PRESS RELEASE

07 February 2023

Public thematic report

UNIVERSITIES AND TERRITORIES

In France, the number of higher education graduates in the 25-34 age group is good (49.4%

compared to an average of 45.6% for all OECD countries). However, if we look at the

geographical distribution of this graduation rate, we can see that there are still territorial

inequalities with regard to access to higher education: the more rural the region, the more

the number of graduates decreases. Indeed,

there are many difficulties in finding a stable

doctrine, the current one oscillating between a guaranteed local offer throughout the

territory on the one hand, and accepting the existence of territorial inequalities in the offer

of higher education on the other. The social background of students remains the main cause

of inequalities in access to higher education. The report published today by Public Finance

Court highlights the complex and persistent relationship between higher education and

geographical origin.

Territorial issues in missions of higher education and student life

Social and geographical inequalities in access to university education around the country

remain an issue, despite attempts to reduce them. To remedy this, university branches have

been opened or maintained in order to improve access across territories. There are

approximately 150 of them, and together they have close to 91,000 students. According to the

Court's survey, the cost of these courses is comparable to, or even lower than that of courses

at the main sites. Moreover, the success rate observed in the branches is very similar to that of

the parent universities. The rate of continuation to postgraduate education, however, is low.

Connected campuses are another response to the geographical and social difficulties in

accessing higher education, although their success appears to be mixed. The fight against

inequality also involves welcoming and supporting students: some universities are making

significant efforts to pursue an ambitious student life policy. However, the Court found that

there were significant differences between institutions. Coordination between Crous centres

and universities, particularly in the areas of accommodation and catering, is lacking on all sites.

The need to acknowledge the disparateness of universities to ensure their management

Today, clear divisions are appearing between institutions: although sharing the name

“university”, they no longer have anything comparable with each other. For example, some

universities conduct world-class research and focus their training on this, while others provide

more undergraduate education and concentrate their research strengths on a few disciplines,

as they are not able to benefit from funding through calls for projects. Universities have also

started to rank themselves by forming associations, whose names indicate their goal

: “French

research universities”, “research and training universities” or “small and medium

-sized

universities”. Moreover, the rise of private institutions granting themselves the title of

university, regardless of the law, or issuing degrees theoretically reserved for public institutions

contributes to the confusion. The Court has therefore considered three options to ensure

better management of institutions that no longer receive the same student profiles, do not

carry out the same missions and no longer receive the same funding.

Institutional relations vary in scope from one territory to another

Local and regional authorities are valuable allies for universities owing to the funding they

provide -

about €1.5 billion per year

- and their often proactive policies. Despite this, there are

too few forums for the exchange of information and the implementation of joint actions by all

the authorities, which hinders the implementation of a coherent and controlled strategy. This

also leads to a suboptimal distribution of funding and, in some situations, to a dispersion of

funding. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Higher Education is struggling to involve local authorities

in the contracting it carries out every five years with universities. Currently, it swings between

a (recent) decentralised system whereby institutions are managed by regional education

authorities, and a management system that remains highly centralised. In the field, the role of

higher education officer, created in some regional education authorities in 2020 to facilitate

dialogue with universities, is being gradually established, but without clearly defined missions

or full delegation from the chief education officers of the academic regions.

Recognition from the business world still to be established

Economic players are becoming essential partners for universities, which involve businesses in

their strategic bodies or pedagogical councils, in particular for professional bachelor degrees

and in master’s programmes. However

, these initiatives remain scattered. The Ministry of

Higher Education has not developed a more systematic approach and methodology. Doing so

would make it possible to calculate the return on investment of higher education spending,

which could be a decisive element in budgetary negotiations with the budget department.

However, there are mixed opinions among business leaders: the majority would like to be more

involved in the definition of curricula and be better informed about the university training offer,

which is still considered too complex and not very clear. Most also deplore a lack of

responsiveness in the construction and accreditation of government-recognised diplomas.

Read the report

PRESS CONTACT:

Julie Poissier

◼

Head of Press Relations

◼

T

+33 (0)1 42 98 97 43

◼

+33 (0)6 87 36 52 21

◼

julie.poissier@ccomptes.fr

@Courdescomptes

ccomptes

Cour des comptes

Cour des comptes