Private universities: Time for a rethink?

The rationale for the establishment of Buckingham university college in 1976 was clearly summarised by Dr D J Paulley. “It is now time to examine”, Paulley claimed, “the possibility of creating at least one university in this country on the pattern of great private foundations in the USA.” For Paulley and the Oxford dissidents who established the institution, the funding structures in the UK were holding back university students; failing to provide an education which would allow them to compete with their counterparts over the Atlantic.

With education funding in the UK again in a dire state once again, claims that we will soon see more private universities from Dr Terence Kealy, Buckingham's vice-chancellor, are unsurprising. If we are to stem the tide of cuts and the seemingly endless reduction in places at our universities, real solutions are needed quickly.

The benefits of private institutions are clear. Buckingham boasts the highest student satisfaction rate in the country according to the Sunday Times, and came second in last years National Student Survey. Class sizes are markedly smaller than most universities throughout the UK, with one member of staff for every 7.8 students, compared to the national average of 17.6. Graduates from the university have the lowest unemployment rate and only eight percent of students fail to complete their courses.

This is perhaps unsurprising given the biggest drawback: cost. Students are faced with fees of some £8,640 compared to £3,225 elsewhere in England. This is more than four times the £1,775 English students pay for university education annually in Scotland, where Scottish students fees are funded by the Scottish government.

This is partially offset by the fact that degrees from Buckingham take only two years; one less than elsewhere in England and half the time most students in Scotland spend at university. Logic from the university goes that the saving on accommodation and living costs makes studying at Buckingham financially comparable to undertaking study elsewhere.

The existence of fees for English students means that privately funded university education has already reached a half way stage, with students expected to contribute to the cost of their education. This is not at the same level as American university education; where those who fail to find sponsorship or bursaries can find themselves unable to go into further education as a result of their inability to pay. But there are clear signs that those without the financial support are less likely to go to university and many more are staying at home to offset the cost of their studies.

It is highly unlikely that those from lower income backgrounds, already put off university education beyond their doorstep, will be the beneficiaries of any increase in the number of private universities. Instead, as with a number of high-fee private schools throughout the country, they will become elitist and accessible largely to the wealthy.

The incoming government will be faced with a stark challenge. If funding solutions which make the cost of education more affordable to all are not forthcoming, the benefits of private universities will become more attractive to those with the financial background which can support such study. The consequences for universal education will be devastating.