Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock

The merger of Kent and Greenwich universities is set to produce the UK’s first “super-university”. This structure will help the universities manage financial risks, while sustaining their distinctive identities. And the merger could also provide a model for the prime minister’s vision for post-compulsory education, outlined recently at the Labour party conference.

Keir Starmer wants two-thirds of young people to enter higher or technical education or apprenticeships. This embraces both further and higher education, and it demands coherence between them. Building on the model agreed between Kent and Greenwich, that could be achieved by colleges joining universities within a single group.

Further education colleges offer a high proportion of the nation’s technical qualifications and apprenticeships, which are central to the prime minister’s target. In towns without universities, colleges provide the route through post-compulsory education. This is often within group structures.

Some already have links with higher education. London South East Colleges, for instance, has seven campuses, which reach south from Greenwich. The group also has a partnership with the University of Greenwich.

Colleges have experienced equal financial challenges to universities, but for longer. They might be wary of joining universities because it could dissipate their distinctive vocational mission. But the model agreed by Kent and Greenwich shows how that can be sustained.

Combining different traditions

While both are universities, the merger of Kent and Greenwich shows it is possible for institutions with very different identities to combine.

Group of students in a study space
Mergers mean institutions can share resources. Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock

The University of Kent was established in 1965, in the wake of the meritocratic vision for higher education laid out in the 1963 Robbins Report.

This report, produced by the government’s Committee on Higher Education, stated that “university places should be available for all who are qualified by ability and attainment”. It argued that universities should provide a liberal education, rather than meeting employers’ immediate needs. This was embodied in the new maps of learning developed by universities like Kent and their greenfield residential campuses.

Greenwich originates from Woolwich Polytechnic. This was the site from which Labour education minister Tony Crosland announced the expansion of polytechnics in 1965.
Crosland wanted to meet “an ever-increasing need and demand for vocational, professional and industrially based courses”. He also opposed the hierarchy of post-compulsory education, which diminished the status of these courses.

Polytechnics became universities from 1992. Their applied courses then made a pivotal contribution to Tony Blair’s 2001 target for 50% of young people to enter higher education. Blair argued that this would create a society “genuinely based on merit”.

By the time this threshold was passed in 2017, Conservative-led governments had established more universities. Citing Robbins, they expected this to drive higher education expansion through competition and student choice.

Reducing polarisation

Starmer’s speech to the Labour conference signals a different approach. “While you will never hear me denigrate the aspiration to go to university, I don’t think the way we currently measure success in education – that ambition to get to 50% … is right for our times,” he said.

Part of the motivation for this approach comes from a desire to counter Reform UK. People without higher education qualifications are more likely to vote for Reform.

Tackling the dissatisfaction of Reform supporters with highly educated elites requires Starmer to depart from previous assumptions about higher education and meritocracy – that a university education is superior to other pathways through lives and careers. That means placing a higher value on apprenticeships and technical education.

Mergers can improve the financial sustainability of universities and colleges by pooling their risks, operations and investment capacity. For example, a recruitment shortfall in one part of a group can be absorbed by others. Services can be provided at greater scale and lower cost within a group. If investment is needed to build provision in one location, that may be secured through the balance sheet of the whole group.

Investment of this kind is crucial for enhancing teaching quality, learner experiences and reputational standing. But group structures can also minimise course duplication and improve progression arrangements. Rather than competing with each other, colleges and universities within a group can agree course content and admissions requirements.

That enables learners to move seamlessly between different levels and types of education. It also builds connections between towns with colleges and the cities where most universities are based, broadening both study options and job prospects.

Group structures could advance separately in higher and further education. That would encourage competition and hierarchy, rather than coherence and progression. But bringing the two streams of post-compulsory education closer together could help achieve Starmer’s ambition to reduce polarisation. It might also give both universities and colleges some financial breathing room.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Chris Millward, University of Birmingham

Read more:

Chris Millward does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.