Student record systems are in the higher education news again following the publication of a report reviewing the implementation of the Data Futures programme (you might know it better prefaced by “beleaguered”).

Data Futures was fundamentally concerned with streamlining the collection of data from institutions in a way which met the requirements of regulators and others and has been ongoing in one form or another for at least a decade. There are still some significant problems as the new report, prepared by PWC and published on 29 January 2025, demonstrates.

Having had occasional engagements with Data Futures at different levels over the years I do recognise many of the issues raised in the report. But there is a prior issue, covered in passing in the report, which I do think merits further consideration.

The way it works

Part of the issue with national level data collection stems from the many and various ways data is collected, organised and stored locally in institutions. Each one has its own student record system. Every institution buys, installs, develops and maintains its own system at significant cost, not just financial but also in terms of people and time – these things can be extremely difficult and take years. Not only is this extremely inefficient when viewed at a sector level it introduces a huge amount of complexity for a programme like Data Futures.

The report on Date Futures (you can find a handy review of it on Wonkhe here) highlights several fundamental issues including:

• The specification and requirements of the programme were constantly changing at the behest of sponsors and regulators meaning that those responsible for delivery were trying to hit an ever-shifting target – not ideal for this kind of operation.
• Programme management and governance was sub-optimal to say the least.
• Resources dedicated to the programme and institutional preparedness in the context of both of these were problematic.

Whilst some institutions managed to do what was required to achieve the necessary returns many did not without significant additional time and intervention.

The report has some broad but telling observations in relation to student records systems:

Broadly, the sector’s student records systems, including those provided by the main student record system providers, are aging tools built on legacy technologies and data architecture, with extensive personalisations within individual institutions. This makes the sector less adaptable to change in this space, with substantial changes being costly, resource intensive and carrying a higher likelihood of error. Materially reducing the administrative burden associated with data collection and reporting, rather than relying extensively on individuals with specialist skills and knowledge, requires institutions and student record systems providers to make substantial investments, and senior leaders within institutions should ensure that institutions have the data capability and tools required.

Of course institutions and their senior leaders can invest heavily in the skilled staff and wider resources required (and many have done and continue to do so) but if the student record system providers are not wholly focused on meeting the requirements in terms of data collection and reporting it will make life infinitely harder.

As this later comment in the report acknowledges:

Like institutions, there is variation in the extent to which student records system providers invested in the Data Futures programme prior to 2022/23. It is also clear that where updates to the data specification or the HESA Data Platform (HDP) required student records system updates during 2022/23, there was insufficient time available for providers to implement and test changes appropriately due to the short timetable available for wider submission. There is a gap between the readiness and successfulness of student records systems in delivering the Data Futures Programme as perceived by the student records system providers and the institutions using those student records systems. Generally, system providers indicated that their solutions were robust and able to produce valid returns, whilst institutions felt frustrated by the extent to which their student records systems’ capabilities lagged the current version of the data model and HDP.

The report overall then identifies a wide range of problems and lack of progress with the (beleaguered) Data Futures programme. This is despite the huge efforts and commitment of those working on the programmed directly and the many individuals across every institution trying to make their required data returns work locally.

I wouldn’t start there if I were you

No-one wants to be where we are at the moment with this. But leaving aside the big issues around changing specification and requirements, poor governance and inconsistencies in institutional preparedness it does seem to me that there is a fundamental change which would make things easier in future and prevent this kind of problem.

I know there has been lots of chat about this over the years and it is very easy to discount it all as being just too difficult but the more I think about it the more sensible it seems as an approach, especially given the financial challenges facing the UK higher education sector at present.

Essentially, I remain convinced that we should select and deploy, over time, a national student record system in every higher education institution in the UK. The impact of this would be transformative and bring huge benefits to institutions and all the people who work in them as well as streamlining regulatory and reporting requirements such as Data Futures. Implementation would not be wholly straightforward but would be no more complicated or challenging than the status quo over the next decade – and significantly cheaper.

I first started thinking along these lines as an exercise to come up with an innovative idea which would enable me to enter an AHUA essay competition and, whilst I was initially pretty sceptical about the arguments in favour, which I have heard before, and being very familiar with the cherished autonomy of UK universities, I nevertheless came to the view that there was something in this.

The 2024 Jisc/KPMG report entitled ‘Collaboration for a Sustainable Future’ addressed the broader issue of sector digital collaboration and set out a number of approaches for short term and long term benefit. The report

outlines how institutions can leverage digital, data and technology collaboratively to unlock efficiencies, reduce costs and contribute to a stable, sustainable future.

I find it hard to disagree with very much in this paper and that is part of the problem I fear. None of these big issues is going to be solved by polite agreement or nice memorandum of understanding. It will take something more profound and directive – either a platform that is genuinely burning rather than smouldering or concerted government-led action. It is conceivable that groups of institutions could get together to make a collective step in the right direction but for all the reasons set out in the report this is really difficult given the operating environment. And, as the Data Futures programme has demonstrated, there is a need for consistency among the external stakeholders too. The Jisc/KPMG report has a number of strengths but the solutions still feel remote and the options for action too diffuse to make an impact. I think we should start with just one thing therefore. A very big one which will make a material difference to everyone.

A big prize

There is only a handful of providers of student record systems and one dominant provider in the UK. By establishing a national student record system, the government would take huge amounts of cost out of the higher education system and remove significant pain from HEIs and their staff. This really would be a big win given where we are now. Now of course it may well be that there is now an easier way to achieve the same ends in terms of sector wide system consistency. That would be great but whatever the technological advances which might enable this the principles in terms of securing a consistent sector-wide approach  are the same. And, as the Data Futures challenges show, we are a long way from that right now.

And should anyone suggest that this is just not possible there is at least one country which has proved that this really can work. The strong example of the success of such a model is the Swedish higher education system where there is a national student record system, known as Ladok which has been adopted by all Swedish universities. If a similar system operated in the UK it would remove a huge amount of pain and cost from HEI operations.

Whilst my starting point was something of a thought experiment, since the original essay was published I’ve had contact with a number of different people and organisations who wanted to discuss the possibility of such a system. This included senior figures from Sweden’s Ladok who talked me through the implementation, development and governance of the system and its cost-effective operation. Other countries have also looked at or are implementing such a model including Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands. It really can work.

Data futures taught us that the current approach is not helping – there is another way.

A final note

Finally, just to note that I didn’t win the essay competition but it was an honour to be shortlisted. And if you really want to know more then you can find a slightly edited version of the essay as published by HEPI . You can see Part One and Part Two here:

Setting the Record Straight: the Case for a National Student Administration Management System – PART ONE

Setting the Record Straight: the advantages and costs of a National Student Administration Management System – PART TWO