

The interview with Nirmal Aryal in Nepali can be read online, click here!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH)
Latest research and knowledge exchange news at Bournemouth University
The interview with Nirmal Aryal in Nepali can be read online, click here!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH)
Yesterday (Sunday 15th October) Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen from BU’s Department of Midwifery and Health Sciences presented a PhD Thesis Writing Workshop at Tribhuvan University (TU), the largest and oldest university in Nepal. The session was organised by Prof. Dr. Bhimsen Devkota in the Graduate School of Education, he is also Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences at BU. Prof. Devkota is currently also involved in a major grant application to the NIHR. This application is together with colleagues in Pakistan and led by Prof. Vanora Hundly in the Department of Midwifery and Health Sciences.
Most people, including students, in Nepal only have one day, Saturday off as weekend. So teaching on a Sunday is normal here. As you would expect from an audience of largely PhD students, during and at the end of the session there was a very good range of very good questions. The teaching session was also an opportunity to promote our textbook ACADEMIC WRITING AND PUBLISHING IN HEALTH AND SOCIAL SCIENCES. This book was published April last year in Kathmandu.
This week Bournemouth University organised two dissemination events for our risk of kidney disease study in Nepalese migrant workers in the Middle East and Malaysia. A previous blog reported on the first event in the capital Kathmandu (see details here!) . These dissemination events have generated a loads of media coverage in Nepal, both in Nepali and in English.
The study was led by Bournemouth University and a charity in Nepal which whom we have been collaborating for two decades, called Green Tara Nepal. This important study, the first of its kind, was conducted among the Nepalese migrant workers and a comparison group of non-migrants from the same community. This study was funded by The Colt Foundation, based in the UK. In the field it was supported by the Madhes Province Public Health Laboratory, the United Nations’ International Organization for Migration and University College London (UCL).
Dr Pramod Raj Regmi (Principal Academic in International Health in Bournemouth University’s Department of Nursing Sciences) is the lead researcher and our team further comprises researchers Dr Nirmal Aryal and Prof Edwin van Teijlingen (both from BU’s Faculty of Health & Social Sciences), and in Nepal clinicians: Prof Dr Arun Sedhai, Dr Radheshyam KC and Dr Shrawan Kumar Mishra.
Prof Edwin van Teijlingen
This mixed-methods study adopted Disadvantaged Populations eGFR Epidemiology Study (DEGREE) protocol which combines a questionnaire around living and working conditions abroad with biological measurements. This study, funded by the UK-based Colt Foundation, is the first of its kind in Nepal. The BU team comprises Dr. Pramod Regmi, Principal Academic and Dr. Nirmal Aryal, Postdoctoral Researcher, both in the Department of Nursing Science, and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, in the Department of Midwifery & Health Sciences. This event yesterday in Hotel Radisson in Kathmandu was first of two dissemination events, the second one will on Wednesday 11 October in the fieldwork area. In Kathmandu some 45-50 people attended including on of the regional ministers of Labour, Employment & Transport.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
The sessions with FCHVs are crucial capacity building as part of our interdisciplinary study ‘The impact of federalisation on Nepal’s health system: a longitudinal analysis’. I had the pleasure of saying a few words about our international project which started in 2020 and will run to 2024. It is funded by the Health System Research Initiative, a UK collaboration between three funders: the MRC (Medical research Council), the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, and the Welcome Trust. The research team includes researchers from MMIHS (Kathmandu), and PHASE Nepal (Bhaktapur), the University of Sheffield, Bournemouth University, and the University of Huddersfield (the three original UK co-applicants), and researchers now based at the University of Greenwich, the University of Essex and Canterbury Christ Church University.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH)
After many emails about predatory journals and conferences, today I received an email about a predatory academic prize. Over the years there have been many BU Research Blogs warning readers about predatory journals, for example in 2014, 2015, 2018, and in 2019, and also about fake conferences (e.g. in 2017). It was inevitable that fake academic prizes would be the next trick. The email announces that for US$ 225 the prize is mine! This development fits in with the many messages I have received about having ‘won’ prizes on platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.
Today’s predatory prize announcement is still very much in its infancy as scammers from the ‘Asia International Research Award 2023’ did not pick the greatest paper written in 2020 by the first author Dr Preeti Mahato, formerly in BU’s Faculty of Health & Social Sciences, and now Lecturer in Global Health at Royal Holloway , University of London. If they had wanted to make the award scam more believable they would have chosen the PloS one paper from her BU PhD work in Nepal [1]. Instead the announcement list a paper with much older data based on secondary analysis [2], not a bad paper, but not a winner either.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
References
Lots of meaty topics for you to chew over this week. The student cost of living debate had a hearing in parliament. The Lifelong Learning (Higher Education Fee Limits) Act 2023 has received royal assent and we’ve a pop out summary on the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill. The OfS received strong criticism in the Lords Industry and Regulators Committee report. We’ve the latest on visa fee increases, clearing and oodles of research news.
Parliament has now entered conference recess but government business will continue over the next few weeks. There will also be items of interest from the party conferences which will receive closer scrutiny this year given the impending general election.
As always if you need this update, or the pop out summaries, in a different format for accessibility please email us on policy@bournemouth.ac.uk
Lifelong Learning (HE Fee Limits) Bill
The Lifelong Learning Bill finished its passage through the Lords and the King has given Royal Assent. You’ll recall this Bill contained limited detail and will be padded out through secondary legislation further down the line – meaning the Government of the day will retain control and be able to tweak the implementation details when they wish. Note the name change: it is now about lifelong learning not lifelong loan entitlement.
During the debate Baroness Barran, the Government’s representative, thanked the former Education Ministers and Secretaries of State for their insight (Lord Blunkett, Lord Willetts and Lord Jo Johnson).
Baroness Barran stated: The LLE will become the route for people who require student finance for levels 4 to 6 study across higher and further education. In introducing the LLE, we want to do as much as possible to make it accessible and affordable for the most disadvantaged. And confirmed that the Government would monitor the concerns the Lords raised at Report Stage, that the number of learning hours in a credit wouldn’t be changed unless sector standards change, and that the alternative student finance product compatible with Islamic finance principles would be delivered as soon as operationally possible after 2025 (further update coming on this later in 2023).
Labour’s spokesperson, Baroness Twycross, confirmed their support for the Bill’s aim: we support the idea that people can access funding to undertake the learning they need throughout their career. With people undertaking portfolio careers and with continual changes in technology and society, it is no longer the case that what you learn through a traditional three-year degree course is all that you will need in your work for the next 45 years or so. But reminded that the detail (scope) of the Bill was limited and felt a more formal review process for several aspects could have been set to safeguard against unintended consequences.
Baroness Garden of Frognal (representing the Liberal Democrats) highlighted the party remained concerned about how many adults will wish to take on debt in order to improve their learning, and we look forward to hearing updates from the Minister about how many people have done so. From these Benches, we feel that grants would be a much more effective way of persuading adults to learn. But, of course, we are all totally in favour of lifelong learning, and we wish the Bill well.
You may have noted the name change to Lifelong Learning (HE Fees Limits) Act, previously it was called the Lifelong Loan Entitlement. Apparently, the name change was decided upon following engagement with the sector. For those that have been in this game a long time you may harbour a small chuckle at the name change when you recall a rival party proposed a similar policy in the early 2000s based on, and called, Lifelong Learning.
The DfE published a policy paper on the LLE – it provides a useful introduction to the key details of the intended LLE operationalisation. Here are the next steps we can expect from the government, including two consultations:
In autumn 2023:
In spring 2024:
In autumn 2024 we will lay the secondary legislation that will set out the rest of the LLE funding system in parliament
In spring 2025 we will launch the LLE personal account where users can track their loan entitlement and apply for designated courses and modules
Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill: The Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill is a controversial bill seen as eroding university autonomy and there was dissent from some parties at the detailed Committee Stage (although other HE sector members agree with its legal principles). You can read a summary of the evidence provided in the early Committee stage sessions here. The bill now awaits a date for Report Stage. Wonkhe also update us that: The Home Office has released draft guidance on the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (FIRS), designed to monitor foreign influence on UK politics. Sector-specific guidance will follow – supported by consultation panels from the research and higher education sector – but there are a handful of examples given of activities either requiring or not requiring registration under the scheme that make reference to international students or staff.
The future for education policy?
The New Conservatives published a ‘manifesto’: plan to upskill Britain which Research Professional view as an attempt to push Conservative education policies to the right. It’s keen on developing technical routes and reforming the apprenticeship levy and technical skills in general.
It’s less keen on universities stating: Since the reforms of 1992, too many universities have not been fit for purpose. Steps to address skills shortages in Britain and rising student debt should not shy away from one of the main culprits – rip-off universities. And: The false promise of university – Long gone are the days when university was the hallmark of success. Many young people today could have much more opportunity if they opted for on-the-job training alongside receiving an industry recognised qualification, rather than go to university. But too few school leavers make that choice [apparently because they’re promised higher starting salaries].
The manifesto calls for a crack down on poor quality and less people attending university- redirecting the public funds saved to quality technical and vocational education. And they call for minimum academic grades to qualify for student loans: Introducing minimum grade requirements at GCSE-level would see an approximate reduction of 10 percent in the number of students qualifying for student loans. Although introducing minimum eligibility requirements of Level 4 grades at GCSE English and Maths would close off student loans to around 40 percent of all students… They would also like to ensure student loans are re-paid – although NHS employed graduates would be offered a three year loan repayment exemption.
Research Professional say the ‘manifesto’ is full of holes – you can read their take down of the manifesto in Blue on blue.
Government role changes: Dehenna Davison MP has stepped away from her post as Levelling Up Minister due to ill health. Jacob Young MP will take over.
Free Speech: Wonkhe highlight that the OfS has published indicative timelines for the introduction of free speech related duties and provisions – under the proposals, 1 August 2024 would see the launch of the new complaints scheme and the coming into force of new statutory duties from providers and students’ unions. Provisions relating to OfS’s monitoring of overseas funding and new conditions of registration around free speech and academic freedom would come into force on 1 September 2025.
ARIA
The construction of ARIA continues – this week their programme directors announced their key questions and invited input from the R&D community. For colleagues familiar with the expression of Areas of Research Interest this is the ARIA equivalent. Although it’s not clear how universities can feed their research in to answer the questions yet. However, Wonkhe, have their finger on the pulse and inform that each set of programme questions has a budget of £50m. And that most of the programme directors have joined from academia. They are now mandated with developing a concrete programme, based on the “area or set of areas they feel compelled to explore” – these include programmable plants, interfaces with the human nervous system, climate intervention technologies, and robotics. Wonkhe also have a neat blog on how ARIA is taking shape. Excerpts:
The team as a whole tells us some important things about ARIA.
The first is that they are aligned to what the broader scientific community would consider to be some of the world’s greatest threats and challenges. AI, climate change, and food security, would appear at the top of most lists of the most pressing issues facing humanity…
Equally, the team straddles a hinterland between having programme directors that have more conventional academic careers with big interests, academics that have run or built companies, and programme directors that lean more into business and technology worlds but with significant academic credentials…
…this [the programme directors] is a group of people who probably ordinarily would never hang out together…The mix of expertise and backgrounds speaks to the fundamental challenge and promise of ARIA. Its whole purpose of existence is to fund the things that funders would not usually fund in ways they would not usually fund them. The challenge is to not only discover new things but to make a new disparate team function with some of the standard practices needed to make scientific breakthroughs… And a tolerance for constructive failure that will see programmes potentially outlive ministers, funding, and maybe even ARIA itself.
Quick Research News
De-risking international reliance
King’s College London policy institute published The China question revisited: de-risking higher education and research. The report was led by previous Minster for Universities, Lord (Jo) Johnson who has long been a supporter of international students balanced by the need to minimise risks to the nation and financial stability of HE providers, e.g. through diversification of international recruitment to reduce the reliance on some countries, including China.
The report highlights that China has become an increasingly entrenched collaborator on research and a key source of doctoral students crucial to the strength of the UK’s research system. The paper proposes a range of measures to de-risk HE’s relationship with China:
If you’ve been following the policy update for a while you may remember our review of a Westminster Higher Education Forum event on this topic earlier this year. The calls to action in the report are exactly those expressed by Johnson previously – he’s nothing if not considered and consistent. Given his influence in the House of Lords, and the strong ex-Ministerial powerhouse of Johnson – Blunkett – Willets, we can expect some pressure from the peers on this and other key HE matters over the next year.
Visas
Legislation to increase the immigration and nationality fees has been laid in Parliament. The changes:
If approved the new fees will apply from 4 October 2023. Changes to the planned increase to the Immigration Health Surcharge are scheduled to be introduced later in 2023. The Home Office equality impact assessment on the fees is here – its concludes there is no direct or indirect discrimination based on protected characteristics observed for the changes to student fees.
The latest visa letter from Home Secretary Suella Braverman is here. The letter is dated 3 August but it has only just been released to the public via the Lords Science and Tech Committee.
There’s also a parliamentary question on visas granted under the High Potential Individual route.
Finally, from Wonkhe, The Erasmus Student Network has published a report on international student perspectives of the UK, based on polling conducted earlier this year (and with EU students notably overrepresented). Almost 16% of 465 respondents who had studied in the UK reported that obtaining a visa was a significant problem, and almost half disagreed that they received enough support from their host university in finding accommodation. Some 77% would have liked more interaction with local students.
OfS Inquiry
From March 2023 the Lords Industry and Regulators Committee ran an inquiry into the work of the OfS looking closely at its effectiveness as a regulator. The committee published their report: Must do better: the Office for Students and the looming crisis facing higher education. As is clear form the title the Lords concluded that the regulator is performing poorly, even accounting for the extra challenges facing HE today. The report concludes that the OfS has poor relations with both providers and students, a controlling and arbitrary approach to regulation, and a lack of independence from the Government.
On the OfS’ duties and decision making the committee highlight that the OfS has legal duties, but substantial freedom to pick and choose what it prioritises, creating uncertainty. Also the Lords believe the other regulators within the HE sector cause duplication and red tape.
The Lords recommend:
On financial sustainability of HE the committee notes the undergraduate tuition fees have been frozen since 2018 with their value further eroded by inflation and that universities are relying more on the income boost provided by international (and postgraduate) fees – which sits uncomfortably with government concerns over the influence of other nations. Bottom line – the committee states that current HE funding is not sustainable and worries about the geopolitical vulnerabilities (in 2021/22 22.3% of student came from China). The peers state we were not convinced that the regulator has paid enough attention to the financial challenges facing the sector.
Recommendations:
On students the Lords committee highlights that despite the OfS explicitly being set up to regulate in the interests of students it has never defined what these interests are, creating a suspicion that it uses them as a smokescreen for political priorities. And that students often feel their views are not acted upon, especially where they do not match with what the OfS wants to do. The committee gives the example of from the OfS’ Student Panel who stated that when student issues of importance contradicted with the Government’s views the OfS threatened the Panel’s future.
Recommendations:
On regulation and sector relations the committee acknowledged evidence from HE sector representatives that found the OfS over controlling in their approach to regulation:
The peers welcomed the OfS’ focus on value for money for students, however, they felt the OfS did not provide HEIs with value for money because of their regulatory approach and particularly when higher registration fees partly reflect the regulator’s own expanding remit.
Recommendations:
On independence from Government the committee questioned whether the OfS really was the independent regulator it claims to be:
Recommendations
Lord Hollick, Chair of the Industry and Regulators Committee said:
The Government must respond to the committee’s report and recommendations by 13 November. It remains to be seen if the Government will throw the OfS under the bus (unlikely) or agree to consider a small number of actions (probable, and most likely those that place the onus on the OfS to deliver) whilst arguing the point on other items. Of course, the Government can completely refute the committee’s report if it wishes too – again this is unlikely because the OfS has already responded to the report conceding improvements are needed in some areas. You can read OfS Chair, Lord Wharton’s, response on the OfS blog and Susan Lapworth’s, OfS Chief Executive, response in Learning lessons – a Research Professional blog.
The report may not be a bad thing for the OfS. They have been willing to concede some shortcomings, and the committee’s recommendations recommend the OfS should be given more freedom and leeway to work outside of the government dictat they currently operate within.
Research Professional (RP) spoke with two members of the Lords committee – Chair Clive Hollick and Ann Taylor (both Labour). RP highlight some of the frank quotes from the Members here.
RP: to what extent do they feel the OfS has fallen short of its objectives, particularly compared with other regulators—and can the trust that has been lost with the higher education sector be regained?
Hollick: It is a relatively new regulator, so it is still finding its feet, if I could put it that way—in response to which, Taylor quips that this is a “very generous” bit of context. Hollick agrees.
They also explore what the Peers think of the OfS denouncement of the QAA:
There was great coverage of the committee report – here are some good sources if you want to read the editorials:
Research Professional: Friends in high places and Lords a-meeting.
Wonkhe blogs:
One obvious area for attention is expectations of providers. Even if OfS was seen as credible in its efforts to pursue the interests of students, there is little doubt that some of the “burdens” of regulation might be streamlined to allow the sector to get on with delivering on those interests…
But efficiencies and engagement can only get a reformed regulator and its beleaguered providers so far. There’s a case to be made that expecting one regulator to have a grip of the range of issues affecting students’ university experience and act as a proxy for bodies as diverse as the Charity Commission, the Competition and Markets Authority, and various local authorities is too much to ask. We need bodies looking out for the interests of students, that are worried about their housing and health, and that are capable of causing those things to be discussed and resolved… if the expectations on OfS are just that little bit too large – yet reflect a wider problem of what we ask universities to do while absolving others from ever thinking about over two million citizens.
There is further coverage in the national media: the Mail, the Standard, the BBC, and Byline Times.
For full detail read: the full published committee report on OfS effectiveness.
Quality Regulation
QAA: This week Research Professional highlighted how the House of Lords critique raising concerns over the effectiveness of the OfS is a small victory for the QAA (Quality Assurance Agency) which stepped down from the role of Designated Quality Body (April 2023) in protest that the English regulatory framework was at odds with European standards. QAA continues to oversee quality in the other nations of the UK as well as internationally. The Lords report recommends that the OfS urgently aligns its framework for quality with international standards, including reinstating an independent Designated Quality Body.
QAA Chief Executive Vicki Stott stated: We’re really pleased to see that the committee recognises the importance of strengthening the current oversight of quality in England by returning to alignment with international good practice and for quality assessment to be undertaken by an independent body… You can’t simply take a self-assessment review and pass it to the body that is doing the regulation and funding and expect the two of them to mediate the accuracy of that assessment for themselves.
The OfS has responded to the report by saying it will consider the findings carefully over the next few weeks.
You can read the full Research Professional write up here.
On the QAA Wonkhe also inform us that they’ve released a briefing note with a definition of quality in UK higher education, intended for policymakers and other stakeholders internationally. Indicators of quality set out include staff and students thriving professionally and academically, a relevant and challenging learning experience, and external experience being sought and used. And:
This morning, and with impeccable timing, the QAA publishes the first in a new series of briefings on the “future of quality in England”—which it says “builds on” the Lords report. Among other things, it calls for England to “realign” its approach to quality assurance with “internationally agreed good practice”. Read The Future of Quality in England. The paper suggests policymakers commit to:
Wonkhe blogs:
Cost of living
This week HEPI published on the student cost of living in: How to Beat a Cost-of-Learning Crisis: Universities’ Support for Students. They find:
Recommendations:
The publication came ahead of this week’s Westminster Hall debate on student cost of living. We have a short summary of the debate cut and thrust here. In the main, Minister Halfon followed the well-worn party line on disadvantage student numbers being up, extra funding for skills, and toughed out the calls for additional hardship funding. He agreed to look into the issue of students taking poorer quality accommodation due to price constraints and explained the government were trying to target hardship funding as there isn’t a consistent national picture. Although it appears the ‘targeting’ is simply the previous redistributed leftover budget that institutions already received.
Research professional also have an excellent summary and analysis on the student cost of living recent publications and debate.
Disciplinary process Pinsent Masons have a blog on disciplinary procedures following the landmark High Court ruling whereby a former student successfully sued their university for breach of contract. It concludes universities should understand the case before making hasty changes to their processes: It is therefore very much about the appropriate training of disciplinary panels and those involved in disciplinary processes, and how they should properly assess and test the evidence put before them – rather than this being a strict process point requiring the need to urgently revise procedures.
Medical Bursaries Vs Loans
While pressure is being applied for allied health professions to reinstate bursaries or receive loan forgiveness the Institute for Fiscal Studies has moved to an opposite position for medical and dental students stating the NHS bursary should be binned and tuition fee loans rolled out. Wonkhe cover the story:
The NHS bursary for medical and dental students should be scrapped and replaced with tuition fee loans, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has argued, with the money saved spent on NHS staff pay. The think tank contends that the bursary “displaces student loan funding” – in some cases leading to less upfront support for those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds – and ultimately benefits high-earning medical graduates who are able to pay off their loans earlier.
It also notes that “Plan 5” student loan reforms in England will benefit medical graduates by around £20,000, undermining one of the original arguments for the bursary which was to protect those who spent many years in training from the effects of high interest rates.
However, the Sutton Trust disagree and call for caution because they believe scrapping the NHS bursary may make medicine less accessible for disadvantaged students. Peter Lampl, Founder of the Sutton Trust, stated: Any change to the NHS bursary should look at the support provided to students across the NHS professions rather than just for medicine…This is to avoid funnelling less well-off young people towards other health professions and away from medicine for financial reasons. We should also ensure that medical students have adequate access to maintenance support to live on, in whichever form that is provided.
Similarly Wonkhe report on the Union position to move away from tuition fees (across all programmes): The Trades Union Congress has carried a motion in favour of campaigning for the abolition of [all] tuition fees, improved pay and conditions in the higher education sector, and the tackling of education “cold spots”. The motion was proposed by the University and College Union (UCU) to the annual congress.
Loneliness
DCMS published an interesting YouGov survey exploring (young) students’ concerns across a range of areas such as friendships and fitting in, cooking and cleaning for themselves and finding housing, homesickness and loneliness, managing money and the difficulty of their course. It shows the range of intensity of concerns in the above areas. Including that 43% of students worry they’ll be judged if they admit feeling lonely. The factors students found least helpful to alleviate the loneliness were speaking to university staff and online resources. The Government has launched a loneliness awareness campaign but it’s received criticism from some sector members.
Quick student news
Parliamentary Question: The Government has no remit to intervene in the student housing market (re: overseas students).
Parliamentary Question: tackling anti-Semitic and pro-Iranian messaging in universities.
Parliamentary Question: non-continuation of first year students (2015-2019)
Wonkhe blog: universities can do more to address gambling harms
Finally there was a Westminster Hall debate on UK support for At-risk Academics who are working overseas. Julian Lewis MP reflected positively on the work of the Council for Assisting Refugee Academics (CARA) and noted that CARA fellows had a (recent) 100% visa application success rate. He called on the Home Office and UK Visas and Immigration to continue to support at-risk academics, and on the government to consider a long-term follow-on scheme. Sarah Dines MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Home Department, responded on behalf of the Immigration Minister noting the benefits at-risk academics bring to the UK and thanked CARA and the wider university sector for their contribution. Research Professional has a good article on the record numbers of Ukrainian and Russian academics placed through CARA in the last 18 months.
Wonkhe report record numbers secured university places through clearing this year despite a dip in overall recruitment:
16,040 UK 18 year olds found a place through Clearing after releasing themselves from a previous choice this year – 32% (the largest single pool) of all Clearing placements. Today’s figures come as we reach 28 days after A level results day, usually considered the end of the main application cycle.
Overall recruitment is down by just over 5,000 from last year, though this still represents a growth of 12.9% over 2019 – the last year to feature a comparable results profile immediately prior to Covid-19. Similarly, this year saw a slight decline (around 500) in international recruitment beyond the EU, though this was 25% up on 2019. The BBC and The Evening Standard cover the news.
Savanta have stated the dip in top A level grades drove the increased demand for Clearing this year: early data from UCAS suggests that by the day after results day, 10,400 school leavers had been through Clearing to secure a university place (compared to 6,600 placed at the same point last year), with fewer securing their first or second choice university.
Savanta also have a downloadable report for colleagues interested in how universities approached the marketing and comms around Clearing.
Research Professional has an entertaining and useful read, UCAS pocus, on the UCAS data released for this year’s student intake numbers. It begins: Once more, it is time to release the party poppers and streamers over in Cheltenham. The headline comes with more spin than the average washing machine…. The press release goes on to say that “growing numbers of students that have been placed at their firm choice are using clearing to secure a new choice of university. In total, 16,040 UK 18-year-old applicants found a new course after releasing themselves from a previously held choice. This compares to 14,760 in 2022, and 12,170 in 2019.”…That all sounds wonderful until you pause for a moment to reflect that this must surely mean that “record numbers” of students were therefore denied their first-choice institutions or failed to make the necessary grades.
… Some 32 per cent declined their original firm choice—this is the largest single pool. Another 30 per cent did not meet the terms of their offer and were released into clearing on results day, while 38 per cent either applied directly into clearing or held no firm choice.
That is, as Ucas acknowledges, an unprecedented use of clearing, which is surely something that cannot be good for either prospective students or university recruitment planners. It all rather raises the question of whether we should now get serious about a post-qualification admissions process.
Care leavers
Think tank Civitas published Breaking the Care Ceiling: How many care leavers go to university? In 2022 the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care estimated the lifetime cost of poor outcomes for children with experience of our care system was over £1 million per child. The report argues that graduating university turns the poor outcomes around.
Wonkhe have two blogs:
Other news
BTEC gap: The Protect Student Choice Campaign published Desperate measures: data and the reform of Level 3 qualifications finding that 155,000 young people – 13% of all sixth form students in England – could be left without a suitable study programme from 2026, given the planned reduction in AGQs [applied general qualifications] and slow growth of T levels. See chart below. They also provide examples of when they believe the government has misrepresented data to suggest AGQs such as BTECs perform poorly. You can read their points on the data here.
HTQs: The Government’s policy line has been to grow Higher Technical Qualifications (HTQ) for several years, and it’s a particular passion for current Universities Minister Robert Halfon. If you’re not quite sure what a HTQ is we’ve got an explainer (below) and the Government has released a policy paper providing an overview of how the funding and approval system works for HTQs.
The key information to understand about HTQs is that they are an alternative qualification to apprenticeships and degrees. They are level 4 or 5 qualifications such as HNCs, HNDs and foundation degrees. They bridge the gap between A/T Levels and degrees and are taught at a range of FE, HE and independent providers. The Government plans to expand the range of HTQ courses by 2025 – there’s a list here (scroll down to Available Subjects).
Creative & Arts round up: An interesting Guardian article noting the disappearance of art schools. Wonkhe also had creative content this week: All political parties should commit to a series of measures in support of creative education, a coalition of sector bodies has urged. The Creative Education Coalition – made up of sector bodies including University Alliance, GuildHE and London Higher, as well as institutions and subject groupings – has set out a manifesto with eight “asks” for revitalising creative arts education from school level onwards, including retention of BTEC qualifications in creative areas and an end to “low value” rhetoric around arts subjects and careers. There’s a Wonkhe blog on the topic too: A manifesto for creative education. Finally, AHRC has announced a reduction in the number of PhD students it funds from 425 to around 300 by 2029–30. There will be an increase in “strategic investments that fill specific sector-related gaps,” with a lower number of studentships through its Doctoral Training Partnerships – these will also be funded through a formula approach, rather than competition, in a move designed to reduce administrative burden (Wonkhe).
Commuters: The COVID Social Mobility and Opportunities (COSMO) study published new analysis of their cohort data and report that this year’s university applicants look more likely to stay at home during term time than previous cohorts.
Midwifery educators: Wonkhe – A lack of senior midwifery educators is severely impacting the UK’s ability to recruit more midwives, a new report has found. The State of Midwifery report from the Royal College of Midwifery (RCM) highlights growing numbers of people leaving midwifery education – with poor working conditions and low pay among the main reasons for the resignations. It says the drop off in educators has increased staff-to-student ratios in the UK, and in the 2022-23 academic year there were fewer recruits than previous years. The number of midwifery students leaving their courses before graduating is also rising, with around 15 per cent of students failing to complete their degree in 2021-22. The Belfast Telegraph has the story.
UUK International published Lessons from the UK higher education sector response to the invasion of Ukraine. Full report here, summary here. UUKi introduce the report: the report highlights how the UK sector was mobilised to support universities in Ukraine and sets out ways in which we might better respond to future crises, while recognising that there is no ‘one size fits all’ model. It reflects on the policy, funding and political levers which have enabled a broadbased response and how these need to be considered when formulating a response to emerging crises at individual, institutional and sector levels. The report sets out a framework that institutions might employ to help develop and tailor such responses, providing a practical tool that can help maximise the effectiveness and impact of university action.
To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email policy@bournemouth.ac.uk. A BU email address is required to subscribe.
External readers: Thank you to our external readers who enjoy our policy updates. Not all our content is accessible to external readers, but you can continue to read our updates which omit the restricted content on the policy pages of the BU Research Blog – here’s the link.
Did you know? You can catch up on previous versions of the policy update on BU’s intranet pages here. Some links require access to a BU account- BU staff not able to click through to an external link should contact eresourceshelp@bournemouth.ac.uk for further assistance.
JANE FORSTER | SARAH CARTER
VC’s Policy Advisor Policy & Public Affairs Officer
Follow: @PolicyBU on Twitter | policy@bournemouth.ac.uk
The best bits from the summer period!
To keep the overall size of this policy update smaller we have included several linked documents to provide further detail on some items. These documents are in pdf format and accessed through a hyperlink in the text. If you would like the original documents (in Word) for accessibility purposes, please email us on policy@bournemouth.ac.uk
Rishi has reshuffled his Ministers and you can find all the Cabinet members here. All the junior ministers and their portfolios for both departments are here.
It’s stability in the main for both departments. David Johnston OBE joins the DfE as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (mainly care, SEND and schools focussed but with free speech in education within his brief too), replacing Claire Coutinho, who was promoted). Johnson was previously Chief Executive of the Social Mobility Foundation (a charity which runs a range of programmes that incorporate mentoring, internships, university application support and skills development to help young people from low-income backgrounds enter universities and professions). Johnson has been active in the media on education, generally supportive of technical education, and tweets about social mobility factors a lot.
Labour has reshuffled the Shadow Cabinet appointments – I’ve put all the appointments (both new and those that have remained in post) here. Of most interest are:
Finally!!! The Government has announced that the UK has made a deal and will associate with the Horizon Europe and Copernicus programmes through a bespoke agreement with the EU. Researchers can apply for grants and bid to take part in projects under the Horizon programme, as a fully associated member from now until the end of this Horizon programme in 2027. Once adopted, the UK will also be able to join the governance of EU programmes – which the UK has been excluded from over the last three years.
The UK will also associate to Copernicus, the European Earth Observation programme. This will provide the UK’s earth observation sector with access to specialist data, e.g. to help with early flood and fire warnings, and be able to bid for contracts (we’ve been excluded for the last three years).
It may be a case of the devil is in the detail however, the Government’s press release sets out the financial protections that have been agreed for the UK:
UUKI state the agreement must be adopted by the EU-UK Specialised Committee on Union Programmes. They also clarify:
From Minister Donelan’s written statement:
Links: Government press announcement; EU/UK joint statement; FAQs on the deal (provided by EU)
Press: Guardian. Research Professional: charm offensive, plan B still on cards (Minister Freeman), implications for Switzerland. UUK warm welcome
The Future Research Assessment Programme (FRAP) is gradually wrapping up following the latest publications. The FRAP addressed how research might be measured (and rewarded) in 2028 and proposed a number of changes to the current REF. The reports that informed the planned changes have been released. This Research Professional article is a good quick read, it begins: we learned what had influenced the thinking behind these changes, with the publication of a summary of stakeholder engagements, an analysis of equality, diversity and inclusion in the 2021 Research Excellence Framework and another analysis, commissioned from the policy-advice group Technopolis, of how much that exercise had cost to run.
You can find all the reports here and the stakeholder engagement summary here.
Wonkhe have a blog too: REF is expensive because it’s good value.
The Science and Technology Committee published their interim report into the governance of AI: summary here. There’s a world first summit on AI safety to be held 1-2 November. International governments, leading AI companies and experts in research will unite for crucial talks and agree a set of rapid, targeted measures for furthering safety in global AI use. Matt Clifford and Jonathan Black have been appointed as the Prime Minister’s Representatives.
Life sciences competitiveness indicators 2023
Life sciences competitiveness indicators 2023: life science ecosystem
Life sciences competitiveness indicators 2023: user guide
Life sciences competitiveness indicators 2023: data tables
Read more about the government’s latest plans to incentivise quality below. In that context, the outcomes of the first two of the OfS investigations into quality related matters – 2 of the 8 business and management investigations – were reported this week. The OfS haven’t announced any sanctions yet, but number controls could be in their toolbox. The VC of London South Bank University (no concerns were found after the investigation) wrote for HEPI about the experience.
Way back (February 2018) PM Theresa May announced a review of post-18 education and funding whereby the Government consulted on HE reform, and the Augar report (2019) resulted. There was a lot of change on the table for consideration and the Government launched further consultation concluding in January 2021 and February 2022. The Government introduced piecemeal changes since the Augar report, most recently laying the legislation for the Lifelong Loan Entitlement (implemented from 2025). This Government response document is the latest in these piecemeal changes and continues to focus on changes to ensure high quality HE provision across the sector. The Government states:
We have set out…what more government will do to continue to drive up the quality of higher education. This includes asking the Office for Students (OfS) to use recruitment limits to help drive out provision which is not delivering good student outcomes, a sharp focus on franchising arrangements, and a reduction in the maximum fee and loan limits for classroom-based foundation years. We will also ask the OfS to consider how they can take graduate earnings into account in their quality regime. We know many factors influence graduate earnings – but students have a right to expect that higher education will lead to improved employment opportunities and commensurate earnings… These reforms represent the start, and not the end, of our determination to drive out low-quality provision. We are confident that this will be successful with the support of the sector. The Government has decided not to proceed with a minimum eligibility requirement at this point in time, but if the quality reforms set out here do not result in the improvements we seek, we will consider further action if required.
Student Number Controls: The government believes that as most HEIs charge the maximum fee, combined with no student number controls, it has incentivised providers to expand student numbers on courses that are less expensive to teach, but which may only provide limited benefits to graduates and the wider economy.
There was a consultation on whether to introduce student number controls to prevent ‘the growth of low quality provision’. Instead the Government decided to task (via statutory guidance) the OfS to consider ‘recruitment limits’ for courses not delivering positive outcomes for students – this is already in train because the OfS is already permitted to impose recruitment limits on providers. However, the Government’s newly announced plans concern the OfS’ existing powers and regulatory framework, including the B3 condition of registration on student outcomes (continuation rates, course completion, and graduate progression). Recruitment limits won’t be applied to a course without a prior investigation, and providers will have opportunities to set out contextual information for why a course might not be delivering the student outcomes required by the B3 condition.
The OfS is expected to consider how it can incorporate graduate earnings into its regulatory regime for quality purposes too.
Foundation Year Fee Caps: Foundation years are a route in for students that do not meet the entry requirement for a particular course. However, the Augar report questioned how effective and necessary they were for students. And with the introduction of the Lifelong Loan Entitlement the Government does not want the full lifelong entitlement to be taken by one degree course entered through a foundation year. They have also been vociferous in their questioning of foundation year costs and urged for some time for the fees charged to be lower. Through the document the Government has stipulated the from 2025/26 the maximum fee and loan limit for foundation years will be lowered to £5,760 for classroom-based subjects whilst the maximum fee and loan limits of £9,250 will remain for all other subjects.
Here’s a little more detail:
Throughout the Government’s campaign to reduce foundation years undertaken, and reduce their costs where there do continue has been the push back from the access and participation community who state foundation years remove barriers and allow non-traditional or disadvantaged students to enter HE and ultimately achieve a degree.
Finally, other consultation questions covered plans for a new national scholarship scheme and how to grow the provision of high-quality level 4 and 5 courses. The Government document didn’t contain any detail on the scholarship scheme, however, they have confirmed they will not change the maximum fee limits for level 4 and 5 courses from £9,250 at this time.
The research on the impact on students of the cost-of-living crisis also found that 1 in 5 students were working more than 20 hours a week alongside their studies, with 64% of those with jobs saying it negatively impacted their students.
PwC and StudentCrowd published Student accommodation: Availability and rental growth trends July 2023 for privately-owned Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) across the UK.
While demand outstripping supply creates an investment opportunity, particularly for private capital, it also represents a challenge for both universities and students. If left unresolved, it is likely to adversely impact affordability of accommodation, the student experience, university reputation and, ultimately, future recruitment of students. With students facing rising costs of living, without a corresponding increase in maintenance loan levels, the cost of accommodation will, for some, become a prohibitive factor in higher education (HE) participation, impacting those from under-represented groups the most.
There are illustrative charts and more detail along with recommendations for colleagues particularly interested in student accommodation – see the full report.
There are three petitions currently in front of parliament relating to pay and financial support (childcare) for healthcare students including student midwives, nurses and paramedics. The petitions call for healthcare students to be paid at least minimum wage for their placement hours and for the 30 hours free childcare offer to be extended to the students. Pay and conditions for healthcare students has been a constant rumble in the background since 2017 when the NHS Bursary and free tuition fees were abolished and students were switched. The strong public support shown for the petitions means a debate has been scheduled and a Government representative will be asked to respond to the petitions.
For colleagues who would benefit from dipping into the full history and detail behind healthcare student’s pay and financial support there is an excellent briefing provided in advance of the parliamentary debate. You can view the petitions here: 610557, 616557 and 6196409.
The House of Commons Library has updated their briefing on student loan statistics. The content is the same as we’ve outlined in recent policy updates. However, what is of interest to the sector is that these briefings are how many non-ministerial policy makers obtain their in-depth information on topics (because they don’t have a departmental team briefing them on the topic). The briefings are impartial (i.e. don’t side with one political party over another) but the content the brief focuses on may lead to debate focusing on these topics in the House. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation and the reinforcement of the focus can lead to a self-fulfilling circle – hence why it’s useful for the sector to be aware of the information the parliamentarians are reading.
For more detail and other student loan statistics you can read the full briefing.
Parliamentary Question: The Plan 5 reforms will make the student loan system fairer for taxpayers and fairer for students, helping to keep the system sustainable in the long term.
Other sources on debt: The cost of student loan debt has been picked up again recently by media. The Times and Martin Lewis ran features on whether it’s better (or not) for parents who can afford to pay upfront for university costs rather than burden their children with long term debt. CAPX wants to replace student loans with ISAs. And Wonkhe report on the small but significant number of students…taking out maintenance loans but not fee loans – in 2021–22 this amounted to £281.2m across 51,000 students. Or 6% of full time English undergraduates. This blog explores the group and considers reasons nicely. There’s a data heavy section in the middle, do skip past it if you’re not keen, and read on further through the blog for more context. Here’s a quick summary of the data elements: The providers where maintenance loans outnumber those with fee loans are mostly connected by a strong access and participation role – that and a recent strategic focus on franchise and partnership arrangements. Wonkhe explain: One possible explanation is that students, agents recruiting students, or some providers are taking advantage of the time period between when students are to access and spend the maintenance loan and when they become liable for the fee loan. We don’t know for sure, but it is certainly one possibility that regulators and those responsible for university partnerships may wish to keep in mind.
UUK report that 73% of UK graduates credit going to university with enabling them to find the job they wanted in under 1 year. In addition the report finds that 79% of graduates say going to university enabled them to build skills that have proved professionally valuable, and 71% of first in their family UK graduates said that going to university opened doors to companies for them.
Employment
Industry knowledge and skills
Increasing social mobility
Vivienne Stern MBE, Chief Executive of Universities UK, said:
The LEO (Longitudinal Education Outcomes) data for 2020-21 has been released. Quick reminder – the LEO data looks at the employment and earnings outcomes of graduates and postgraduates at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years after graduation. One aspect of a university’s performance that the regulator watches with their quality hat on is their graduate outcomes. If you’re interested in graduate outcomes I’d recommend you engage with the short, simple explanations here and there’s plenty to capture your attention further down the page where you can drill down into charts and summaries by student characteristics such as subject, prior attainment, ethnicity, and disadvantage (POLAR). The provider level data is also well worth a browse through. There’s too much of interest for us to cover it all here so do dive in at source.
What we will mention is where media focussed their attention – on the widening pay gap for graduates previously receiving fee school meals. The data shows that at one, three and five years after graduation, graduates whose families claimed free school meals (FSM) were less likely to be in sustained employment, further study or both than graduates whose families did not claim FSM…and their median earnings were lower – 10% lower at 5 years post-graduation. It continued a trend seen in previous years – that the earnings gap increases as the years after graduation increase. You can see the charts and read more of the detail on the gap here.
If you’d prefer a very quick overall here’s what Wonkhe have to say: This latest iteration of the Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO) dataset shows that the impact of Covid-19 as measured by subject area and by industrial area varied widely. Overall, the experience was a negative one for graduate and postgraduate earnings – though in most cases these remained relatively stable in real terms. At a subject level, there appeared to be a greater impact by provider in computing, law, and business and management subjects. This year’s Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO) data drop refers to the 2020–21 tax year – a period during which you may recall that the global economy was subject to a number of shocks. The fascinating thing about what we see from our heavily-caveated data on graduate salaries is how little impact this appears to have had. In most cases graduates could expect a similar level of pay, in real terms, to every other year LEO covers.
And what they read into the politics: All this prompts us to ask what LEO is really for, and what it really shows us. It’s gone from being a central feature of the government’s armoury of tools to identify and destroy “low-quality” courses – thus driving down the cost of the loan system – to featuring only on the data graveyard that is Discover Uni. Even the people who write those “best course for a big salary” articles rely on aggregated CVs rather than an actual government release. One wonders if Wonkhe will change their opinion on this given the weekend’s announcement on the role of graduate data in student number controls.
Plus a blog: LEO – it promised much, but in regulatory terms has delivered little. David Kernohan wonders what went wrong. And another: however, it does offer a useful corrective to the use of provider- and subject-level outcomes measures.
Note: the LEO data is different to the DfE 2022 Graduate labour market statistics (see Graduate Employability section for coverage of the DfE statistics).
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) published an article on the data released exploring the educational attainment of pupils in English towns, using data from the Longitudinal Educational Outcomes (LEO) dataset. It examines how educational attainment differs by town size, deprivation level and the average qualification levels of residents in the previous generation, using LEO data, and focusses on pupils who sat their GCSEs in the 2012 to 2013 school year. A summary provided by Dods Political Intelligence is available here.
This Parliamentary Library paper on Sharia-compliant alternative student finance is a good catch up on the basics and latest news for the alternative student finance system which the Government plan to introduce from 2025. There haven’t been any further developments since this was announced at the beginning of the summer period.
Cost of living: Wonkhe blog – Eighteen months into the biggest cost of living crisis the UK has seen in decades, Jim Dickinson tries to work out if university advice on the costs that students will face has improved.
Mental Health: Wonkhe – Some 30 per cent of undergraduates starting university this September will have a history of missing education due to their mental health, the Unite Students 2023 Applicant Index suggests, drawing on a survey of 2,141 applicants for 2023–24 entry conducted by Savanta in May (and weighted to be broadly representative of the applicant population as a whole). Of these, 24 per cent have missed 20 days or more due to mental health issues. The survey also found that 18 per cent of applicants with a disability say they have no plans to disclose it to their university.
Harassment: The Women and Equalities select committee report Attitudes towards women and girls in educational settings concluded that sexual harassment and abuse of female students and staff is a serious problem in education. They call on the Government to support the following recommendations for implementation in universities
Transport: Parliamentary Question – the cost of public transport on students’ finances and mobility.
Parliamentary Question: Students cost of living (grant question).
The UCAS and Sutton Trust report What influences the choices of would-be apprentices looks at the choices and barriers students face on the journey to an apprenticeship, such as when discovering, applying for and entering a role. Here’s the press release if you prefer the quick read version: Three in five do not pursue apprenticeships because they cannot find one, or here’s an impartial succinct summary of the key points prepared by Dods.
Of note for HE in the report are the recommendations for degree apprenticeships (below) and the recommendation for parity between degrees and apprenticeships (see page 7).
Parliamentary Question: Incentivising universities to provide more higher apprenticeships
The Government responded to the House of Commons Education Committee’s report on The future of post-16 qualifications. Committee report here; Government response here. The Government’s response does not depart from the same party lines you’d expect – rationalising qualifications, the study of maths to age 18, skills bootcamps and is primarily focussed on T levels and apprenticeships. Halfon’s priorities are apparent – HTQs, apprenticeships/skills, and careers advice (especially as relates to T levels). One concession is that the Government does ‘note’ or acknowledge the Committee’s interest in Baccalaureate models.
We’ve three major data releases included in this policy update. This one is the 2023 cycle application data (at 30 June deadline). The June deadline is when students have to apply for (up to 5) choices of HE provision (and make their conditional firm and back up selection) so this data snapshot provides a good look at the application rates.
We cover the high level data below, but for those who want more interpretation of the implications we recommend reading Research Professional’s (slightly irreverent) Ucas’d a spell on me – What’s the difference between reality and spin in this year’s application data? It begins: It is one of the perennial puzzles of higher education in the UK: why does the university application service Ucas insist on trying to spin good news stories about higher education entry data when the available evidence points to the contrary?
Here’s the top level data:
Note: All data relates to UK applicants unless we specify otherwise.
HEPI published their annual soft-power index (where the world’s countries are headed by someone educated in the UK or another country other than their own). America still leads the field but the UK has taken a step closer to America’s top numbers.
Research Professional verge dangerously close to stating that the recruitment of international students for financial sustainability is/will impact on the number of domestic UK students recruited when they report on this Telegraph article and this opinion piece. Read the Squeezed Middle (meaning middle class students are/will be pushed out by international recruitment and outreach targets to recruit disadvantaged students) to see if you agree with the reasoning presented. Of interest is that the number of unplaced applicants (presumably domestic applicants) rose by 46% last year to 20,000 (was 14,000 the previous year), that’s quite a jump.
Quick news from Wonkhe:
Parliamentary Question: Cost of living support for international students.
The Research Professional article Squeezed Middle may be of interest.
TASO (Transforming Access and Student Outcomes in Higher Education – one of the Government’s what works centres) published a project report – Addressing gaps in the participation of sandwich courses. Project partners were:
Findings – intention to apply and participate
Findings – successful completion of sandwich course
Recommendations for HE providers:
The Sutton Trust published: Stories from the Class of 2023 – Education experiences of high potential students from different backgrounds as part of its new Social Mobility: The Next Generation series. The report sets out key differences and similarities between high attainers from different socio-economic backgrounds:
Differences
Similarities
Recommendations include a national strategy to close the attainment gaps that have opened since the pandemic, reform of school admissions for a better socio-economic mix of pupils across schools (those who attend more socially mixed schools progress more at GCSE), universities to recognise the disruption faced by students and support their transition and success (universities to identify key gaps in learning at an early stage in the first term, and provide continuing support if necessary, as well as support for student mental health and wellbeing).
There’s a short blog on the report if you don’t fancy reading the full content.
HE Minister Halfon spoke at the NEON Summer Symposium. The key element of his speech focussed on social justice, structured around his three ‘P’s of Place, Privilege and Prestige. His passion topics of skills, FE, apprenticeships and careers advice were all explored in the speech.
As far as I am concerned, social justice is fundamental to higher education. Universities should exist to facilitate the studies, progression and graduation of all students – including those from disadvantaged backgrounds – so they can go on to get good jobs and pursue worthwhile careers.
On Privilege: the Office for Students recently launched the Equality of Opportunity Risk Register, with 12 key risks to equality of opportunity across the student lifecycle. These have used evidence to determine where interventions can really move the dial on social justice. They’ll be an important tool for designing future initiatives to broaden access to HE, and I look forward to providers rewriting their upcoming Access and Participation plans to incorporate them.
On Prestige:
You can read the official (as written, not necessarily exactly as Halfon delivered it) speech here.
However, NEON report that the audience was unimpressed and even angered by Halfon’s speech. One attendee, Jessica Newton, felt compelled to blog and give voice to her frustrations. Excerpts:
The DfE published the 2021/22 widening participation in HE statistics. The statistics explore young progression to HE study by a range of student characteristics such as free school meals, ethnicity,
Parliamentary Question: Accreditation scheme for universities to demonstrate the gold standard in the care leaver provision.
Blogs: Wonkhe – To meet legal responsibilities to disabled students, the sector must address the overwhelming workloads of disability services staff, says Hannah Borkin.
The House of Lords debated the Lifelong Learning (HE Fee Limits) Bill. Despite the vigorous debate no changes prevailed as all amendments were either withdrawn or not moved. Baroness Barran as Minister for the School System and Student Finance was able to bat away most of the opposition. She emphasised that the policies behind the Bill had been designed in consultation with relevant HE sector stakeholders and there would be further consultation to come.
The Government intend to set most of the detail of the Bill through secondary legislation. In essence this means that Parliament passes the Bill so it becomes an Act. Then the Government backfill the nitty gritty detail which sets out the operation and how things run. The positive of secondary legislation is that it can flex with the times – fee limits can be raised, new clauses can be brought in to respond to the unexpected and keep the sector functioning well and responding to change. The negative is that it hands full power to the Government of the time to set these items with very little parliamentary scrutiny or power to change the Government’s will – it could result in a bad deal for the HE sector being forced through. In practice, while the Bill is passing it means that Parliamentarians, and the Bill is currently with the House of Lords, can raise objections and call for certain things to be changed and the Government’s representative can simply provide reassurances without conceding or changing the wording of the Bill. Likely the Government will listen to the amendments and speeches made and may make concessions or adapt to points raised through the secondary legislation (as suits their policy ideals). But there is no guarantee of this. There is little detail for the Lords (who now have a very well informed, experienced and powerful HE faction, with several ex-Universities Ministers) to take a stand on and force a change. Meaning the Bill may pass quite quickly as it is so bland. Short of the unexpected this Bill will become law before the next general election (and is planned to be implemented in 2025).
Distance learning fees: the Government have no intention of differentiating fee limits between distance and in-person learning under the LLE. The per-credit fee limits will be the same for full-time, part-time, face-to-face and distance learning…Distance learning courses will remain in scope for tuition fee loan support under the LLE.
Distance maintenance: The Baroness stood firm against calls for maintenance support for distance learners although will continue current arrangements for distance learners with a disability to qualify for maintenance loans and disabled students’ allowance. The disabled students’ allowance will be extended to all designated courses and modules.
More reading:
This parliamentary question reveals there is still no set date for the free speech Act to come into play: The timeline will involve working in collaboration with the OfS on the creation of new registration conditions and a complaints scheme dedicated to handling freedom of speech complaints, which will be operated by the OfS. The OfS will also develop guidance on how to comply with these duties, in consultation with providers, constituent institutions and students’ unions. Another related parliamentary question asks whether freedom of speech in the UK includes the right to criticise ideas around gender identity. Answer – it’s defined in case law and in the HE (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 and the Government has no plans to outline the specific content of freedom of speech on an issue-by-issue basis.
Finally, Wonkhe report: At the House of Lords Education for 11–16 Year Olds Committee yesterday, schools minister Nick Gibb was on the end of a grilling from committee chair Lord Johnson of Marylebone over the Department for Education’s use of Russell Group entry rates as a performance indicator for schools in England. The former universities minister suggested that the government was “fixated” on the Russell Group and disincentivising schools from sending students to other universities. Gibb replied that the term “high tariff” could have been used instead. You can watch the session back online.
HEPI celebrated their 20th Birthday by releasing UK higher education – policy, practice and debate during HEPI’s first 20 years. Fifteen contributors cover a wide range of HE policy matters including governance, research, student learning, funding and finances, and the relationship between HE providers and Government. One thing HEPI haven’t learnt in 20 years is that not many people enjoy the thought of reading a 184 page document, so do use the contents page to jump to the section you’re most interested in.
Click here to view the updated inquiries and consultation tracker. There isn’t much of interest at present but things will pick up over the autumn period. You can email us on policy@bournemouth.ac.uk if you spot a consultation or inquiry that you’d like to contribute to.
Turing: The House of Commons Library has a comprehensive briefing on the Turing scheme which funds international study and work placements. At 51 pages it’s a bit long but there is a useful 2 minute read summary here.
Cyber employment: DSIT published Cyber security skills in the UK labour market 2023. It sets out the skills needs and job vacancies across the UK cyber security sector.
Findings:
DAPs: The OfS has published new operational guidance for providers to apply for (or vary existing) degree awarding powers (DAPs). The OfS’ powers mean they can authorise HEIs to grant different types of degrees, including:
Full details here.
Digital Education ID: The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change published The Future of Learning: Delivering Tech-Enabled Quality Education for Britain. There are a number of recommendations mainly aimed at schools. Of interest is their recommendation to introduce a digital learner ID for every pupil that would:
A digital ID implemented as described may have implications for the HE admissions system and for student data interface, particularly as the expectation would be to continue this regular feedback model direct to the student throughout their HE study.
Parliamentary Question: Evaluating the interventions aimed at increasing boys’ learning in educational settings.
HE Net Zero: Wonkhe – Achieving a net zero higher education sector will cost £37.1bn based on current decarbonisation costs, according to a report from the Association of Higher Education Directors of Estates, the British Universities Finance Directors Group and the Alliance for Sustainability Leadership in Education. A “cost of net zero calculator” has also been released, designed to allow individual institutions to estimate the financial resources required to reach net zero. Also from UKRI:
To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email policy@bournemouth.ac.uk. A BU email address is required to subscribe.
External readers: Thank you to our external readers who enjoy our policy updates. Not all our content is accessible to external readers, but you can continue to read our updates which omit the restricted content on the policy pages of the BU Research Blog – here’s the link.
Did you know? You can catch up on previous versions of the policy update on BU’s intranet pages here. Some links require access to a BU account- BU staff not able to click through to an external link should contact eresourceshelp@bournemouth.ac.uk for further assistance.
JANE FORSTER | SARAH CARTER
VC’s Policy Advisor Policy & Public Affairs Officer
Follow: @PolicyBU on Twitter | policy@bournemouth.ac.uk
Yesterday I wrote my resignation letter to the journal BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth. After acting as Associate Editor for fifteen years the time has come for me to give it up, and I found ‘giving up’ very difficult. The enormous growth in my workload at Bournemouth University and the increasing requests to take on new papers as Associate Editor, on top of the many requests to review papers and grants, just became too much. It made me realize I needed to reduce several tasks and jobs to have a slightly better balanced work-home life.
I am still co-editor of the Journal of Asian Midwives, book review editor of Sociological Research Online, guest editor for a special issue of Frontiers in Public Health, and I am still on the editorial or advisory boards of: Birth (published by Wiley), Sociological Research Online (published by SAGE), Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, Journal of Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences, and Midwifery (published by Elsevier), so still plenty of work to be done.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health
Congratulations to BU’s PhD student Mr. Md. Shafkat Hossain who has been selected by Bloomberg Philanthropies as one of the Emerging Leaders in Drowning Prevention programme. This programme has been designed to create a cohort of younger leaders to join national and international efforts to raise awareness and strengthen solutions and political commitment towards drowning. This programme is hosted by the Global Health Advocacy Incubator and provides a unique opportunity for people like Shafkat to develop leadership skills in drowning prevention, and be a part of a global community working to reduce drowning deaths. This first group of Emerging Leaders includes people from Bangladesh, Ghana, India, Uganda, United States and Vietnam. Each Emerging Leader will be expected to participate in monthly sessions, both online and in person. The programme includes funding for Shafkat to attend the World Conference on Drowning Prevention in Perth, Australia in December 2023 (wcdp2023.com/) and the World Conference on Injury Prevention and Safety Promotion in Delhi, India in September 2024 (worldsafety2024.com/).
Shafkat’s PhD research focuses on aspects of the Human-Centred-Design element of the Sonamoni project.
Bournemouth University and the Centre for Injury Prevention and Research, Bangladesh (CIPRB) jointly lead research into the prevention of children drowning deaths in Bangladesh. The project, called ‘Sonamoni’, is being coordinated by BU in collaboration with the University of the West of England, Bristol, the University of Southampton, and the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI). We are working with CIPRB to reduce drownings among newly-mobile children, generally under two years old. This £1.6m project has been made possible thanks to a grant from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) through their Research and Innovation for Global Health Transformation programme. For more information, visit the NIHR website.
CMWH
It is always a pleasure to see your own paper in print. If all is properly organised at the publisher, the first time you see you paper as it will look in its final version when you receive the proof copy. It is the authors’ task to proofread this final copy and pick up any mistakes you may have made or the journal has made putting your word file into the journal’s layout. More and more journals now ask you to do the proofreading and editing online. The first message here is that proofreading is exact business and most certainly time consuming. Moreover, feeding back mistakes you may find in the proofs is not without its trials and tribulations.
Yesterday we received the proofs for a paper accepted by BMC Health Research Policy & Systems [1]. The BMC is part of the publisher Springer , and it uses an online proof system eProofing to which the authors get temporary access, to read and correct text. This system looks good online, but beware the online version you get to edit does not look the same as the version that will appear in print. The draft print version generated by eProofing has line numbers which don’t appear online when you are editing the proofs. So we had to write on the online system separately that we found a set of quotes glued together, as the system does not allow authors to change the lay-out (for obvious reasons). In this case, we had to write details like: “There needs to be a space after first quote line 421.” What might look okay in the eProofing version didn’t do so in the print version, where it was it is wrong. This is illustrated in the example picture below.
Last month we battled with the proofs of another BU paper forthcoming in the journal Women and Birth [2], which is part of Elsevier. Again, it has an online system for proofs. This system does not allow the authors to correct mistakes in in the line spacing. So we ended up writing to journal manager, not the editor, things like: “There is a very big gap between the end of section 3.7. and Overview of findings section – please could the text be rearranged to get rid of this big gap.” We also asked for a summary section to be kept on one page, not having an orphan two words on the next page, but that appeared to be too difficult a request. We think we a little flexibility, i.e. a human intervention the lay-out could have been improved. See illustration below with text as it appears in the current online-first version.
We like to stress our advice to set plenty of time aside to read and edit the proofs, and to send details instructions to the journal manager or editor about what needs changing. Changes include typos, grammar and style, but also lay-out of text and illustrations, boxes in the text, tables and figures. “It is also important to check tables and figures during the proof-reading as the formatting can often go astray during the typesetting process” as we highlighted by Sheppard and colleagues [3]. Also double check correct spelling of names of co-authors and the final author order in the proofs. Many years ago, I received the proof of pages of a midwifery article [4].
I dutifully read and edited the proof of the actual text, but I never check the short introduction with the authors’ names which an editor had added to the final proofs. When the paper came out in print to transpired that this editor has changed the author order, i.e. my name was first, probably because I had submitted the paper on behalf of my co-author. This cause some problems with my co-author, made all the worse since I am married to her.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health
References:
This Monday, 11th of September, BU is running a Research and Knowledge Exchange Explorer Event at the Russell-Cotes Gallery and Museum as part of a developing partnership between the two institutions.
Event Details:
Book your place on Eventbrite: Russell-Cotes Partnership Explorer Event Tickets, Mon 11 Sep 2023 at 16:00 | Eventbrite
The Explorer Event is an opportunity to discuss and develop possibilities for collaborative research and knowledge exchange connected to the Russell-Cotes’ world-class anthropological, archaeological and art collections from across the globe, as well as:
– exploring possibilities for cultural heritage management;
– local seaside tourism;
– Digital and virtual heritage;
– diving into the archives (inc. theatre, local history and beachfront tourism history of Bournemouth);
– wellbeing connections to arts and heritage,
– investigating heritage tourism potential.
With the guidance of Russell-Cotes staff you will have the opportunity to see some of the collections on display, including a number of collections from across Asia, as well as hidden in the stores, in more detail and discuss with Russell-Cotes experts. It’s also an opportunity to make connections with other BU academics to develop potential cross-disciplinary projects over coffee and cakes.
The History of the Russell-Cotes Collection
I caught up recently with Sarah Newman, the Manager, to find out a little more about this hidden gem on the cliffs of Bournemouth Beach:
Coastal view from the balcony at the Russell-Cotes
‘It’s an is a very special place because it’s a very personal collection, so you get from the sublime to the ridiculous’ said Sarah. ‘It captures a moment in time, with the collection exhibited in the context for which it was bought and collected for, which is very unlike other museums. There are some small houses where historic collections survive, but here it is a much larger collection, drawn from around the world. Where else do you walk out of a Heavily Victorian grand house out on to the spectacular beach-cliffs with a view out to sea! Until you experience it you can’t understand it, the atmosphere here is so special, the house itself is also a precious ‘object’, and the eclectic nature of our collections really makes it sparkle’.
The collection was created, and then gifted to Bournemouth, by a couple who travelled the world as tourists and this makes it entirely unique. Sarah told me more about how the collection came together: ‘Merton Russell Cotes was a self-made man, yes he was rich, but he was just an average person who became an entrepreneur, someone from relatively humble origins in Victorian society; but the society allowed people to develop socially through love and interest, which is what he and his wife Annie did.’
The Drawing-Room Collection
But there is another very interesting aspect to the Russell-Cotes that is different from other collections, as Sarah explained: ‘In many collections nowadays people are addressing empire in relation to Victorian world travels, as a museum we are very transparent about how things were paid for, and how they were collected by Merton and his wife as tourists. There are few contested pieces here, and there is certainly some ‘cultural bling’ items created for the ‘tourist market’, as well as some truly special pieces, including objects in our Japanese collection. At the time the couple were visiting Japan it was the end of the ‘isolation’ period and people wanted to get rid of the old and were happy to give things away. There are also pieces that the Russell-Cotes’ were given on their travels – there are so many different stories and some real hidden treasures. You can’t pigeon-hole the collection…there are no grand colonial narratives here.’
Monks – One of the photographs from the extensive photographic archive
‘But what you do have is the story of Merton and Annie as a couple, and how they created their dream home. How inspiring is that – what would you do? It’s family story and of how they expressed their philanthropy and love of global cultures. But it’s also a story about how Bournemouth was developed as a tourist resort, with the narratives of the people who live here and the people who visited here. You can see that Merton was right on that and made a virtue out of necessity with the art that he was buying and selling he was definitely wheeling and dealing. He thought about things in terms of ‘Yes this is a wonderful piece of art I can let you buy, and of by the way it comes from Bournemouth and I happen to have a hotel there did you know?
‘Venus Verticordia’, the iconic Pre-Raphaelite work by Dante Gabriel Rossetti (1828 -1882)
He was opening Bournemouth up to the world at a time when people wouldn’t necessarily have had access to information about it. But is was a kind of enlightened view, yes he was doing things for himself as a businessman, but there was also the philanthropy aspect, where he wanted to share what his family loved and had. So we also have wonderful little collections like theatre history, costumes, musical instruments, which are completely untapped. There is so much that would benefit from further examination.’
Contact:
With the BU Partnership we are are just at the start, and the Explorer Event is a great way to open up opportunities and inspire academics. It’s all about the conversations now, so join us at the Event on Monday – go to the Eventbrite link at the top of the blog to book your place!
Any queries, please contact the Knowledge Exchange Manager: wsmorrison@bournemouth.ac.uk
The Diamond Sutra manuscript from Mogao Caves
It’s been a couple of months since I started in my new role as Knowledge Exchange Manager at BU and while I’ve been getting to know people and how things work, I’ve also been reflecting on something which has come up a lot – innovation. It’s something I’ve had a wonderful opportunity to work with across my career in the Higher Education sector and in Whitehall, and innovation is also important in my ongoing my research. Some people might think this is surprising considering my research focus is the Ancient Silk Road… however the ‘Library Cave’ in the Taklamakan Desert of Dunhuang, NW China (where my research is based) contained the first known, dated, (11th May, AD 868), printed book in the world – the Diamond Sutra – which tells you all you need to know!
Virtual books: images only – The Diamond Sutra: Introduction (bl.uk)
This academic year, as well as having the pleasure of working across all faculties, with a range of academics to enhance research knowledge exchange culture, capabilities and capacity, I am joining Professor Lee Miles and Assoc. Professor Elvira Bolat on the Knowledge Exchange Innovation Funding Panel (starting in September). Further details are to follow, so keep an eye on the Research Blog for announcements…
The way I see it, Bournemouth University has something unique to offer the world of Higher Education. How it has developed as an institution, has meant that is has a particularly creative, exploratory and applied perspective. This means that as an academic community we have the potentiality – the various elements which can be brought together – to generate some real innovation. So what exactly do I mean by innovation…what does it mean to me?
Innovation is one of those words that gets bandied about in Higher Education and in Government, but its meaning has almost become an anathema – it’s lost its true essence and joined the ranks of other words co-opted by frameworks and means of measuring, such as ‘impact’ and ‘evaluation’, to become something often considered as arduous ‘add-ons’ to research. But to me, innovation is not just doing something a little bit different to the way it’s usually done and trying to make it sound special. Innovation is something truly new.
So does this make it harder to do innovation in our research? Because in reality, we could choose not to innovate. We could just do things the way they have always been done; stay nice and safe without taking any calculated risks, not challenge the status quo and forget about the creative, lively, curious, experimental, exploratory, and adventurous parts of our minds, hearts and lives.
Universities exist because of all these aspects of who we are. They are places to not only meditate on the great questions in our hearts and minds about the world we live in, what it is to be human, and how to go beyond limitations, but also to have the space to play, explore, discuss and put our answers to the test. In other words we have the opportunity to really see things anew, the way they have never been thought of, seen or done before, even when it feels both risky, and exciting. Innovation is the juice that drives us as researchers.
So where is she going with this? I hear you say…
Well, doing things differently is a risk worth taking, because the result, if it is successful, could make a real difference. The important factor in my mind is to remember that research is the foundation, and the checks and measures are only a means of sharing them to benefit the institution as a whole – which means sustainability for our research going forward and recognition of our work and efforts to make a difference in the world. Innovation in research helps to create the structure of Higher Education, it offers us the space to explore, muse, and collaborate with others who are as passionate about research and discovery as we are, inside, and outside of the University.
However, when doing research and deciding it’s time to bring our innovative ideas, materials, development, technology, way of seeing the world, interpretation, or story, to the light
Wild Rhododendrons in Kashmir – by Major Edward Molyneux
of day, taking a moment to reflect is important. It is human nature that people may think of similar answers or solutions to certain problems. It’s important to check that an idea really is innovative. To ask if it truly is new, and not just a little different from something someone else has done somewhere else in the UK, or in the world. It’s less common than you might think that two people can come up with the same entirely new and brilliant idea at the same time. Look at Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace – and if you want to take an actual look at the co-emergent development of the theory of natural selection by these two biologists, here’s a link to a discussion from Berkley, University of California.
Natural Selection: Charles Darwin & Alfred Russel Wallace – Understanding Evolution (berkeley.edu)
Innovation is brought to life by us and the research that inspires us. Once we have generated a research outcome that is new, publish, take on a proof-of-concept opportunity, trial or pilot it…all of these options offer a chance for us to check, tweak, discover something we weren’t expecting, or prove to ourselves that we’ve got something truly innovative to share with the world.
As well as my Knowledge Exchange role, I keeping going with my research independently – and with a young family I’m not saying it doesn’t have its challenges – but researchers do what we do because we love it. We are passionate about our subject, our questions and what we can do to bring new knowledge and ideas into being through our work, and to share and exchange this. Even when hitting an inspiration slump, something, somehow, always lights the fire again, and again, and again…even when we fail. No failure, no learning, and no learning, nothing new.
https://dorsetchamber.co.uk/bournemouth-university-ranked-in-top-7-of-universities-globally-in-times-higher-education-the-impact-rankings/
At BU we have an opportunity to bring our innovative research to life – so whether you’ve got something you’ve come up with from your research that is ready to roll, or you’ve got the seed of something creative, exploratory or ‘not quite formed or acceptable because it doesn’t follow the rules, but you always felt it might be completely awesome‘, that’s been hidden away in the bottom drawer of your mind while you get on with the ‘real work’ – stop ignoring it and come and have a chat with me in the Fusion Café, you can usually find me working there on a Monday; or drop a message in my inbox or Teams chat wsmorrison@bournemouth.ac.uk
Links to give context and inspiration for Innovation:
A UKRI template for a brilliant approach to creating powerful Research Resumes, rather than the traditional CV, which evidences a wider range of skills and experience for individuals and teams for applying for UKRI funding opportunities:
Résumé for Research and Innovation (R4RI) guidance – UKRI
UKRI-210223-ResumeResearchInnovationTemplate2023.docx (live.com)
Industry and Innovation at the Royal Society, Supporting innovation, promoting collaboration and recognising innovative scientists, including some case studies: Industry and innovation | Royal Society
An interesting post on the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ from the World Economic Forum ‘Why the Arts and Humanities are Crucial to the Future of Tec’; inspiring us to collaborative insight and research:
Why the arts and humanities are key to the future of tech | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)
…and a useful reference on innovation in the arts from a developing research funding proposals perspective:
Innovation in the Arts: Concepts, Theories, and Practices – 1st Editio (routledge.com)
Back to basics with the R&D People and Culture Strategy from Whitehall, take a look for things you don’t expect, like information on public dialogue, community-led research and innovations, research leadership and talent: R&D People and Culture Strategy (publishing.service.gov.uk)
And if you are interested in funding social innovation like Climate Resilience or Equality research, have you seen the Global Innovation Fund? There are calls for bids and consultancy calls advertised in their News section. Worth a look even for the brilliant dancing on the current home-page!:
Global Innovation Fund | Improving lives through social innovation
…and if going global with your research is new for you, you can always discuss your ideas and questions with the BU Global Engagement Team GlobalBU@bournemouth.ac.uk.
This week Research.com, a leading academic platform for researchers, finished releasing the 2023 rankings of best scientists and universities in the world across all major scientific disciplines. Click here for a quick summary of how Bournemouth University stood in these rankings.
Congratulations go to 13 BU scholars who are listed in this world ranking! Top of the list is Professor Dimitrios Buhalis!
Half of the authors are associated with Bournemouth University, two are Visiting Faculty (Prof. Dr. Padam Simkhada and Dr. Brijesh Sathian) and the third one is Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in the Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH). The Nepal Journal of Epidemiology is an Open Access journal and therefore the paper is freely available to read to anyone across the globe.
References:
UK’s Carbon Emissions Progress
UK’s Carbon Emissions Progress [stock image]
Introduction:
Professor Zulfiqar Khan has been working in Energy Capture, Conversion and Storage for more than a decade which has led to significant outcomes for UK industry in terms of technological innovations to meet UK net zero targets and UNSDGs by agreed deadline.
In addition, energy efficiency in interacting systems and complex machines have been at the heart of Professor Khan’s research at BU. Machines and interacting systems use lubrication and therefore sustainability context is key to be taken forward into design considerations. Both the above themes have provided a platform for interdisciplinary research in collaboration with major UK and International Industry and HEIs partners.
Professor Khan has been collaborating with Generative AI in terms of clean energy and future goals to reduce our dependency on non-renewable energy technologies. Although, unlike his longstanding industry collaboration, his GAI partnership is in its initial stages, Professor Khan believes that there are opportunities to drive clean energy research forward to realise UK targets and UNSDGs in collaboration with GAI.
The United Kingdom has embarked on a transformative journey towards sustainable energy solutions, marked by its commitment to reducing carbon emissions and aligning with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This article presents a comprehensive overview of the UK’s current state of progress in carbon emissions reduction, its contributions to the UNSDGs, and the intricate details of its energy portfolio. The following brief article is written in collaboration with Generative AI.
Progress in Carbon Emissions Reduction:
Carbon Emissions Reduction Targets:
The UK’s resolute commitment to achieve Net Zero by 2050.
Noteworthy reduction of carbon emissions by 51% since 1990 levels by the year 2019.
Renewable Energy Sources:
A remarkable 48% of electricity generated from renewable sources in 2020. Continuous expansion of wind and solar energy capacity.
Energy Efficiency:
Implementing energy-efficient measures in both industrial sectors and households.
Contributions to UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):
Affordable and Clean Energy (SDG 7):
The UK’s renewable energy sector has generated over 100 TWh of electricity, making a significant contribution to SDG 7.
Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure (SDG 9):
Substantial investments exceeding £2.5 billion have been directed towards innovative energy capture and storage technologies, fostering economic growth while minimizing environmental impact.
Climate Action (SDG 13):
The UK’s remarkable carbon emissions reduction of 51% surpasses the SDG 13 target to combat climate change.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement:
Transportation Sector:
Electrification and the promotion of alternative fuels remain pivotal for addressing emissions in the transportation sector.
Energy Storage:
Enhancing energy storage solutions is imperative to address the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources effectively.
Carbon Capture, Utilisation, and Storage (CCUS) Technologies:
The development and integration of CCUS technologies for heavy industries are crucial for reducing carbon emissions further and aligning with climate goals.
The UK’s Energy Portfolio (2020):
Energy
Type/Technology |
Energy Output
(TWh) |
Energy Consumption
(TWh) |
Natural Gas | 338.6 | 465.3 |
Oil | 143.8 | 231.5 |
Coal | 2.3 | 9.1 |
Nuclear | 55.9 | 61.8 |
Renewables
(Total) |
132.3 | 283.1 |
Imports | 7.4 | N/A (included in total) |
Market Share (2020):
Natural Gas: 38.5%
Oil: 16.4%
Coal: 0.3%
Nuclear: 7.9%Renewables (Total): 18.7%Imports: 3.6%
Interpretation:
Non-renewable sources still dominate the UK’s energy portfolio, comprising approximately 63% of energy output in 2020.
Natural gas is the largest contributor to both energy output and consumption.
The transition to renewable energy sources, particularly wind and biomass, is vital for reducing the UK’s carbon footprint.
Conclusion:
The United Kingdom’s commendable progress in carbon emissions reduction, aligned with UN SDGs, signifies a dedicated commitment to a sustainable future. While substantial headway has been made, addressing challenges in transportation, energy storage, and the integration of CCUS technologies is paramount. The UK continues to lead the path towards a low-carbon future by aligning policies with UN SDGs and promoting sustainable energy solutions.
We are grateful to the members of our International Advisory Board for volunteering to do this important work. We were struck by the dedication of the international team members this morning. We especially admire the International Advisory Board member who was online at 21.00 local time in Australia and even more perhaps our member in Canada for whom the local time was 3.00 in the morning.
Sonamoni is being coordinated by Bournemouth University in collaboration with the University of the West of England, Bristol, the University of Southampton, and the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI). This project, with Prof. Dr. Aminur Rahman as Bangladesh lead, includes a BU-based PhD project. The interdisciplinary team at Bournemouth University covers three faculties through: Dr. Mavis Bengtsson, Dr. Kyungjoo Cha, Dr. Mehdi Chowdhury, Dr. Yong Hun Lim, Mr. John Powell, and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen.
Today we were informed by Razi International Medical Journal that the paper ‘Management capacity in the Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) Afghanistan: Political and socio-cultural issues’ [1] is finally out in print (i.e. online). I wrote a BU Research Blog (see copy of this here!) on May 1st to announce that this paper had accepted by the editors in late April. It has taken another four months at the editorial office to sort the publication details.
The lead author is Dr. Shaqaieq Ashrafi Dost, and this interesting paper is part of the dissemination of her Bournemouth University PhD research. The paper is in an Open Access journal and hence freely available online to read.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH)
References:
Ashrafi Dost, S., Arnold, R., van Teijlingen, E. (2023). Management capacity in theAfghan Ministry of Public Health pre-Taliban: A mixed-methods study of political and socio-cultural issues. Razi International Medical Journal, 3(1): 9-18. DOI:10.56101/rimj.v3i1.67