Working class students are suffering from a “poverty premium” in tertiary education, a sector that is making money from their plight, according to a new report by the NUS students’ union released today.

The report looks at the barriers faced by working-class students, ranging from the costs of childcare and accommodation to travel and course fees.

It states: “There is a market in poverty: the tertiary education environment has either knowingly or unknowingly commodified class. It has generated specific income streams by monetising inequality and risk”.

FE students worse off

Drawing on input from trade unions, campaigning bodies, charities, and agencies working in the FE and HE sectors, the report adds: “This ‘poverty premium’ is endemic and is present throughout the various educational transactions, services and consequences relating to people from working-class backgrounds”.

The report says: “As a result of the general decline in FE funding and/or the rise in living costs, students in FE are now worse off than their predecessors”.

It cites larger loan debts relating to studies as well as “transport costs arising from being last in the queue for private rented student accommodation, stuck on the outskirts of a college or university town”.

The report refers to work by the Institute for Fiscal Studies showing that the poorest 40 per cent of students graduate with around £57,000 in student loan debts compared to the £43,000 average debt for students from the richest 30 per cent of backgrounds.

Average student expenditure routinely exceeds income, leaving many forced to go cold or hungry because they cannot afford food or heating, according to the report.

Minimum living income

The government review of post-18 education and funding “should create a minimum living income for students across further and higher education”.

Grant funding “across further and higher education” should be reinstated and the report also recommends tackling the “inadequate” pay of apprentices by increasing the apprenticeship minimum wage.

NUS president Shakira Martin left school with just one GCSE and is only the second NUS president to have not attended university.

She said: “Being born working class is one of the biggest barriers to education” and added: “The shocking poverty premium is only going to get worse while the system ignores the fact it penalises poorer students for being poor. If sources of student income fail to keep pace with inflation, working-class students will continue to be hit the hardest”.

Affordable transport

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “It is wrong that in 21st century Britain, the success of a young person is still so closely linked to their socio-economic background - as illustrated by this new report by NUS. I would urge the government to look closely at the barriers that young people face in accessing post-16 education.

“There are issues which can readily be addressed such as affordable transport and ensuring that young people from families in receipt of welfare have fair access to an apprenticeship. Too many young people do not feel that they can take up an apprenticeship because of potential financial penalties for their families if they do - most notably cuts to child benefits.”

He added: “If we want a country that works for everyone, which promotes social mobility agenda, we need to make sure that nobody is penalised for taking up opportunities that will improve their abilities to get on in life, or be plunged into poverty when they do so.”

Open to all

John Widdowson, chair of the Mixed Economy Group of colleges offering HE, said: “This NUS report is timely and highlights a number of key areas for action if our education and training system is to be truly open to all”.

He commented: “Apprentices and full-time college students face escalating transport costs and immense difficulty in simply making ends meet. At a time when our economy needs more highly skilled individuals than ever, policies that discourage or exclude substantial numbers of individuals from making the most of their potential do not make sense. This report deserves to be taken seriously by both policymakers and providers”.

The Department for Education has been approached for comment.