Learning from Futuretrack: Impact of work experiences on HE student outcomes SRHE November 8 th 2013

Aims and objectives Futuretrack study How this study was carried out Key findings Discussion

Futuretrack  Longitudinal tracking study of the cohort of applicants to HE in 2006  Funded by HECSU, conducted by the Institute for Employment Research at the University of Warwick under leadership of Professor Kate Purcell.  Four stages – captures student journey from application to post-graduation outcome.  Unprecedented data set

Futuretrack data source

Research questions What proportions of students participate in internship, sandwich placements, and work experiences and do these differ by socio- economic group, institution, subject, age, gender, ability and ethnicity? What is the impact of work experiences on graduate outcomes and student aspirations? Is there a relationship between socio-economic group and subject discipline in sandwich courses and choice of institution? Is there a relationship between the level of participation in work/ work experience/placement and subject of study, and institutional type (i.e. whether highest – low tariff institution)? In what way does the timing of participation in paid and unpaid work differ by institutional type?

Method Review previous Futuretrack findings Re-analyses and descriptions Discussions with BIS Modelling and regression analyses + Implications for practice?

Summary of findings  Paid work  Unpaid (voluntary) work  Structured work experiences  Those who had undertaken both paid work and structured work experience had the most positive outcomes  Those who had undertaken no work had the least positive outcomes

Pathways into and through HE

Previous FT findings Participation in paid work during term time linked to socio-economic disadvantage and lower entry tariff institutions. Work-related activities varied with institutional type and subject. Stage 4 reported that integral work placements, vacation internships, and paid work for career experience – led to higher proportion who felt job was very appropriate than those who worked only for money.

Paid work 33.7% men, 28.9% women and 40% of those aged 26 years+ did no paid work. Women did more paid work in vacation and term times at stage 2. More men in vacation-only work by stage 3. 50% of Asian respondents did not do paid work at stage 2. All ethnicities increased paid work by stage 3. More from routine/manual backgrounds worked both vacation and term time. Those of parents with HE experience – less likely to work both vacation and term-time and more likely to work during vacations-only.

Hours of working by institutional type: stage 2

Structured work experience Work placements and sandwich years influenced by subject and institution type. Placements more likely in Education and Subjects allied to medicine; sandwich more likely in Engineering and Business. Least likely to do placement or sandwich at highest tariff but more likely to do vacation internship.

Work related learning by subject at stage 4

Work experiences by age

Work experiences by institution

Combining work experiences

Results

Work experiences

Summary and conclusions 25% had undertaken paid work during the entire period of HE and 15% had undertaken none, yet participation levels differ considerably. Results of regression analyses suggest that work experiences had an effect on labour market outcomes that was at least partly independent of respondents’ background characteristics. The study provides a baseline against which further research can evaluate changes in work-related activities of students.

Thank you Contact Jane Artess on or telephone