What 'more' can universities do for Michael Gove and Alan Milburn?
"Universities should do more" is a phrase heard rather frequently in the corridors of power. Michael Gove only recently asserted that universities should take a leading role in raising A-level standards. Now, Alan Milburn is telling universities to "redouble their efforts" to enable disadvantaged students to gain places in university. In both cases, the diagnosis of the problem is clear and sound. That universities can play a role in addressing both issues is also sensible. But there are issues – and tensions – inherent in the solutions proposed that may make progress difficult.
In my view, Gove understands well what is wrong with the current A-level system, not least because universities have been complaining that students are ever less well prepared for undergraduate study. He – and universities – rightly want schools to strive for the highest levels of excellence. Milburn's recent report addresses a very different but equally pressing issue. Social mobility has stagnated in part because disadvantaged young people are less likely to go to university. This needs to be addressed not only in the interests of social justice, but to support the needs of the economy.
Where Gove's focus is on excellence, Milburn wants universities to make lower offers to disadvantaged students and an extension of foundation degrees and other 'access' programmes. His aim is not to lower standards but to "level the playing field", getting universities to help disadvantaged students overcome material and cultural barriers inhibiting entry to and success in higher education.
But there remains a tension in what universities are being asked to do. Milburn's vision is egalitarian and opens the doors to expansion of higher education provision. Gove's vision is elitist and unopposed to a shrinking of the sector. How can we raise academic standards and at the same time overcome barriers to social mobility? Surely, universities should play a substantial role in both, but is this possible without placing unrealistic demands on a hard-pressed sector that already does a great deal in this area?
Both universities and the private sector have developed bridging resources with considerable potential. JISC Content has digitisated a large number of educational resources mainly for university students. Jorum is a repository of free learning and teaching resources created by UK FE and HE institutions. Khan Academy delivers the basic building blocks of knowledge in a wide range of disciplines via short animated podcasts. MOOCs (or Massive Open Online Courses) are generating huge interest from universities and learners. Curriki, a non profit online education community, enables teachers to create their own bespoke resources – as does the Guardian Teacher Network.
Universities also organise conferences where research specialists address A-level students and teachers. They act as consultants for exam boards and review syllabi. They work with local schools in disadvantaged areas and invite pupils to 'taster' lectures, summer schools, and other activities that demystify university for those, often the first in their families, to enter higher education. However, in the overwhelming majority of cases, academics and universities work locally, without much coordination and all too often without significant effect.
Universities could substantially and effectively contribute to the agendas set by Gove and Milburn by means of a common virtual platform which universities across the UK contribute to, and from which teachers and students across the UK can draw. There are several platforms available that would fulfil this need, such as the Excellence Gateway. Another that I am personally involved with and which I think could make a difference is JISC-funded the Faculties.
This site includes filmed lectures by academics on topics taken directly from the A-level curriculum. These free 'stretch and challenge' resources can be played on laptops, tablets and mobile phones, and bring the latest research into A-level classrooms not to prep students for the exam, but to inspire the sort of higher level thinking that Gove wants to see. And they keep teachers and examiners up-to-date with the research too.
Many of the films are specifically tailored to prepare students for the challenges of higher education. An entire section of the site is devoted to careers, so prospective students can see what opportunities an undergraduate degree opens for them. Students and teachers can also use the interactive discussion function associated with every podcast to engage with each another and the presenter.
The site addresses the Milburn report recommendations by providing a platform for universities to create 'access' resources and engage in outreach activities collectively instead of individually and nationally instead of locally. And by building a library of rigorous A-level study aids and access resources, universities can make a big difference by recording what they do already and by virtually engaging their audience too.
It may sound like another burden for universities but platforms such as this promise powerful impact from modest effort by taking advantage of simple technologies that students use every day. And there's a sweetener. Universities cringe at the demands made of them at a time when they must focus on the new fee regime and the challenge of sustaining recruitment. But those universities that contribute resources to the Faculties can embed banners to draw attention to their programmes. There may be other ways for Gove and Milburn to achieve their goals, but as things stand, innovating trumps asking universities to 'do more'.
James Harris is senior lecturer in Modern European history at the University of Leeds and project manager of the Faculties, providing university lectures for secondary schools – follow it on Twitter @thefaculties
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more articles like this direct to your inbox, sign up for free to become a member of the Higher Education Network.