In a new report (attached) from the Higher Education Policy
Institute (HEPI) and the Centre for Global Higher Education
(CGHE), graduates in England explain their views on the student
loan system, praising its income-contingent and repayment
features but criticising the high fees and large debts.
Hidden Voices: Graduates’ Perspectives on the Student Loan
System in England (HEPI Report 145) by Professor Claire
Callender and Dr Ariane de Gayardon is based on interviews with
48 graduates who were subjected to the 2006 funding regime paying
tuition fees of £3,000 and 50 more who were subjected to the 2012
regime, paying £9,000.
Professor Claire Callender, Professor of Higher Education
Policy at UCL Institute of Education, Professor of Higher
Education Studies at Birkbeck, University of London and Deputy
Director of CGHE, who co-authored the report, said:
‘Our findings suggest it is important to listen to graduates’
different views and integrate them in debates on the future of
higher education funding in England. Graduates offer a
distinctive perspective on student loans. Their experiences may
not always be easy to listen to and may be contrary to
policymakers’ thinking, intentions and vision.
‘Nonetheless, there are significant lessons for policymakers.
While there are benefits of the 2012 funding reforms, the changes
exacerbated the very features of the student loan system
graduates already found problematic and increased the burden of
student debt. The views of graduates are vital for building
evidence-based, sustainable and fair funding policies in the
future.’
Dr Ariane de Gayardon, a researcher at the Center for
Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) at the University of
Twente in the Netherlands, who co-authored the report,
said:
‘Debt can take a psychological toll on graduates arising from the
size and longevity of the debt, alongside the interest charged.
All can potentially damage the lives and aspirations of future
generations. When reforming the loan system, one objective
should be to reduce the burden of student debt for graduates. To
do so, we need to listen to the voices of graduates. Our new
report provides important insights into what graduates feel about
the English student loan system and which features work for them,
and which do not.’
The main findings of the report include:
- Graduates think income-contingent student loans offer access
to higher education and regard the repayment system as
manageable, withthe income repayment threshold protecting against
low earnings. Monthly repayments are seen as affordable and
automatic repayments are valued.
- However, graduates consider tuition fees and interest rates
to be too high, see the amount of debt owed as a burden and feel
the repayment period is never-ending.
- Graduates describe emotional and psychological disturbance
from their debt, with graduates in the post-2012 reforms cohort
considerably more negative about their student loan debt.
Since the 1990s, England’s higher education funding system has
been reformed many times, leading to a system based on high fees
and loans. Undergraduate tuition fees for full-time students were
introduced in 1998, and rose to £3,000 per annum in 2006,
increasing further to £9,000 in 2012. The 2012 reforms enabled
the lifting of the cap on student numbers but increased the
burden of student debt.
The report includes comments from graduates about the loan
system:
- According to one graduate from the 2006 funding regime
cohort, ‘The amount that students have to pay is just ridiculous
and honestly, if I had to pay the amount that students today have
to pay, I probably wouldn’t have gone to uni at all’.
- A graduate from the 2012 funding regime cohort said ofthe
accruing interest on their debt: ‘It makes you feel sick and
horrible, you know: an absolutely horrible feeling inside your
chest, your stomach’.
Although the report focuses on England, the lessons are also
likely to resonate in Wales, where high fees are also in place;
in Northern Ireland, where the funding regime resembles the
previous regime in England; in Scotland, where higher education
funding remains contentious; and in other countries with
income-contingent loans or which are interested in reforming
their systems.
