Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill - Fairer Scotland Duty (FSD) Summary

Summary of evidence

The Bill sits within a wider programme of reform, which is supported by an extensive evidence base:

• The Purpose and Principles for Post-School Education, Research and Skills^[1] sets the vision and objectives for the wider post-school education and skills reform programme. The Purpose and Principles Fairer Scotland Duty Summary^[2] has described how future policy development would be assessed.
• The Independent Review of the Skills Delivery Landscape^[3] by James Withers (“the Withers Review”) which makes 15 recommendations for change in skills delivery. This includes reform of the functions of two of the principal public bodies which help run our post-school education and skills system, SDS and the SFC.

The Scottish Government conducted a public consultation^[4] between 25 June and 20 September 2024. The consultation sought views on proposals to change what public bodies do in the post-school system in order to simplify responsibilities for apprenticeships and student support. In total, 194 consultation responses were received and analysed. This consisted of 133 responses from organisations and 61 from individuals. Characteristics of individual respondents such as their experience of poverty and disadvantage was not asked for the consultation. Therefore, views specifically from these groups of respondents were not captured.

Views of respondents to the consultation will also inform subsequent policy development. Some of the views expressed through the consultation are not addressed on the face of the Bill. There will be further consultation and stakeholder engagement on the development of subordinate legislation and on the detail of implementation.

The Bill allows the consolidation of responsibility for securing and funding all forms of tertiary education and training provision, including NTPs, apprenticeships and work-based learning in a single public body, the SFC. The Bill provisions do not directly impact on any specific groups of learners, and will not directly impact on inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage. Contextual evidence may be indicative of the wider background in which post-school reform is taking place, and which might influence future policy development.

The evidence available indicates that inequalities exist in education and employment outcomes. The Bill provisions do not directly address these.

There is a lack of evidence around inequality in access by household income or socioeconomic background. There is a paucity of relevant data or evidence regarding inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage. There is also limited evidence available that is directly relevant to the provisions of the Bill. These gaps in evidence suggest that determining the direct impact of the Bill provisions on those experiencing disadvantage and poverty is currently not possible. However, there will be future opportunities where these may be further explored.

Access and participation in education by learners from different socio-economic backgrounds in the UK is not easily comparable with data from another countries. Where there is data available, the UK compares favourably with many other nations regarding equity and access to education but substantial gaps persist. Approaches to widening access and participation, based in the UK around outcome-related plans and agreements, compare favourably with how the majority of other countries approach this issue^[5].

The evidence base relating to impact on those individuals or groups with lived experience of poverty and disadvantage is anticipated to be strengthened. This may be done through further engagement with public bodies, institutions, training providers and through learners themselves.