What will universities be for?

There’s nothing like a Bank Holiday weekend to make a start on a blog article on a subject that plenty of others have written on in the past, more eloquently and better researched no doubt. I’m thinking of Cardinal Newman, and more recently Stefan Collini.

Newman said that the purpose of a University is:

“An assemblage of learned men, zealous for their own sciences, and rivals of each other, are brought, by familiar intercourse and for the sake of intellectual peace, to adjust together the claims and relations of their respective subjects of investigation. They learn to respect, to consult, to aid each other. Thus is created a pure and clear atmosphere of thought, which the student also breathes, though in his own case he only pursues a few sciences out of the multitude. He profits by an intellectual tradition, which is independent of particular teachers, which guides him in his choice of subjects, and duly interprets for him those which he chooses. He apprehends the great outlines of knowledge, the principles on which it rests, the scale of its parts, its lights and its shades, its great points and its little, as he otherwise cannot apprehend them. Hence it is that his education is called “Liberal.” A habit of mind is formed which lasts through life, of which the attributes are, freedom, equitableness, calmness, moderation, and wisdom; or what in a former Discourse I have ventured to call a philosophical habit. This then I would assign as the special fruit of the education furnished at a University, as contrasted with other places of teaching or modes of teaching. This is the main purpose of a University in its treatment of its students.”

More recently, Stefan Collini has tried to reinforce the need to answer the question “What Afe Universities For”, by looking beyond a

“public perception of universities (that) focuses too much on their teaching role”

noting

“they have become an important medium for conserving understanding extending and handing on intellectual scientific and artistic heritage.”

And

“This wider perspective may help us become more aware of the limitations of treating economic growth as the overriding test of value”

However much of this post is prompted by recent publications by two other writers, Joanna Williams, of University of Kent, and Andrew McGettigan, author of The Great University Gamble.

At a time when we are preparing ourselves for an HE future that will be shaped by the outcome of this year’s General Election, when so many universities are focussing on their finances, their ability to provide the necessary “student experience”, their contribution to improving student employability, then these writers challenge us to think again about what higher education is about.

Higher education, according to all of the recent major party manifestos is expressed in terms of the financial benefit to the individual (and hence to society through increased tax revenues, and repayment of tuition fee loans). However, previous work from the the Department of Business, Industry and Science – who have been responsible for universities – has shown in “The Benefits of Higher Education Participation for Individuals and Society” that people who attend university are less likely to commit crime, drink heavily or smoke, and  are also more likely to vote, volunteer, have higher levels of tolerance and educate their children better than non-graduates”. The BIS report identifies a range of market and non-market benefits and whether they relate to the individual or society.

Joanna Williams captures the rationale for celebrating higher education in a short piece for Palgrave where she says:

“The idea of the ‘student as consumer’ is derided by academics and commentators alike but it can seem as if there are few intellectually inspiring visions of higher education on offer to young people today. To celebrate higher education we need to move beyond mundane ‘skills for employability’ and to stop drawing a trivial financial equivalence between tuition fees and posh cups of coffee. Rather than focusing upon student satisfaction and the customer experience, universities need to promote the knowledge, ideas and understanding that only they can provide.”

Andrew McGettigan takes a focused look at the treasury view of HE in a new paper for PERC at Goldsmiths where he states:

The focus of policy has been the transformation of higher education into the private good of training and the positional good of opportunity, where the returns on both are higher earnings. Initiation  into the production and dissemination of public knowledge? It does not appear to be a concern of current policy.

He highlights that the Treasury view of higher education is based on the concept of human capital investment, where ultimately the information on salaries earned by graduates from individual subjects at universities, based on tax receipts and levels of payment of student loans will become a factor provided to allow decision to be made about where to study. Recent legislation has provided a series of measures to enable this that:

will also help to create an incentive and reward structure at universities by distinguishing the universities that are delivering the strongest enterprise ethos and labour market outcomes for their students.

This will provide data on the repayment rates for different subjects at different institutions, as well as the promotion of “value added” as being based purely on graduate earnings. No doubt this will then provide a new series of value judgments about universities based on metrics rooted in monetarist theory.

McGettigan questions how academics might challenge this new orthodoxy;

The risk is that academics seeking to resist this further privatisation of knowledge will be cast as vested interests seeking to protect an old, inadequate system lacking in transparency. We will end up on the wrong side of the argument. The difficulty: How to articulate what is threatened? How to defend forms of knowledge which are not subordinate to private returns? Academic freedom and autonomy now face a more pressing, insidious, financialised threat than the traditional bugbear of direct political interference. But all this may prove too abstract for effective resistance.

McGettingan cleary states that he does not have a “glib solution”, but that maybe academics (and indeed universities) could challenge the key definition of institutions as providers of

undergraduate study as a stratified, unequal, positional good dominating future opportunities and outcomes. What might find broader public support is a vision of higher education institutions that are civic and open to lifelong participation, instead of places beholden to the three-year, full-time degree leveraged on loans and aiming to cream off ‘talent’.

Although universities need to be managed and governed in such a way that they use public and private monies responsibly, from an academic perspective we need to ensure that in the drive to satisfy our neo-liberal paymasters that we don’t lose the other non-financial benefits of HE and the ability of, and indeed need for, education to be transformational, not just in terms of employability, and for the broadest range of students.

At my own institution, as we move from our new statement of strategic intent, to the development of a new University plan, we have  already said that we will challenge and support our students through “the obligation to provide programmes that stretch our students, delivered by critical thinking, pedagogically advanced, scholarship- and research-active academics”

We need to create a narrative that shows how we can transform all of our students into fully engaged members of society who are able to engage with their subjects to the level of challenging established truths, as well as being able to engage with  the broader hopes of the academy. We need to look closely at what we mean by employability, and make sure that we give our students the opportunities to develop the social capital that they need over and above subject expertise and “transferable skills”. A university that is able to stay true to the principles originally expressed by Newman, reinforced by Collini, and recognises the dangers posed by the current limited thinking driven purely by economics will be the university that enables its students to fully engage with their subjects, to be able to challenge and help create new truths and possibly even be more employable.

References

Stefan Collini: What are Universities for? Publisher: Penguin (2012) ISBN-13: 978-1846144820

Newman http://www.newmanreader.org/works/idea/discourse5.html

Andrew McGettigan “The Treasury View of HE: Variable Human Capital Investment” http://www.gold.ac.uk/perc/news/percpaperno6thetreasuryviewofhevariablehumancapitalinvestment.php

Joanna Williams: Celebrate Higher Education http://www.palgrave.com/page/Joanna-Williams/

 

Complete University Guide 2016

The first major league table is published today, the Complete University Guide.

This table uses metrics  on ten measures: Student Satisfaction, Research Quality, Research Intensity, Entry Standards, Student: Staff Ratio; Spending on Academic Services; Spending on Student Facilities; Good Honours degrees achieved; Graduate Prospects and Completion.

From the press release:

“Coventry University becomes the UK’s leading “new” university (former polytechnic) replacing Oxford Brookes University.

 

The University of Cambridge heads the ranking of 126 UK universities, with Oxford in second place and the London School of Economics and Political Science third. The other top ten universities are Imperial College London, Durham, St Andrews, Surrey, Lancaster and University College London.”

No real surprises in the top 10, and the continued and sustained rise of Coventry is notable.

One of the changes from last year to this, is the way in which research has been reported – previously there has been a report of research quality, but this year (and until the next REF) we have separate indicators for research quality and for research intensity.

The second change is that the table includes the results of People and Planet Green League Table, although these results are not used in any calculation of overall score or ranking.

Staffordshire University rises 2 further places to 103rd, and is represented in 24 of the subject tables, with improvements in position in , Accountiung and Finance, Aeronautical & Manufacturing Engineering, Art and Design, Business & Management Studies, Geography & Environmental Science ,Hospitality, Leisure, Recreation & Tourism, Marketing, Nursing and Sports Science.

 

 

 

Seeking Cyclists

For the third year running, a group of intrepid Staffordshire University staff will be taking part in the British Heart Foundation Midnight Bike Ride, which runs from Manchester to Blackpool, through the night of 26th-27th September.

So far, we have willing participants from:

  • Academic Development Unit
  • Faculty of Business Education and Law management team
  • Business School
  • School of Sciences
  • School of Engineering
  • School of Psychology Sport and Exercise

If you’d like to join us, then there’s plenty of time to get your bike out of the shed and do a bit of practice. It’s not a race, and we won’t be going that fast ( at least I won’t). Get in touch if you’d like to join the merry band.

 

What Uni Guide

As we move deeper into league table season, then the next set of information to come out is the result of the WhatUni.com Student Choice Awards.

This is not based on the range of metrics that the main league tables use, rather it is based more on opinions of students. It will be interesting later in the year to compare the views expressed where, with those that come out of the National Student Survey.

The top 10 universities this year are:

position Position last year University
12 3 Loughborough
2 7 Harper Adams
3 1 Swansea
4  n/a New College of the Humanities
5 8 Falmouth
6 10 Surrey
7 15 Bangor
8 6 Bath
9 12 UEA
10 17 Glasgow

Staffordshire remain in the same 96th place as last year

Looking at the different categories for SU:

Category This year Last year Top uni
Job prospects 107th 71st Nottingham
Course and lecturers 53rd 90th New Coll of Humanities
Student Union 60th 52nd Loughborough
Accommodation 81st 61st Loughborough
Uni facilties 69th 84th Surrey
City life 104th 70th Bristol
Clubs and societies 78th 59th Bangor
Student support 79th n/a Harper Adams

 

So some good news for us here in “Course and Lecturers” and in “University Facilities”.

 

Those Manifestos and HE

The first election in which I could vote was 1983, when I was a student at Sheffield University, living in the only Conservative constituency in the city. At the time there was much talk of tactical voting, asking people to split the anti-Conservative vote. As it happened, the Conservative candidate was re-elected, although the seat more recently has been held by the Lib Dems through Nick Clegg.

In that election, if you wanted to know what the parties were saying, you actually had to buy copies of the manifestos, from WH Smith including the “longest suicide note in history”. Leap forward 32 years, and manifestos are now readily available online, so here is a cut out and keep guide of what the major parties have to say in 2015 about higher education.

Conservative.

Firstly on immigration:

We will reform the student visa system with new measures to tackle abuse and reduce the numbers of students overstaying once their visas expire. Our action will include clamping down on the number of so-called ‘satellite campuses’ opened in London by universities located elsewhere in the UK, and reviewing the highly trusted sponsor system for student visas. And as the introduction of exit checks will allow us to place more responsibility on visa sponsors for migrants who overstay, we will introduce targeted sanctions for those colleges or businesses that fail to ensure that migrants comply with the terms of their visa.

And on universities:

This year, for the first time, over half a million people have been admitted to our universities, including a record proportion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds. From September, we will go even further, abolishing the cap on higher education student numbers and removing an arbitrary ceiling on ambition. Our reforms to university funding mean you do not have to pay anything towards tuition while studying, and only start paying back if you earn over £21,000 per year. We will ensure the continuing success and stability of these reforms, so that the interests of both students and taxpayers are fairly represented. We will also introduce a national postgraduate loan system for taught masters and PhD courses. We will ensure that universities deliver the best possible value for money to students: we will introduce a framework to recognise universities offering the highest teaching quality; encourage universities to offer more two-year courses; and require more data to be openly available to potential students so that they can make decisions informed by the career paths of past graduates. We will ensure that our universities remain world-leading We will maintain our universities’ reputation for world-class research and academic excellence. Through the Nurse Review of research councils, we will seek to ensure that the UK continues to support world-leading science, and invests public money in the best possible way. And we will encourage the development of online education as a tool for students, whether studying independently or in our universities.

So in summary, two year degrees (again), caps on student migration (nothing new) but a welcome commitment to loans for postgraduates.

Labour

The key Labour announcement on reducing the fee cap to £6000 came out a while ago, and has been subject to much analysis already. In addition the manifesto says:

We will make sure that apprenticeships can lead to higher level qualifications by creating new Technical Degrees and supporting part-time study. They will be co-funded, co-designed and co-delivered by employers and they will be the priority for expansion within our university system.

Reduce tuition fees to £6,000 a year

Our economy and our society benefit from the talent and investment of people who come here, including university students coming to study.

So happy for international students to come to the UK, and some ideas about Technical Degrees. Are these going to be the new Foundation Degrees? A surprisingly short amount on HE, unlike our next candidate…..

Green Party

The Green Party actually have a whole section on HE:

Higher education is in crisis. The fundamental purpose of universities should be to promote critical enquiry, social innovation and cultural renewal. But these aims have been sidelined in an atmosphere of increasing managerialism and commercialisation.
Higher education is vital to our cultural health. It should be concerned with public engagement and increasing social participation, not considered merely a production line for enhancing the earning power of individuals. The current focus on research ‘outputs’ – in the narrow definition used by the Research Excellence Framework – means that the crucial role of lecturers as teachers has been denigrated. This emphasis needs to be reversed.
The Conservative-led Coalition and the Labour Party bear responsibility for the current system of university funding, which is largely dependent on tuition fees that now stand at £9,000 a year for undergraduates. This was a betrayal of a promise and has blighted the future of thousands of young people who now graduate with a debt of at least £45,000. With the removal of public funding from most undergraduate and all postgraduate courses, UK universities are now all but privatised. The only people to benefit from the current system are university Vice-Chancellors and senior bureaucrats, who award themselves massive pay rises, while those on the ground who carry out teaching and research face ever more punishing terms and conditions of employment. In practice, this severely compromises the quality of education through reduced student-contact hours with overstretched staff.
Zero-hours contracts are now commonplace and shocking disparities in pay characterise every campus, especially among service workers, who are commonly denied a living wage. Conversely, university administrative departments continue to swell as money is routinely wasted on copying expensive private sector practices – including ludicrous rebranding exercises – in search of ‘market share’. The future of the arts and the humanities has been endangered by a systematic denigration by the dominant political parties and university administrations alike, who create a perception of such courses as an expensive luxury without the vocational ‘usevalue’ that renders them worth the financial risk. The Green Party believes that the arts and humanities have an essential part to play in creating a more democratic, sane and participatory society.
The situation for mature students is even more dire. Over the past five years, every continuing education department in the UK has been scaled back or closed down altogether, often as a managerial response to caps on students numbers and diminished funding for the sector as a whole. Adults wishing to return to education are faced with a situation where short courses and part-time study are considered not cost-effective in market terms.
In December 2010, just after the trebling of tuition fees, Caroline Lucas MP argued that the costs of a free higher education could be met by increasing corporation tax for larger companies to the level paid in other G7 countries and ring-fencing some of that money. Businesses depend enormously on graduates’ skills and knowledge, so it’s only fair that they invest in the higher education system from which they benefit. Allied to this, the cost of studying the qualifications that universities stipulate as entry requirements is prohibitive. An ‘A’ level for those who are not registered as school or college students attracts a fee of several hundred pounds. Access to education diplomas are also meshed within a loan system for those over the age of 24, and uniformly cost in excess of £3,000. The part-time and short courses for which non-traditional applicants can enrol are often hugely expensive, especially when measured against the contact-time with lecturers.
‘Lifelong Learning’ is a phrase that is much used by politicians and education professionals. Giving people the opportunity to be ‘second chance’ learners should be a crucial part of what universities offer to wider society. Countering the monetisation of higher
education across the entire sector is vital to reverse the destructive and wasteful market model of university education.
The Green Party would address this through:
• Ending undergraduate tuition fees. We appreciate that the current level of applications to study at university reflects the paucity of other opportunities available to young people. This is part of a wider social problem that must be tackled. To be saddled with a huge debt for the right to access higher education at the beginning or middle of adulthood is neither ethical nor sustainable. Because of the way the student loans system works this would cost about £4.5 billion over this Parliament, and in the long run around £8 billion a year.
• Cancelling student debt issued by the Student Loans Company and held by the government. Taking account of the loans that it is expected would never be re-paid, the total value of these loans is estimated to be around £30 billion. Assuming that these loans would be paid off over the next 25 years, and taking account of interest, this amounts to around £2.2 billion a year in revenue that the government would not receive.
• Reintroducing student grants costing £2.2 billion over the Parliament. In the longer run we would support student living costs through the Basic Income.
• In the longer term, considering scrapping fees for academic postgraduate courses.
• Restoring access to lifelong learning by supporting mature students and their families. We will reverse the 20-year programme of dismantling the lifelong learning sector.
• Reintroducing the block grant to universities. It is essential that teaching and learning can be supported effectively across the sciences and the humanities.
• Encouraging universities and pension funds such as the Universities Superannuation Scheme to divest from fossil fuel companies. This would follow the example of the University of Glasgow.
• Supporting the 10:1 ‘fair pay campus’ campaign. We are committed to ending the scandal of Vice Chancellors paying themselves £300,000 a year while cleaners on the national minimum wage have to resort to food banks.

Plenty in here to cheer those who lament the rise of the neo-liberal revolution in universities (it’s almost like reading one of my more ranty blogs, or a piece by Henry Giroux), however, will this remain empty rhetoric?

UKIP

Always worth a look at the new kids on the block:

Previous government policies of pursuing higher education targets and introducing tuition fees have had a crippling effect on our young people’s finances and job prospects. The average student now leaves university with a debt of £44,000, yet students are less likely to find a graduate-level job than ever before. 47 per cent of recent graduates were ‘under-employed’ in 2013, as opposed to just 37 per cent in 2001. This marks a 27 per cent increase in the inability of graduates to get a job utilising or requiring their degree qualification.
The taxpayer fares little better: 45 per cent of all student loans have to be written-off.
To combat this growing problem, UKIP will drop the arbitrary 50 per cent target for school leavers going to university. We will not increase the current level of undergraduate courses until we can be sure there are sufficient vacancies in the economy to provide at least two-thirds of students with skilled graduate jobs. We will also encourage students to choose careers that will help fill the current skills’ gap, to both benefit Britain and set them on the path to a solid, prosperous career. UK students taking approved degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Medicine (STEMM), mainly at universities funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, will not have to repay their tuition fees. This is on condition that they work in their discipline and pay tax in the UK for at least five years, after they complete their degrees. Accordingly, UKIP will adjust the number of STEMM subjects funded to allow for a greater uptake of these subjects.

Student visas The international student community makes an important contribution to the UK. Because students are in Britain only on a temporary basis, we will categorise them separately in immigration figures. All non-UK undergraduate and post-graduate students will be required to maintain private health insurance for the period of their study.

Where do you start……..The level or number of undergraduate courses is not actually set by government currently, so difficult to see how UKIP think that they won’t increase it. Who will “approve” degrees in STEMM subjects? Many graduates are successful in careers not related to their discipline. However, an interesting commitment to removing tuition fee debt for students of STEMM subjects (notice that medicine has crept in there), although this fails to recognise the importance of the humanities and social sciences. And to note that students would not be included in net migration targets.

The Others

I’ve not looked at Plaid Cymru or the SNP, since I am mainly interested in HE in England, although the views of these and other minority parties will become relevant if the outcome is a coalition or minority government.

The final word should go to Nick Clegg, seeking re-election in Sheffield Hallam, and where I voted in my first general election.

Liberal Democrats have ensured that no undergraduate student in England has to pay a penny up front of their tuition fees. Students in England do not have to pay anything until they are earning over £21,000 per year – a figure which will increase in line with earnings – and over that income, monthly repayments are linked to earnings.
This means only high-earning graduates pay their tuition fees in full.
We now have the highest university application rates ever, including from disadvantaged students. But we need to ensure higher education is accessible to all those
who can benefit, including at postgraduate level. Liberal Democrats in government secured the first ever income-contingent loans scheme for graduate degrees, which we will protect and seek to extend.
We will:
Ensure that all universities work to widen participation across the sector, prioritising early intervention in schools and colleges. This will include running summer schools and setting up mentoring programmes between students or alumni and school pupils.
Require universities to be transparent about their selection
criteria.
Work with university ‘mission groups’ to develop a comprehensive credit accumulation and transfer framework to help students transfer between and within institutions, enable more part-time learning, and help more people to complete qualifications.

Improve the Key Information Set and explore the option of
a standardised student contract. We will legislate to reform
regulation of the higher education sector, improving student protection.
Establish a review of higher education finance within the next Parliament to consider any necessary reforms, in the light of the latest evidence of the impact of the existing financing system on access, participation (including of low-income groups) and quality. The review will cover undergraduate and postgraduate courses, with an emphasis on support for living costs for students, especially from disadvantaged backgrounds.

 

They would appear to have been influenced by the recent publications from Which? and CMA, in terms of student contracts and student protection. Any review of HE finance will have to look at the costs of the current system o floans, where the RAB charge appears to making it more not less expensive than previous funding systems.

 

So you pays your money, and you takes your choice. The big issues for HE in future will be about regulation of the variety of providers, long term sustainable funding and support for stdnets other than full time undergraduates. However, for thjsoe waiting to plan for teh future, the most significant change already happened in the Autumn statement in 2013. The removal of the student number controls for entry to awards this summer will have significant impact on the sector. The removal of SNC is effectively the removal of market protection or a “safety net” for low performing institutions. This could have more immediate impact than much of what we might be waiting for in May.

Times Higher Student Experience Survey 2015

This year’s THE Student Experience Survey has been published, with few surprises among the top performers.

Despite several new entries into the top 10 this year, both the University of Cambridge (fourth place) and the University of Oxford (fifth) retain their high positions, as do the University of Exeter (eighth, down from seventh) and the University of Leeds (unchanged at ninth). “This year’s results reinforce how much can be achieved by those universities most committed to improving the student experience,” says James MacGregor, director of YouthSight, which provides the data for THE’s Student Experience Survey. “The relative stability of rankings between years highlights the remarkable gains made by a few.”

Bath University come out top and the reasons provided by their VC include:

  • nurturing environment for excellent enterprising minds
  • Student liaison groups in each department
  • a strong relationship with the students’ union
  • spending more than £1 million a week on improving the infrastructure over the past year

As last year, I still think that the results should be taken with a pinch of salt, based on the relatively small sample size of students For instance for this university, the results are based on responses from 116 students, recruited through UCAS. So, a small sample, and one that does not represent the fuller and wider student population.

However Staffordshire University’s position has moved as follows:

year position
2015 88
2014 97
2013 60

So a gradual improvement, and looking at all of the various factors, we can see an improved score in all but three of the areas:

  • Good environment on campus/around university
  • Good security
  • Good library and library opening hours

The ongoing campus investment, and the recently revised library hours will hopefully improve student satisfaction in these areas, and we will see the benefit in the forthcoming NSS results

That WonkHE Power List

This week WonkHE (the blog and website for HE wonks) published it’s “power list”, an idea clearly not influenced at all by the Sunday Times or GQ…

Compiled by an independent panel of HE experts, the 2015 HE Power List represents the top 50 movers and shakers in English higher education. Who has the most influence in the sector? Who will be instrumental in shaping its future? For the first time, the HE Power List brings you the top 50 names that set the agenda – often behind the scenes, sometimes in full view, inside and outside of universities and across the world of politics and policy making

Well worth a read, as the panel who compiled it clearly understand our sector.

The top 3 places are held by politicians – Osborne, May and Milliband.in a top 10 which contains 8 politicians and 2 civil servants. Our first academic appears at 15 with the VC of Cambridge, one of 11 VCs to feature. As well as the leaders of a number of think-tanks, the heads of NUS and UCU are present, but only one university mission group is represented with Wendy Piatt coming in at number 50.

Janet Beer has commented on the diversity of the list – only 12 of the 50 are women and only 1 of the top 10.

This list clealry shows those who influence the policy that will have an effect on HE, as well as those who have stuck their heads above the parapet to be noticed for their work in supporting and developing the sector.

Just for fun though – is there another Wonky Power List we could create – those who challenge the status quo and keep us thinking about how universities might work in the future, as well as those whose products drive us in certain directions?

Here’s my starter for 10.

Stefan Collini – author of “What are Universities For?”

Evgeny Morozov – author of “To solve everything, click here” and a critic of technological solutionism

Henry Giroux – author of “Neoliberalism’s War on Higher Education”

David Ruebain – head of Equality Challenge Unit

Jay Batt – head of Blackboard inc – one of the main VLEs used in the HE sector, how much does this drive the way we teach?

Tim Cook – CEO Apple, just imagine working without an iPad…..

Feel free to suggest who else might belong to such a list.

 

 

 

 

 

Let’s Talk About Race

Over on the Equality Challenge Unit blog, Janet Beer (VC of Liverpool and Chair of the ECU Board) writes of the need for consideration of race equality in HE.

I’ve written plenty of times in the past about the differential outcomes for students, but here Professor Beer focuses on the inequalities for staff:

…..speculating about how long it will be before minority ethnic women, or minority ethnic individuals generally, are fairly represented within our sector is different. Leaders in our higher education institutions know that racial inequalities exist, but we are not talking about them publicly. None of us wants to attract negative press, or say the wrong thing, or to be accused of being institutionally racist.

Furthermore, whilst men and women are working side by side to promote gender equality, the equivalent does not seem to be happening to the same extent with race. The combined effort of men and women, with all acknowledging the need for change, has been crucial to the advancement of gender equality. For a step change in race equality to take place, the imbalance in advantage also needs to be acknowledged and owned by all.

Professor Beer rightly acknowledges the commitment of 26 universities to sign up to the new Race Equality Charter Mark (and it’s pleasing that Staffordshire University is in this group). She also refers to new ECU research which shows that

in a survey of 1201 academics working in the UK and overseas,  BME academics are significantly more likely to consider moving overseas in the hopes of furthering their careers than white academics.The research aims to highlight the differences between ethnicities when considering a move overseas and understand why these differences occur as well as establish what higher education institutions can do to retain staff or entice them back to the UK once they have left.

The interesting linkage for me in both the lack of a  diverse demographic of senior staff as well as a tendency to seek advancement overseas, is the  impact that this might have on our students.

At our own Learning and Teaching conference in 2014 Winston Morgan clearly showed the importance of having a teaching body that provides some reflection of the student body as part of of tackling the attainment gap of undergraduate students. By having a more diverse staff profile  at all levels and in all roles of the organisation might mean that all students can see more clearly that university is for people like them.

“Good” degrees – but not for everyone

In a recent post I looked at the latest HESA data on the numbers of 1sts and 2(i)s awarded, noting the continued rise, and how these figures feed into the various league tables.

I suggested then that the HEIDI data could be used to see how students from different groups perform – in fact this is how the Equality Challenge Unit annual statistical reports are compiled.

Having looked at the information from the last two years, then we can see the attainment gap for BME students for 2012-13:

2012/13
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
White
Classification of first degree
1st and 2(i)s
2012/13
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Black
Classification of first degree
1st and 2(i)s
2012/13
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Asian
Classification of first degree
1st and 2(i)s
2012/13
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Other (including mixed)
Classification of first degree
1st and 2(i)s
2012/13
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Not Known
Classification of first degree
1st and 2(i)s
Sector Average 69% 45% 55% 62% 44%
Gap 24% 14% 7% 25%

 

In 2013-14 this changes to:

2013/14
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
White
% 1sts and 2(1)s
2013/14
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Black
Classification of first degree
% 1sts and 2(1)s
2013/14
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Asian
Classification of first degree
%1sts and 2(1)s
2013/14
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Other (including mixed)
Classification of first degree
% 1sts and 2(1)s
2013/14
HE student qualifiers
Full-person equivalent
Ethnicity (detailed 6 way)
Not known
Classification of first degree
%1sts and 2(1)s
Sector Average 71% 48% 58% 65% 45%
Gap 23% 13% 5% 25%

 

So we can see that the attainment gap across the sector is beginning to close, but its still a work in progress. The data I’ve used to create these summary results does provide results for each institution, however I won’t be publishing that here, as all universities are tackling these matters in their own way, depending on their particular subject mix and student population.

At Staffordshire we’ll be doing some focused work in two particular schools (both of which I am currently seconded to), as these are our schools with the most diverse undergraduate populations. Conversations with our staff have already started to identify differing levels of engagement and attendance, and we are now looking at many of the topics raised by Winston Morgan, in his talk here last year, for instance the use of appropriate examples in teaching materials, the composition of the teaching team and the need to provide positive role models in an institution where the mix of people in power may not fully reflect the student body.

As well as considering ethnicity, we also need to look at how disability can affect student attainment. In general, disability has less of an impact on degree classification than ethnicity, however BME student with a disability are less likely again to gain a good degree, as shown in this data from the most recent ECU “Equality in higher education: statistical report 2013” :

ecu dis eth 1 ecu dis eth 2

None of this is going to be easy, but if we want to ensure success for all students then it’s an issue we need to tackle head on.

Essays on student fees, student engagement and student choice

“What do I Get” is the title of this collection of essays on student fees, student engagement and student choice, published by HEPI.

The title comes from a Buzzcocks song, which prompted a a flurry on Twitter of other possible HE report titles with song titles, which led to my first (and possibly only) reference in the Times Higher.

whatdoiget

The book seeks to provide evidence of how institutions are faring in a world of £9000 fees, and how this can vary.

Some gems for me:

Edward Acton, former VC of UEA, explains how that institution developed and celebrated a career track that focused on teaching, which led to an improvement in student-staff ratios. In addition, Grove points out the need to take ownership of, and make real, a weekly study time of 40 hours. On this latter point, in the Faculty I currently work in, we will be doing a lot more work in the next year to make sure that we firstly identify all the student-centred learning that is part of a module, but then crucially, to make sure that this is communicated to our students, and is an integral pat of learning, not just “go and read chapter 2”.

Authors from University of Sheffield discuss how, in 2010, a project ran in the university to prepare for the new fee regime.. One of the outcomes from this was the definition of a Sheffield Graduate – that i,s a series of promises around the 5 themes of: course, personal development, support, community and future. An interesting new development for 2015 is the introduction of inter disciplinary projects for all undergraduates.

Richard Brabner of Hertfordshire considers embedding employability into the curriculum, noting that this is increasinglysomething that students expect from university, Again, a set of graduate attributes are described, but here they are linked to the university’s performance management and spending plans. Departments have to show how attributes are embedded and describe their plans for employability. Senior management can monitor activity, reward success and deal with under-performance.

The final essay I’ll look at here was by Ian Dunn, PVC at Coventry and responsible for the development of Coventry University College. This subsidiary company of the university was set up to provide HE with a different learning, teaching and assessment strategy in order to widen access, and crucially at a lower price. Courses range from foundation years, through to honours degrees. The LTA strategy involve modules being taught intensively over 6 weeks each. For modules which fall below a quality threshold, then detailed action plans are implemented to bring them back on track.

Notable from the various essays are the following:

  • the increasing focus on employability – are we keeping pace with others in the sector on this?
  • the development of graduate attributes – how distinctive are these between individual universities?
  • the increase in use of  performance management tools – how do we ensure we have the right data, and use it for enhancement?
  • provision of foundation year programmes – is the CUC model one that others might choose to replicate?