News

Masters of science

Pupils from a Brightlingsea school took part in a new day-long Science Master Class at the University earlier this month.

The 25 teenagers from Colne Community College studied computer programming, social psychology, sports science and a biology experiment.

The aim of the day was to enthuse the GCSE students about the variety and relevance that studying science can offer, as well as informing them about university life.

Teacher Richard Taylor said: 'It has been such a pleasure to see my children slip into the higher education environment so effortlessly. They have turned from school pupils into university students, right before my eyes.'

The Science Master Class was organised by Student Recruitment Assistant (Science) Lucy Nowak, an Essex Psychology graduate, who said: 'We wanted to show that science is enjoyable, and encourage pupils to see that both university life and science study could be options for them.'

It is now hoped to extend the event to other Essex schools.

Lucy is also organising this year's National Science Week programme, which will see some 60 pupils from seven local schools sampling the scientific fare on offer at Essex.

The Experiment with Science Day, which takes place on 19 March, offers six different science sessions. These range from experiments in computer logic with the Department of Electronic Systems Engineering, and instructing a robot with the Department of Computer Science, to a practical session with the University's newest department, Health and Human Sciences.

Top-up fees, what happens next?

Following the government's narrow victory in getting the Higher Education Bill through its second reading, the University's Vice-Chancellor and current Students' Union President offer their views on the future of higher education funding.

Government concessions strengthened HE Bill
From Vice-Chancellor Professor Ivor Crewe

The House of Commons approved the second reading of the HE Bill by the hairsbreadth majority of five, after intense debate in the media and Parliament.

Why was the majority so tiny? The media's explanation is that a large number of Labour backbenchers objected to 'top up' fees but the government scraped home by making concessions.

Reality is more complicated. I talked to Labour backbenchers and the majority of the 91 rebels recognised the funding crisis in universities.

Most rejected the NUS and AUT view that extra money be found from raising taxes. They accepted the principle of tuition fees and the need for fees to rise to between £2000 and £3000.

Their objection was to variable fees, i.e. the right of universities to choose what to charge, because they feared this would lead to students from poor families choosing to study cheap subjects at cheap universities. They wanted a standard but much higher fee (in many cases £3,000) across all universities and subjects.

I thought they were mistaken because (a) £3,000 is likely to become the standard fee; (b) no student will pay fees up-front; (c) it would be wrong to oblige universities to charge students higher fees than necessary.

The government did make concessions, but not at the expense of universities.

It increased the maintenance grant for the poorest students from the original proposal of £1,000 to £2,700, allowed graduates to write off debts after 25 years and increased the maintenance loan entitlement.

These changes strengthen the Bill. They ensure the poorest students will be no worse off (and probably better off) than under the current system, while universities will receive an extra 30 per cent in fee income for UK and EU undergraduates.

At Essex we hope to ensure through bursary schemes that all students currently eligible for full or partial fee waivers (about 50per cent) are no more indebted than now.

This would still leave a significant increase in fee income to improve teaching facilities, reduce staff student ratios and improve staff salaries.

However, the government's proposals are not yet law. There will be more hard fought debates and close votes at report stage, in the House of Lords and at third reading. It is in the interest of the University's staff and students that the Bill is passed.

To claim victory would be foolish
From Darren Jones, Essex SU President

The second reading represented the biggest Parliamentary revolt in 50 years. The government may have secured enough votes to proceed, but to claim victory would be foolish.

The high level of backbench rebellion was because Labour MPs did not want to be responsible for condemning higher education to a market based system where choices are made according to cost.

Those MPs who rebelled understand the content of the Bill and comprehend the damage it would inflict on universities. They know the introduction of variable fees would represent the thin end of the wedge. If the variable element is introduced, in years to come, universities will have the power to set fees at whatever level they like. Some institutions will charge tens of thousands of pounds and poorer students will suffer.

The concessions offered by the government were piecemeal, put together as the vote drew close. If the government was confident its proposals would not impact on poorer students then why try to spin concessions as proof that poorer students would not be put off by higher fees?

Further examination of the concessions reveals that no student will be better off, only vice-chancellors will benefit. Although the money raised by top-up fees will not plug the funding gap.

Opposition to the Bill from Universities UK and the Russell Group subsided as they realised that letting the Bill pass is the least painful way to get fees raised to levels they want. Some institutions have already said they will charge £15,000 a year.

Although the government scraped through the second reading, the Bill has a long way to go. Students should be encouraged by the opposition to top-up fees and continue campaigning to ensure the Bill is defeated in the latter stages of the Parliamentary process.

If we don't, we will condemn future students to a system that is the preserve of the rich with many courses and institutions out of the price range of thousands. We cannot ignore the threat of a market in our education system; where variable fees, will lead to variable pay, will lead to variable quality in education.

Also in the printed March edition of Wyvern:

• Children's Legal Centre continues groundbreaking work
• University's £10 million student!
• Writing help for internationals
• AUT and NUS unite at the picket lines
• Saving marine life the Essex way
• Top family law judge gives annual lecture
• Little green planet the subject of Colchester lecture