Almost two-thirds of English universities could potentially face sanctions for failing to meet new quality thresholds that were introduced last month, analysis suggests.

The Office for Students introduced long-awaited thresholds that higher education providers need to meet to avoid investigation, and possible sanctions, on 3 October as part of its drive to improve standards in the sector.

These thresholds – which focus on full-time students pursuing a first degree – include a target of 80 per cent continuing their studies, but a Times Higher Education analysis of OfS data for providers with at least 1,000 students shows that 5 per cent of universities would not meet this.

A further target for 75 per cent of students to complete their course would be failed by 6 per cent of universities, while 2 per cent would not meet the threshold for 60 per cent of students to go on to further study, professional work or other positive outcomes within 15 months of graduating.

ɫ��ֱ��

Analysis showed that 10 per cent of large providers failed to meet all three thresholds, although all 20 Russell Group institutions did.

And when looking at individual subjects, almost two-thirds (64 per cent) of universities failed to meet every threshold in every course – including two in the Russell Group, the University of Nottingham and the University of Manchester.

ɫ��ֱ��

The OfS could intervene and impose sanctions for a breach of its conditions of registration if performance is not “adequately explained by a provider’s context”.

“The Office for Students is right to scrutinise student outcomes and to look at these outcomes at subject level,” Richard Boffey, head of AccessHE at London Higher, which represents universities in the capital, told ɫ��ֱ��.

“However, its newly announced outcomes thresholds are too narrow in focus and oversimplify the multifaceted value of a higher education degree for students.”

He said rigid national targets were also unhelpful, particularly in London, where uniquely high levels of graduate migration create a competitive job market.

“We urge the OfS to provide more information on the rationale behind how they will be making a judgement on the context they say they will consider around each university,” Dr Boffey added.

ɫ��ֱ��

The analysis also showed that certain subjects were making universities more likely to fall below a threshold than others, with 57 per cent of sociology, social policy and anthropology courses not meeting the progression expectation.

Universities UK said student outcomes data could only ever capture certain aspects of student success and needed to be considered in the context of students’ aspirations and the circumstances of their studies.

“This should include the wide range of benefits that students take from their university education, including meaningful and satisfying careers which have value far beyond income,” a UUK spokesperson said.

ɫ��ֱ��

“The OfS will need to work with the sector and be transparent in taking context into account in regulatory judgements.”

In response, the OfS said many higher education providers and courses delivered successful outcomes, but there were too many students recruited on to courses with weak outcomes.

“We can now intervene in these courses, and will take contextual matters into account, including factors that may justify a higher education provider’s past performance and actions that they are taking to improve performance,” an OfS spokesperson added.

The OfS has named the subjects it will focus its investigatory activities on this year: business and management; computing; law; psychology; sociology, anthropology and social policy; sport and exercise sciences; history; and archaeology.

ɫ��ֱ��

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com