War.experience.uk

359 views

Published on

Presentación expuesta durante el III Workshop Internacional sobre Equidad en la Educación Superior organizado por la Cátedra UNESCO de Inclusión en la Ed. Superior (Santiago de Chile, 6 noviembre 2010)

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
359
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
87
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

War.experience.uk

  1. 1. SOCIAL INCLUSION IN HIGHER EDUCATION – THE POST-WAR EXPERIENCE OF THE UK Dr Jon Cloke
  2. 2. A brief look at historical trends in UK higher education
  3. 3. (Source: UK House of Commons, RESEARCH PAPER 99/111, 21 DECEMBER 1999 A Century of Change: Trends in UK statistics since 1900)
  4. 4. (Source: Robertson, 2010)
  5. 5. UK GDP growth 1950-2010
  6. 6. The growing gap in HE participation rates by social class from 1960 to 2000…
  7. 7. A Snapshot of UK social inclusion in 2010
  8. 8. Class difference: core results for England, HEFCE (2010)  OVERALL - % YP in England living in the most disadvantaged areas entering higher education increased by around +30 per cent over the past five years, and by +50 per cent over the past 15 years.  HOWEVER - Increases in the YP HE participation rate for most disadvantaged areas greater than the rises for those living in advantaged areas since the mid-2000s. (HEFCE Issues Paper January 2010/03)
  9. 9. Trends in young participation by areas of advantage/disadvantage classified by HE participation rates (HEFCE, 2010)
  10. 10. Difference in young participation by sex for disadvantaged areas (HEFCE, 2010
  11. 11. Gender difference: core results for England, HEFCE (2010)  YOUNG WOMEN – from (more or less) parity in 1990, more young women likely to enter higher education than young men – 2010, 40% of young women enter higher education compared to 32% of young men;  270,000 FEWER YOUNG MEN than young women entered higher education in England as a result of lower participation rate over past 15 years.
  12. 12. Trends in young participation by sex (HEFCE, 2010
  13. 13. Minority participation in UK Higher Education: 2003 (Source: Opportunity Now Research Centre Website, http://www.opportunitynow.org.uk/research/the_business_ case_for_diversity/the_work_environment/bme_women.html)
  14. 14. A Changing Policy Focus
  15. 15. Policy on social inclusion: the move to the market  Robbins Report (1963): “maximum participation in initial higher education by young and mature students and in lifetime learning by adults, having regard to the needs of individuals, the nation and the future labour market. . .”  The realisation grew that: “There is no fixed ‘pool’ of potential students: people respond to opportunities that are available.” (Patterson, 1997:44)  Conservative governments 1979-1997 - policies and finance created significant increase in student numbers; derived from market-based ideological arguments; social exclusion generally absent.
  16. 16. Policy on Social Inclusion (II)  Dearing Report 1997 - followed by ‘Our Competitive Future: Building the Knowledge Driven Economy’ (DTI, 1998) - universities ‘central engines’ in building new knowledge- driven economy.  Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (DBIS) report: Higher Ambitions (2009): “As a developed country we are operating at the knowledge frontier. We no longer have the choice in this globalised world to compete on low wages and low skills. We compete on knowledge – its creation, its acquisition, and its transformation into commercially successful uses (DBIS, 2009: 3).”
  17. 17. Factors affecting policy
  18. 18. FACTORS ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION:  MAIN FACTOR – belief that HE leads to better career/job prospects, earnings, job security  STUDENTS FROM LOWER SE STRATA emphasize this more than students from higher SE strata, as do MATURE STUDENTS, STUDENTS FROM MINORITY ETHNIC GROUPS  OTHER FACTORS – desire for self-improvement, liking for topic of study (Connor, H., Dewson, S., Tyers, C., Eccles, J., Regan, J. and Aston, J. (2001) Social Class and Higher Education: Issues Affecting Decisions on Participation by Lower Social Class Groups, Institute for Employment Studies, Reseach Report No. 267)
  19. 19. FACTORS DISCOURAGING PARTICIPATION:  MAIN FACTORS – ALSO employment and finance; need to start earning immediately, career path not needing HE qualification.  DEBT, COST – also important factors; @ half of students from lower SE strata working during term- time, but only slightly higher amount than those from higher SE strata (av. 13-14 hours weekly).  PERSONAL – coping with academic work, entry qualifications, application process, personal issues (child care) (Connor, H., Dewson, S., Tyers, C., Eccles, J., Regan, J. and Aston, J. (2001) Social Class and Higher Education: Issues Affecting Decisions on Participation by Lower Social Class Groups, Institute for Employment Studies, Reseach Report No. 267)
  20. 20. OTHER KEY INFLUENCES  Prior education and family background (affecting CONFIDENCE/SELF-CONFIDENCE levels)  Issues of SECURITY/INSECURITY - Students from lower SE strata take account of a wider range of issues
  21. 21. Entry to HE is just the beginning…  Students from disadvantaged backgrounds more likely to drop out of courses, forego opportunities for more advanced courses.  More likely to follow complicated paths in HE, deferred enrolment, gap-years and switching, repeating or restarting their courses for non- academic reasons.  A number of different factors lie behind these difficulties. (Alasdair Forsyth and Andy Furlong, Socio-economic disadvantage and experience in higher education, 16 May 2003)
  22. 22. Growing problems…..
  23. 23. Too successful? The crisis in funding  UK funding crisis precipitated by rising costs and student numbers by early 1990s; 1-in-17 attended university early 1970s, 1-in-3 by the early 1990s.  Dearing Report: establishment of student fees around 25% of average cost of a degree course, system of maintenance loans for students.  HEIs forced to look ‘beyond the borders of the national state’ - branch campuses, franchising programmes, increased enrolment of international students, developing networks and alliances to increase access to resources. (Source: Robertson, S.L. (2010) Globalising UK Higher Education published by the Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies at: http://www.llakes.org)
  24. 24. Structural imbalances  SPATIAL: < one in five young people from the most disadvantaged areas enter higher education, compared to > one in two for the most advantaged areas.  SPATIAL/GENDER: - mid-2000s young women > 25 per cent more likely to enter higher education than young men, rising to >44 per cent more likely in disadvantaged areas.  CLASS/INSTITUTIONAL: some UK universities have @ 50% of students from working class backgrounds, others < 5%.  OCCUPATION STATUS/INSTITUTIONAL: high status occupations (medicine, law, dentistry) with strong links to high status institutions dominated by middle classes distort earnings average re government ‘graduate premium’ (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2007)
  25. 25. Some Policy Considerations…  Does it help to think in terms of barriers to inclusion, if not processes of exclusion?  What are the roles of the private and public sector and is it helpful to think of social inclusion in HE in these archaic terms?  How is appropriate financial help to be targeted, and who by?  How does a government overcome inequalities in investment outcome given links between social class/status and institutions, labour market and wages (Robertson, 2010).
  26. 26.  ILD: nearly 92% of businesses, 76% of rural properties and 65% of the dwellings in 12 Latin American countries studied are in the informal or “extralegal” sector.  Dwellings, rural properties and businesses in the informal or extralegal sector of 12 Latin American countries are worth more than $1.2 trillion – Hernando de Soto refers to this as “dead capital”.  What part does lack of access to higher education play in maintaining this situation?  What can governments of the region do about “dead” educational capital and the subsequent loss of social/economic capital? (Sources: The Multilateral Investment Fund, Microscope on the Microfinance Business Environment in Latin America 2007, IADB Press Release June 12, 2006) Some Latin American Considerations….

×