My People of the year – 2019

It may not quite be the end of the year, or indeed the decade, but writing a list of people who I’ve found inspiring is cathartic, doing this before we know the results of this week’s election, one which has been characterised by lying and the worst of people.

Sport

In at number one and representing the world of sport. In a year where as always we could be spoilt for choice, I picked Dina Asher Smith. Academically brilliant – 10 A* at GCSE, 3 As at A level and a first from King’s London, this year she was winner of the 200m title in the World Athletics Championships 2019 and she is the fastest British woman runner in history.

Music

From the world of music, my album of the year is Kiwanuke, the third album from Michael Kiwanuke. Soulful, and written to be listed to as an album, which suits us older folk!

Public Life

For standing up for what is right, despite all the smears, and being prepared to use the British judicial system to hold parliament to account, despite all the obstacles place in her way, Gina Miller. It’s worth reading the linked article for an understanding of what she believes in.

Books

In literature, the inestimable Margaret Atwood. Continuing the story of the dystopian Gilead is a parable for our times.

Cinema

One of the most powerful films this year was “Sorry, We Missed You”. Ken Loach at the age of 83 still produces work with a sublime combination of empathy and shock. His portrayal of the gig economy and its effect on individual and families should be watched by anyone, in fact everyone, who relies on their purchases from Amazon or elsewhere being delivered by courier. You won’t complain about a late or mishandled delivery again.

On the subject of film, mention has to go to Debbie Honeywood, an unknown actor who played Abby in “Sorry We Missed You”. Two of her scenes, both where we see and hear just her side of a phone call, are some of the most moving in the film.

Politics

From the world of politics, it sometimes seems hard to find someone you might respect, but look beyond this small island and its ongoing psychodrama and we have Jacinda Ardern. Her response to the massacre in Christchurch was a lesson in humility, dignity and leadership to all others.

Science

As a scientist, I have to pick someone from the world of science, and who better than Katie Bouman. Her excitement was infectious when the first ever photograph of a black hole was revealed, where she had led the development of the imaging algorithm.

Environment

And finally – a remarkable person who holds us all to account, who repeatedly reminds us of what science says. You know she’s right when a bunch of angry white men have to take to their keyboards to discredit her – Greta Thunberg

Comfortably Numb

On this day, 40 years ago, Pink Floyd released “The Wall”.

At that time, I was in the first year of 6th form, at that age where you are still trying to find and define your musical identity, which for soem reason mattered more in those days. As someone who’d bene brought up with classical and church music, and who played in orchestras, prog inevitably drew me in.

And then Pink Floyd released this. The ever so worldly upper sixth formers I knew (in what I would now know to call a vertical tutor group), were astonished that the album appeared to be so commercial, and were even more shocked that they managed to get a number one single from it, “Another Brick in the Wall, Part 2”. Possibly my least favourite song on the entire album, with its “We don’t need no education” refrain.

But the album had absolute gems, and even at first it didn’t seem to compare to Dark Side, or Wish You Were Here, some lyrics just stood out, and stand the test of time.

“Hey You”, with its spiky acoustic guitar, and the sound of fingers sliding across the frets:

Hey you, out there in the cold
Getting lonely, getting old
Can you feel me?
Hey you, standing in the aisles
With itchy feet and fading smiles
Can you feel me?
Hey you, don’t help them to bury the light
Don’t give in without a fight

The despair of “Nobody Home”:

I’ve got a little black book with my poems in.
Got a bag with a toothbrush and a comb in.
When I’m a good dog, they sometimes throw me a bone in
.

Side 4 was never a comfortable listen (yes kids, albums had sides in those days). You had to remind yourself the fascist Pink was part of  a dream sequence, but you know there’s plenty of people around today who would happily say

“There’s one in the spotlight, he don’t look right to me”

Finally, redemption in “Outside the Wall”.

Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.

And when they’ve given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it’s not easy
Banging your heart against some mad bugger’s wall

But let’s face it, the top track is the last one in side 3, with two fabulous Dave Gilmour guitar solos. This is from the band’s “reunion” in 2005. Enjoy

“This tweet is unavailable”

The phrase we see on Twitter, when a user has chosen to make their account private, and I confess that these days, this does include me.

For over 10 years I’ve used Twitter – I was a fairly early adopter, and to start with struggled to see what was the point, but very quickly, Twitter became a virtual home, place where I could share ideas about my work, make connections and develop a “personal learning network”. It became the place I plugged my blog articles, where I found some key thinkers on higher education policy and allowed me to identify possible speakers for conferences.

More recently I’ve become less enamoured, let me explain why.

Twitter and HE

There are still plenty of users who provide great insight into HE, and organisations like HEPI and Wonkhe are a reliable guide to the challenges and thinking in the sector. On the downside though, too many individual accounts are now just retweets of that user’s institutional marketing, or a tweet to announce “I’m at this meeting today”, while making sure that the head of department, VC and institutional account are copied in. Even worse is the individual academic account tweeting about a course being, for example, 2nd in England for an aspect of student experience as measured in a league table (not of course, the original NSS data form 2 years previously…). It all gets rather tedious

Edu-twitter

As a qualified teacher, I’m also interested in thoughts of other teachers, and Twitter has been a great sources of support and links to resources as well as current thinking about education. It does get pretty vicious though, especially the ongoing fight between trads and progressives.

Snowflakes

Oh yes, the accusation thrown out to anyone who disagrees with you. Organisations can seem to be pretty snowflakey too – they have a reputation to protect after all, and will make sure that the digital chip-paper that is Twitter never appears to challenge that. I’m sure there was a good reason why there were 5 accounts belonging to employment lawyers (individual and corporate accounts) who were following me. I don’t know the reason, but, reader, I blocked them.

Politics

And now the sewer really deepens. Politics in the UK has become so polarised, and I am sickened just reading the comments. Most worrying is that an increasing number of people cite social media as their source of news. Really? This is scary, but it’s easier to have all your biases confirmed and polarised further than it is to read a decent newspaper.

Ten arguments for deleting your social media accounts right now

This is a great book by Jaron Lanier. He presents 10 reasons for leaving, or at least stepping back from, social media.

Read it, just read it and re-evaluate why you think the way you do.

Conclusions

Am I likely to quit Twitter – nah, not completely, but I’ve been badly burned in the last year by the way some people have chosen to interpret my tweets.

Hence, I might retweet a newspaper article, but I won’t comment much. I rarely make an individual comment on education anymore. I do comment on cycling – that’s uncontentious, although despite being delighted that Bernal won the Tour, I’d have loved to see another team win for once. (Sorry to all the Team Ineos fanboys)

Oh, and I’ll be keeping my account locked as well as maintaining a long list of accounts I’ve blocked, so that I get to decide who can read what I write.

Humiliation

This is a slightly off-topic blog post, the only real link to education, and in particular higher education, is the origin of the parlour game, Humiliation.

This makes its appearance in David Lodge’s campus novel “Changing Places”. Lodge’s character Philip Swallow introduces this to american colleagues at Euphoric State University. The idea is to name a book that you’ve not (but might be expected to have) read. Points are scored for everyone else who has read the book. The humiliation comes from admitting you haven’t read canonical works of literature. In the book, an admission of not having read the text of Hamlet leads to an English academic not getting tenure.

Anyway, as a scientist, I’m expected to be a philistine, and have certainly not read much of what might constitute an undergraduate literature reading list. Last week however, I was settling into that most British of activities, namely reading the Radio Times, the Christmas issue being  the only issue bought in middle class households across the country. Going through the film listings, I realised that I could play Humiliation, using classic movies I’ve not seen, so here’s a list of what I’ve managed to miss or avoid.

  • The Sound of Music
  • Mary Poppins
  • It’s a Wonderful Life
  • The Wizard of Oz
  • Citizen Kane
  • ET
  • Jaws
  • Pretty much all horror films, apart from Psycho, and The Omen

I didn’t see the original Star wars until probably 10 years after it was released. I must have spent too much time reading books.

Reflections on TEF

It’s been almost a week since TEF results were made public, and some of the predictable coverage, posturing, and agonising have occurred. Here are a few of my thoughts.

The importance of the written submission

In advance, we were all told that the written submission mattered, but at the same time, that the initial hypothesis that would be based purely on metrics was felt to be the factor that would determine classification. Looking at the result then plenty of universities have been awarded a TEF rating higher than their initial metrics would suggest. (This is personally pleasing since I wrote a significant amount of my previous employer’s submisison). The commentary provided by the TEF panel on each submission makes it clear that a written submission that demonstrated that an institution understood why it it missed benchmarks, could explain this in terms of contextual data, and show that activity was taking place to remediate the situation, then the higher award was possible.

The press didn’t understand what was being measured.

In advance of publication I was asked on Twitter whether anyone outside the sector was going to be interested in the results. Inevitably those papers who have a vested interest (by publishing their own university guides) or who have a reputation for being a TEF booster ( I’m looking at you here, The Times), were always going to publish something.

We inevitably saw articles reminding us that Southampton, LSE and Liverpool of the Russell Group had not performed as expected, and this this showed the shake up in the sector. Equally, there was criticism that the expected ranking or established order was not being replicated.

Any paper that publishes its own league table is going to be concerned if another form of ranking does not tally with their figures. But this is to misunderstand what TEF is – it’s about measures against benchmarks, not absolute performance, hence the difficulty for some unis in scoring above already high benchmarks, and for the press to create a simple story from a more complex narrative.

Universities love to celebrate

There was plenty of gold across those who felt they’d done well! This despite the rumblings and complaints in advance that the idea of three levels of ranking, like medals, was reductive and couldn’t possibly communicate the complexity of what a university does

How much does it matter to the sector?

TEF clearly matters to those in the sector, and will have implications for behaviours in the future. Universities already work hard to make sure that they optimise their data returns to HESA, that they get good scores in NSS by promoting and managing survey completion, and getting good scores on DLHE by managing those returns.

In future, these activities might drive performance management behaviours in universities even more than at present, with possible unforeseen consequences – courses and subject areas that perform poorly on a key metric may not longer be considered as viable, especially while TEF continues to be at institutional level.

For planning departments, then we can expect to see ever more sophisticated models of academic portfolio performance, and increased scrutiny of data returns.

((From the Modern Toss Work postcard set: http://ow.ly/hFV530cT60U )

The impact on fees has been temporarily removed, and with possible changes to funding in future (let’s face it, HE funding is back on the agenda after the recent General Election), then TEF as an instrument of marketisation through differential fees loses its power.

How much does it matter to the press?

For those in the press, TEF might just be a way to get easy headlines about perceived poor performance of established universities, while expressing shock at the performance of some FE colleges.

For the specialist press, commentariat and twitterati, TEF is a gift – something for the wonks to pore over and luxuriate in, in that quiet period at the end of an academic year.

How much does it matter to the punters?

For parents and potential students, TEF is just one more set of information to use, and has to be added to existing marketing collateral, multiple league tables, and guidance from schools and colleges. Without a clear explanation of what i being measured (particularly the issue of relative performance rather than absolute) then it’s not a straightforward measure, but just one more to add to the mix. Coupled with the Guardian University Guide concept of “value added” then it’s hardly surprising that potential students aren’t always clear about what might be on offer.

Finally, TEF may just be ignored if it does not provide the confirmation bias that people often use on making these kind of decisions. For example, I have a son who wants to study History in a year’s time. Both Staffordshire and Durham scored Silver. But I’m only going to recommend one of those.

You can bet though, that universities will shout about their TEF outcome (provided it was good) at this summer’s open days.

A New Home

My previous blog has now been migrated to this site (actually this has been a mirror site for quite a long time, but never used beyond that).

It’s time to start writing new content, and building up stats again – but just to show how much the old blog was read, here’s a peek at the final usage stats:

 

And that “best ever” – that was on the day I wrote about the Guardian University Guide in 2014. In fact most of the high traffic posts have been about league tables, although one of the latest posts on “Does UK HE have a Retention Problem” has been pretty popular.

Does UK HE have a retention problem?

Last night I attended an event at King’s College London, hosted by UPP Foundation and Wonkhe, looking at retention issues in UK higher education. The format was a series of initial thoughts from each of 5 panel members, followed by a lively discussion, showing the importance of this topic.

wonkheupp

Richard Brabner

Richard introduced this as the second of three workshops on student journey. He pointed out that  HESA stats on  non-continuation show that this is getting worse, and especially for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. he reminded the audience that in light of this Les Ebdon of OFFA expects next access agreements to focus on retention.

Liz Thomas

Liz stared by explaining that UK figures for retention are in fact much better than most European countries. In those countries with free tuition, then there was a feeling that getting students out of the system was part of the quality system. In awold domintae dby fees and student loans, then this attitude cannot prevail. We admit students to our courses and so we have obligation to help them succeed. So we do have an issue around student success and retention, in particular around differential levels of success, retention and  plus employment outcomes when we consider BME, WP and other factors.

From the HEA/Paul Hamlyn What Works  project it was clear that learning and teaching is critical to student success and retention by building a sense of belonging in the academic sphere. This goes beyond curriculum, but is about the whole institution recognising that it needs to make students successful, and needs to consider role and contribution of all staff.

Sorana Viera

Sorana of the NUS believes that the UK HE does have a retention problem for some groups of students and suggested that an unforeseen consequence of TEF is that game-playing to satisfy the metrics could exacerbate the situation.  The NUS view was that the rushed nature of TEF potentially leaves dangerous holes. Since the key metrics that universities can impact is non continuation then all eyes should be on retention.
Universities should  invest more in those supporting activities that are evidence based, and Soranna cited the What Works project as an example of this. If evidence is presented in accessible ways, then NUS will champion it.

In particular, the impact for commuting students was raised – these are students with financial pressures, family and work commitments, who may have chosen to study at a local university which may not be the right university for them.

Alex Proudfoot

Alex showed that some of the issues for alternative providers are quite different. Students are much more likely to be from a  BME background, or be aged over 30, so these providers are dealing with very different cohorts of students.

A focus for alternative providers was on delivering courses that focus on employability by creating industry links and ultimately an industry community within the college where staff and students might collaborate on projects outside of class.

In terms of pathways and transitions into HE, students who go through the same provider from level 2 and 3 have better retention at HE levels.

For students with low entry qualifications, then classes on study skills are a compulsory part of curriculum, rather than be in an additional optional choice for the student

Ross Renton
Ross highlighted the huge differences in retention and success based on ethnicity. he emphasised the need to develop an understanding who is joining your university or couerse, and developing a relationship with them before they arrive or join the course.

At Hertfordshire they had previously targeted POLAR quintile 1&2 students on entry, and provided peer mentoring plus other additional activity,tailored to each student. Retention figures improved by 43% for these students, and DLHE shows better rate of graduate employment. This intensive personalisation works but is expensive

Ross also highlighted the fact that problems need to be owned by everyone – it’s not a matter of sending a student off to some student hub, but all academic staff need to take ownership. There is also a need to systemise personal tutoring, so that key and meaningful conversations take place at the right times for all students, including at all transition periods, long holidays etc.

In the future Ross saw some risk in being overly focused on the use of metrics and analytics – this is still about people working with people.

Panel Q&A

Key points in the Q&A session were around:

  • How do we support hourly paid lecturers- not delivering HE on the cheap, but supporting the right staff properly
  • The current retention metrics don’t allow for students to step out of HE with interim quals in a flexible framework
  • Staff also need to feel that they belong, so need to consider institutional culture.
    How do you support students through whole institution approach.
  • How can we build success in L&T including retention and success into reward and recognition for staff?
  • How do we making the campus more “sticky” for students living at home? The research on commuting students suggests that these students feel the campus is not for them and they feel marginalised and invisible. Details in prospectus will cover accommodation but not local travel. Universities were often not set up to  support these students, expecting them to be in 4-5 days a week.
  • Tax burden for those who drop out but have student debt – ethics and who should pay? 1 yr of study should be seen as a success
  • Can we use analytics to create better informed interventions as otherwise it is difficult to personalise in mass system without good real time information.

Takeaways

Certain key factors stand out:

  • The need to look carefully at differential retention and success, and to ensure that TEF does not drive perverse behaviours
  • The opportunities to use better analytics to personalise student support
  • The need for rigorous and meaningful personal tutor systems
  • A pressing need to understand how a sticky campus can support commuting students and meeting their specific needs.

 

EdTech futures in the Connected University

Digital technology is bringing huge changes to all industries and sectors, not least higher education. It isn’t the future, it’s the present. This article summarises three recent publications, firstly the annual NMC Horizon report that I’ve previously blogged on here; a talk by Steve Wheeler, the keynote speaker at last years Learning’s and Teaching Conference, and finally a piece by Eric Stoller, who will be delivering a keynote at this year’s conference.

Firstly let’s look at this year’s NMC Horizon report. This is categorised into:

  • Key Trends Accelerating Higher Education Technology AdoptionNMC 2017-1
  • Significant Challenges Impeding Higher Education Technology AdoptionNMC2017-2
  • Important Developments in Technology for Higher EducationNMC2017-3

Usefully NMC have provided a summary of their predictions from previous years, and it’s worth noting that not all of their predictions come to pass; equally some remain on the radar for a number of years. Audrey Watters has previously provided a critique of NMC for those who’d like a different view.

Nonetheless, this is a useful starting point, and we can map our own activities against all of  the 18 trends/challenges/developments, but here I’ll focus on a few.

As we walk around this campus (and many others in the UK), we can see how learning spaces are being transformed to allow different ways of learning to take place.

We have a major focus on improving staff and student digital capabilities, recognising that this will help drive innovation, as well as improve employability prospects of our graduates.

The achievement gap is one I have blogged about previously – this continues to be a difficult multi faceted probelm. Technology will not provide all the answers, but may help level the playing field in some areas.

The possibility of a very different LMS in the future is tantalising. We know that current systems such as BlackBoard and Canvas are very good at managing learners and resources – making sure the right information is provided to the right people at the right time. Changes to the way in which staff and students collaborate through co-creation and sharing could render this form of LMS redundant in future.

Away from the NMC report, Steve Wheeler of Plymouth University presented on what’s hot and what’s not in learning technology. The video is well worth watching.

Steve identifies a huge range of technologies that will likely have an impact: voice controlled interfaces; gestural computing, the Internet of Things (pervasive computing); wearable technologies;artificial intelligence; touch surfaces for multitouch multiusers; wearable tech; virtual presence; immersive tech such as Oculus rift for VR and AR; 3D printers and maker spaces. The list goes on.

Steve identified three key elements for the future:

  • Very social
  • Very personal
  • Very mobile

and this needs to be underpinned with developing digital literacy, particularly when wading through alt-facts and fake news. Our students need to learn how to check the veracity and relevance of materials.

Steve postulates that until the development of the PC or web, everything was teacher centred. Technology allows us to become learner-centred, but have we adjusted enough to being learner led?

This should impact the way in which we assess- education and training must go from recursive to discursive, no longer repeating or regurgitating materials from the teacher, but through a  discursive approach developing problem solving skills etc.

  • The changes are
  • Analogue to digital
  • Closed to open
  • Tehthered to mobile
  • Standardised to personalised
  • Isolated to connected

 

Finally, a new blog post from Eric Stoller looks at “Student Success, Retention, and Employability – Getting Digital in a High Tech, High Touch Environment”.

Eric identifies that the more engaged a student is during their university experience, the more successful they will be. Digital offers us the opportunity to increase the channels through which we communicate with and engage with our students.

Eric (as well as Steve above, and the NMC report) highlights the importance of digital capability, particularly through the lens of employability. Students need to graduate with the digital skills they will use in the workplace, not just those that they use to complete a university course. Interestingly Eric also highlights the need to teach students about their digital presence and identity.

Finally he refers to the existence of a digital divide (again identified by NMC as digital equity) – “If your university is students first, that means all students”. This a a challenge that focusing on providing the right kit, but more importantly developing the right skills an behaviours means that we can get all staff and students to engage in a connected digital future.

Last year we enjoyed Steve Wheeler’s presentation at our Learning and Teaching Conference – I can’t wait to hear Eric Stoller later this year at the same event.

 

 

 

My Social Media Profile

As a university we are committed to becoming the Connected University, and are making great strides in changing our approach to learning and teaching, to our campus transformation and to the way in which we run the business, all enabled by digital tools and technologies.

On an individual level, we can reasonably expect colleagues to embrace aspects of digital technology to enhance their work, to change the way in which they communicate with each other, with our students and with other stakeholders.

When we look at the amount of content being created, and the amount of communication taking place in just one minute, we can’t avoid being engaged with social media:

16_domo_data-never-sleeps-4

(from https://www.domo.com/blog/data-never-sleeps-4-0/) 

At last year’s Learning and Teaching Conference, we asked attendees to make a pledge of what they might do differenlty, based on what they were taking away from the conference. On reviewing these, it was clear that lots of colleagues wanted to dip their toe into the world of social media, or if they were already using such tools, explore and expand further their use.

This short article is a reflection of how I use social media. I’m not suggesting this is the only way, and I’m sure I can identify gaps in my own practice.

As a starting point, it’s worth looking at the work of David White, who proposes that the term “digital native” has had its day, and that we shouldn’t decide on a person’s digital literacy based solely on age, but in terns of how comfortable they are in using technology. White’s model of looking at digital residents vs visitors is a useful starting point for assessing our own digital skills (in addition to the various diagnostic tests we can use).

mgh resident visitor

Through this approach I can map my own own digital profile, which in itself raises a number of questions: where do I live in the digital world? Can I be found? Can I be found in multiple channels? How do I manage a level of authenticity? How do I moderate my voice between different channels and different audiences?

My social media profile then is primarily found in:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Strava
  • Flickr
  • WordPress

Twitter is my most work-related tool, although not everything posted here is work-related. As part of building an authentic voice, it’s important to reveal enough of yourself as a person, your other and commitments, to allow followers to gain a greater insight into you. For example, following a recent accident, the message on Twitter from a nationally known HE commentator was simply “How’s the bike?”.

Through Twitter, I’ve developed a really useful network outside the University, often with people who are influential in the sector, but who I wouldn’t meet otherwise. It means that attending meeting across the country, more often than not, you already know a lot about the people you will be meeting. And last year’s keynote speakers for our L&T conference as well as this year’s came from people I’d got to know through Twitter.

We all know of the danger of social media becoming an echo chamber – it’s good to follow people who you don’t agree with on all things, otherwise we are missing the benefits of academic debate.

Facebook for me is purely social. I do follow feeds from the University and from various schools an departments. My posts here are almost never work related and hopefully the privacy settings are such that I can maintain a more private profile here, which focuses on family, friends and hobbies.

Strava i is totally social – only look at this is you want to know how far and how slowly I ride a bike.

Flickr is for serious photography – quick snaps may appear on Facebook or Strava, anything that require any amount of editing will end up on Flickr.

WordPress is the software that powers many of the world’s blogs. This blog itself is a WordPress installation on the university system. I have a second site  as a backup, and where I can experiment with some additional WordPress tools and integrations. I’ve written before about why I write a blog – it provides a means to communicate in longer form than Twitter, and to provide my personal analysis of changes in the HE sector, both for internal and external consumption

There are a whole load of tools I don’t use – Snapchat and Instagram come to mind immediately. If nothing else, I’m not a great fan of the #artificialhashtag. However, institutionally we do need to be on top of these – these are the tools our students are using.

Finally I’ve mapped a number of other tools – WhatsApp, Skype for Business, FaceTime, FB Messenger – these are my comms channels in addition to my 2 email accounts.

There’s a lot to keep on top of!

 

 

Guardian University Guide 2017

The second big university league table of the year, the Guardian University Guide, was published today, one which the compilers say is the most student friendly,as it focuses on subject level scores in more detail, and measures things that are of importance to students. In other words, research is not a part of the table.

“The methodology focuses on subject-level league tables, ranking institutions that provide each subject area, according to their relevant statistics.

To ensure that all comparisons are as valid as possible, we ask each institution which of their students should be counted in which subject so that they will only be compared to students taking similar subjects at other universities.

Eight statistical measures are employed to approximate a university’s performance in teaching each subject. Measures relate to both input – for example, expenditure by the university on its students – and output – for example, the probability of a graduate finding a graduate-level job. The measures are knitted together to get a Guardian score, against which institutions are ranked.

A lot of emphasis is given to student experience, through the outcomes of the National Student Survey, and entry grades are dealt with twice – firstly in the details of entry tariff, and secondly in the measure of “value added”, which is an assessment of good degrees, but related to the entry grades of individual students.

The top 4 places are unchanged – Cambridge, Oxford, St Andrews and Surrey. The entrant into the top 5 is Loughborough.

The big winners this year are: Manchester Met, Northumbria City, Bradford, Anglia Ruskin, Derby, Liverpool Hope, Sunderland.

While going down are:Liverpool John Moores, Queen Margaret, Brunel, Brighton, Cumbria ,Birmingham City.

Staffordshire University have pleasingly gone up 14 places to 69th.

guardian2017