Introductions

1. A comparative investigation into Widening Participation practice in a post-devolution United Kingdom Chris Bayes (Lancaster University), Laura Johnstone (Focus West), Deirdre Lysnkey (Queen’s University Belfast), Steve Minney (Swansea University)

2. Introductions Who are we Abstract and what prompted us to do the session Themes we are going to cover: Funding and Finance to support progression of disadvantaged students The respective roles of state led projects (NCOP, Reaching Wider etc) and individual institutions to widen participation in each nation Discussion

3. Who we are • Chris Bayes –Lancaster University –Outreach & Student Success Manager • Laura Johnstone –Focus West, University of Strathclyde –Senior Programme Co-Ordinator • Deirdre Lynskey –Queens University, Belfast –Widening Participation & Learning Development Manager • Steve Minney –Swansea University –Head of Undergraduate Recruitment

4. Abstract • Following election of New Labour in 1997, the United Kingdom transferred various legislative powers - including those governing Higher Education (HE) - from Westminster to the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Government and Northern Irish Assembly. • “Education, education, education” – A key element of New Labour Policy was educational reform

5. Abstract • Across the four nations, there have been various state funded projects designed to widen participation in HE. • There has been great variance with regards to funding models in respect of targeting, how the impact of these schemes has been evaluated and how HEIs have been expected to balance involvement against their institutional commitments.

6. Defining scope of presentation • In initial discussions, it was clear we needed to refine our focus to a couple of key topics: • State funded intervention to widen access via collaborative outreach projects • Funding and finance to support the progression of disadvantaged students • Reflecting on previous cross-nation presentations (HELOA) in which practitioners talk about their day to day work, we thought it would be interesting to research into practice in another nation. • This would help us to identify commonality/divergence in approaches, what works (and what doesn’t). • We could also encourage further sharing across borders in future.

7. Scotland Chris Bayes (Lancaster University)

8. My initial thoughts/perceptions • Scotland does not charge tuition fees – This should support WP • Challenges around progression of WP students to ‘elite’ universities are present and possibly more pronounced in Scotland • Scotland appears to have a more coherent approach to policy and a more concerted approach towards collaboration between HEIs • Scotland appears to more fully recognise the value of long-term, multi-agency engagement

9. Research and findings • 2016 paper – ‘A blueprint for fairness’ • Chair’s foreword refers ostensibly to ‘Access’ – A recognition that this remains key challenge in Scotland? • Highlighted challenge – “18 year-olds from Scotland’s 20% least deprived communities are more than four times as likely to enter university as those from the 20% most deprived communities. For those who wish to enter most selective institutions, the position is considerably worse.” (UCAS, 2016) • Recognition that “present generation of work on access is reaching a natural end and the time is ripe for a more coordinated, collaborative and comprehensive approach.” • Recognition that university is not sole option. Fair access is entirely complementary to the work of the Developing the Young Workforce (DYW) programme – Contrast with some of the recommendations of Augur which highlighted the disconnect between FE & HE in England

10. Research and findings • Commission made a comprehensive set of recommendations to ministers. • Consulted effectively with ‘experts’ drawn from across the sector • Used this consultation to set ambitious, but clear targets • Provided a set of comprehensive recommendations which recognised that HE alone cannot solve the challenges around Social Mobility • Highlighted ongoing challenge around ‘evidence base’ – Led to development of a ‘Framework for Fair Access’ - https://www.fairaccess.scot/ • Recommended the appointment of a Commissioner for Fair Access to implement recommendations

11. Similarities and differences Similarities with English context Differences from English context Appears to be a greater connectivity across sectors at present – Multi-agency approach. Smaller number of partnerships, more sustained collaboration. Greater recognition of the role FE plays in WP. Development of a framework highlighting ‘what works’ and encouraging institutions to focus spend on programmes consistent with this. • WP remains an ongoing challenge, especially in terms of progression to ‘elite’ institutions. • Collaboration between HEIs encouraged by state funding. • Desire to demonstrate VfM and increase evidence base. • Issues around tracking of progression of students.

12. Northern Ireland Laura Johnstone (Focus West)

13. NI Perspective • History and culture • Nation without a government • Launch of first HE strategy in 2012 ‘Graduating to Success’ where one of four guiding principles includes making Higher Education more accessible • Followed by Widening Participation strategy titled ‘Access to Success’ where expressed that Widening Participation is a key strategic goal for the Department of Employment and Learning

14. Target groups • Key target groups identified due to under representation • Persons from low SEC groups (Socio Economic Classification) • Young Protestant males • Students with a disability • Under represented communities (often linked with level of deprivation in the area) • Further area identified • Mature learners

15. Projects and Funding • From Access to Success and Graduating to Success, 20 projects were formed with 70 project outcomes • All projects have rigorous Programme Management structures with 3 groups including representatives from HE, government, business and communities • Funding given through Widening Participation Premium for costs associated with recruitment and retention of under represented students through things like on course support • Access Agreements to ensure additional tuition fees produce enhanced outreach activities and make bursaries available

16. Projects and Funding • All universities produce a Widening Access and Participation Plan as well as a Strategic Assessment which is to critically evaluate performance and progress • Realisation that many under represented groups didn’t know about bursaries and so can’t be a strong determinant • Highly selective institutions seen to give bigger bursaries than anyone else • Encouraged to put some of this to enhanced outreach as more evidence this works in raising aspiration and applications

17. Observations and Comparisons • While differing landscapes and education systems, many comparisons can be drawn from policy and aims • Value the learner not the cohort approach • Mature learners required to widen the pool of potential applicants • Strong partnership approach • Strong focus on evaluation and critical reflection • History and community big influencer • Differences in language

18. Wales Deirdre Lynskey (Queen’s University Belfast),

19. The Welsh Perspective: In its guidance to HEFCW on fee and access planning, the Welsh Government confirms that it wants fee and access plans to make a significant contribution to widening access to higher education. Fee and access plans set out how regulated institutions will invest a proportion of their income in supporting equality of opportunity and the promotion of higher education and engaging with groups under-represented in higher education. Regulated institutions set out their objectives and provision to support groups under-represented in higher education, including groups with protected characteristics.

20. Additionally, fee and access plans must include provision to: Attract applications from groups under-represented in higher education Retain individuals from groups under-represented in higher education Provide financial assistance to students Make available to students or prospective students on financial assistance Inform prospective students of fee levels

21. Wales - Reaching Wider Aims to increase higher education participation from targeted groups and communities in Wales by raising educational aspirations and skills, and creating innovative study opportunities and learning pathways to higher education. Reaching Wider engages two main groups of people of all ages who are under-represented in higher education: people living in areas of deprivation (Communities First cluster areas and the bottom quintile of the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation) looked after children and care leavers. Three regional Reaching Wider Partnerships lead activities in North and Mid Wales, South West Wales and South East Wales (First Campus). All higher and further education institutions in Wales are members of Reaching Wider Partnerships. Other regional partners vary, but include local authorities, employers, schools, the voluntary sector and Careers Wales.

22. My observations: Joined up thinking, planning and action Commitment by all to fund Widening Access Fee and Access plans that allow for development and are inclusive Clear guidelines that challenge universities to look at all aspects of support, pre entry, finance, on course support, widening the social and cultural capital of WP students, career and global opportunities etc Inclusive practice recognition of WP and also students with protective characteristics. There seems to be a good and constructive relationship between HEFCW and partners.

23. England Steve Minney (Swansea University)

24. Student Support: England Pre 1962 – Fees charged 1962 – 1998 – No tuition fee and means tested maintenance grant 1996 Dearing Report – expand participation by increasing funds through student contribution 1998 - £1,000 tuition fee (means tested), abolition of maintenance grant September 2006 – £3,000 tuition fee (England only) September 2012 - £9,000 tuition fee – means tested maintenance grant September 2016 – abolition of maintenance grant September 2017 - £9,250 tuition fee June 2019 – Augar – proposes differential fee, reintroduction of means tested grant Chaotic, incoherent, political – impact on participation?

25. England – The arc is long but bends towards justice? Personal experience: 1990 - 8% of school leavers entered HE Mass Market Higher Education – post 92 landscape Move towards direct WP intervention 2000 onwards (previously largely focused on mature market) Whole cohort approach – Compacts Aim Higher – construction of regional networks (knowledge transfer/collaborative input/beginnings of continuum 2010 – 2015 coalition – Aim Higher dismantled. HE Act 2011 triples tuition fees

26. Social Mobility commission – Cross Party, Alan Milburn NCOP – targeted collaborative regional funding (competition/student acquisition) Theresa May 2016 – “The Great Meritocracy” Office for Students - same as it ever was Regional Outcomes - 2018 entry: London Challenge 1st Generation Corbyn – Social Justice supercedes Social Mobility Forthcoming demographic uplift – growth v selection

27. Further discussion: Chris Bayes - Outreach & Student Success Manager, Lancaster University c.bayes@lancaster.ac.uk Laura Johnstone - Senior Programme Coordinator, FOCUS West laura.johnstone@strath.ac.uk Deirdre Lynskey - Widening Participation & Learning Development Manager, Queens University d.Lynskey@qub.ac.uk Steve Minney - Head of Undergraduate Recruitment, Swansea University s.n.minney@Swansea.ac.uk