Dr. Joseph Ryan:

On behalf of the Technological Higher Education Authority, THEA, I appreciate this opportunity to discuss future funding. I commend and refer members to our written submission. This is the critical conversation. An agreed sustainable funding approach is the essential prerequisite for a healthy system of higher education. The Minister, Deputy Harris, has signalled openness to a reduction in the student contribution. Members will recall that THEA advised against any increase and argued against the introduction of student loans. This was on the grounds of sustainability but also because our experience was the contribution was proving a barrier to access for individuals and families. However, in introducing this topic, the Minister has signalled the opening to the future funding debate. With the student contribution capped or even reduced, and the employer contribution having reached the 1% and realising a billion in available funding, the only advance can be in the direct Exchequer investment in higher education. This points to prioritisation.

Ireland has many assets: we are well located and anglophone, enjoy a temperate climate and have a stable democracy. However, our greatest asset and native genius lie in our people. Investing in human capital is critical to our well-being, culture and future prosperity. As the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, stated recently, "Our further and higher education and research systems represent a critical national asset which can be an engine for economic growth and support the future success of our citizens."

The transformation to technological universities is the biggest educational change of our times. We have an excellent design, commendable ambition and willing and talented staff. Let us match these with necessary and sustained investment. Our system is a critical national asset. It needs to be prioritised for direct and sustained investment as this will be repaid with greater economic activity and the enhanced well-being of our citizenry.

The lack of sustainable core funding is becoming increasingly obvious in the areas of research and innovation, where time-limited capacity-building funding is being used to support initiatives that would more sustainably be funded from core. THEA has repeatedly stated the research and innovation allocation through the recurrent grant must increase initially to 5% of the total, as was recommended by the Higher Education Authority in 2017, rising to the 10% allocation, as is the case in the traditional universities. The recent announcement on a capital programme of €450 million over four years is welcome. It comprehends both further education and training and higher education, and we advocate continuing this investment.

The increase in student numbers is creating an unprecedented demand for suitable, affordable student accommodation, which has been exacerbated by the wider societal housing needs. Technological universities have long sought access to the borrowing framework. The investment metrics have changed and direct Government investment and reform of the cost rental model is required.

A further challenge relates to the lessons from Covid-19. Students appreciated flexibility and online access to lectures. The NextGenerationEU package and our resulting national recovery and resilience plan emphasise the power of the latest digital and online technologies. This digitisation challenge has been a consistent feature of recent THEA budget submissions. Covid has highlighted inequalities in terms of housing, income and cultural capital. Students shouldered more than a fair share of the impact. Considerable support was furnished by the Government and is acknowledged. The lesson is we need to build additional capacity and resilience in our caring services with a view to providing more comprehensive and equitable support for learners.

The deprivation index scores published last week by the Higher Education Authority, HEA, provide a rich data set that should be mined to inform policymaking and targeted investment. This is revealing about the character and added value of the technological sector. The overall score for our member institutions is 1.3 compared with a national average of 2. THEA member institutions represent eight of the 11 higher education institutions, with the highest proportion of students from disadvantaged areas. The data also show our institutions have a distinctively local geographic footprint in respect of student profiles, serve their regional and local communities and provide access to higher education to some of the country's most socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. This has consequences for pedagogy and both learning and pastoral supports and needs to be reflected in the funding model.

In any given academic year, up to half of all first-year entrants will have gained a place on a basis other than leaving certificate attainment. Our advanced entry agreements with the further education and training sector maximise the potential of those entry routes for students. In 2020-2021, 25% of students from institutions represented by THEA were enrolled part time by comparison with 17% elsewhere. Some 12% of students are registered as remote by comparison with 3% in other institutions. Students facing particular challenges frequently benefit from supplementary teaching and learning support or additional time.

The total number of students enrolled in THEA member institutions increased by 23.7% from 2014-2015 to 2020-2021 by comparison with an increase of 15.6% elsewhere. Data available to the Department show that, despite our focus on small group teaching and focused support for students with lower prior attainment, the student–staff ratio in these institutions has, for more than a decade, been significantly higher than elsewhere. Notwithstanding, the most recent analysis of completion rates demonstrates a comparative success.

We advocate increased direct Exchequer investment commensurate with the ambitions for the system. We believe the current funding model does not adequately address the diversity of needs. There is insufficient weighting for student access and no weighting for the smaller student groups that our pedagogical model employs.

We believe the current funding model does not adequately address the diversity of needs. There is insufficient weighting for student access and no weighting for the smaller student groups our pedagogical model employs. Technological universities do not enjoy well established pipelines of philanthropy and alumni support. At a time, therefore, when higher education is under major financial pressure the impact on technological TUs is comparatively greater and in this formative stage they require targeted support to deliver on balanced economic and regional development and access to education for all.