Halfon hopes sector can avoid repeat of marking boycott issues

England’s higher education minister has called for “lessons to be learned” from last year’s marking and assessment boycott, as he insisted he remained “hopeful” that the sector could avoid further disruption this year.

Appearing in front of MPs investigating the fallout of the University and College Union (UCU) action, Robert Halfon said some universities had regulations that had made it “difficult to adapt” and suggested that the sector regulator, the Office for Students (OfS), could be more “agile” in responding to developing situations.

Union members refused to set or mark assessments between April and September 2023 as part of a long-running dispute over pay and working conditions, leaving thousands of students unable to graduate as planned, with many facing difficulties progressing to further study or employment.

Explaining the “disparate” impact of the action – with some universities far worse affected than others – Mr Halfon said the differing regulations in place, the difficulties some had in recruiting alternative markers and the level of union representation were all significant factors.

“Given what has gone on, I do think if this happens in the future – and I’m very hopeful it won’t happen this year – I do think, I hope, that those universities that were affected the most will have learned from this and have serious contingency planning in place to make sure it doesn’t happen again,” he said.

A fresh round of pay talks is set to begin imminently, but UCU does not currently have a mandate to take industrial action after its last ballot failed to reach the 50 per cent turnout threshold, although it could choose to call another vote at any time.

The House of Commons Education Committee also heard from university leaders about the impact of the boycott on their institutions.

Karen O’Brien, the vice-chancellor of Durham University, said 18 per cent of its academics took part, with 20 per cent of its 5,000 graduating students initially left without enough marks or credits to receive their degree, a figure that was reduced to 13 per cent by August.

Adam Fagan, the vice-president (education and student success) at King’s College London, said it had been a “very difficult” period for the institution, with students experiencing a “paralysis of fear” at not being able to progress to the next stage of their life.

About 25 per cent of students were affected, but King’s was able to classify and graduate all students eligible to do so, Professor Fagan said, largely thanks to staff – including senior leaders – taking on additional marking, although he stressed that “nobody marked work who did not have expertise in that area”.

Salary deductions from staff taking part in the boycott were used to employ additional mental health counsellors for students and to fund study sessions and careers advice, he said.

Both leaders emphasised that they felt the integrity of their degrees had been upheld despite the mitigations needed, with Professor O’Brien stating that students’ final degree awards proved to be same as the interim classifications they had been given “99.7 per cent of the time”.

Stuart Elborn, the provost of Queen’s University Belfast, said Northern Ireland’s earlier examination period left the institution facing issues four to six weeks ahead of English equivalents.

It was felt that the Universities and Colleges Employers Association – which represents employers in collective bargaining – was being driven by the situation in England, Professor Elborn said, and this partially explained why Queen’s agreed a local pay deal with staff to end the boycott that resulted in its membership of the body being suspended.

While out of the process for the next three years, the university will continue to try to align its pay award with what is happening across the UK, Professor Elborn added.

In a statement in response to Professor Elborn’s comments, Raj Jethwa, Ucea’s chief executive, said the body “strives to reflect the views of all participating higher education institutions in pay negotiations, across all four nations”.

The three university leaders were asked if the reputational damage suffered as a result of the boycott was partly to blame for a fall in international student numbers this year, but they said other factors such as visas and the cost of living in the UK were proving to be more significant factors.

At Durham, Professor O’Brien said, all badly affected students had received a £500 goodwill payment, and some who lost job opportunities had been compensated for the potential loss of earnings.

Saying she would have welcomed a more proactive response from the OfS, she noted that there was “more they could do to share information and provide guidance”.

There could be a role for the regulator in looking at what universities do in emergency situations and the regulations that govern this, she added.

In his evidence, Mr Halfon said the role of the OfS was currently being reviewed by Sir David Behan and he did not want to prejudge the outcome of this. Nevertheless, he continued, “I think whether or not the OfS could be more agile when there are issues that come up, that’s a debate that might well be worth having, absolutely.”

tom.williams@timeshighereducation.com