Broader debate needed on role of third-level sector

The Government has invested heavily in the third-level sector. But we need to go even further - and faster, writes Michael Kellyof the Higher Education Authority

Among the key messages to emerge from a recent conference organised by the National Competitiveness Council were how essential it is for Ireland's competitiveness that we continue to focus on and invest in our higher education, research and skills base, and how we need to become really serious about building the "knowledge economy". We are blessed with some advantages - especially a growing population of young people combined with a strong, almost insatiable, appetite for higher education, and a higher education sector that has proved its capacity to respond to national needs. We are now at a crucial moment in our social and economic history. We can rise to the challenge, play to our strengths and prosper. Or we can ignore the opportunity and settle for less than premier-league performance.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, students, their teachers and parents, aided by media outlets, became experts in the "points race" as demand for courses rose while places were limited. Ireland then could not provide higher-education opportunities for all those school-leavers who wanted them. Some pursued higher education abroad; many never got the opportunity. In either case talent and ability were lost.

But the last decade in Ireland has seen the most dramatic changes of any period in higher education. Over 60 per cent of the Leaving Cert age cohort (17- to 19-year-olds) will go to college this year, compared with 44 per cent in 1998. The number of full-time places in higher education increased from 108,000 10 years ago to 140,000 today, while part-time student numbers are up from 28,000 to 37,000.

This surge in the number of students graduating from our higher education institutions reflects a very significant achievement by Government, by the institutions, and by students and their families. In competitiveness terms, this growth in output also reflected a considerable productivity gain by the higher-education system. And it is still the case that, among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, we continue to achieve somewhat higher than average levels of educational attainment at third level for somewhat lower than average levels of public investment.

It is important, however, that we do not fall victim to complacency, born of our success. There is a myth that a fall in the numbers sitting the Leaving Certificate in recent years will mean less demand for third-level places in the future. In fact, there are three reasons to be optimistic about future participation, and all the indications are that the points race will resume unless we take steps to better balance supply and demand in terms of places in higher education. First, there is no halt to the growing demand among 17- to 19-year-olds for higher-education places. Last year, almost 40,000 students accepted places through the Central Applications Office system. That is 5,000 more than 10 years ago. Second, given our growing population (seen most vividly at primary and secondary levels), the HEA expects that Leaving Certificate numbers will start to grow again within the next decade. Third, there is a real need to seriously ramp up the opportunities for people seeking a return to education and to make this aspiration for life-long learning an achievable reality.

This growth in demand for higher education is a huge strategic advantage for Ireland, but only if we recognise it as such and act to meet it. The National Skills Strategy predicts that, by 2020, the share of our population with third-level needs will rise from 20 per cent at present to 32 per cent. Other reports have identified the need for an additional 100,000 graduates over and above expected graduation in the coming decade. The Government is committed to participation rates in higher education, which are among the top rank in OECD terms by 2016. The HEA, in its analysis, has suggested that we will reach 176,000 full-time students by 2015/2016.

The demand is there, but what then about the supply position? The Government has signalled the priority it attaches to investment in higher education, research and innovation, and the very significant investment levels reflected in the National Development Plan underline that commitment, as do on-going investments in teaching and research infrastructure, the recruitment of world-class research talent and the support for innovation.

But we need to go even further and faster. It is a sobering realisation that the plans and choices we make now will have their greatest impact in 10-20 years' time. Unless we are planning to at least keep up with the best performers internationally, we are unlikely to continue to yield the competitiveness dividend from our skills base that we have in the past, and that we need for the future.

Our future plans for higher education are intimately tied to our perception of where we want to be as a society. We need a broader debate about this. That debate needs to be entered into with open minds. Ideally, it should lead to choices being made about the levels of participation and quality and the level and sources of investment. Without this form of planning, there are fairly predictable consequences over the next decade. As demand continues to increase, growth will be at the expense of quality, or there will be a return to an even more acute points race.

To conclude: the appetite for education continues to be one of our greatest national resources; as a society we should treat this resource with care and respect; we need to plan more deliberately now for how we nurture this great strength for the future.

Michael Kelly is chairperson of the Higher Education Authority.