UK science principles criticised

Scientists and campaigners have questioned how the UK government plans to engage with scientific advisers.

On Tuesday, the government published a set of principles to "clarify the relationship between advice and policy".

The independence of scientific advisers has been under question since the home secretary sacked former drugs adviser, Professor David Nutt.

But critics say that the principles are ambiguous and need clarification.

These guidelines, published by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Bis), sought to answer calls from MPs and scientists for ministers to uphold scientific independence.

Professor Colin Blakemore from Oxford University, former chief executive of the Medical Research Council said that, overall, he was pleased with what the government had done.

But he drew attention to one point in the guidelines, which said that the government and its scientific advisers "should work together to reach a shared position, and neither should act to undermine mutual trust".

"I do worry with the potential picture of advisers and civil servants, or ministers, sitting together... to cook up the evidence appropriately to support whatever line the government wants," he told BBC News.

"That isn't necessarily what the government wanted at all, but it might mean that some clarification is needed here. This is open to [an] interpretation that would contradict much of the rest of the document."

Tracey Brown, managing director of campaigning organisation Sense About Science, welcomed the publication of the new principles, but said she was "very concerned" about that same point.
   
Ministers rely on scientific advice to develop sound government policy
Lord Drayson

"It re-introduces the ambiguity that we thought we were all seeking to eliminate through the development of these principles," she said in a statement.

"How will advisers know whether, in answering a question at a lecture or from a journalist one morning, they might be undermining mutual trust with the government?"

But Science and Innovation Minister, Lord Drayson, said that the principles would strengthen the important relationship between ministers and advisers.

"Ministers rely on scientific advice to develop sound government policy," he said. "[The principles] emphasise the importance of academic freedom, and the responsibilities of both scientists and ministers."

He added that they would now go out for consultation.

Culture clash

The government has assuaged some of the concerns that scientists raised in the wake of Professor Nutt's dismissal.

Some researchers said that there had been several examples of "news management" by Whitehall departments, when the government did not agree with the conclusions of a report.

The Bis principles have now made it clear that scientific advisers "have the right to engage with the media and public independently of the government".

Prior to their publication, the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee had recommended that if ministers did reject scientific advice, they should formally explain their decision.

The new principles do not go that far, but do suggest that, if government "is minded not to accept advice of a scientific advisory committee... the relevant minister will normally meet with the chair to discuss the issue before a final decision is made".

They also say that scientific advisers to the government must be "free to communicate in a professional capacity within their field of expertise, subject to normal confidentiality restrictions".

This point will aim to answer those scientists who criticised the Home Secretary Alan Johnson for dismissing Professor Nutt. Mr Johnson has said that Professor Nutt "crossed the line" in his role, by campaigning against government policy.

Timing is crucial

Scientists had also criticised the government's timing when it published its response to scientific advice.

Earlier this year, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) published its own climate projections on the same day as a scientific report that criticised them.

The new principles state: "The timing of the government's response to scientific advice will demonstrably allow for proper consideration of that advice."

The government says the principles were designed to cover "trust, respect, independence, transparency and openness".

They were agreed after a series of meetings, with input from scientific advisory committees, learned societies, science media representatives and Sense about Science.

NEWS BY:http://news.bbc.co.uk

London Metropolitan University faces £6m over-recruitment fine

A London university is facing a fine of just under £6m for over-recruiting UK undergraduates this year.

London Metropolitan University says it recruited 1,500 more students than it should have done, partly because of the rush for places last summer.

It received a letter from England's higher education funding body Hefce this week saying it would be fined £5.9m.

That is more than twice the highest fine imposed last year.

The magazine Times Higher Education is reporting that some believe as many as 25,000 students will have been over-recruited in this way, meaning there could be record fines this year.

Universities in England have to pay roughly £3,700 for each student they take above a set number they have been told they can take.

Last year Hefce imposed fines of just over £8.5m in total.

The largest (£2.2m) was against South Bank University, also in London.

This year's fines will be published by Hefce at the end of March.
'Take it on the chin'

London Metropolitan's Vice Chancellor Malcolm Gillies wrote to staff this week to explain what had happened.

He said London Met was one of "many" English universities which had unintentionally over-recruited during a rush for places ahead of the increase in tuition fees for many students in the UK.

The university had been seeking to fill up half of its places through Clearing - the system which matches vacant university places to applicants who generally either apply late or do not get the grades they need for their first choices.

Prof Gillies said: "Because of the volatility of admissions in 2011-12 during Clearing, many English universities unintentionally over-recruited.

"Universities have an obligation to accept students in particular categories. We have always been a big university for Clearing and we are proud of that, of giving an opportunity to students," he told the BBC News website.

"There was a large rush through the gate at the last minute. But we greatly exceeded our number so we have to take it on the chin and recognise that we have an obligation to reach our target and we will have to revise our system."

Prof Gillies said that because the university would receive tuition fees [more than £3,000 a year this academic year] from the extra students it had taken on, this would offset much of the fine.

The net cost of taking on the students would be £700,000 he said.

The government has said over-recruitment is putting extra unexpected pressure on its finances, because of the cost of supporting students with tuition fee loans and bursaries.
UK picture

From this autumn, students from England attending universities in any part of the UK will pay tuition fees up to a maximum of £9,000 a year.

The government has been encouraging universities to charge fees of less than £7,500 by offering extra places to those which do.

Fees at London Met range from £4,500 to £9,000 a year, with an average of £6,850.

Students from Scotland who study at universities in other parts of the UK will also pay fees at this level, although Scottish students who stay in Scotland will continue to pay no fees.

Students from Wales will be subsidised by the Welsh government wherever they study in the UK and will pay no more than the present level of fees.

Fees for students from Northern Ireland who stay there to study are being frozen at present levels, but those who study in other parts of the UK will pay fees of up to £9,000 a year.

NEWS BY:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-17067132

UK university applications in 'steepest fall for 30 years'

The proportion of UK students applying to start degrees in the autumn will drop by 10% this year, a university leader has predicted – the steepest fall for 30 years.

Professor David Green, vice-chancellor of the University of Worcester, based his forecast on more than 25 years' involvement in university applications, nine of them as the head of an institution.

His prediction comes ahead of the publication on Monday morning of figures that will show how many students have applied to start university this autumn – when fees rise to up to £9,000 a year.

The figures, published by the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (Ucas), will give the number of applications institutions received by 15 January – the official deadline.

The final application figures will be announced in the autumn because some students apply for courses between now and the end of June, outside the official route.

Professor Green predicts that, by this summer, there will be an estimated 70,000 fewer applications from UK-born students than there were last summer – a 10% drop. He said this would be the biggest fall in the proportion of UK students since the 1970s.

However, he said about 140,000 students would still be rejected by universities this summer because institutions were restricted by the number of places they could offer. Last year, almost 210,000 – one in three applicants – failed to get a place.

Professor Green said the reasons for the expected drop in applications were multifold and include the fact that the maximum fee has almost trebled to £9,000.

He said teenagers may have been deterred from applying by mistakenly thinking they may have to pay for their fees when they register at university. Students pay their fees with a student loan, which they start repaying when they graduate and earn more than £21,000.

Some young people now wrongly thought their employment prospects would be enhanced by skipping university and starting paid work on leaving school, Green said.

"There has been much talking up of apprenticeships and learning a trade when opportunities for both of these are limited," he said. "In the short term, some young people who would have gone to university will end up on benefits, in the long term, we will have a workforce that is less skilled."

Earlier this month, the latest statistics from Ucas showed UK applications for this autumn had slumped by almost 8%.

Some 283,680 people had applied from within the UK, compared with 306,908 at the same point last year.

The fall has been partly blamed on the fee hike, but is also thought to be due to a glut of applications in 2010 in anticipation of the fees rise. Demographic factors could also be behind the slump. The number of 18-year-olds in the UK is projected to decline over the rest of the decade by 11%.

The figures on Monday will show whether 18-year-olds from low-income families have been particularly deterred. Ucas has classified parts of the UK into five groups according to their level of participation in higher education.

NEWS BY:http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/30/uk-univeristy-applications-fall?newsfeed=true