Higher Education Funding 2010

FOSIS response to Lord Browne’s Review of Higher Education Funding

The Federation of Student Islamic Societies opposes a number of the recommendations made by Lord Browne in his recent review on Higher Education funding. We believe that many of his proposals, which include a removal of the current £3,290 cap on tuition fees, the elimination of minimum bursary requirements, the introduction of market interest rate on debt, and proportionally lower grants, are contrary to the pursuit of a fair and accessible education system and would increase social inequalities.

1. Pricing out the poor

1.1. Lord Browne’s proposals to remove the cap could see university students paying an unlimited amount in university tuition fees. The prospect of a potential £30,000 debt in university fees alone will not only serve to deter people from less advantaged backgrounds from applying to university, it will result in our highest quality institutions becoming financially ring-fenced outside the reach of the majority of students.

1.2. Furthermore, Lord Browne’s proposal to increase grants to £3,250 will by no means be sufficient for students from poorer backgrounds. Under the current system, students from poorer backgrounds who receive the full £2,906 grant pay approximately £384 in fees. Yet under Lord Browne’s proposed measures, students who receive the £3,250 grant may still be required to pay a further £3,000, if not more. Moreover, the minimum bursary requirement will be scrapped, cutting off yet another essential lifeline for economically disadvantaged students.

2. Disproportionate impact on BME and Muslim students

2.1. FOSIS believes that the proposed changes will have a devastating impact on Muslim and BME communities who are under-represented in Higher Education and already face a number of barriers towards participation. A study carried out in 2002 by M. Shiner and T. Modood titled ‘Help or Hindrance? Higher Education and the route to ethnic equality’ demonstrated that in the current HE environment, minority applicants face an 'ethnic penalty' and have to “perform better than their White peers in order to secure a place” at university, with Pakistani applicants having “a slightly lower than expected offer rate across the whole higher education sector.” As 73% of UK Muslims are of South Asian descent (with a significant percentage of the remainder coming from African or Arab backgrounds), it is clear that the majority of the Muslim community also face these same barriers.

2.2. If enforced, these proposals will further discourage Muslim students, a significant number of whom are from deprived backgrounds, from continuing into Higher Education. Initiatives that increase the financial burden on parents as well as students, many of whom are from inner-city areas and must support extended families, are fundamentally unfair and unjust.

2.3. Given that many BME and Muslim students will come from families with limited university experience, and already face significant differences in educational attainment as compared with ‘White’ peers, we feel that the encouragement of BME and Muslim participation in Higher Education is crucial. It is key that socio-economic barriers are removed and not erected, to allow every young person the opportunity to access Higher Education.

3. Interest rates

3.1. Of particular concern to FOSIS, however, is the proposed change in interest rates on debt repayment. FOSIS fundamentally opposes the principle of ‘interest’, as we believe it is a prime contributor to social inequality. Asking all but the poorest graduates in England to pay a "market" rate of interest is unethical and unjust; while richer graduates may pay off their loans quickly and thus accumulate very little interest, the proposed system would see middle income graduates forced to pay higher interest, on a greater debt, over a longer period of time. Such graduates would thus face a lifetime disadvantage in their own financial stability, and over time we would see a growing economic divide between higher and middle income earners.

3.2. Higher interest rates will also damage the participation of Muslim students in Higher Education. Many Muslim students are averse to interest due to teachings in the Islamic faith, and already feel uncomfortable with the current levels of interest on student loan repayment. As it is, a 2003 Universities UK report on ‘Attitudes to Debt’ found that “non-Muslims were three and a half more likely than Muslims to anticipate taking out a loan.” We have observed a rising trend for Muslim students either to study from home in order to keep costs down, or to defer entry to university until they can afford to pay it without the need for a loan. In this way, the choice of universities for Muslim students is restricted and the age of entry is increased. We therefore feel that the current system of interest-based loans discriminates against Muslim students and adds to the barriers against entry into Higher Education. This problem will be exacerbated Lord Browne’s proposals, which would force more students to take loans, and compel Muslim students to choose between Higher Education and their personal values. FOSIS believes that changing interest rates in such a manner, with no viable option of alternative funding, continues to ignore the sensitivities of many Muslim students and greatly restricts their accessibility to Higher Education.

4. Inclusivity and empowerment – Higher Education as a means to create a more equal society

4.1. FOSIS is committed to ensuring that universities remain an accessible option to every member of society – regardless of ethnic, religious, or economic background. We believe that education is the key to self-improvement, and a vital tool for social mobility. The notion of equality is one that is at the very core of the both Islam and British society.

4.2. Yet there currently exist a plethora of social, political and financial obstacles facing BME and Muslim youth who seek to access Higher Education. Lord Browne’s proposals will only increase the economic, ethnic and religious divides in attainment that currently exist in our education system today. Such divides, coupled with the overwhelming debt these proposals seek to burden the next generation with, threaten the very fabric of our society and its development. Furthermore, we believe that raising interest rates for student’s loans over-and-above indexed inflation rates is unethical, unjust and destructive for students and a country already drowning in debt.

4.3. We call on the government to reject any proposals made by Lord Browne which will exacerbate social inequality, such as higher fees and interest rates. We ask the government, and universities, to join us in committing to a principle of accessible education, by putting in place structures that encourage, not exclude Muslim, BME and less privileged students from Higher Education. Most importantly, we ask the government to ensure that universities remain bastions of social progression, free thought, and self-improvement.