understood that the UK government has no plans to make good on these ambitions.

    Source link

  • Podcast: Scotland, Secret life of Students

    Podcast: Scotland, Secret life of Students

    This week on the podcast – recorded live at our Secret Life of Students event in London – we get across the financial crisis facing universities in Scotland. Can the SNP hold its “free education” line forever?

    Plus there’s clips, highlights and reflections from our Secret life of Students event in London – where we’ve been discussing student health, what students learn, the time crunch that prevents meaningful engagement and what universities can do to “make the space” to innovate in the student interest.

    With Jimena Alamo, President at University of Bath Students’ Union, Mark Peace, Professor of Innovation in Education at King’s College London, Debbie McVitty, Editor at Wonkhe and presented by Jim Dickinson, Associate Editor at Wonkhe.

    Additional £10m funding from the Scottish Government

    Breaking out of Borgentown – the case for hope in higher education

    You can’t change the design of a plane while it’s in flight

    The SU University of Bath – Together we shape tomorrow

    Source link

  • New legislation in Scotland increases the SFC’s powers, but only up to a point

    New legislation in Scotland increases the SFC’s powers, but only up to a point

    Post-school reform in Scotland continues to chug along, following last month’s announcement of the preferred future shape of the funding body landscape.

    Today sees the legislation that will enact the changes introduced in Holyrood: the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill.

    We’ve been over how responsibilities for further education student support and apprenticeships and skills funding will shift around, and the bill also contains expected changes to the governance arrangements of the Scottish Funding Council (SFC), as well as some technical changes relating to fees and private provision.

    But what’s emerged as perhaps the more pressing question for the higher education sector is how the legislation will change SFC responsibilities and powers, as these apply to its work with universities. The legislation sets out the route the Scottish government will take here, and it’s a fairly balanced one – we are still a long way from an England-style “boots on the ground” regulatory environment, likely to the relief of many.

    Tell us about your finances

    Much of what the bill will do legislatively is through modifications to the Further and Higher Education (Scotland) Act 2005. Section 22(4) of this gives the SFC various powers to “pull” information from universities – or strictly, from their governing bodies – but only where the funder knows that the information exists, or may exist.

    The new legislation aims to create a landscape in which post-16 education bodies must “proactively notify SFC of certain developments of which the SFC might otherwise be unaware” in what the bill’s policy memorandum characterises as a “push” of information – a responsibility to notify the funding council of things it would not have known otherwise. Those who are more used to other UK systems will probably be thinking of “reportable events”.

    It’s suggested that notifications would likely be sought in the following kinds of situation:

    • Where a university is planning voluntary or compulsory severance (so no daily refreshing of the QMUL UCU cuts tracker for the SFC)
    • Where a university has reached a certain threshold in a rapidly worsening financial viability situation
    • A major data breach, such as resulting from a cyberattack.

    But exactly how this will work is not specified on the face of the legislation – it would be determined by ministers via the laying of regulations, with consultation and an affirmative procedure in the Scottish Parliament, “given that they could potentially place significant obligations on post-16 education bodies.” But this does mean that there is a lack of clarity on exactly what the bill is going to mandate.

    Part of the rationale for beefing up the legislation from what was previously anticipated (and let’s be honest, what was in the consultation) seems to be that ministers have not received enough clarity about the financial challenges being faced by certain universities and colleges. When the policy memorandum notes that “there can be challenges for SFC in getting information from post-16 education bodies about their financial sustainability,” you feel that really the issue is about ministerial oversight and the sense of having active levers to pull. This is given an explicit tweak elsewhere in the bill (again, quoting the policy memorandum):

    New section 15A(2) allows the Scottish Ministers to seek information and advice from the SFC relating to post-16 education bodies, this could be an individual body or the bodies as a whole. Section 15A(3) requires the SFC to respond to any such request from the Scottish Ministers and the SFC may also offer information proactively when it considers it appropriate to do so. This is necessary because unforeseen circumstances may arise of which the Scottish Ministers might otherwise be unaware (and so would not know to enquire).

    So what are you going to do about it?

    Also in the 2005 Act is provision for the SFC to “secure the promotion or carrying out of studies designed to improve economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the management or operations of any fundable body” – but no such power exists where the matters are not related to financial support.

    The new legislation would amend this, with the intention of making the SFC able to “address a broader range of matters to assist with performance improvement.” So in scope for an efficiency study would now be the needs and interests of learners:

    The policy intention is that the SFC could, particularly where notified of certain adverse circumstances (such as course closures), instigate studies or reviews of the impact on students and learners so that assistance could be provided to ensure they are not negatively impacted. For example, if a college was heading towards needing to close courses before students could complete them, the SFC could help to make arrangements for the students to continue their education at different colleges.

    Bringing the student interest in scope sounds sensible in theory, but there remains the question of what changes on the ground, beyond the production of a study. The 2005 Act allows the SFC to attend and speak to an institution’s governing body – the new section 15(4) of this bill will extend this to the issuing of a set of written recommendations.

    So the SFC will be able to recommend setting specific improvement targets, or requiring the development of an improvement plan. And it will now even be able to publish these, “where there is wider interest amongst institutions, or the public, in the recommendations and they are not sensitive.” But it won’t be obliged to.

    And what if its recommendations are ignored?

    As with the SFC’s right to address meetings, already provided for in section 16 of the 2005 Act, there is no corresponding duty on the fundable body to do anything in response to the recommendations. However, as a matter of good governance and practice, the Scottish Government would expect the fundable body to consider them appropriately.

    But beyond these recommendations, in the legislation as it stands there would be proper statutory powers for the SFC to influence educational institutions’ behaviour, through the issuing of guidance, which currently is “purely administrative” (though presumably always very welcome). The Tertiary Education and Training Bill will change this, so that institutions must have regard to the guidance, in the carrying out of their funded activities (note that “have regard to” is quite woolly language – something that the Office for Students has exploited frequently within the way HERA was drafted). But the SFC will have to consult both ministers and institutions in issuing guidance.

    It could have been otherwise

    Various alternative approaches were considered and rejected. The use of codes of conduct (“for example to address concerns around breaches of fair work conditions”) was felt to potentially lead to complex interactions with other requirements, and diminish autonomy. Plus there would have been a need for “appropriate enforcement mechanisms,” which is a whole other question.

    More powers of audit and investigation were also considered and not taken forward, which would have been a move towards a “more interventionist SFC.” Likewise for stronger enforcement and intervention action, including serving enforcement notices or the removing, suspending, or appointing of officers or governing body members.

    But this would have been “a fundamental change to SFC’s role which requires more careful consideration” – and would have gone way beyond what was originally consulted on.

    There’s still a long way to go here – Universities Scotland is already noting the “new, very broadly defined provisions regarding the monitoring of the financial sustainability of institutions,” and raising concerns that too much change in the relationship between the SFC and universities (or universities and the Scottish government) could jeopardise the classification of universities in the Office for National Statistics classification.

    The Scottish government seems to be aware of this particular risk – but there are certainly MSPs keen for the SFC to become more “interventionist”, and the legislation now faces a complicated passage through a Parliament in which the SNP does not hold a majority. The ministerial statement to Holyrood launching the bill saw Ross Greer of the Scottish Greens concerned about whether the SFC would have the ability to intervene in matters relating to fair work – higher education minister Graeme Dey said he would be happy to discuss the issue further.

    For now the legislation aims at a delicate balancing act between juicing up the SFC’s role and preserving universities’ autonomy. The next question is whether this persists in the face of deeper scrutiny and parliamentary compromises.

    Source link

  • Scotland eyes new graduate visa for international students

    Scotland eyes new graduate visa for international students

    Speaking at an event in Glasgow this week, John Swinney blasted the UK’s “disastrous” decision to leave the European Union, but suggested a new migration route specifically for students who choose to study in Scotland.

    “Twenty years ago, the Scottish and UK governments worked together to launch a tailored migration route designed to enable international students to stay in Scotland after they graduated,” he said. “I see no reason why this cannot happen again.”

    Under the plans, designed to keep highly skilled graduates in the country, the Scottish Graduate Visa would be linked to a Scottish tax code and be issued on the understanding that recipients would live and work in Scotland. 

    But despite Swinney’s assurances that he was “ready to work with” Downing Street on making the proposal a reality, his idea already appears to have been rebuffed by the UK government.

    A government spokesperson quoted by The Evening Standard indicated that there were “no plans” for a new Scottish visa, citing the UK’s Graduate Route already in place that allows international students to stay in the country for up to two years after they graduate.

    In his speech, Swinney said a new Scottish Graduate Visa would benefit not only the country’s institutions but its economy after international students’ graduation, highlighting that this group contributes £4.75 billion a year.

    “In small but important ways, it would make our economy more robust, and our public services more sustainable. It would play a part in making our communities more prosperous,” he said.

    In small but important ways, it would make our economy more robust, and our public services more sustainable
    John Swinney, Scottish first minister

    Pointing out that Scotland’s projected population is expected to dip for the next two generations, Universities Scotland convener Paul Grice highlighted the benefits a Scottish Graduate Visa could bring the country and said he hoped the proposal would “progress in a meaningful way”.

    “It would be enormously helpful if a policy space could be created between governments to consider greater regional variation of migration within an overall UK framework,” he said.

    “Inward migration will be essential to Scotland’s future and there is a really positive opportunity for Scotland’s universities, as magnets for the attraction and retention of highly-skilled people, to help deliver this as a win-win for the sector and Scotland as a whole. There is a lot to like in this outline proposal.”

    Although it does not appear to welcome the idea of a Scottish Graduate Visa for the time being, the UK government seems to be embracing international students.

    This week, education secretary Bridget Phillipson recorded a video message to international students in the UK promoting the country’s post-graduation work opportunities.

    Source link

  • A new funding body landscape emerges in Scotland

    A new funding body landscape emerges in Scotland

    Last June the Scottish government set out two proposals for changing up the funding bodies in post-compulsory education, following James Withers’ damning indictment of a “lack of cohesive approach, common purpose, or strategic narrative” in how Scotland’s skills system was organised.

    There were two options on the table, and the less drastic reshuffle has prevailed following consultation: the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) will take on all the funding responsibilities from Skills Development Scotland (SDS), which currently handles apprenticeships and training. And the Student Awards Agency Scotland (SAAS) will take further education student support off SFC’s hands, rather than being dissolved as per the other consultation option.

    We’ll be left with one funder – SFC – and one student support distributor – SAAS. SDS will still exist, retaining its careers information and guidance roles. It all sounds fairly coherent, when put like that, though open to criticism that it is simply a rejiggling of the funding system component parts (Annex B to the business case presents an exhaustive list of all the possible permutations of changes to the landscape, which some poor civil servant had to go through). Certainly from what we’ve seen, many consultation responses stressed that when it came to funding, the burning question is “how much” rather than “who”.

    Whether student support responsibilities stayed with SAAS or became a department of SFC was probably at the end of the day a somewhat moot point, and the Scottish government doesn’t bother to give any particular justification for the decision, besides it being slightly preferred by consultation respondees (44 per cent to 35 per cent). It would likely have been a whole heap of organisational work for little strategic reward.

    But let’s not underestimate the overall change that’s going to take place. We’ve now got post-school funding responsibilities all in one place within the SFC, including apprenticeships and other training – a landscape-wide role for new chief executive Francesca Osowska (who starts this week) to get thinking about. It’s a similar tertiary lens to Medr in Wales, and the kind of thing that some commentators on the English system would bite your hand off for. That said, there’s no indication that the Scottish government will think about giving the SFC freer rein to assign funding across the skills system as it sees fit – we’ll still be puzzling over itemised budgets each December covering exactly how much will be spent where, for the foreseeable future.

    Legislation to enact the changes will now arrive “in the coming weeks”, with a view to it all being in place by autumn 2026. This may prove ambitious given that there are elections in Holyrood in the interim.

    Anyone for new powers?

    The consultation also asked for feedback on changes to SFC governance (all largely welcomed by respondents), as well as on “enhanced functions” for the funding council. This wasn’t a set of proposals, but more along the lines of a call for ideas, on issues like the information that those funded need to return to SFC, or the strengthening of data collection processes (respondents unsurprisingly were pro-strengthening rather than anti-strengthening).

    But it’s worth thinking about what’s changed since the consultation was launched. The financial situation at various Scottish universities has worsened significantly (meanwhile in England the sector has been hammering its regulator for not having collected more timely financial data). Higher education minister Graeme Dey has explicitly linked possible new powers with the SFC – for oversight and intervention – to its ability to respond to university financial crises.

    So in the consultation responses we see “calls for up to date information on the financial sustainability of institutions and skills providers, and the financial health of the skills sector as a whole” – moves here would seem to chime with ministerial thinking. On the question of new powers of intervention, there’s likely to be much more pushback:

    A number of fundable education bodies, individuals and others […] did not see any need for additional powers for SFC. These respondents suggested that SFC had all of the powers required for their current role, and that proposed reforms should be implemented before reviewing the need for new powers. This was also linked to a view that implementation of reforms should initially focus on policy and support.

    Today’s announcement on the preferred rearrangement of funding bodies is not accompanied by any indication of where government policy is going on powers and duties for the SFC – this will come with the legislation, and then almost certainly be the subject of parliamentary horse-trading during the bill’s passage through Holyrood.

    Source link