Problems about using agents, for example, acting in a freelance capacity and bringing in students, is one area where I think they identified difficulties.

The PIE: Is there any form of quality assurance that can be introduced there?

SJ: Admissions is part of our remit so we do ask questions about admissions. I think the challenge in these circumstances is going beyond the current remit to look at other aspects of college management. We’ve done this now with the introdution of financial and governance checks into the review of educational oversight providers and that is in effect making our methodology more like an accreditation process. There may be an argument for us needing to go further. We don’t sit in on classes, for example. There may be an argument for us to see delivery of teaching first hand.

The PIE: Will you be reviewing any of the 57 colleges that have had their licences suspended?

SJ: Too early to say. We are in the process of assessing them at the moment and looking at those we have already reviewed and what issues there are in association with that. If there are problems, then we will use our concerns scheme to follow up.

The PIE: Are the Home Office pushing you to do more?

SJ: We have a continuing dialogue with the Home Office. As part of their review of the whole process of student migration, they are asking both ourselves and the Independent Schools Inspectorate (ISI) to reassess our processes to see if there are areas in which we plan to enhance our methodologies.

Part of our problem is we don’t have any statutory powers. We are not a government organisation, we’re an independent body. Our authority, such as it is, comes from our member institutions. One way in which we could extend our effectiveness would be to be given statutory powers to inspect colleges. One of the areas we’re looking at at the moment, and would be my own preference, is to look at the licensing of private colleges. There would be a process to establish whether or not a private college was a fit and proper place to deliver higher education, and that new entrants should go through a process which would include things like financial and governance checks.

Part of the problem at the moment is we’re using a review process in effect to do this accreditation of private providers, and I think separating out the two processes would be a more effective way of trying to tackle these issues. And some of these colleges would never get established in the first place.

“It’s a particular feature of the UK system that there are no barriers to entry into the sector”

It’s a particular feature of the UK system that there are no barriers to entry into the sector, and the Department of Business, Industry and Skills, I think, is quite keen to maintain that because they’re very keen to encourage new providers of higher education. Anyone can set up a college. That’s what the Home Office has been concerned about – the relative ease with which the more doubtful providers can gain access to the sector, and through that, get access to funding sources like student loan support.

The PIE: Do you think it’s likely you’ll be given statutory powers?

SJ: It’s something we have raised with the Home Office. Part of the problem is there is a different perspective for the Home Office and for BIS, and I think our established institutions would not want us to have statutory powers, because our whole approach of peer review is based on this understanding between the Agency and institutions as autonomous bodies to manage their own quality and standards. But increasingly I’m coming round to the view that we can’t easily apply the methodology to different types of institutions. I think private institutions do operate in a different way.

I think it’s going to be very interesting to see what happens as a result of the Home Office statement. It’s quite likely that a significant number of those 57 colleges will go out of business as a consequence. They tend to operate on quite tight margins, and if they can’t recruit students then the business model itself may not be viable, and then you end up with a large number of students who can’t complete courses.

The PIE: So presumably some students will have to leave the country?

“It isn’t a very happy state of affairs and many of the students have signed up in good faith, and then found themselves abandoned.”

SJ: It’s a very pertinent question, because in the past when private colleges have closed down students tend to redistribute among other private providers and that can exacerbate the situation rather than resolve it. In the case of Tasmac, the Indian college which closed a couple of years ago, a lot of students had to go back to India.

It isn’t a very happy state of affairs and many of the students have signed up in good faith, and then found themselves abandoned.

The PIE: Do you think this will damage the UK’s reputation long-term?

SJ: I don’t particularly – I think the fundamental issue here is about malpractice. They’re not criticisms of the quality and standards of the academic programme, of the learning that students have been receiving, and I think that remains intact. The academic issues are not the focus of the Home Office’s attention at the moment. It’s about how colleges are managed and governed.