BME attainment gap institutional KPI

1.How we developed the BME attainment gap KPI - our journey and our challenge. 2.How we measure the attainment gap - the Value Added Score. 3.Kingston’s institutional KPI and achievement plan. 4.The evaluation of the achievement plan and its success so far. Contents:

Our journey and our challenge

 BME attainment gap is a long standing sector wide issue (HEFCE).  Particularly important for Kingston as we have the largest population of BME students of any UK university (51%).  In 2011/12 Kingston’s BME attainment gap was 30%.  By 2013/14 we had reduced it to 23%. 1. The journey to the KPI

Understanding the perceptions and awareness levels - Internal research (2011) - Student initiatives and staff development - Equality Committee Away day (Mar 2013) Senior Staff Conference (Nov 2013) Developing a compelling argument for the Senior Management team - Proposal: BME KPI (May 2014) - Vice Chancellor ‘s support – SMT level KPI - 6 months to develop a robust metric and plan so he could make a recommendation to the Board. Adopting the BME attainment gap KPI - Strong and regular communications - Conducted a mapping exercise – raising awareness - Established the right metric - Conducted the research into what works - Breaking through silos - Took the proposal to the People Committee (Feb 2015) - KPI adopted by the full board (Mar 2015) 1.1 The journey to the KPI

The Value Added score

2. The Value Added (VA) Score  Expectation of cohort derived from entry qualifications, field of study & 5 years of comparable sector data.  1 st /2:1 expectation of cohort vs actual 1 st /2:1% = VA Score.

2.1 University level VA Scores In 2012/13, 64% of our BME students were expected to get a good degree. Ultimately, only 51% did, giving a Value Added Score of In contrast, while 68% of our white students were expected to get a good degree, 73% did, giving a Value Added Score of

2.2 Course level VA Score analysis 38 broad subject groupings for the cohort of 2012/13 graduates:  BME students performed below white students on 34 courses, and above on only 4.  BME VA Score below 0.7 on 15 of the 32 courses where there were at least 9 BME graduates.  On 5 of these 15 courses, white students also scored below 1.  Some subjects, with the highest achievers for white graduates, had the biggest gaps.  In 5 of the 6 subjects, where BME students performed above 1, white students also scored more than 1.

2.3 The institutional KPI The target of BME attainment gap KPI is to raise BME students VA Score to 1.0 by the end of the 2018/19 academic year. Table below shows how many additional good degrees BME students would need to close the attainment gap, if: a. White VA Score remains constant at 1.07 b. White VA Score also increases

An institutional approach

3. Addressing the attainment gap In view of the evidence of complex causation, we have structured the Achievement Plan to focus on three areas:  Enhancing knowledge and skills of staff  Unconscious bias workshops  Equality essentials training  EDI in the curriculum workshops  Raising student success  Beyond Barriers mentoring scheme  Oral and Written Skills workshops  Academic Progression workshops  Compact scheme  Improving institutional processes  Pre-populated course monitoring reports  EDI in quality assurance process  EDI in academic promotion criteria  BME attainment features in Education and Quality Assurance Committee Terms of Reference

Evaluating success

4. Evaluating success Interim measures of success include:  Institutional: recruitment to diversity values expressed in the academic role profiles  Knowledge and skills: staff engagement in related training e.g. inclusive curriculum workshops  Student: Progression rates without resits, participation rates in successful initiatives, evaluation of student support initiatives

4.1 Evaluating success Progression rate analysis of student initiatives have shown:  Compact scheme: 84% progression rate for BME students, higher than the 80% overall UG population.  Research internships: 100% of BME interns progressed compared to 78% of all BME students in 2013/14.  Student integration scheme: 91% of BME students progressed compared with 77% in the overall population.  Student leadership project: 88% of BME students progressed compared to 79% of non participating BME students.

Summary of the BME attainment gap

In summary  Developing an institutional KPI and plan takes time - win hearts and minds and break through silos.  The Vice Chancellor’s visible commitment is critical.  The Value Added Score provides a robust metric for measuring the attainment gap at Kingston.  The achievement plan introduces initiatives to:  Improve institutional processes  Enhance the skills & knowledge of staff  Raise student success  The KPI’s target is to raise BME students VA score to 1.0 by the end of the 2018/19 academic year.  There is great momentum and enthusiasm across the institution to address the BME attainment gap.

Questions for us? Questions for you  Is there anything new in our approach?  What learning/ideas can you take back to your own institution?  What strategies/initiatives have worked in your organisation?