Should employers pay more towards the cost of Higher Education?

Shortly before £1,000 tuition fees were first introduced in 1998, a landmark report by Sir Ron Dearing had pointed out that employers were also “major beneficiaries of higher education through the skills which those with higher education qualifications bring to the organisations which employ them.”This led Dearing to recommend that government should “seek an enhanced contribution” from employers towards the cost of Higher Education, or HE. Almost three decades later, these ‘enhanced contributions’ have not materialised, even though tuition fees for students have risen from £1,000 to £9,535.A new report by Professor Dave Phoenix, Vice-Chancellor of London South Bank University, which was published in April by the Higher Education Policy Institute, says it is time to reopen the conversation about employers helping meet the costs of HE.So, what exactly has Professor Phoenix proposed? Is it fair to ask employers to pay more towards the cost of HE or are they already making a big enough contribution? And how likely is it that employers will be able to afford extra contributions when faced with so many other financial pressures?I’m delighted to be joined by Dave Phoenix to discuss his new report, and we are also joined by Johnny Rich, Chief Executive of the Engineering Professors’ Council, who has previously written about this fascinating and controversial topic.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

No-one is surprised when a newly elected government decides to create new initiatives and new organisations to signify a change in direction and a break from the past.Skills England, a new agency within the Department for Education, was announced by Prime Minister Keir Starmer just after last year’s General Election, along with his observation that “our skills system is in a mess”.But since that announcement, Skills England has not had an easy ride, with some observers describing it as a power grab that lacks clarity and clout, while others have questioned whether we needed Skills England in the first place.So, why has the government created Skills England? What challenges is Skills England likely to face inside and outside government? And will Skills England, as the Prime Minister promised, transform our approach to meeting skills needs over the coming decades, or will it end up causing more problems than it solves?My guests are Kirstie Donnelly MBE, Chief Executive at the City & Guilds Group, and Rob Nitsch, Chief Executive at the Federation of Awarding Bodies.DOWNLOAD MY REPORT ON SKILLS ENGLAND HERE: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2025/03/31/skills-england-will-be-in-a-battle-for-relevance-from-day-one/CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

The Curriculum and Assessment Review, which is being chaired by Professor Becky Francis, was commissioned by the Department for Education last summer and will not conclude its work until this autumn.Even so, the Review has attracted so much interest from schools, colleges, teachers, leaders and parents that the interim report from the Review, published at the end of March, was an important and high-profile milestone.So what problems in primary and secondary education has the Review identified in its interim report? Which aspects of our curriculum and assessment system does the Review think are worth protecting, and which aspects need to be reformed? And how easy will it be for the Review to come up with solutions that are widely supported and improve outcomes for children and young people?My guests are Mary Myatt, an education adviser, writer and speaker, and Dale Bassett, the director of assessment at United Learning, a group of over 100 schools.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

Those who work in and around the Higher Education, or HE sector, have been having a rough time if recent media headlines are anything to go by.Since the turn of the year, there has been what’s felt like a constant stream of stories about universities making redundancies, cutting costs and scaling back their operations in an attempt to make themselves more financially sustainable.But despite all the gloom, one person is certainly not giving up on the HE sector. David Willetts was minister for Universities and Science from 2010 to 2014 and is now President of the Resolution Foundation and a member of the House of Lords.David recently published a report for the Kings College London Policy Institute called ‘Are universities worth it’. So, to hear his case for why supporting universities is a good thing, and why he disagrees with many of the criticisms aimed at universities, I’m delighted to be joined by David in this episode to discuss his new report.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

Seeing as the government is clearly short of spare cash, you would have thought the Department for Education investing in a new national programme to improve pupils’ outcomes would be well received.The Government recently announced over £30 million for a pilot of free breakfast clubs in 750 primary schools starting in April 2025 in advance of an expected national rollout of breakfast clubs in all primary schools next year.But far from generating positive headlines, the breakfast club pilot scheme has been dogged by reports of schools pulling out or potentially being left worse off as a result of taking part in the pilot. So why has this new scheme been met with such scepticism? What obstacles could primary schools face when setting up new breakfast clubs or expanding existing ones? And does everyone agree on what problems a national rollout of breakfast clubs is supposed to solve?My guests are Rebecca Paddock, an Executive Headteacher at Hoyland Common Academy Trust, and Anna McShane, director of the New Britain Project – an independent progressive think tank.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

Given the endless debates and disagreements about Ofsted, the school and college inspectorate in England, Ofsted’s proposed new framework for conducting inspections was never going to go unnoticed when it launched in early February to kick off a 12-week consultation.But far from splitting opinion, a poll by Teacher Tapp of more than 11,000 teachers found that 0% of respondents were ‘very positive’ about Ofsted’s plans, and a mere 6% were ‘somewhat positive’. Meanwhile, a survey by the National Association of Head Teachers found that 92% of school leaders disagreed with the main proposals put forward by Ofsted.So what has Ofsted included in its new inspection framework? Have they learnt the right lessons from the current inspection system? And why does there seem to be such a large gap between the views of Ofsted and those working in the education sector? My guests are Mark Enser, a writer and columnist and also a former teacher and Ofsted inspector, and Julie McCulloch, Senior Director of Strategy, Policy and Professional Development Services at the Association of School & College Leaders.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

Shortly after the General Election in 2024, the newly elected Labour government announced a Children’s Wellbeing Bill – a new piece of legislation that set out a range of policies such as a register of children not in schools, restrictions on branded items in school uniforms and greater powers for Ofsted to tackle illegal schools.However, just before Christmas, the Children’s Wellbeing Bill suddenly morphed into the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill and included a whole host of measures intended to overhaul the way that state schools are managed and supported.So what changes to our state school system have been put forward in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill? Is the Labour government right to question the previous government’s approach to overseeing state schools? And why has this Bill sparked accusations of ‘educational vandalism’ from its critics?  My guests are Freddie Whittaker, the Deputy editor at Schools Week, and Leora Cruddas, Chief Executive of the Confederation of School Trusts.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

Just before the end of 2024, the Government announced the outcome of their review of Level 3 vocational and technical qualifications, which are offered to 16 to 19-year-olds along with A-levels, apprenticeships and the new T-levels.The review confirmed that many vocational and technical qualifications that were going to have their funding removed will in fact continue to be funded. Well, at least until 2026. Or maybe 2027. It depends. And lots of qualifications will be defunded in any case.Regardless, the conclusion of the review provided some welcome relief and certainty for schools and colleges. Well, maybe a bit of certainty, for a couple of years, possibly less.So what exactly did this Review say about vocational and technical qualifications? Has the decision to fund many existing qualifications for just one or two years created a more stable or unstable system? And will we be back here in a couple of years’ time having the same conversation about qualification reform all over again?My guests are Tom Middlehurst, Deputy Director of Policy at the Association of School and College Leaders, and James Kewin, Deputy Chief Executive at the Sixth Form Colleges' Association.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

Happy New Year and welcome back to Inside Your Ed.Regular listeners will know that this podcast usually focuses on the latest education news in England, but for my first episode of 2025 we are taking a quick trip over the Atlantic because, as you may have noticed, Donald Trump will start his second term as President of the United States on January 20th.So what plans does President-elect Trump have for K-12 education, from Kindergarten at age 5 up to 12th grade at age 18? Should colleges and universities in the US be worried about what may lie in store for them? And, most importantly for us on this side of the Atlantic, could Trump’s plans for education in the US have a knock-on effect on education debates and policies in England?I’m delighted to be joined today by Dr Rick Hess, who is an American educator, political scientist, and author. He is currently a Senior Fellow and Director of Education Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, and his work has been widely published in academic journals as well as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Education Week and Education Next.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X

“Labour will establish a youth guarantee of access to training, an apprenticeship, or support to find work for all 18- to 21-year-olds, to bring down the number of young people who are not learning or earning.”So said the Labour Party election manifesto in June 2024. Fast forward to the end of 2024, and the Labour Government confirmed in its Get Britain Working report that a Youth Guarantee is now up and running.However, the same report admitted that at the moment, the Youth Guarantee is in fact just a collection of existing provision and entitlements for young people, and it does not offer any new national programmes or initiatives.So is the Government’s Youth Guarantee for 18 to 21-year-olds on the right or wrong track? Would this sort of Guarantee actually reach the young people who need it the most? And what could a more ambitious Youth Guarantee look like in 2025 and beyond? My guests are Barry Fletcher, Chief Executive at the Youth Futures Foundation, and Naomi Clayton, Director of Policy and Research at the Learning and Work Institute.CLICK HERE TO BROWSE OUR PODCAST BACK CATALOGUEFOLLOW US ON TWITTER / X