Too many people go to university is a popular argument. I disagree. Insofar as our economy does not create enough highly skilled jobs for the graduates we produce, the fault lies with our economy, not an “overeducated” workforce.
But let’s park that row about the volume of higher education and focus on its geography. MPs calling for fewer students never answer the next question: which university to close? They don’t suggest one in their constituency.
The truth is that universities in deprived areas would shut. The economic damage would be significant, but new research from the US shows the impact of creating more education “cold spots” would be broader. The authors ask whether how far people live from the nearest post-secondary institution affects their chances of further study. Distance matters, they find, but in different ways for different groups.
Overall, living further from a college makes students less likely to continue studying post-18. But the effect of living far from a local community college (providing two-year courses) varies. Non-disadvantaged students’ main response is to attend more prestigious colleges (offering four-year degrees).
But more disadvantaged (plus Black or Hispanic) students are less likely to study at any college. Living 30-plus miles from a community college reduces the chance of them attending a four-year college by 6-12 percentage points.
Today, 61.4% of London students go to university against 44.5% in the south-west, and students in Wales on free school meals are less than half as likely, at 19%, as others to attend university. Let’s be honest about where the cost of university-bashing would lie.
• Torsten Bell is Labour MP for Swansea West and author of Great Britain? How We Get Our Future Back
