not direct, fees were believed to have given encouragement to a. 'consumerist' .... lecturers at the two new universities remarked on the increase in local students, a .... the amount of teaching they will receive and tend to accept what they are given. .... 'It has made me a lot more cynical about students, which is a bad thing.
The effect of tuition fees on students’ demands and expectations: evidence from case studies of four universities
Heather Rolfe1
Discussion Paper No. 190 December 2001
Abstract This paper uses qualitative data from interviews with university lecturers to examine the effect of tuition fees on students’ demands and expectations. Lecturers identified four main changes: a higher proportion of students enter higher education for career reasons than in the past; students are less interested in the intellectual content of their subject than in vocational aspects; students are less willing to under-take independent study and are more demanding of teaching staff’s time. A further change was identified in the extent of part-time working by students which has a detrimental effect on learning. These changes had adverse effects on university lecturers and have implications for job satisfaction and for recruitment and retention. Although lecturers felt that the link between tuition fees and students’ attitudes was not direct, fees were believed to have given encouragement to a ‘consumerist’ attitude towards Higher Education.
1
This paper uses findings from a study on the effects of tuition fees on universities, funded by the Leverhulme Trust. Martin Weale and Hilary Metcalf at NIESR were responsible for the development of the research, and Philip Stevens conducted interviews with lecturers. Their advice on this paper is acknowledged with thanks.
Introduction More than ten years have passed since the replacement of the student maintenance grant by student loans, which began the gradual shift in the burden of the cost of higher education on to the student (and their family). The introduction of tuition fees in 1997 represented the latest step in this direction, and raised concerns about participation in Higher Education, particularly by groups which are under-represented. But whilst the impact of financial changes on participation has been addressed in the education media and in research (see IES, 1999; NUS, 2000), the effect on students’ demands and expectations have been given relatively little consideration. Yet there are a number of ways in which the transfer of costs to students might be expected to change their demands of their university. One might expect concerns about future employment to be a key area of change, with the accumulation of debt increasing students’ desire for provision which assists their future employment. This may affect their expectations about quality of teaching, the results of assessment and vocational provision. One might also expect fees to change students’ approach to education from that of a recipient of a free service to that of a consumer. Indeed, there are reports of an increase in litigation by students (see Slapper, 1997). Universities may also see student demands on them change due to an increase in term-time working, which is recognised having increased in recent years (see Ford et al, 1995; Callender and Kemp, 2000). Part-time working may affect both students flexibility over timing of teaching and the use of educational resources (such as computer suites and libraries) and the hours which they may devote to study. Universities may see pressure to concentrate teaching within fewer hours of the day, and to reduce contact hours, attendance requirements and assignments. If students’ demands and expectations of university are changing, this might be expected to be experienced directly by teaching staff. Moreover, irrespective of students’ expectations and demands, teaching staff and universities may feel under a different obligation towards students and may change their provision. This paper uses qualitative data from interviews with university lecturers to explore whether there is a discernible change in students demands and expectations in recent years and how this affects teaching staff and university provision. A total of 70 lecturers were interviewed, in four British universities, between November 2000 and April 2001. Interviews covered a range of issues, including students’ demands and expectations of a university education, their demands for the amount of teaching, type of teaching and other contact, the effect of part-time working, parental involvement and lecturers’ perceptions of their own role and obligations. The research findings are from a study conducted by NIESR on tuition fees which included case studies of four universities, selected to typify universities with different status in the Higher Education market, measured by entry requirements. To preserve anonymity, the universities are referred to as University A, University B, University C and University D, respectively. Universities A and B are old universities, with high and low entry requirements respectively, whilst Universities C and D are new universities with high and low entry requirements respectively. On a range of measures, University A would be seen as highest status, and University D as
2
lowest status, with the relative position of the other two universities less clear. Students' demands and expectations of a university education Previous research has indicated a strong instrumental orientation in the decision to go to university, particularly the improvement of employment prospects (see Callender, 1997). Interviews with lecturers identified a number of changes in the reasons why today’s students go to university, principal amongst which were job prospects. Lecturers believed that a higher proportion of current students go to university for career reasons than in the past. A number felt that this is partly because of professionalisation of many occupations and degree-level entry to many careers and that careers education and guidance emphasises this fact. Therefore many students were seen to be motivated to study at university principally by the prospect of getting a 'good' (well-paid) job, an aim which was rarely voiced by students in the past. A number of lecturers therefore described students' approach to their university education as 'instrumental', and some felt that this encouraged students without an interest in the subject to go to university. As one lecturer with 8 years of experience in university education remarked, ‘More people see it as the passport they need to a good job and that’s it a relatively simple route. You do your degree and there’s a job out there waiting for you’. ( B13) Lecturer's views on the importance of future employment in students orientation to higher education are borne out by data from our student survey which found employment prospects the most common reason for going into higher education and a strong consideration in choice of university and subject choice for about half of students (see Metcalf, 2001). Fewer students were reported to go to university for the student ‘life-style’ than in the past. In discussing changes in orientation towards university, lecturers at the two new universities remarked on the increase in local students, a trend which has been widely noted (see for example Cofield and Vignoles, 1997) and in the extent of part-time working. The student survey found that proximity to home was very important in university choice for 40 per cent of students at University D, but for only three per cent at University A. Lecturers generally viewed studying locally as a negative development because it leads to less involvement in student life and diminishes the 'student experience'. Local students were reported to spend little time on campus, attending only for teaching sessions and participating little in the social and political life of the university. Lecturers at these universities also reported a marked decline in student involvement in extra-curricula sessions and in student politics, partly because of part-time working, but also because of a declining interest in their studies and in student life. Students were therefore seen to be motivated principally by the outcome of their studies rather than intrinsic factors.
3
Many lecturers at Universities B, C and D, while agreeing that the prime motivation of some students in going to university is career considerations, referred to the expansion of higher education during the 1980s and 1990s and the broadening of the intake to include lower achievers at secondary level. A number remarked that university was now seen by many young people as a 'natural progression' rather than a definite choice. A number of lecturers identified a different approach among the newer intake of students. These students were seen as more 'consumerist' or 'instrumental' in their approach, less academically able than their predecessors and less interested in their subject. Interest in the subject, or in a 'vocational education' A number of lecturers were concerned at what they saw as a declining interest among students in the subject they study. Many believed that fewer students go to university out of interest in their subject than in previous years and those who do have an interest in the subject are less interested in theoretical aspects than in the past. Their views are compatible with the findings of the student survey, which found interest in further study in third place, behind employment prospects and others' expectations and advice (see Metcalf, 2001). A number of lecturers felt that the main concern of many students is to achieve a good class of degree rather than to gain knowledge in a subject of interest to them. Career considerations were thought to be behind this concern. Lecturers in all four universities felt that, through the same motivation, students want a more vocational education, to gain skills which would enhance job prospects. This was felt especially strongly by some lecturers at University B who had found expectations among some students for a vocational course which would equip them with specific skills. Interest in theoretical aspects of study was reported to be unusual. Although this was most commonly reported by lecturers in subjects with a vocational slant, for example computing, it was also reported by lecturers in more mainstream academic subjects, for example a lecturer in Economics, when discussing students' preferences for course modules stated, 'They increasingly find economics too theoretical and prefer to go for more applied, career-oriented subjects like finance and accounting rather than pure economics’ (B6) In some subjects, for example law, students were reported to select modules which would make them more attractive to employers. Some lecturers viewed this development with some concern, as a lecturer in Business and Management at University B, complained, ‘ It is even beyond instrumentalism in that it isn’t “I could be skilled at this and therefore I could be great at that” its “I’ll have a good CV”’. (B13)
4
Some lecturers felt that the emphasis on vocational relevance did not come from students alone, but was to some extent encouraged by the concern of university departments to improve the employability of graduates by meeting employers' skill needs. These were both vocational skills and ‘core’ skills in such areas as team working and communications. As a lecturer in physics at University A remarked, ‘Our approach was to go to graduate employers and say to them “what are you not currently getting from physics graduates that you think that we can put into the course” and we have responded fairly heavily to that, built our fourth year around skills development, group working and that sort of stuff’. (A4) There was some difference in the views of lecturers at old and new universities, with those at the former polytechnics finding students' preferences for a vocational orientation more acceptable than their counterparts at the old universities. Expectations of students at the two new universities for a vocational education, and their focus on career prospects were generally regarded as legitimate by lecturers because of a traditional emphasis in polytechnics and new universities on vocational skills and outcomes in provision. Therefore many lecturers at the new universities made no distinction between students' interest in their subject and interest in vocational skills and did not believe there had been a significant change in these respects. Grades and degree class Students at all four universities were widely reported to be more concerned and therefore more motivated than in the past by grades and degree class. Indeed, some lecturers felt that many students are motivated principally by assessment, as a lecturer in physics at University A reported, ‘I think that they are more driven in terms of assessment. They are interested in “what do I need to do to pass this assessment, rather than “what do I need to do to understand this bit of physics”.’ (A4) It was also reported that some students chose modules in which they can score the highest marks, rather than those in which they had an interest. Some lecturers reported that this led some students to adopt a more 'consumerist' approach, in wanting to be told what is required to achieve a good mark. Some lecturers felt that, as a consequence of students' heightened concern at their results, they were expected to deliver a different style of teaching, geared to ‘training’ students to achieve the highest possible marks. In terms of degree class, it was widely reported by lecturers in Universities A, B and C that students expect to gain a class 2.1 degree at least, or feel they have failed. A 2.1 was therefore seen as the 'gold standard'. A number remarked that students' expectations are high and sometimes unrealistic. As one lecturer remarked,
5
‘There now seems to be an expectation that ... whatever they do, unless it is horrendously bad, a 2:1 mark will result at the end of it whatever happens’ (A11).
A number of lecturers in all four universities commented that students watch their grades assiduously in order to check they are on target for the degree class they want. Some lecturers felt that this attitude had been encouraged by the modular system in which students gradually accrue marks from an early stage and obtain regular feedback. Therefore, the frequent provision of information on grades was thought to promote interest and fuel anxiety, which leads to dissatisfaction and grievance. Lecturers in all four universities reported an increase in complaints about marks, but those in University D expressed most concern about this trend. Some lecturers felt that students had been encouraged to become more 'disputatious', including by the university itself. As one lecturer explained, ‘We have seen a rise in the number of students who are challenging marks. This may be related to the consumer culture and I can’t think of what would explain it other than fees. There has been a change in the ethos of the university towards treating students as customers’. (D6) As Murlis and Harlte (1996) remark, in this respect, universities are increasingly similar to private companies. However, students' concern to achieve a 2.1 or a 1st were also thought to be fuelled by the competitive market for graduates, particularly in such areas as law where it is a requirement of many firms recruiting trainee solicitors. Prior to the expansion of higher education it might be simply sufficient to have a degree to have an advantage in many areas of the labour market. Lecturers remarked that this is no longer the case and that this makes students more concerned than in the past to achieve a good class of degree. Students' demands for the amount of teaching and other contact One might expect that an increase in costs of higher education for students would result in demands for more teaching, through an increase in provision of lectures, tutorials and individual contact time. However, most lecturers felt there has been no change in students' demands for the amount of teaching and other contact in recent years, particularly through provision of lectures and tutorials. Some lecturers reported that contact hours were in any case high and gave students no cause for complaint. A number of others believed that, on arrival at university, students rarely have clear expectations about the amount of teaching they will receive and tend to accept what they are given. Some lecturers at University C reported a preference from some students for small group teaching, rather than the large lecturers which accounted for much of the teaching they received. However, lecturers were not convinced that students generally preferred this style, since attendance
6
at seminars was often low and student participation poor. It was believed that while some students expect high contact hours, particularly lectures, on arrival at university their attitude changes during their first year. Indeed, there were reports that many students do not attend the time-tabled classes, and this was a matter of concern to some lecturers. In some cases poor attendance was believed to be a consequence of part-time working, and this was an issue of particular concern to lecturers. A small number of lecturers at each university said that some students made more demands for individual contact with teaching staff than in the past, asking tutors to explain areas of work with which they experienced difficulty and wanting more feedback and discussion of their results. Some lecturers felt that the increased demand for individual contact came largely from students of lower ability, who had increased in number in recent years. Demand for individual contact was particularly marked near assessment times, as a lecturer in Health Studies at University C reported ‘I find that students, around exam time or when assignments are due in, are knocking constantly on the door because they have missed things and they want to catch up’ (C17) Some lecturers felt that students continually demand assistance from them and that email communication had exacerbated the situation, by providing students with a further means of access. A number commented that some students expect instant help and do not appreciate that teaching staff have other work responsibilities apart from teaching, as a lecturer at University D remarked, ‘An increasing number almost expect you to drop everything for them when they want it. It is more a case that they have got an issue and they want you to deal with it then and there, rather than realise that you have other work to do’. (D11) Many lecturers displayed the times at which they were available to students on their office door, but some reported demands from students to be seen outside of these hours, for reasons which include part-time working. Some lecturers admitted spending more time working at home in order to evade students' attentions. Students' demands for type of teaching As a result of a combination of factors, lecturers felt that students want more direction and guidance than in the past, particularly over what knowledge they are expected to acquire, and to demonstrate that they have acquired, for assessment. Students were reported to want more ‘prescribed’ teaching, delivering the required knowledge, rather than to do their own reading and research. As a lecturer in music at University A explained, ‘Ten years ago we would have pointed the students in the direction of certain books and articles that we would expect them to read. Today it is assumed that you will provide the students with all the details of 7
all they need to go, that you will provide them with book references, page, references, chapter references, and that all of this will be laid out before the student even begins the module. To say that we are doing a module on Mozart’s Operas and expect the students today to go into our library and, for themselves, find the source material which they need to read, listen to, and to study, you actually could not do that today’ (A11) This was seen by some lecturers as a consequence of students’ concern with grades, since many students were reported to want to know how to get a good mark for a piece of work or a module. It was also seen as a result of a change in the intake and the increased number of students of lower ability who find independent study difficult and prefer direct teaching. Some lecturers believed that students become accustomed to the style of teaching and learning typically used at 'A' level. This was seen to 'spoon-feed' students rather than require independent study, which might be expected of students in higher education. As a lecturer with 13 years teaching experience at University C stated in relation to ‘A’ levels, ‘They get a tremendous amount of input from teachers and they expect that when they come to university. I don’t think that used to be the case as much as it is now’. (C17) The extent to which lecturers based their beliefs about sixth form teaching methods is not clear. Bradford (1996) argues that such beliefs are largely based on speculation since, despite major changes in secondary and higher education during the 1980s and 1990s, ‘ ……few people working within either sector have been involved in, or are very aware of, the changes in the other’ (1996:130). According to Bradford, university lecturers have less involvement in such activities as ‘A’ level examining and writing of texts than in the past. However, the view that secondary school teaching equips students poorly for independent study is a widely held view among university teachers. Demand for materials and presentational styles A large number of lecturers reported an increased demand for handouts, lecture notes and other materials. Some stated that students now expect these, and rely heavily on their use rather than materials which they obtain themselves. As a lecturer in Law at University A stated: ‘There is a growing expectation that we will provide all materials. I have had a few students this year saying “You are giving us lecture handouts but you are then expecting us to read legal cases and you haven’t photocopied those for us”.’ (A9) Students were reported to protest if lecture handouts are not provided. As a lecturer in Maths at University D explained,
8
‘They expect handouts, you get lynched if you don’t provide handouts…. Personally I think we shouldn’t give handouts because students think the handout is definitive and they don’t need to think’. (D13) Lecturers also received requests to make notes available in ways other than the lecture: on the university web-site; through personal email from the lecturer to the student; or to be made available in advance of the lecture. Lecturers responded very differently to such requests. Some resisted pressure from students and gave no lecture notes at all, but these appeared to be in the minority. A number of other lecturers were concerned that distributing lecture notes on the Internet encouraged a poor approach to learning, as a lecturer at University C stated, ‘If students are accessing learning materials electronically, are they adequately supported? Is that the same as coming along to the lecture and engaging with the tutor. Is it the same as having opportunities to discuss with peers, for example?’ (C2) Lecturers gave a number of explanations for the increased demand from students for materials, including the influence of schools’ teaching, referred to above, and part-time working by students. A number believed there is a tendency to 'spoon-feed' students on 'A' level or GNVQ courses and that students are given insufficient encouragement to carry out independent study. Consequently, many do not have the study skills which would be expected of students in the past. As a lecturer in engineering at University D remarked in relation to students entering with GNVQ, ‘They aren’t quite as prepared as they used to be to do their own thing, to back up what’s in the lecture with going back and doing reading and that sort of thing. They want a whole set of hand-outs and that’s it’. (D2) Some lecturers, particularly at Universities C and D, believed that the increased demand for 'off the shelf' materials resulted partly from part-time working which caused students to miss lectures (see below). The cost of buying books was also thought to be a factor, as was the difficulty of borrowing books from university libraries, given the expansion in student numbers and high demand for key texts. A number of lecturers said that students have higher expectations of lectures than in the past, wanting a more ‘lively’ or entertaining presentation. As one lecturer in Civil Engineering at University A reported: ‘Yes. They like colour and they have extremely low attention thresholds. ... When they get bored they have absolutely no qualms about showing it. Maintaining their attention has become more difficult. They like to be indulged. They don’t like taking notes - they are not good at taking notes, they have lost that skill’. (A14)
9
These changes in student expectations were seen to some extent as a result of moves to improve the quality of teaching rather than a result of any demands by students. Pressure from the Quality Assurance Agency was believed to be a particularly strong influence. At the same time, some lecturers felt that the increased use of ‘power-point’ and other computer packages was partly a result of technological advances which expanded the possibilities for presenting materials. Therefore, one lecturer described it as a ‘technology pull rather than teaching push’. However, students were also seen to expect a higher professional standard, particularly in subjects such as computing and media studies. where use of latest technology is part of professional practice. However, many lecturers believed that the impetus for the use of technological aids in teaching came from lecturers themselves, or from their departments, from concern to improve the quality of their delivery, rather than from student demand. Indeed, some lecturers doubted that students preferred ‘high-tech’ presentations at all, and simply like variety, including ‘straight’ lectures using technology no more complex than an overhead projector. Lecturer's views on the changes, and effects on their work A number of questions arise from the findings presented so far: how did lecturers feel about the changes they identified; was their own work affected, and in what ways? Of the changes identified by lecturers in students' attitudes and expectations, those which were mentioned most often and considered most significant for higher education generally, were first, in students’ reasons for coming to university and second, their demands and expectations for direction and guidance. On the first of these, many lecturers expressed disappointment that present-day students seem to be less interested in their chosen degree subject than in the past. For some lecturers, this devalued the experience of university lecturing . As two lecturers at University A remarked: ‘You feel as if you are being treated as the lecturer providing them with lecture notes which they’ll take down to try remember how to answer exam questions, rather than someone who is trying to convey a love of the subject or an interest in the subject…. Students want a degree and not an education’. (A8). ‘It has made me a lot more cynical about students, which is a bad thing. …….. Studying is seen as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself’. (A1) A number of lecturers said that, as a result of these changes, they were now less interested in teaching than in the past and gained more satisfaction from other areas of their work, such as research. Some lecturers expressed concern for other students as well as for their own job satisfaction, particularly for those students who wished to engage in debate when many others did not. Some lecturers believed that the experience of university for more academic students had deteriorated. But what did they feel was responsible for this change in student attitudes?
10
Many lecturers explained what they saw as a decline in academic interest among students with reference to the expansion of higher education and a change in the student intake. The expansion of higher education was viewed by lecturers as a positive development, in extending opportunities to previously excluded groups. However, it was also seen to have made higher education an 'automatic' choice rather than a positive decision to enter into further academic study. Consequently, many lecturers believed that some students go to university 'for the sake of it', because it is ‘the thing to do’ rather than out of any academic interest. Therefore many lecturers believed that an increased number of students have little motivation for study, other than to obtain good marks. Many lecturers referred to as a negative development, was a lowering in the ability of the intake. This was seen to have led to a more ‘needy’ and ‘demanding’ group of students who are less capable of independent study and dependent on an closely guided teaching. Lecturers reported pressure to deliver teaching closely related to prescribed course content and to lower their expectations on students for independent study. However, some lecturers reported pressure to deliver more ‘prescribed’ teaching from students of all ability levels who had become accustomed to guided teaching. A number felt that this change came as much from universities as from students themselves who had effectively drawn up a ‘contract’ between the university and students through course details published in course handbooks and a range of other university documents. Many lecturers welcomed this development, feeling that expectations should be ‘two-way’. A few even welcomed what is widely seen as students’ new 'customer' status, as a lecturer at University B remarked, ‘We are increasingly seeing them as customers and as customers we should be giving them a good service which, again, I think is a good thing’. (B6) However, many lecturers felt it the availability of such detailed information on course content and the standards required can only encourage the narrow focus on grades and degree class adopted by many students and what many described as a ‘consumerist’ approach to their university education. The ratio of students to staff has greatly increased in recent years, from 9:1 in 1990 to 17:1 in 1998 (see Greenaway and Haynes, 2000) and was even higher at two of the case study universities. The greater pressure on lecturers, resulting from larger class sizes and demands from individual students, have been widely reported in the higher education media and by academic research (Keep et al, 1996). Lecturers reported that the expansion in student numbers and a more demanding and needy intake had led to an increased workload in a number of areas: preparation of lectures and materials such as hand-outs and lecture notes; marking students’ work and providing detailed feedback; and dealing with enquiries from individual students outside of formal teaching time. Whilst few lecturers were resentful of the time spent in meeting such demands, many felt the need to place limits on their availability to students, particularly out of office hours and had developed strategies for avoiding excessive student demands. Some lecturers
11
commented that they had less time to undertake research, a consequence of higher student numbers noted by Keep et al (1996:35). The role of fees in changes in students’ demands and expectations What did lecturers feel had caused the changes they identified in students’ expectations and demands? Few felt that changes in funding and the introduction of tuition fees played a major role, but many felt that the expansion of higher education had brought in students with different attitudes and expectations to those in the past. The most notable change was that many students attend university to gain a degree, which has become the ‘gold standard’ qualification and therefore to ‘kick-start’ their career. Few were thought to have a strong academic interest, although many were motivated to work hard and obtain a good degree. A second influence on students’ attitudes was identified in schools’ approaches to teaching ‘A’ level, which many saw as ‘spoon-feeding’, and students’ difficulty in accepting a different style of teaching and learning once at university. A third influence was seen as coming from the QAA and from universities themselves, who had unwittingly encouraged a consumerist attitude in their efforts to clarify students’ entitlements. However, while many lecturers believed there is no link between students' attitudes in these respects and the introduction of tuition fees, others felt that fees had given further encouragement to a consumerist attitude, which began with the introduction of loans and the increasing cost of higher education to students. Lecturers gave a number of examples of such a change in attitude among students: • • • •
Paying fees confers the right to a degree, regardless of performance; The university should provide 'value for money' in its courses and other provision; Lecture notes and other materials are university 'products’ which are covered by fee payments; Lecturers should be readily available to provide assistance to students.
This last point was perhaps the most strongly felt, possibly because it directly affects lecturers' ability to perform their job. Here, fees were seen to accelerate an existing trend, as a lecturer at University D explained,. ‘Fees have come into a culture that already created this teacher/pupil relationship. Fees are doing further damage to our identity as lecturers and as academics. The profession is being downgraded and it affects the respect that students have for lecturing staff.’ (D8) Lecturers reported an increase in student complaints, although the majority of these were informal, as in the past. The nature of these complaints was varied, and included facilities, resources such as handouts, workload and access to tutors. Formal complaints tended to concern issues of grades and degree class. Many lecturers believed that the cause of this increase was the introduction of clearer documentation, in such areas as course and module content, which allowed students to compare written descriptions with actual 12
delivery, along with the introduction of more formal procedures for dealing with complaints. These included structures to deal with informal complaints, such as staff-student committees and formal structures such as departmental and faculty boards. There was considerable doubt about whether tuition fees were a factor in the increase in complaints, so that while a small number of lecturers felt that fees encouraged complaints, others felt that fees were used as a ‘lever’ by students to argue for better provision, or were a factor in their department’s more conciliatory attitude. Some departments had responded to increases in complaints by reviewing their assessment criteria and complaints procedures to ensure that these were robust and to discourage the less legitimate claims under the ‘mitigating circumstances’ regulation. Ironically, however, this process of clarification of procedures was thought by some to have actually encouraged complaints, by making the criteria and procedure easier for students to follow and by encouraging student feedback. As previous research suggests, universities have undergone a similar development in this respect to organisations in the private sector (see Murlis and Hartle, 1996:55). The effects of part-time working on students’ education Lecturers were asked if they thought that part-time working by students affects their education in any way, for example in attendance at lectures, the amount of private study they do or their commitment to their studies. Some differences were found in response according to university, particularly between University A, where many lecturers were not aware of part-time working among students and the other three universities. At the other three universities there was evidence of an emerging change in lecturers’ attitudes towards part-time working, possibly reflecting growth in its incidence and extent. This was particularly apparent in University D where paid employment among students was very common. Lecturers at University A generally believed that few of their students worked part-time, which some explained with reference to the affluent background of many of their intake, as a lecturer in French explained, ‘Many of our students are from private schools or grant maintained, and they have mobile phones and cars’ (A1) Lecturers’ beliefs about the extent of part-time working during term-time were reasonably accurate: the first survey of third year students found only 27 per cent of students at the university worked during term-time, compared with more than half of students at the other three universities (see Metcalf, 2001). Many lecturers at University B believed that the majority of students have part-time jobs. This is an accurate estimate, since the first survey of third year students found 53 per cent of students to work during term time, a similar proportion to University C. Although the proportion of students working part-time during term time was not much higher at University D, it was more regular, with 40 per cent of students working every week, compared with between 13 and 27 per cent at the other universities. This may account for the different attitude of lecturers at University D, explained below. 13
The main effect of part-time working at Universities B,C and D was reported as poor attendance, particularly on non-compulsory courses. Late arrival and early leaving was not unusual and tiredness, illness and depression were seen to sometimes result from working excessive or unsocial hours. This affected students' abilities to concentrate. Part-time working was also reported to affect choice of courses where students’ hours of part-time work clashed with course time-tables. A number reported that students were less flexible about the timing of teaching sessions, as a Course Leader in Health Studies explained, ‘Students are constantly asking to change their seminar groups because it does not fit in with their work commitments…….. it never used to be as bad as it is now’. (C17) Lecturers in University D reported the same effects of part-time working as in the other three universities, but to a much greater extent. Students were reported to choose modules which would fit in with their part-time working, and non-attendance at classes was reported to be high. Requests for deadline extensions for assignments were higher than in the past, and students were more ‘up-front’ about using part-time work as a reason for late submissions. It might therefore be considered surprising that the first survey of third year students found that students at the university encountered fewer problems combining paid employment and study than elsewhere. This is possibly explained by the greater acceptance of part-time working than elsewhere, and the accommodating attitude of lecturers. For example, the hours of libraries and other services were designed with the needs of working students in mind and lecture notes and a range of other learning materials had been made available 'on line'. This may have meant that students perceived their part-time employment as less of a problem to their studies than elsewhere, even if lecturers believed that it had a detrimental effect. Part-time working and private study Most Lecturers were unsure about the effects of working on private study, not having the evidence for any link and believing that poor performance often has other causes. A number of lecturers believed that some students aim to fill their non time-tabled hours with part-time work and that these could therefore do very little private study. However, this may indicate a change in attitude among some students rather than result from part-time working per se. Indeed, many expressed the view that students in general are less inclined than in the past to spend time on private study, particularly in reading around their subject, but did not link this to part-time working. Lecturers at University D were more inclined than those elsewhere to say that part-time working affects private study, and made particular reference to the decline in reading. Therefore, students tended to have a more narrow knowledge of their subject than in the past. This was not only explained with reference to private study, but with the decline in attendance and opportunities for discussions with other students. A Senior Lecturer in 14
Politics compared his own experience as a student with those he was teaching, ‘The student experience is changing. When I think back to my own time at university, sitting in canteens and talking to my colleagues….that aspect of student life is suffering. They’re coming on to campus at the times they aren’t working, picking up materials, doing what they need to do and going off again and not immersing themselves in student life. What this must have an impact on is sitting down with colleagues, talking about issues and making connections between subjects and areas that you wouldn’t make connections between, and also sorting out collective responses to problems like exam revision and so on’. (D6) Lecturers expressed concern both for students who worked and were therefore missing lectures, study and social aspects of university life. They also expressed concern at the declining quality of the student experience for those students who regularly go to sparsely attended lectures and find life on campus quieter than they expected. Part-time working as part of student life With the exception of University A, lecturers appeared to be treating parttime working as part of student life, for example by accepting nonattendance and even late submission of work. This was possibly a result of pressure from students who impressed on teaching staff their need to earn money. Therefore, while some lecturers issued guidelines on the number of study hours or advised against working, they reluctantly accepted that these were of little influence. As a course leader in Health Studies at University C stated, ‘They expect their work commitments to be taken into consideration. They are up-front about it. They say “I can’t do that, I’m working”. They have got to work and they know that we know that they have to pay their own fees and have to work to do it. So they assume that because they have got to work we should take that into consideration’ (C17) Lecturers at University A said it was rare for students to use part-time working as an excuse for non-attendance or for late submission of course work, but this was not the experience of lecturers at the other three universities who said that part-time working was not infrequently presented as a reason for a late assignments. Whilst in the past this would not have been accepted as a valid excuse, lecturers interpreted rules on mitigating circumstances to include part-time working because they were sympathetic to students’ situation. Some felt that part-time working may become a legitimate reason for late assignments in future. Many lecturers at University D had the impression that almost every student works and several gave examples of students in full-time employment. The first survey of third year students found the proportion of students in paid 15
work to be higher than in the other three universities, with 40 per cent working every week during term time. Possibly because of this, part-time working appeared to be unofficially accepted as part of student life and allowances made for timing of classes, non-attendance and missing deadlines. Some lecturers believed that while part-time working was not new, fees had the effect of making it legitimate, as a Senior Lecturer in Maths explained, ‘Just about every student works, and whereas three years ago we could turn round to students and say “look your assignment’s not in on time” and they’d say “it’s because I’m working full-time” we could say “you’re on a full-time degree course you shouldn’t be working full-time”. We are now not in a position to do that because we realise that students would starve unless they worked…..This directly affects their studies because they can’t concentrate so much on developing themselves as they used to’. (D13) Are there any positive effects of part-time working? Lecturers at University A could identify very few positive effects of part-time working, other than financial benefits, because of the low skilled nature of the kinds of jobs to which most students have access. Lecturers at the other universities were able to identify some positive effects of part-time working, but these were largely confined to students who worked in areas relevant to their studies. Some examples were given of sports students working in the fitness industry, of computing students working in computer retail or in their own business. A few lecturers referred to transferable skills which might be gained, for example the communications skills of language students were thought to improve through working in hospitality and tourism, where some worked part-time. Some lecturers felt that part-time working improved social skills generally. It might also occasionally provide students with contacts for research projects. However, for the most part, students were thought to work in low skilled jobs in bars, shops and fast food outlets and did not, therefore gain much more than very general transferable skills, which they were thought to already have. Some lecturers felt that part-time employment gives students some experience of the ‘real world’ and a ‘balance of life’, including the opportunity to mix with people other than students. Therefore part-time working was seen to give some students a ‘broader outlook’ on life. A few lecturers also expressed the view that combining study and paid work teaches students organisational skills, in particular to have more than one set of responsibilities. These were, however, minority views, with the general view being that part-time working is a negative influence on academic performance. As an economics lecturer at University B stated, ‘They should focus on their studies. We have work placements here which are often very beneficial, but to work for a few hours a week in an unskilled job, the costs outweigh the benefits’. (B6)
16
Lecturers in University D were somewhat more likely than those in the other three universities to identify positive effects of part-time working, including group skills, status, responsibility and a ‘sense of perspective’. However, whilst these were seen as having a positive and ‘maturing’ influence, particularly on younger students, they were not seen to benefit the learning process itself. There was almost no reference made by lecturers at this university to students working in areas of relevance to their study. Moreover, the extent of part-time working, the proportion of students with jobs and the number of hours that many work, was seen as unacceptably high. The long hours worked by some students were seen to allow little time for private study and lead to work being ‘de-prioritised’. In addition, lecturers regretted that socialising and other areas of personal development were sacrificed by the need to work part-time.
17
Lecturers' perceptions of their own role and obligations Lecturers were asked if they felt their own role is different in any way because students are paying fees. Most felt that it was not, even though some had expected that it might. As one lecturer at University D stated, ‘No, there was a time when I thought the atmosphere might be worsened by this customer/client type of notion but I resisted it and I do tell students they have to perform up to standard and the analogy with the customer falls down there’ (D12). Those lecturers who did feel that their role had changed referred to a growing ‘consumerism’ within higher education which led to greater demands on teaching staff, for example to increase contact time with students. Some lecturers felt more conscious that they were delivering a ‘product’ and that they need to be more responsive to students’ demands. Some lecturers felt that their role had changed but because of influences other than fees, including cuts in the unit of resource, the growth in the student/staff ratio and the expansion in student numbers. Lecturers were asked if their relationship with students has changed since they started to pay fees and again, the most usual response from lecturers in all four universities, was that it had not. Many said that it was still a professional relationship in which their own responsibility was to provide a high standard of education. Some had anticipated a change towards a customer and provider relationship but believed that, although there was some evidence of a trend in this direction, this had not happened. This was despite a widespread view that students are customers of the university (see below). Those lecturers who felt that their relationship with students had changed, referred to students' views of them as 'teachers' and to students' expectations of high levels of contact, good grades and degree class. However, it was generally thought that, where relationships had changed, that this was a result of a number of factors, which included the expansion in student numbers and a change in the student intake. As one lecturer in University D remarked, ‘Fees are one of a number of different things which has changed the relationship between tutors and students. The paying of fees is only part of a general trend in things like value for money and accountability. The nature of higher education has changed ever since Thatcherism. We’ve had a changing role and people are more aware of their rights and what’s expected and the sort of contractual nature of the process’. (D7) Few lecturers said they did anything differently as a result of the introduction of fees. Some said they provided more detailed information and feedback about students’ work but that this was not only because students were paying, but because of quality control measures and concern about Quality Assurance assessment. A number of lecturers at Universities C and D said 18
that since the introduction of tuition fees they had become more sympathetic towards students’ part-time working and, in recognition of their financial and personal circumstances, were generally more sympathetic towards students. Lecturers were asked if they felt they have a greater obligation than in the past to provide students with what they ask. The usual response to this question was that they already provide students with what they want, or at least need for their studies. As a lecturer in University B stated, ‘I think I would confidently say that I am not doing anything differently. I would like to think I have always been aware of students needs, regardless of whether they are paying fees and that I provide a good level of teaching and support’.(B3) Some lecturers said that they were aware that students were paying and that they were concerned to provide students with value for money. Lecturers in University D where most student hardship was reported, were particularly concerned to do so. As a lecturer in Maths explained, ‘The actual relationship between students and tutors hasn’t changed, its just that they are a lot worse off and this has its own problems in the extent of part-time working. We sympathise with them, we think its terrible’. (D13) Some lecturers elsewhere had similar feelings: ‘The fact that they are paying means that they have become customers, there’s no question about that. We have to pull them in and we want their custom, so we are aware that a full service has to be provided’ (B8) ‘I feel more responsible for individuals and responsible for the quality of education at my own institution. I feel I have to deliver something good because of the financial sacrifice they are making. (C3) This pressure was seen to come as much from the university as from students, with some lecturers referring to the use of ‘managerial language’ and to market pressures. However, this was seen to pre-date fees and to result of the increased competition between universities, as one lecturer reported, ‘So in terms of thinking of our students as customers, this hasn’t just been since fees were introduced. We’ve had that sort of awareness and that sort of climate has been around in this institution longer than fees’. (D7) A few lecturers said that either they or their universities regarded students as customers and that this gave the university a responsibility to provide a
19
certain standard in such areas as quality of delivery. A lecturer at University C explained that she tells students that they are customers with rights. ‘I do find myself saying to them that if they want to come and see me, that is part of what I am paid for, they are customers and they have rights.’ (C7) Lecturers were asked if they are more concerned than in the past about possible complaints and even litigation by students. Many said that they were not, on the grounds that they had not yet experienced more complaints and threats of litigation. However, lecturers across all four universities said they were somewhat more aware of the possibility than in the past. As a lecturer with 14 years experience at University A remarked, ‘The staff are beginning to couch things in terms of ‘would this be defensible in a legal sense?’ we’d better not do that because of x, y and z, so it is getting down to that money and legality side and it is beginning to affect our mentality when we are writing procedures and codes of practice. We have to think in those sort of terms’. (A3) Some lecturers remarked that the university is considerably more aware of complaints and litigation than in the past and had impressed the need to install appropriate procedures on lecturers. This had led to increased documentation which many found onerous and time-consuming. As one lecturer at University A explained, ‘There is a general culture of being concerned about possible litigation’. The university has tried to circumvent this by being more ‘tight’ with their teaching and marking procedures. ‘If you are watertight then 99% of the potential litigation problems evaporate’. (A11) It also meant that lecturers had to be clear to students about their own role and the extent of support they could provide. Some felt the need to be more careful in their relations with students than in the past, and particularly to retain a professional ‘distance’. Fees were not seen as a direct influence on this trend, although fees were believed to be increasingly cited in complaints by students and parents. Therefore, a number of lecturers remarked that the increased threat of litigation is not specific to higher education. Society in general is becoming more litigious and students, and their parents, are not excluded from this trend. In this respect, comparisons were made with high rates of litigation in higher education and elsewhere the United States. Conclusions The qualitative research on which this paper is based was conducted to identify the views of university lecturers’ on the impact of tuition fees on students demands and expectations of a university education. One would expect a range of views to be expressed, reflecting experiences of working in different types of institution, different academic disciplines and length of service. Some such differences were evident, for example younger lecturers 20
with fewer years of experience were less likely to remark on students’ vocational orientation and unwillingness to undertake independent study. Similarly, lecturers in the highly rated old university, and those teaching in popular subjects where entry requirements were high, were less likely to perceive a fall in average ability of students. Lecturers in the four universities also had different experiences of part-time working by students and its affects. However, as a qualitative study, the extent of these differences between universities and lecturers cannot be gauged, and the conclusions to this research must therefore focus on the key trends and issues identified by the 70 lecturers interviewed. Four main changes in students' attitudes and expectations of university were identified by lecturers: • • • •
A higher proportion of current students go to university for career reasons than in the past; Today's students are less interested in their subject and are more interested in vocational aspects of their studies; Students are less able or willing to undertake independent study than they were ten or more years ago, and expect more instruction and guidance from teaching staff; Lecturers in three of the universities believed that part-time working is increasingly common among their students and has a detrimental effect on their studies.
These changes had a number of adverse effects on lecturers: Many expressed disappointment that today's students are less interested in their degree subject than in the past. For some lecturers, this has devalued the experience of university lecturing. A number said that they were now less interested in teaching than in the past and gained more satisfaction from other areas of their work, such as research. What did lecturers feel had caused the changes they identified in students’ expectations and demands? Few felt that changes in funding and the introduction of tuition fees played a major role. Rather, many felt that the expansion of higher education had brought in students with different attitudes and expectations to those in the past. Many students were seen to attend university simply to gain a degree, which has become the ‘gold standard’ qualification, essential for many professional-level jobs. Lecturers therefore believed that the intake of students to university had undergone a significant change as instrumentalism took the place of academic interest as a key motivator. Students’ attitudes were also seen as encouraged by the approach of schools to teaching at ‘A’ level, characterised by many lecturers as ‘spoon-feeding’ and which causes students difficulty in accepting a different approach to learning at university. Many lecturers also believed that today’s intake of students is, on average, lower in ability than in the past, and therefore that some changes in expectations, particularly in relation to teaching and learning, and the need for support and guidance, were a result of this drop. This was felt most strongly by lecturers at University D, the lower ranking of the two new universities.
21
Some lecturers felt that there was no link between the attitudes and expectations of students and tuition fees, others felt that fees affected these in a number of ways, although these were sometimes quite subtle. Firstly, fees were seen to have given further encouragement to a ‘consumerist’ attitude among some students, which began with the introduction of loans and the increasing cost of higher education to students. This attitude was identified in students’ expectations for a certain level of provision, contact with teaching staff and for ‘products’ such as lecture notes and handouts. Some lecturers felt that a consumerist attitude was more apparent among a new type of student, attending university principally for career considerations and that this attitude therefore reflects changes in the higher education intake. The most concrete effect of fees was felt in the growth of part-time working by students. This was a particular concern of many staff at all but the top ranking old university. Lecturers felt that part-time working has detrimental effect on student performance by reducing attendance at lectures and affecting students’ ability to concentrate and apply themselves to study. Lecturers felt under increasing pressure to make allowances for students unable to attend sessions or complete work to deadlines because of part-time working. Some lecturers felt that part-time working is becoming a legitimate excuse for late assignments, a development which was regretted for its ‘down-grading’ of education as a priority. The findings of the research have implications for job satisfaction of university lecturers and therefore for recruitment and retention. Changes in students’ demands and expectations have came on top of other changes to universities and the work of university lecturers. in the case study universities these included mergers with other institutions, closure of university sites, courses and departments and redundancies of teaching staff. Staff also felt subjected to far more scrutiny than in the past, in relation to their teaching and service provided to students, through the requirements of the Quality Assurance Agency and in their research output through the Research Assessment Exercise. Therefore, it was apparent that many lecturers found aspects of their job somewhat stressful. Tuition fees contributed to this stress in a number of ways, including the following: • • •
Concern to provide value for money to students, including through providing lecture notes, handouts and photocopies of key texts; Being available to students at times convenient to them and responding to requests for help through written messages and email; Concern about loss of students to ‘vocational’ courses and feeling pressure to emphasise the vocational relevance of modules and courses.
Lecturers also raised a number of other concerns about tuition fees. A number of lecturers at University A remarked that the proportion of students from working class backgrounds had shrunk to insignificant levels in recent years and were concerned that such students were discouraged on financial grounds or through ‘debt aversion’ (see Knowles, 2001). Concerns were also expressed at the perceived decline in mature student numbers across all four universities. Some lecturers believed that the withdrawal of the student grant 22
had more effect on participation, on debt and on part-time working than the introduction of tuition fees. The research therefore found lecturers to be dissatisfied with many aspects of their job, which related to changes in students’ attitudes and expectations. While fees were not considered responsible in themselves for most of the changes they identified, fees were seen to accelerate existing trends, particularly by lending legitimacy to students’ views of the student/university relationship as one of customer and provider, which led some students to have unrealistic views on their entitlements. Some lecturers also felt that aspects of this change in the relationship between students and universities were positive, in that they require the university to state its responsibilities towards students. Other changes regarded as having positive as well as negative consequences included the expansion of higher education, which had widened access, but had also reduced the average ability of the intake. Many lecturers therefore had mixed views on the changes they had experienced in recent years, both in university teaching and the attitudes and expectations of students. With regard to fees, however, lecturers were in less doubt about the advantages and disadvantages: where fees were seen to have an influence in such areas as student participation, attitudes and performance, it was almost universally negative.
References Bradford (1996) Geographical Transitions, in Rob Cuthbert (ed.) Working in Higher Education, The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press. Callender, C. (1997) Full and part-time students in higher education: their experiences and expectations, National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, Report 2. London HMSO Callender, C and Kemp, M (2000), “Changing Student Finances: Income, Expenditure and Take-up of Student Loans Among Full and Part-time Higher Education Students in 1998-9”, DfEE Research Report no.213. Coffield, Frank and Vignoles, Anna (1997) Widening participation in higher education by ethnic minorities, women and alternative students, The National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, Report 5 Ford, J., Bosworth, D., and Wilson, R. (1995) ‘Part-time Work and Full-time Higher Education’, Studies in Higher Education, 20:2, pp 187-202. Greenaway, D and Haynes, M (2000), ‘Funding Universities to meet National
23
and International Challenges,’ School of Economics Policy Report, University of Nottingham Institute of Employment Studies (1999) Making the Right Choice: Main Report, CVCP, UCAS, HEFCE Keep, E, J Storey and K Sisson (1996), Managing the Employment Relationship in Higher Education: Quo Vadis, in Rob Cuthbert (ed.) Working in Higher Education, The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press. Knowles, J (2000) Pity the Poor Students: Educational Success, Social Exclusion and Exclusiveness, University of Lincolnshire and Humberside. Metcalf, H. (2001) The changing nature of higher education: the role of finance in student orientation to higher education, Forthcoming, Murlis, Helen and Hartle, Frank (1996) Does It Pay to Work in Universities? in Cuthbert, Rob (ed.) (1996), Working in Higher Education, The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press National Union of Students (2000), Equal access or elitist entry? The impact of student funding on access to higher education: four international case studies, NUS Research, November Stevenson K., Sander P., King M., Coates D (2000). University students' expectations of teaching. Studies in Higher Education; 25(3):309323. Slapper, Gary (1997) Judging the educators: forensic evaluation of academic judgement, Education and the Law, Volume 9, Number 1, March
24
