2.2.25 There is clear evidence that HE participation rates vary between different learner groups as well as different socio-economic groups, and some of the available data is summarised in Table 2.1 above.
2.2.26 Literature reviewed describes the existence of outreach and progression interventions that specifically target different learner groups. The evidence suggests that interventions targeted at disabled learners have been the most prevalent, perhaps reflecting the requirement for Aimhigher Partnerships to target this group of learners, and to do so regardless of their socio-economic status (HEFCE, 2007/12). There is also evidence of significant work with vocational learners through the LLNs. There was very little evidence that fell within the scope of the review regarding targeted work with learners from ethnic minority groups, although this is not to suggest that good practice does not exist.
2.2.27 Alongside participation in targeted interventions different learner groups engage in activities that are seeking to be inclusive of learners from all widening participation backgrounds. There is
5 The EEF has agreed to fund a larger trial based on 1,000 pupils for summer 2013. This will be an individually randomised controlled trial with two groups.
18 however evidence that take up of ‘mainstream’ programmes is unequal, for example participation rates of male learners in some summer school programmes fall well below that of female learners (HEFCE, 2009/11). There is however little evidence available of the approaches taken to ensure outreach and progression activities are inclusive of all learner groups.
2.2.28 Evidence of the effectiveness of both targeted and mainstream interventions in meeting the needs of different groups is limited with much of the research describing the barriers to HE
progression and little which provides evidence of what makes a difference to progression rates of different learners. Table 2.2 below summarises some of the key issues emerging from discrete research or extrapolated from a range of more general studies.
Table 2.2: Overview of key outreach and progression issues for different groups Group Issues identified in the literature
Disabled learners The literature recognises some of the barriers faced by disabled learners and the variable outreach provision for this group in place at higher education providers.
Small scale research comparing the barriers and enablers to HE
progression for disabled and non-disabled peers identified that disabled learners face more barriers, particular around negative attitudes of others and a lack of support to make the transition to HE (Wray, 2012). Disabled students expressed views that they did not feel they had been pushed enough to raise their educational aspirations and attainment at school (Wray, 2012). The same research identified a range of enablers including the participation in pre-entry activities, pre-entry contact with disability services and support from students and student unions. The importance of adopting the social rather than medical model6 of disability in research and policy making was identified (Wray, 2012).
The definition of disability affects participation in targeted support. There are problems around the identification of disabled learners. Data is not reliable for targeting and some learners will choose not to give information about their impairment (Impact Associates, 2009).
Disabled learners may face problems in taking part in outreach and progression programmes including problems with the availability of support staff outside school (Impact Associates, 2009).
Vocational learners Progression to HE by vocational learners is proportionally lower than for people taking academic qualifications. An analysis by HEFCE (2007/35) of a cohort of level 3 BTEC students (61,684 students) using HESA data and
6
The social model of disability ‘shifts the emphasis from personal inadequacy or abnormality to physical and societal (legal, cultural, and attitudinal) barriers experienced by a person with impairment. These barriers are viewed as disabling the person and are external to the individual. This viewpoint shifts the focus onto the rights of disabled people and the requirement for society to change’ (Action on Access, 2005).
19 Learning and Skills Council learner records found that out of the 56% who qualified from their course, 41% of these qualifiers went on to HE (well below the rate for A-level learners). More recent work (London Economics, 2013) suggests a contrast between the predominantly linear paths into HE by A-Level students and the more typically non-linear paths followed by BTEC students.
Some of the evidence indicates that vocational progression tends to be into certain subject areas. A report on the transition from vocational education to HE (Hoelscher et al., 2008) suggests that this could contribute further to the academic/vocational divide. The London Economics (2013) study confirms that the BTEC route typically leads to specific degree subject areas.
Hoelscher et al. (2008) also note that vocational routes have not tended to widen participation into the highly selective universities. Issues have been raised about the extent to which higher education providers have clear and transparent mechanisms for dealing with the wide range of vocational qualifications in their application processes (Alison et al., 2010).
Care leavers An institutionalized split between the care and education systems means social workers are not encouraged to take an interest in education and are able to give only limited support to the young people in their care (Jackson and Cameron, 2012). Young people leaving care are unlikely to have strong social networks and their horizons were often limited by their educational experience. The report suggests that ‘targeted measures to promote social mobility via participation in HE…should be an explicit aim of welfare authorities’ (p.1107).
Systems to provide financial and personal support to care leavers in HE were found to be limited (Jackson and Cameron, 2012).
Opportunities for young people may be hampered by ‘chronic and
continuing exclusion as they move abruptly into “instant adulthood”’, and ‘the myth that one reason for poor and disrupted educational experiences among looked after children and care leavers is that they come into care because of bad behaviour’ (Rogers, 2011, p.412). This report further suggests that ‘ensuring a more supported, gradual and measured
transition into young adulthood would at least go some way to addressing the significant transitional disadvantages currently experienced by care leavers’(p.424).
Male learners There is evidence that male learners are under-represented in outreach activities, for example analysis of participation in Aimhigher summer schools between 2004 and 2008 (HEFCE, 2009/11) found that girls
20 outnumbered boys by a ratio of 2:1 and in a review of their summer school provision The Sutton Trust (2008a) reported that boys made up just 30% of 2006 summer school applicants. In HEFCE guidance for summer school provision (2008/24), higher education providers and Aimhigher
Partnerships were tasked with finding ways of improving the participation rate of boys on the programme.
There is evidence that higher education providers and Aimhigher Partnerships have sought to address this imbalance in outreach
participation between the sexes. In their report to HEFCE Action on Access (2009b) identify a range of approaches developed to improve male engagement with outreach activities, some of which are targeted
specifically at boys (for example through sports based activities) and others which seek to make existing programmes more attractive to male
participants. The report comments on the lack of evidence regarding the relative effectiveness of different interventions although improvements in data between 2006 and 2009 were acknowledged. However, ‘tentative recommendations’ include continued use of male role models, ensuring interventions form part of a planned programme of support and ensuring all outreach activities are attractive to male as well as female learners. The report finds little empirical evidence to support the use of male only activities.