Critical Issues in Widening Participation

1. Critical Issues in Widening Participation WP Workshop, London May 2012 Tempus: Equal Access for All Day One Prof Penny Jane Burke

2. Aims: • To introduce and critique key discourses in WP policy in the UK: Fair access & Raising Aspirations • To draw on research to illuminate my points • to engage participants in critical discussion about these discourses

3. Overview • Need to critique problematic assumptions of WP (e.g. barriers, raising aspirations) • Need also to challenge problematic constructions of students & institutions associated with WP • Developing strategies that engage with deeper issues such as the complexity of inequalities in HE (& beyond) • Shifting from utilitarian to transformatory approaches to WP

4. Critiquing ‘Barriers’ • WP – focus on ‘barriers’ • imagines that there are concrete obstacles that can be simply identified & removed • these barriers are important (e.g. financial, location, etc) • However, ‘barriers’ also works to conceal the more subtle and complex dimensions of inclusion and exclusion in relation to access & participation

5. Sociocultural dimensions • Whilst the concept of barriers is a useful one, it provides rather limited purchase on the sociocultural dimensions to understanding behaviours and outcomes. • We need to understand better from within any specific setting: • a) the historical/material context for contemporary cultural practices; • b) the cultural resources that people are drawing upon in constructing their learning identities and trajectories; • c) the interactive processes by which learning identities and trajectories are sustained or transformed over time; • d) the dominant discourses that shape perceptions of the issues and guide actions in response. (Lynn Raphael Reed, 2007, Young Participation in HE, University of the West of England.)

6. Deficit discourses • Having a sense of belonging and inclusion as a student is deeply tied to emotional and subjective processes – feeling ‘good enough’, ‘shame’ and sense of (not) belonging • Students from traditionally under-represented backgrounds have often been seen in largely deficit terms – e.g. lacking skills, lacking potential, lacking aspiration, etc - reinforcing sense of shame, not belonging & marginalisation

7. Pathologizing & polarizing discourses • “Non-traditional students are pathologized (...) as being deficient: in ability, in not having a ‘proper’ educational background, or in lacking the appropriate aspirations and attitudes” (Leathwood and O'Connell 2003: 599). • “The normal, the worthy student and the acceptable processes of admission are legitimized by references to the abnormal, the unworthy the unacceptable” (Williams, 1997, 25).

8. Marginalisation • Those in marginalized positions are aware of their marginalisation • seek to act in ways to distance themselves from the classifications of others • Yet, they are often unable to escape those classifications. • E.g., in a study of working-class women participating on caring courses, Skeggs (1997) explains:

9. Recognising the recognition of Others ‘The women in this study are aware of their place, of how they are socially positioned and the attempts to represent them. This constantly informs their responses. They operate with a dialogic form of recognition: they recognize the recognition of others. Recognitions do not occur without value judgments and the women are constantly aware of the judgments of real and imaginary others. Recognition of how one is positioned is central to the processes of subjective construction’ (Skeggs, 1997).

10. Frightened to speak… • “If it was someone like that fella who- who was very very intelligent then I'd be more quiet I think, because I wouldn't want him to think I was totally stupid in the questions that I ask. I mean I was listening to you for quite a while before I said anything. So I'd have to be listening for quite awhile before I'd actually say something” (Amanda, interview, 1999). • “The first thing I was really frightened of was the speaking out” (Linda, interview, 1999). • (from Burke, PJ, 2002)

11. Raising aspirations • A central discourse of WP policy in England • Turns our attention away from structural and discursive inequalities - focuses instead on individuals and families seen to ‘lack aspirations’ • Material poverty and social inequality are reconstructed as poverty and inequality of aspiration (Morley, 2003).

12. Re-conceptualising aspirations • Emphasis on individual aspirations: misses out the interconnections between an individual’s aspirations and identity formation • Ignores the social, spatial and cultural contexts in which individuals are constructed, and construct themselves, as having or not having potential • Aspirations are formed through social relations, identity positions and are negotiated and renegotiated within the social contexts that the individual is situated • not linear in formation but cyclical and reflexive (Burke, 2006)

13. Formations of masculinities & aspiration-construction • E.g. my research on men, masculinities and HE participation: the men construct their aspiration around idealized formations of masculinity, which are entwined with the desire for respect and respectability • The men’s aspirations to become HE students linked to the desire for being recognized as a respected subject. • E.g, in Gladiator’s account, the constitution of respectability relies on a distancing from physical labour:

14. The higher learning class • [Being a student] feels good. Because working is not good. Working is very hard and physical, compared to learning. I don’t know, I’ve always had this thing, when I walk along the road., as either being common or intellectual, just the two groups. And I know it sounds horrible, but I don’t like mixing with the common or, I don’t know, choose people. So I’ve always wanted to be in the higher learning class, so being amongst all these students here is great. • (Gladiator, aged 19, Science and Engineering Foundation Programme)

15. Class interests • Gladiator refuses to name a class position describing himself as ‘comfortable’ • Highlights that ‘class formation is dynamic’ (Skeggs, 2004: 5) and difficult to conceptualise: “Class (as a concept, classification and positioning) must always be the site of continual struggle and re-figuring precisely because it represents the interests of particular groups” (Skeggs, 2004: 5).

16. Class/ification • HE is a site of class struggle, intensified perhaps through WP policies that emphasize accessibility to students from class groups historically under-represented in university spaces. • In those spaces, seen largely as neutral (once admission has been achieved), ‘the systems of inscription and classification (which work in the interests of the powerful)’ are hidden (Skeggs, 2004: 4).

17. A kind of respect • It is not surprising then that the desire for respect and respectability is a central theme in many of the men’s accounts of accessing higher education. • It’s kind of respect as well. You are considered more in society, if you’ve got good education you are OK (Dragon, aged 18, SEFS).

18. Changing practices • As well as challenging problematic discourses, which oversimplify the issues surrounding WP, we need to develop practices of WP which are embedded in our institutional & programme ethos and frameworks

20. Research Aims • to examine admissions practices in the selection of students for art and design courses in five case study HEIs • to uncover the complexity of processes of admission and to deconstruct the key assumptions underpinning the selection of students • to collect detailed data of everyday practices and to analyse the assumptions, values and perspectives admissions tutors bring to the selection process

21. Research Methods • An information review • In-depth interviews with admissions tutors about their perspectives of the admissions system and process • Observations of actual selection interviews with candidates • Nine of the eleven NALN art and design college were approached, and five agreed to participate. • 2 in large metropolitan areas • 1 in a cathedral town, one in a rural area • 1 in a large town. • 3/5 ‘selecting’ rather than ‘recruiting’ institutions • 10 admissions tutors were interviewed • 70 selection interviews were observed

22. Fair Admissions • Key discourse at play in WP policy • 2003: UK government commissioned report on admissions (Chair, Steven Schwartz) • Report highlighted five central principles for a fair admissions system; • transparency, • the selection of students able to complete the course as judged by their achievements and potential, • reliable and valid assessment methods, • minimizing barriers for applicants, • creating a professional system underpinned by ‘appropriate institutional structures and processes’ (Schwartz, 2004: 7-8).

23. fair access • premised on assumption -through ‘transparent’ sets of criteria & procedures admissions tutors & staff can make fair judgements about selection • Based on notion of meritocracy • Ability & potential something that can be objectively identified • ‘There is no neutral definition of “merit”; however it is defined, it will benefit some groups while disadvantaging others’ (Karabel, 2005: 3).

24. Democratization or differentiation? • International debates on the ideology of widening student participation policies question whether they are a force for democratization or differentiation (David, 2007). Initiatives are perceived as a form of meritocratic equalization and/or as a reinforcement of social stratification processes. Those with social capital are often able to decode and access new educational opportunities. Those without it can remain untouched by initiatives to facilitate their entry into the privileges that higher education can offer (Morley and Lugg, 2009: 41)

25. Conceptual Tools: power and identity • concepts of power and identity help to shed light on the relations of inequality and misrecognition that are often so subtle and insidious that they are largely overlooked in everyday practices • Student identities are constructed through difference and ‘polarizing discourses’ – the imaginary ideal-student subject; the traditional, standard, 18 year old student (Williams, 1997, 26). • ‘The normal, the worthy student and the acceptable processes of admission are legitimized by references to the abnormal, the unworthy the unacceptable’ (Williams, 1997, 25).

27. Potential is…

28. Striking… • Most candidates only about 17 and yet to start their courses… • Highlights complexity of ‘potential’ • To what extent is the candidate identified as having potential expected to already display certain attributes, skills and understanding? • How are characteristics such as ‘wit’ and ‘being unusual’ or ‘inventive’ measured and judged and how can this be made ‘transparent’ and ‘fair’?

29. Inequalities and misrecognitions • Certain characteristics e.g. ‘having something to say’ and being ‘incredibly interesting’ -- steeped in value judgements - connected to historically privileged ways of being • tied in with ontological perspectives that value certain dispositions & attitudes more highly than others - inextricably connected to gendered, classed and racialised inequalities and mis/recognitions

30. Influences • Nina, a Black working class young woman from a poor inner city area, applying for a Fashion Design BA, was asked at the beginning of her interview about the influences on her work:

31. Rejection • Body language of interviewers changed – suggested they disengaged from Nina • They asked her what she would like to design and she answered that she was interested in designing sports tops. • After Nina left, the interviewers immediately decided to reject her. • Discussion of how to record this on their form:

32. Influenced by Hip-Hop • Interviewer: What influences your work? • Nina: I’m influenced by Hip-Hop? • Interviewer: Hip-Hop or the history of Hip-Hop • Nina: The History of Hip-Hop

34. Unfashionable, immature, lacking confidence • Before the interview, Nina’s portfolio had not deemed it as weak. • Nina’s clothes were noted as not fashionable • Interviewers said she lacked confidence • They were dissatisfied with Nina’s intentions to live at home whilst studying – sign of immaturity.

35. All part of the experience • The white middle-class male candidate interviewed immediately after Nina, was from an affluent spa town, expensively dressed and cited famous artists and designers amongst his influences. • In the interview discussion, he confirmed that he would ‘definitely be leaving home because it is all part of the experience.’ • The young man was offered a place in spite of having considerably poorer qualifications than Nina, including having failed GCSE Art.

36. Embodied misrecognised subjectivities • Nina not recognized as a legitimate subject of art and design studies because she cited a form of fashion seen as invalid in the higher education context. • Nina embodied Black racialised ways of being, which were seen as signs of immaturity and lack of fashion flair. • Her intentions not to leave home were read as signifying her inappropriate subject position.

37. Processes of Recognition • The male, middle-class, white-English candidate knew how to cite the discourses that would enable him recognition as a legitimate student subject. • The admissions tutors’ judgments shaped by implicit, institutionalized, disciplinary and racialised perspectives of what counts as legitimate forms of experience and knowledge. • Classed, gendered and racialised formations of subjectivity (embodied and performative) profoundly shape selection-processes.

38. Reflections • Admissions practices in Art & Design - privilege the subjectivities of ‘traditional’ students– underpinned by white, middle-class, masculined ontological perspectives • Admissions systems are designed to be ‘fair’ & ‘transparent’, but the lack of attention to the disciplinary & discursive practices that reproduce gendered and racialised inequality and privilege undermines the project of WP • A shift from individual practices & students to wider sets of inequalities & discursive practices is required to develop inclusive selection practices