COMPETENCIAS GENERALES, BÁSICAS Y ESPECÍFICAS

Partnerships between FE and HE have a history that dates back to the 1940s when a number of previously partnered colleges to the University of London became universities in their own right.

(e.g. the University of Nottingham) (Hilborne, 1996, p 61). Further associations developed in an ad hoc way and at the discretion of the institutions concerned (ibid). This was at a re latively slow pace until the late 1980s and early 1990s when up to half the FE colleges in England and Wales became involved in partnerships with Higher Education (Bird, 1996; Parry, 2005). At this stage, government displayed little or no concern or ‘low policy’ as identified by Parry and Thompson (2002), with such partnerships.

Many such partnerships developed in relation to the provision of pathways from Access courses (in which learners aged 21 or more were provided with an alternative route to higher education without requiring traditional qualifications) and offered greater flexibility of HE via the FE colleges (Parry, 2005). Further increases were due to the expansion of HE numbers, mainly from polytechnics or post-92 institutions to meet the demand for places that could not be met within those institutions themselves. This also enabled increased HE numbers without a commitment to heavy investment costs of new builds (ibid). This reveals how strategies were driven more by the immediate concerns of resourcing, rather than alliances with FE colleges to promote widening participation and improved progression for local communities (ibid). FE colleges had been involved through Local Authority arrangements with HE and polytechnics and had seen their numbers grow (ibid). The only reason why the proportion of higher education students taught in FE colleges did not fall was because of the phenomenon of franchising (Parry, 2005, p 2). This strategy of prioritising financial and resource needs over the educational imperatives of widening participation represented a key challenge for HE and FE providers that commit to collaborative arrangements (ibid).

This growth of partnerships through franchising sustained HE provision in many colleges throughout this period (Parry & Thompson, 2002). The post 1997 period, described as ‘high policy’ (Parry and Thompson, 2002, p 35), signified much greater attention from both the UK and Welsh governments and its agencies and had been prompted by the Dearing inquiry report

(1997) as well as earlier reports (for example, DES, 1991) that had pointed to fundamental policy directives that culminated in this period of greater direction from government. Both the UK government and the devolved administration in Cardiff identified HE in FE as a key policy aim (Parry & Thompson, 2002). As early as the ‘low policy’ period, there had been indications that there was to be a growing focus on an increase in HE student numbers including a national target for HE student numbers. Yorke (1993) reveals that as early as 1987 and 1991 two Government White papers had strongly stressed the need for a greater uptake of higher education, with the latter advocating a participation rate of one person in three by the year 2000 (1993, p 169).

Expanded HE numbers were regarded as a policy steer to support HE in FE, either by direct or indirect strategies. However, the expansion did not fulfil FE colleges’ aspirations for greater independence in running their own HE provision. The move to indirect funding, alongside the need to enter into structured partnerships with degree-awarding institutions was not popular with colleges (Parry & Thompson 2007). This indicates that some prospective partners in collaborations were motivated by resource needs and not necessarily by those of widening participation. The literature has revealed that partnership initiatives driven by policies of the UK national government have resulted in a series of challenges that are not exclusive to higher education in England, but applicable across the HE sector in the UK. In another example, Abramson (1996) highlights income-generation motives for expansion of HE in FE, although partnerships between FE colleges and HE institutions can be regarded as ‘A blend of commercial and academic imperialism’ (Woodrow, 1993, quoted in Abramson, 1996, p 8) and not necessarily an opportunity to build genuine, mutually agreed partnerships.

Such was the increasing interest in the provision of higher education through HE in FE partnerships, that HEFCE commissioned research and two reports were produced in 2003. One was concerned with strategy (HEFCE 2003/16) and a second report with support and development and aimed at practitioners (HEFCE, 2003/15). This latter report’s immediate remit was to evaluate the use of the HEFCE Development fund that had been established to support development of HE in FE specifically those initiatives that were directly funded. The two reports also looked specifically at how FE and HE institutions collaborated. They clearly identified that FE colleges had a role to play in the expansion of HE student numbers and that they were well placed to recruit and teach non-traditional students, and were able to do so at a lower cost than HEIs (HEFCE 2003/16, p 3). Whilst these reports are specific to England, their

findings would prove to be similar to the situation that existed in Wales with regard to HE/FE collaboration.

Interestingly, there is no reference to staff conditions of service and salary comparisons that supports supposed lower costs in FE compared with HE. The reference to lower costs is one that has been challenged in recent empirical studies of HE in FE. Delivery in FE Colleges tends to be in smaller groups with more intensive support and FE Colleges are under-resourced (Marks, 2002). The reports offered guidance for strategic planning and management and various examples of good practice were presented for practitioners to consider.