Higher education policy in post-devolution UK: more convergence than divergence?

Abstract

Many researchers studying the impact of parliamentary devolution conclude that education policies in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are diverging. They attribute this to five factors: the redistribution of formal powers associated with devolution; differences in values, ideologies and policy discourses across the four territories; the different composition, interests and policy styles of their policy communities; the different 'situational logics' of policy-making and the mutual independence of policy decisions in the different territories. This article reviews trends in higher education (HE) policy across the UK since parliamentary devolution. It focuses on policies for student fees and student support, for widening participation, for supporting research and for the HE contribution to economic development, skills and employability. On balance, it finds as much evidence of policy convergence, or at least of constraints on divergence, as of policy divergence. It argues that each of the five factors claimed to promote divergence can be associated with corresponding pressures for convergence.

Rethinking the ‘third mission’: UK universities and regional engagement in challenging times

“…As Cochrane and Williams note, of the situation in England, "It would be hard to find any explicit reference to local or regional economies in statements emerging from the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills or the Higher Education Funding Council for England since May 2010May " (2013, while Gallacher and Raffe (2012) note the opportunities for the devolved Scottish government to develop initiatives of its own.…”

The effect of schools on school leavers’ university participation

“…Following administrative devolution in 1999, there has been a transfer of powers relating to HE to each of the governments or assemblies in Wales and Northern Ireland. The nature of HE participation and the organisation of many of its activities, such as research funding, have meant that there continue to be as many similarities as there are differences in each of the four countries (Gallacher & Raffe, 2012). Nevertheless, the areas where there has been the greatest divergence have been in relation to tuition fees, financial support, and widening access strategies.…”

A ‘home-international’ comparative analysis of widening participation in UK higher education

“…Following parliamentary devolution of formal powers in the UK in 1998, legislative powers over education and training were devolved across the four jurisdictions of the UK, albeit, quite unevenly between them (Keating 2002;Jeffry 2006). Since then, policies and agendas for widening participation produced by each of the four home nations have been characterised by both divergences as well as convergences (Gallacher and Raffe 2011). A significant area of divergence has been in HE funding arrangements and systems of student financial support adopted by each of the home nations (Gallacher and Raffe 2011;Raffe, 2013).…”

“…Since then, policies and agendas for widening participation produced by each of the four home nations have been characterised by both divergences as well as convergences (Gallacher and Raffe 2011). A significant area of divergence has been in HE funding arrangements and systems of student financial support adopted by each of the home nations (Gallacher and Raffe 2011;Raffe, 2013). These divergences have led to distinct approaches to widening participation and the institutions (HEIs) within the home nations are monitored in terms of their performance on widening participation and access.…”

“…1 In NI, HEIs had to submit Access Agreements to OFFA until 2013 but since then have had to report to the Department for Employment and Learning in NI. In formation of nuanced mechanisms for supporting entry to HE amongst students from low-income backgrounds Gallacher and Raffe (2011). One of the most striking differences between the home nations is in their tuition fee arrangements.…”