University leaders feel that communications from England¡¯s ÖйúAƬ regulator have started to improve, but feel there is ¡°room to build¡± on relations.

An independent report commissioned by the Office for Students (OfS) found that most respondents felt there had been positive changes in engagement approaches, including improvements in the quality and clarity of communications.

However, the report, based on 44 interviews with?vice-chancellors and other senior staff at institutions regulated by the OfS, found that concerns still remained over political neutrality and the extent of ¡°meaningful¡± dialogue with the sector.

A general improvement was reported in the perceived quality of OfS communications, with the average rating standing at 55 per cent, up from 38 per cent two years ago. Over half (52 per cent) of respondents said that the OfS had become ¡°somewhat better¡± in terms of the way in which it engages with the sector, and 11 per cent said it was much better.?

ÖйúAƬ

The report follows mounting criticism of the OfS, after an independent review last year found?that it was perceived as hostile and high-handed, while a House of Lords committee report found it took a ¡°distant and combative¡± approach to relations with universities.

Respondents praised the watchdog for its introduction of quarterly webinars to tackle relations; one-to-one visits to providers; a shift in tone of communications; and universities being provided with a named contact.

ÖйúAƬ

However, the?report finds there is still a long way to go for the OfS, with 31 per cent believing communications have stayed the same, and 7 per cent believing they have got ¡°somewhat¡± worse.

Those who felt communications had?mostly stayed the same felt that the introduction of webinars was ¡°largely symbolic¡± and ¡°did not ultimately improve engagement with the sector or provide opportunity for meaningful dialogue¡±.

Overall, such measures were ¡°generally seen as a step in the right direction¡± but some participants felt they had not dramatically shifted the overall tone or nature of the OfS¡¯s engagement with providers.

Criticism also highlighted that some people felt their feedback ¡°ultimately [did not] make a difference¡±, and others echoed previous concerns that the OfS is ¡°too influenced by the priorities of government to have undergone any meaningful change¡±.

ÖйúAƬ

Participants?mostly?described communications as ¡°functional and informative¡±, but felt there was a lack of opportunities for dialogue, which was seen as ¡°fundamental¡± to developing two-way engagement.?

Susan Lapworth, the OfS¡¯ chief executive, said that she ¡°recognise[d] the concerns that have been raised¡±.

¡°Two-way, trust-based, relationships with the institutions we regulate are an important foundation for effective regulation. This research demonstrates the significant progress the OfS has made towards this goal over the past 18 months,¡± she said.

¡°I¡¯m pleased to see positive feedback about our direct engagement with vice-chancellors and principals through our regular mailings and briefings. Our programme of visits to institutions has helped to broaden OfS colleagues¡¯ understanding of the diverse sector we regulate. And we¡¯ve engaged extensively with universities and colleges ¨C and sector bodies ¨C on changes to our regulation and the development of our new strategy.?

ÖйúAƬ

¡°But we¡¯re not complacent and there¡¯s more to do. We recognise, for example, that a need for precise language has sometimes led to correspondence feeling too formal. We¡¯re keen to extend opportunities for richer dialogue in our briefings. And we want to go further to tailor our communications with different types of institutions to increase their value.¡±

juliette.rowsell@timeshighereducation.com