1. Thinking ‘spatially’ about mature, part-time learners in HE Kate Thomas SCUTREA 2015, University of Leeds, UK 7-9 July 2015

2. outline thinking spatially? research context concepts and methods examples

3. thinking spatially? conceptual and methodological tool for ‘thinking about spatiality in a highly active manner’ (Massey, 2005) power relations in space spatial relationships (of higher education) how (institutional/campus) spaces are defined how (mature, part-time students) use/inhabit space

4. research context HEA-funded research into part-time, mature undergraduates, retention and the discourse of ‘belonging’ in English HE (2012- 2015) continuing and significant disparity between full and part-time undergraduate retention rates in English HE significant decline in part-time undergraduate entrants to English HE since 2012 multiple case study: 4 English HEIs delivering face-to-face part- time undergraduate teaching (3 post-1992, 1 pre-1992)

5. retention – and belonging dominant narrative of ‘belonging’ in retention literature and institutional approaches (in English HE) –belonging in HE based on dominant idea of student as full-time, young, time- rich, residential on campus… Thomas (2012) - ‘a sense of belonging is … critical to both retention and success’ drawing on Tinto (1975) - integration and congruency as conditions of student persistence dominant but problematic narrative for part-time, mature undergraduates (in English HE)

6. mature, part-time undergraduates highly diverse cohort: age, gender, ethnicity, educational background, qualification aim, employment status, parental and/or caring status… a ‘highly instrumental approach to HE’ ‘difference’ from majority student population and ‘absence’ from campus both ‘problematic’ in relation to dominant narrative of ‘belonging in HE’ occupy increasingly endangered spaces in English HE

7. a borderland analysis MASSEY space-time progressive sense of place BRAH diaspora relational positioning BOURDIEU habitus, field, capital to realise the complexity of student development it is important to use multiple theoretical perspectives in conjunction with one another, even when they contradict’ Abes, 2012:190

8. thinking spatially: a methodological tool each case study site (HEI) viewed as an activity space (Massey, 2005) with institutional geographies of power tracking retention strategy pathways through the HEI with document analysis and interview mapping belonging on campus maps

9. HEI as activity space HE sector government policies HEI globalised economy ‘ the spatial network of links and activities, of spatial connections and of locations, within which a particular agent operates’ (Massey, 1994) hierarchies, discourses and practices of the HE sector: mission groups, league tables, REF changing student markets/populations (

10. institutional geographies of power where is power concentrated, who/what is powerful within the institution, why? dominant narratives of ‘HE’, ‘the student experience’ ‘who belongs’ strategy: production, consumption and use (Prior, 2003) blockage, disruption, absorption in other agendas, gaps between rhetoric and experience centre?

11. mapping belonging Student Workshops - participatory diagramming technique campus maps – hot/cold spots, colours instrumental engagement – limited use of campus peripheral, satellite, ‘darkened’, ‘empty’ are mature, part-time students ‘on the map’?

12. why think spatially? conceptual and methodological tool conceptualise spatial relationships of HE – institutional/ individual interrogate narrative of ‘belonging’ through space and power - belonging is relational in structured social space of HE – a restricted narrative incompatible with diverse student populations map gaps between institutional rhetoric and individual experience capture dimensions of belonging: centre, cohort, programme, virtual, imaginary - complex, not uniform, negotiated, based on relations of power

13. questions? thank you