Data from the publication Widening Participation in Higher Education [URN 11/1082]

This covers measures of widening participation in Higher Education including progression rates for young people in England by free school meal status and school type. Source agency: Business, Innovation and Skills Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics Language: English Alternative title: FYPSEC

🇬🇧 영국

Lidia Dancu reports on how The Open University in Scotland is forging new partnerships with community organisations and opening up new opportunities with a “nothing about me without me” approach.

This material is part of the Covid Chronicles from the Margins project, funded by The Open University and The Hague. The project aims to highlight the impact of the pandemic on refugees, asylum seekers & undocumented migrants.

This item can also be found on our website.

This review provides a critical appraisal of the measurement of students’ social class and socioeconomic status (SES) in the context of widening higher education participation. Most assessments of social class and SES in higher education have focused on objective measurements based on the income, occupation, and education of students' parents, and they have tended to overlook diversity among students based on factors such as age, ethnicity, indigeneity, and rurality. However, recent research in psychology and sociology has stressed the more subjective and intersectional nature of social class. The authors argue that it is important to consider subjective self-definitions of social class and SES alongside more traditional objective measures. The implications of this dual measurement approach for higher education research are discussed.

Last update: April 2013 Was added to StatsWales: April 2013 Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Contact: post16ed.stats@wales.gsi.gov.uk The information in this table is taken from Performance Indicators in Higher Education in the UK available on the HESA web-site at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi. A Guide to Performance Indicators in Higher Education is also available at this web-site. The indicators are designed to provide reliable information on the nature and performance of the higher education sector in the UK. The performance indicators broadly cover access to higher education, non-continuation rates and outcomes. Indicators relate to higher education institutions in the individual countries of the UK. The Performance Indicators Steering Group (PISG) has led the development of these indicators. Members are drawn from the four higher education funding bodies for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (HEFCE, SHEFC, HEFCW, DEL); the Department for Education and Skills and other government departments, the Higher Education Statistics Agency, and universities and colleges through their representative bodies (Universities UK and SCOP) Since 2002/03 HESA has published the Performance Indicators on behalf of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) who published them previously. A number of changes were introduced for the 2002/03 publication; further details can be found at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi . The access indicators relate to students starting in 2004/05; the indicators of non-continuation (students who do not continue after their first year) and of non-completion (students who drop out and do not resume later or transfer elsewhere) relate to the cohort starting in 2003/04. The disability indicator covers all students, not just entrants, on undergraduate programmes in 2004/05. WIDENING ACCESS: PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG FIRST DEGREE ENTRANTS FROM STATE SCHOOLS OR COLLEGES. School type is taken from previous institution attended. All schools or colleges that are not denoted ‘independent’ are assumed to be state schools. This means that students from sixth-form or further education colleges, for example, are included as being from state schools.

Last update: April 2013 Was added to StatsWales: April 2013 Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Contact: post16ed.stats@wales.gsi.gov.uk The information in this table is taken from Performance Indicators in Higher Education in the UK available on the HESA web-site at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi. A Guide to Performance Indicators in Higher Education is also available at this web-site. The indicators are designed to provide reliable information on the nature and performance of the higher education sector in the UK. The performance indicators broadly cover access to higher education, non-continuation rates and outcomes. Indicators relate to higher education institutions in the individual countries of the UK. The Performance Indicators Steering Group (PISG) has led the development of these indicators. Members are drawn from the four higher education funding bodies for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (HEFCE, SHEFC, HEFCW, DEL); the Department for Education and Skills and other government departments, the Higher Education Statistics Agency, and universities and colleges through their representative bodies (Universities UK and SCOP) Since 2002/03 HESA has published the Performance Indicators on behalf of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) who published them previously. A number of changes were introduced for the 2002/03 publication; further details can be found at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi . The access indicators relate to students starting in 2004/05; the indicators of non-continuation (students who do not continue after their first year) and of non-completion (students who drop out and do not resume later or transfer elsewhere) relate to the cohort starting in 2003/04. The disability indicator covers all students, not just entrants, on undergraduate programmes in 2004/05. WIDENING ACCESS: PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG FIRST DEGREE ENTRANTS FROM STATE SCHOOLS OR COLLEGES. School type is taken from previous institution attended. All schools or colleges that are not denoted ‘independent’ are assumed to be state schools. This means that students from sixth-form or further education colleges, for example, are included as being from state schools.

Last update: April 2013 Was added to StatsWales: April 2013 Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Contact: post16ed.stats@wales.gsi.gov.uk The information in this table is taken from Performance Indicators in Higher Education in the UK available on the HESA web-site at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi. A Guide to Performance Indicators in Higher Education is also available at this web-site. The indicators are designed to provide reliable information on the nature and performance of the higher education sector in the UK. The performance indicators broadly cover access to higher education, non-continuation rates and outcomes. Indicators relate to higher education institutions in the individual countries of the UK. The Performance Indicators Steering Group (PISG) has led the development of these indicators. Members are drawn from the four higher education funding bodies for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (HEFCE, SHEFC, HEFCW, DEL); the Department for Education and Skills and other government departments, the Higher Education Statistics Agency, and universities and colleges through their representative bodies (Universities UK and SCOP) Since 2002/03 HESA has published the Performance Indicators on behalf of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) who published them previously. A number of changes were introduced for the 2002/03 publication; further details can be found at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi . The access indicators relate to students starting in 2004/05; the indicators of non-continuation (students who do not continue after their first year) and of non-completion (students who drop out and do not resume later or transfer elsewhere) relate to the cohort starting in 2003/04. The disability indicator covers all students, not just entrants, on undergraduate programmes in 2004/05. WIDENING ACCESS: PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG FIRST DEGREE ENTRANTS FROM STATE SCHOOLS OR COLLEGES. School type is taken from previous institution attended. All schools or colleges that are not denoted ‘independent’ are assumed to be state schools. This means that students from sixth-form or further education colleges, for example, are included as being from state schools.

This project will establish an interdisciplinary network in order to develop strategies for technology-enhanced teaching and learning of 'threshold concepts' in higher education. Effective teaching of these transformative, irreversible, integrative and often 'troublesome' concepts demands that teachers provide students with flexible learning activities designed to support learning as a form of conceptual change. They represent a challenge to both traditional and technology-enhanced teaching and learning environments and this promising field has not been adequately investigated to date. Effective investigation of threshold concepts in technology-enhanced learning can only be achieved through interdisciplinary research involving Computer Science, Education, Cognitive Science and other disciplines. Ultimate beneficiaries of this proposal will be teachers and learners across subject areas in Higher Education and potentially across other educational settings and phases including schools and workplace learning. This project is primarily concerned with research and development of approaches and solutions which address the personalisation of learning and the development of flexibility in provision. Threshold concepts are associated with conceptual change models of learning, and as such may offer the basis for learner-centred activities that promote reflection, self-regulation and independence. Better understanding of how to support learners developed from interdisciplinary perspectives will inform inclusion issues including widening participation in Higher Education and better alignment of university and work-based learning.

The data and analyses described in this paper are part of a larger controlled longitudinal study of the impacts of attending an inclusive STEM high school (ISHS). We define an ISHS as a school or school within a school accepting students primarily on the basis of interest rather than aptitude or prior achievement and giving them more intensive mathematics and science preparation than their state requires for graduation in order to prepare them for STEM college majors and careers. The project is testing the effects of attending an ISHS using student surveys, academic records, and interviews in Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio—three states with significant numbers of ISHSs and strong administrative data systems. Across the three states, the study has examined high school experiences and outcomes for students first surveyed in the 9th or 12th grade in 50 ISHSs plus students in the same grades in same-state comparison schools identified through propensity score matching. Matched students in ISHSs and comparison schools were surveyed a second time after 3 years (for those originally surveyed as 9th-graders) or were followed up in state higher education records two years after high school graduation (for those surveyed originally as 12th graders). After controlling for differences in the characteristics of students entering STEM and non-STEM high schools, the team has compared students on high school outcomes related to college readiness and the pursuit of postsecondary work in STEM. These include STEM interest and expectations as well as course-taking, graduation, and achievement. This project also has examined alternative types of ISHSs and explored relationships between STEM school design and implementation features and student outcomes. Policymaker interviews and survey data from school leaders provided information on school context, design, and implementation features and as well as state policy influences. Subgroup analyses have investigated whether different kinds of students benefit differently from the ISHS experience.

This study is comprised by the data collected for a wider project exploring the historical relationship between higher education and the UK economy. The project sought to provide a long-term explanation of the relationships between funding, widening access and socio-economic aspects of higher education. Three main areas were considered:
-The provision of an in-depth historical account and analysis of the numbers and extent of students and staff for the purposes of evaluating the main characteristics of UK higher education development back the 1920s.
-The provision of an in-depth historical account and evaluation of levels and structures of income and expenditure in higher education
-The interpretation of these data with reference to major socio-economic indicators.

This qualitative data-set is of young people's spatial imaginaries within the UK context. It contains interviews carried out with young people aged 16/17 years across different geographic contexts. In particular, interviews focussed around the importance and significance of place, including: i) the role place has on the choices of young people who are socially and educationally similar but located in geographically diverse areas; ii) ways in which economically, socially, culturally or politically distinct places act as pull or push factors for different social groups; iii) what social, cultural, or economic importance particular localities hold for different groups.

The creation of a fairer society through social mobility is high on the political agenda in the UK. It is often assumed that widening participation in higher education (HE), through various policies and initiatives, will equate to a fairer and more socially mobile society. Yet, while more disadvantaged groups are now progressing to HE, social mobility remains weak, suggesting that this is an over-simplified picture of the ways in which social inequalities are (re)produced in countries like the UK. The geographical (im)mobility of young people at this key transition point is rarely alluded to here, in terms of its significance in shaping social (im)mobility. In spatially diverse countries like the UK, access to universities, key labour markets, social networks, and other valuable resources often necessitate some degree of geographical mobility. In addressing social inequalities in wider society, it is therefore crucial to understand the nature of student flows across diverse parts of the UK, including the rationales different young people have for their (im)mobility to and from different places. There is already some evidence to suggest that the costs of HE study can deter the most disadvantaged young people from moving away for their studies, but what other place-based factors, including the cultural, social, and economic characteristics of localities might be important in shaping student (im)mobility? This interdisciplinary project will undertake an innovative and far-reaching programme of policy relevant research addressing the mobility patterns of UK HE students. The value of this research has been endorsed by all four UK HE Funding Councils, the UK Government's Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission (Chaired by Rt. Hon. Alan Milburn), The Sutton Trust, and Universities UK. These organisations are members of the project stakeholder group and will be closely involved in the research and dissemination programme, ensuring that the research addresses areas of policy relevance and reaches a wide audience. This novel research will uncover, for the first time, the nature of student flows within and across the four countries of the UK, together with rich and in-depth understandings about how they are shaped. Taking into account the socially, economically, politically and culturally diverse nature of UK society, the project will seek to understand the placed nature of educational decision making in particular. This unique work is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing on, and contributing to, the academic disciplines of geography, education, and sociology. The research is mixed methods and organised around two distinct but sequential phases, which include large scale quantitative analysis of UK-wide student records data (phase 1) that will frame the collection of new qualitative data (phase 2). Phase 1 will involve advanced spatial analysis to examine student flows at country, region, and locality levels, producing innovative graphics displaying these spatial movements in visual form. This analysis will explore patterns and relationships between student movements and social as well as spatial characteristics. In the second phase, qualitative research will take place in 10 purposefully selected case study schools across the UK, selected on the basis of criteria developed from the quantitative analysis. To explore the sorts of factors shaping young people's mobility patterns, data collection will involve interviews with young people, two members of their social network, as well as observation of their school contexts. These rich qualitative data will dig beneath the surface of the quantitative patterns, capturing how young people's subjective experiences of space and their own geographical imaginaries impact on their geographic (im)mobility. It will explore how these relationships to place and mobility intentions are constructed and influenced by their individual biographies, social network and school.

Supporting data for Hubbard et al., 'Levelling the Playing Field: The effect of including widening participation in university league tables', in press at International Review of Education.For analysis script see 10.6084/m9.figshare.12951278

Last update: April 2013 Was added to StatsWales: April 2013 Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Contact: post16ed.stats@wales.gsi.gov.uk The information in this table is taken from Performance Indicators in Higher Education in the UK available on the HESA web-site at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi. A Guide to Performance Indicators in Higher Education is also available at this web-site. The indicators are designed to provide reliable information on the nature and performance of the higher education sector in the UK. The performance indicators broadly cover access to higher education, non-continuation rates and outcomes. Indicators relate to higher education institutions in the individual countries of the UK. The Performance Indicators Steering Group (PISG) has led the development of these indicators. Members are drawn from the four higher education funding bodies for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (HEFCE, SHEFC, HEFCW, DEL); the Department for Education and Skills and other government departments, the Higher Education Statistics Agency, and universities and colleges through their representative bodies (Universities UK and SCOP) Since 2002/03 HESA has published the Performance Indicators on behalf of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) who published them previously. A number of changes were introduced for the 2002/03 publication; further details can be found at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi . The access indicators relate to students starting in 2004/05; the indicators of non-continuation (students who do not continue after their first year) and of non-completion (students who drop out and do not resume later or transfer elsewhere) relate to the cohort starting in 2003/04. The disability indicator covers all students, not just entrants, on undergraduate programmes in 2004/05. WIDENING ACCESS: PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG FIRST DEGREE ENTRANTS FROM STATE SCHOOLS OR COLLEGES. School type is taken from previous institution attended. All schools or colleges that are not denoted ‘independent’ are assumed to be state schools. This means that students from sixth-form or further education colleges, for example, are included as being from state schools.

Last update: April 2013 Was added to StatsWales: April 2013 Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Contact: post16ed.stats@wales.gsi.gov.uk The information in this table is taken from Performance Indicators in Higher Education in the UK available on the HESA web-site at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi. A Guide to Performance Indicators in Higher Education is also available at this web-site. The indicators are designed to provide reliable information on the nature and performance of the higher education sector in the UK. The performance indicators broadly cover access to higher education, non-continuation rates and outcomes. Indicators relate to higher education institutions in the individual countries of the UK. The Performance Indicators Steering Group (PISG) has led the development of these indicators. Members are drawn from the four higher education funding bodies for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (HEFCE, SHEFC, HEFCW, DEL); the Department for Education and Skills and other government departments, the Higher Education Statistics Agency, and universities and colleges through their representative bodies (Universities UK and SCOP) Since 2002/03 HESA has published the Performance Indicators on behalf of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) who published them previously. A number of changes were introduced for the 2002/03 publication; further details can be found at www.hesa.ac.uk/pi . The access indicators relate to students starting in 2004/05; the indicators of non-continuation (students who do not continue after their first year) and of non-completion (students who drop out and do not resume later or transfer elsewhere) relate to the cohort starting in 2003/04. The disability indicator covers all students, not just entrants, on undergraduate programmes in 2004/05. WIDENING ACCESS: PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG FIRST DEGREE ENTRANTS FROM STATE SCHOOLS OR COLLEGES. School type is taken from previous institution attended. All schools or colleges that are not denoted ‘independent’ are assumed to be state schools. This means that students from sixth-form or further education colleges, for example, are included as being from state schools.

Supplementary data comprising journal articles used to conduct a systematic literature review on widening participation

This paper presents the full qualitative results of a study to propose a new conceptual model for widening participation of online education. The six critical dimensions of widening online participation model helps to explain how open online programs can both enable and constrain educationally under-served, non-privileged learners in different global contexts. It can be used to consider and design programs that tip the balance in favour of enabling more learners.This paper provides examples and analysis for each of the key studies used to justify the parts of the model as the results published elsewhere (peer reviewed journal) will necessarily present a highly summarised view.