The old Office for Fair Access (OFFA) regime and the intended Access and Participation Plans work at an institutional level, but beneath institutional averages there are massive differences between subjects. Where, for example, providers deliver Nursing and Midwifery, that provision usually means a significant proportion of that provider’s mature recruits are enrolled on health courses. More...
Even with the massive increase in student numbers the most selective institutions have not diversified sufficiently on issues of race, gender or socio-economic background. Ensuring that students from all backgrounds have an equal chance to attend the same universities and can progress into equally successful careers must be a key goal. More...
For more low-income students to enter higher education, they have to want to go to university in the first place. In my own experience, by the time university is being seriously discussed in the state school system you are well into secondary education, and often surrounded by a culture that sees academic effort as ‘uncool’. Low-income students, from a young age, need examples of people from similar backgrounds who have succeeded at university. More...
Widening access work across the last 20 years has been bedevilled by short termism. There has been a parade of time-limited national collaborative outreach projects, from Excellence Challenge in 2000 to the National Collaborative Outreach Programme (NCOP) in 2017, with moving targets. More...
One of the challenges in a new role is that there is a pressure to innovate and do something new. But access and widening participation is a well-travelled path. Rather than fruitlessly searching for a silver bullet, we should utilise the existing expertise and ideas. A good starting point is the October 2016 report of the Social Mobility Advisory Group, Working in Partnership: enabling social mobility in higher education, which is full of good recommendations and proposals, most of which have been sidelined as politicians and decision-makers have grappled with new challenges. More...
Meeting the needs of care-experienced and other vulnerable groups should be explicitly included as a priority within guidance from the Office for Students. We would recommend that all institutions are required to include a target to improve the access, success or progression of care experienced students. We believe that this would demonstrate a real commitment to ensuring a significant change in the educational and life outcomes of this marginalised group. More...
Higher education providers are well-placed to lead collaborative networks which raise the aspirations and attainment of disadvantaged young people in their locality. From years of leading and evaluating widening participation work, we believe that collaborative outreach is not only ethically sound in an increasingly marketised sector, but is also financially efficient, reducing unnecessary duplication of work while utilising the varied strengths of a broad range of partners. More...
There is too great a focus on simply accessing university, particularly a Russell Group university, in the widening participation debate. Access to university is not necessarily the great leveller it is assumed to be. More...
White working-class boys are the most under-represented group in higher education. Their access to university – and the access of white working-class girls too – should be a top priority for the Office for Students. More...
Most of the difference in the likelihood of going to university between poorer and richer students can be explained by differences in their prior achievement. However, there remains a socio-economic gap in access to high-status institutions even when we allow for prior achievement. We also know that poorer students are less likely to apply to these institutions. So interventions to influence application behaviour are essential. More...
/https%3A%2F%2Fprofilepics.canalblog.com%2Fprofilepics%2F1%2F0%2F1076071.jpg)
