It has now been a few weeks since Minister for Education Mats Persson explained in both an op-ed in Svenska Dagbladet and in an interview on Radio Sweden’s Saturday show that the Government has now decided that it “... will reduce the proliferation of freestanding and distance learning courses...”. Resources from these programmes will be reallocated to engineering programmes. The reactions were immediate. It is perhaps no surprise that criticism has been voiced by representatives of Sweden’s universities which (like Stockholm University) do not have an engineering programme. Yet strikingly, higher educations that have such programmes have been just as outspoken in their dissent.
A great deal of focus has been directed at the startling fact that Persson’s statements seemed to imply that the Government now intends to step in and control the range of courses offered, thus encroaching upon the autonomy of Sweden’s HEIs. As per the annual appropriation directions, the HEIs themselves have long been responsible for dimensioning their education programmes according to student demand and the needs of the labour market.
But in point of fact, could the Minister be on to something here? He says that more and more people are taking freestanding courses, and that the supply of freestanding courses and distance learning courses has increased as a result of previous policies. This, argues Minister Persson, has led to fewer resources for vocational training and, by extension, a labour shortage. But is this true? Is that the real state of things?
When it comes to freestanding courses, the unequivocal answer is no. The Swedish Higher Education Authority has a rich statistical database from which to obtain information. It shows that in the autumn term of 2003, 215,000 students in Sweden were enrolled in a freestanding course. Two decades later, today’s figure is 132,000, a decrease of 38 per cent. During the same period, the total number of students has also increased, so the proportion of students taking freestanding courses has fallen from 63 per cent to 34 per cent. So, no, it is not true that more and more people are taking freestanding courses.
What about distance courses? Well, it is correct that there has been an increase here. During the period of 2009 to 2019, the number of full-time equivalent students enrolled in distance courses fluctuated between 38,000 and 47,000. After 2019, the curve rose steeply, and last academic year the corresponding figure was nearly 62,000. So, there is a clear increase here. Yet it is worth noting that this increase coincides with the COVID-19 pandemic, when many HEIs were first forced to set up distance teaching. They subsequently took advantage of the experience they acquired, thereby allowing them to reach broader student groups. Thus, it is hardly politics that has led to an increase in distance education.
Finally, what about “hobby courses” on topics like beer knowledge, oenology, or canine behavioural biology, course offerings which the Minister considered more appropriate for non-universities? To what extent does the presence of such courses affect the resources available for engineering programmes? It is difficult to find national statistics on this topic, but we can look at the range of courses offered at Stockholm University, which has more students enrolled in freestanding courses than any other HEI in Sweden. We also have the second highest number of students enrolled in distance education. The university’s course catalogue has 3,760 courses, of which 2,396 can be taken freestanding. If you filter your online search to find freestanding, first-cycle level, distance courses worth 7.5 credits and sift through the results to find the ones that are obviously not part of a progression, you will be down to about a hundred courses. Perhaps we ought to call these “culture courses” and view them as an important part of our social mission. Regardless, these 2-3 per cent of our course offerings are hardly to blame for the shortage of laboratory sessions in Sweden’s engineering programmes. However, there is one concrete measure that would clearly strengthen the country’s higher education: Increase the amount of state funding for all education, so that we can continue to give students the quality of education they deserve!
This text is written by Clas Hättestrand, Vice President. It appears in the section ”Words from the University’s senior management team”, where the management take turns to write about topical issues. The section appears in News for staff.