The Attainment Gap and CSR Widening Participation, Learning Outcomes and Graduate Opportunity Professor Matthew Weait Dean, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences

Looking solely at higher education institutions, the number of students studying at all levels increased over the ten years by 2.8%, from 2.2 million to 2.3 million (Figure 6). The only overall decrease between 2004–05 and 2013–14 has been in other undergraduate students, which have fallen by 56.3%. Over the ten-year period first degree students increased by 24.0%, postgraduate research students by 27.2%, and postgraduate taught students by 8.4%. Numbers studying at higher education providers increased over the ten years by 2.8%, from 2.2 million to 2.3 million. Total number of students in HEIs studying at all levels has increased by 2.8% to 2.3m http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Pages/PatternsAndTrends2015.aspx#.VvOZrOKdCUk

Rise in FT first degree (26.5%), PGT (38%) and PGR (41%) While full-time first degree, postgraduate taught and postgraduate research entrants rose considerably over the period (by 26.5%, 38.8% and 41.1% respectively), part-time first degree and postgraduate taught entrants declined, as did entrants to both modes of other undergraduate study. Part-time first degree entrants fell by 12.2% over the whole ten-year period, with much of the decline between 2011–12 and 2013–14 (the years before and after the introduction of undergraduate tuition fee reforms, during which period entrants fell by 30.6%). Other undergraduate entrants fell by considerably more, with full-time falling by 44.6% between 2004–05 and 2013–14, and part-time falling by 52.7% in the same period. Rise in FT first degree (26.5%), PGT (38%) and PGR (41%) Significant fall in PT first degree (-12.2%) and other UG http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Pages/PatternsAndTrends2015.aspx#.VvOZrOKdCUk

Access to HE Between 2012-13, application rates for 18 yr olds to FT UG courses rose 1% to 35% Average university acceptances for applicants from POLAR3 quintile 1 is 12%, for quintile 5 it is 29%

Increase in participation from low participation neighbourhoods, measured by POLAR3 classification) Young entry from most disadvantaged areas up from 13% (1998/9) to 20% (2011/12) But gap between highest and lowest has persisted over that period, and participation among most advantaged group has increased by 9% in that period (least advantaged 7%) And there is a widening participation gap between young men and young women from the most disadvantaged group … [POLAR3 is a classification of small areas within the UK, showing the chances of people aged 18 to 20 entering HE based on where they live. It is seen as one way of measuring ‘disadvantage’ for young students. The classification consists of five quintiles, which each account for 20 per cent of the cohort of young people in the UK. Those from quintile 1 wards have the lowest participation rates, while those from quintile 5 wards have the highest.] Trends in young participation report (HEFCE 2013/28)

Where do Students from Disadvantaged Groups Study? In 2011/12 a young person from most advantaged group was 6.3x more likely to study at a higher tariff university than someone from one of the two most disadvantaged areas (Trends in young participation by student background and selectivity of institution OFFA 2014/01) This matters if employers target graduates from universities with higher tariff (they are less likely to attract applicants from areas of disadvantage) Some evidence for this from HighFliers http://highfliers.co.uk/download/2016/graduate_market/GMReport16.pdf This is confounded by fact that, as a group, students from lowest participation areas with the highest A -level scores achieve relatively fewer good degrees than their most advantaged counterparts with the same scores (so even if they study at high tariff / employer-targeted university they may be less competitive if degree outcome used as easy proxy) (Differences in degree outcomes: Key findings, HEFCE March 2014/03)

Progression and Retention Continuation and success rates vary widely. HEFCE (2013) data show that young (<21) men, FT, first degree entrants are less likely to be in HE one year after entry than equivalent women (6.4% /8.5%) Retention rates for all ethnic groups apart from those with Chinese ethnicity are lower than for their white peers (highest for black students (11.3%) – significant issue, also as regards employment, being addressed by HEA)

Those from lowest participating quintile significantly less likely to be in HE after one year than their highest participating quintile peers (9% / 5%) BIS: National strategy for access and student success in higher education (2014)

Who Gets Good Degrees? Those with good A Levels. Of those with 4 A Grades at A-Level, 94% achieved a First or 2:1 (44% First Class) Of those with 3 C Grades at A-Level, 70% achieved a First or 2:1 (15% First Class) Those who study Medicine and Dentistry, not Agriculture … 90% of graduates in medicine and dentistry achieved First and 2:1s (average tariff on entry of 535), 66% / 308 for Agriculture and related subjects. Those who study full-time. 75% of FT graduates achieved Firsts or 2:1s, while 57% of PT students did so. Those aged < 21 on entry (75%) as opposed to those >21 (64%), though when compared on a like for like basis (controlling for entry qualifications), those >21 do better. Those who are female (74%) rather than male (70%) Those who do not have reported disabilities (73%) compared with those who do (69%) Those who are white (76%) as opposed to those who are from BAME populations (60%) Those from independent schools (82%) rather than state schools (73%) (though once entry qualifications are controlled for, state school students tend to do better) Those from high-participation (POLAR Quintile 1) neighbourhoods (77%) compared to those from low-participation (POLAR Quintile 5) ones (66%) Source: HEFCE (2015) Differences in degree outcomes: The effect of subject and student characteristics

Graduate Progression to Employment Students enter HE to pursue career aspirations. NSS 2010-11 reasons given: To gain qualifications (45%) It is necessary to have a university degree for the career I want to follow (36%) To improve earning potential (27%) Both students and economy benefit from graduate success, but HE also contributes to social mobility and reduction of economic inequality (CBI, Tomorrow’s Growth, 2013) Such social mobility is not just about securing more access to the most selective institutions (all can / should contribute) Nor is it about increasing access to established professions (these change, e.g. creative technologies – taught primarily in HEIs that have history of widening participation) All great, but there are problems and barriers …

Key Findings and Issues People from low participation areas are significantly less likely to access HE access higher tariff / prestigious (preferred by employers?) universities remain in HE get good degrees be employed 6 months / 40 months after graduating Be employed in “graduate” jobs Association of Graduate Recruiters found that only 13% of employers collect data about socio-economic background of graduates they recruit, and of these 100% monitor school attended 77% for first generation HE 19% for free school meals 15% parental occupation Also found that only 24% have initiatives to improve socio-economic mix of workforce 21% have plans to do something 41% have nothing and plan nothing

Key Findings and Issues (Cont.) Somewhere between 25%-35% of employers specify min UCAS tariff of 260 (BCC) This disadvantages graduates from low participation areas who DO achieve equivalent degree results (where university has acted to “level” the playing field in this way) Employers possibly ignoring / not taking into account the added value of the degree, blocking mobility – and particularly problematic for those taking less conventional routes into HE Employers targeting certain institutions – which can entrench advantage

What to Do? There is already good work being done, but … If part of CSR involves improving social and economic mobility, HEIs and employers to work more closely together, specifically in targeting / supporting / promoting opportunities for graduates from low participation areas Identify the specific needs of / issues affecting / sustained support for this group – be more granular Work towards targeted placements / internships for this group (1/3 of graduates working in the Top 100 employers had worked there before graduating) (HighFliers Report, 2013) Develop more sector-specific employability skills (and co-deliver?) Work together to embed these skills in programmes and courses Mentors and Ambassadors

Two Questions: What are the immediate priorities? What are the barriers, and how do we overcome them?