120 likes | 267 Views
Ruth McLellan , Southampton Solent University Centre for Widening Participation, OU 24 th June 2010. Reducing the gaps: how to engage white working class young men. What we know so far:. £392m spent on widening participation activities from 2001-2008 (House of Commons, 2009).
E N D
Ruth McLellan, Southampton Solent UniversityCentre for Widening Participation, OU24th June 2010 Reducing the gaps: how to engage white working class young men
What we know so far: • £392m spent on widening participation activities from 2001-2008 (House of Commons, 2009). • HEIPR data - Males: 37.8%, Females 49.2% (DIUS, 09) • Fewer than 1 in 5 young people from most disadvantages areas enter HE compared to more than 1 in 2 for most advantaged areas (HEFCE, 2010). • Since mid 2000’s participation rate of Young Men increased MATERIALLY from 29% to 32% (HEFCE , 2010) WP MAKING A DIFFERENCE BUT BOYS STILL AN ISSUE
Research Aim and Questions: Aim: To examine what influences the decision making process of white working class young males (aged 15-16) and the impact that widening participation activities have on their decision making process. Research Questions: • To explore the decision making process that young males go through when considering HE. • To ascertain what influences young males decision to participate in HE. • To examine the impact widening participation activities have on young males and how this affects their HE decision making process.
Theoretical Underpinning: • Wide range of Labour Government reports on widening participation • Socio-economic gaps • Gender gaps • Impact of School • Impact of Aimhigher • Impact of self-perception/self-doubt
Research Methodology SCHOOLS: ‘Parkway’ and ‘Westside’ Secondary Schools (11-16) LSEG WHITE YOUNG MALES (Year 10) x 5 participants • Adults Interviewed: • Head teacher • Deputy head • Head of Year (Westside only) • Nominated teacher • Careers Advisor – school based • Student mentor – (Parkway only) • Legal Guardian(s) • Aimhigher representatives Young People Interviewed: 1) Young males themselves (6-10 times) 2) Nominated peer from school • Observation of young males: • HEI Aimhigher Easter Residential 2009: • Humanities – Parkway School • Science – Westside School
Research Findings: Theme 1: Impact of the School • Potentially big impact on aspiration raising • Head teachers aware, but not filtered down • School places majority responsibility on Aimhigher to raise aspirations • Teachers have “cupboard mentality” – do not see outside of their subject area • Effectiveness of WP activities at the mercy of the school • Targeting not effectively carried out
Research Findings: Theme 2: Impact of Aimhigher • Residential/on-campus very strong impact • Student ambassadors make a big difference – “they’re just like me”. • Got to talk ‘language of HE’ with other students– reducing barriers
Research Findings: Theme 3: Impact of self-doubt/lack of confidence • Boys don’t have language of HE • Not completing forms = not attending events • Teachers not reminding/re-enforcing benefits of WP activities • Parents have limited/no experience of HE so cannot provide insights • Leads to a lack of language – unable to participate in discourse and relevant narratives
Reducing the gaps(1): • More exposure to WP activities • Follow on from residential – keep momentum going – reinforce and remind • Talk the language of HE (peers and Aimhigher Associates) • Boost boys self-confidence • Form filling – big issue – how overcome?
Reducing the gaps (2): Educating Stakeholders: • Teachers regarding the role that they could play in affecting the decision making of white LSEG boys. • Changing role of IAG – needs to be aware of issues with white LSEG boys. • Aimhigher central – whole school training
Questions: Ruth.mclellan@solent.ac.uk
References: • HEFCE (2010). Trends in young participation in higher education: core results for England • House of Commons (2009). Widening Participation in higher education. Public Accounts Committee. Fourth Report of Session 2008-09. • HEIPR/DIUS? See slide 2