CEIR

This article critically analyses the impact of reforms to the student financial support system in English higher education. Comparative analysis of financial support mechanisms and patterns of outreach engagement with groups underrepresented in higher education show a marked deterioration in the levels of cash support available and an increasingly focus on the brightest poor students (in the form of merit aid) at the expense of the generality of poorer students since the new support programme came into place. This can be seen as part of a wider policy shift away from generic widening participation to the targeting of specific cohorts to raise the attainment level of intakes or to meet recruitment shortfalls. The findings are located in a context of a (near) trebling of tuition fees, stagnation in overall student numbers and the promotion of market mechanisms, all of which can be seen as a challenge to the notion of social justice through the higher education system.

This paper argues that the introduction of access agreements following the establishment of the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) has consolidated how English higher education institutions (HEIs) position themselves in the marketplace in relation to widening participation. However, the absence of a national bursary scheme has led to obfuscation rather than clarification from the perspective of the consumer. This paper analyses OFFA's 2008 monitoring report and a sample of twenty HEIs’ original 2006 and revised or updated access agreements (2008) to draw conclusions about the impact of these agreements on notions of ‘fair access’ and widening participation. The authors conclude that, unsurprisingly in an increasingly market-driven system, institutions use access agreements primarily to promote enrolment to their own programmes rather than to promote system-wide objectives. As a consequence of this marketing focus, previous differences between pre-1992 and post-1992 institutions in relation to widening participation and fair access are perpetuated, leading to both confusion for consumers and an inequitable distribution of bursary and other support mechanisms for the poorest applicants to HE.

This paper explores the linkages between national identity and educational traditions, and the range and flexibility of the incarnations of tradition. It investigates in detail three versions of a specifically English tradition in education that have been generated at different times in England over the past century. These are Cyril Norwood's account of the English tradition in the 1920s, Fred Clarke's portrayal of education and social change in the 1940s, and the ideals of teachers' professional autonomy as they were articulated in the postwar period. In each instance the 'tradition' developed as responses to contemporary challenges and threats, and asserted particular images of the past to justify a given approach to present and future changes. These representations of the national tradition have thereby established sets of values and principles drawn from idealised versions of the educational past that provided guidelines for reform, and the direction and guidelines of change.

One form of ecological fallacy is found in the dictum that 'you are where you live'otherwise expressed in the idea that you can infer significant information about an individual or their family from the prevailing conditions around their home. One expression of this within higher education in the UK has been the use (and, arguably, overuse and misuse) of 'low participation neighbourhoods' (LPNs) over the last 15 years. These are areas that have been defined, from historic official data, as having a lower-than-average propensity to send their young people on to university. These LPNs have increasingly become used within the widening participation and social mobility agendas as a proxy for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds who have the potential to benefit from higher education, but who would not attend without encouragement, support and/or incentives. In this article, we explore the various uses to which LPNs have been put by policy makers, universities and practitioners, including the targeting of outreach activities, the allocation of funding and the monitoring of the social mix within higher education. We use a range of official data to demonstrate that LPNs have a questionable diagnostic value, with more disadvantaged families living outside them than within them, while they contain a higher-than-expected proportion of relatively advantaged families. We also use content analysis of university policy documents to demonstrate that universities have adopted some questionable practices with regard to LPNs, although some of these are now being actively discouraged.

This project, funded by the Higher Education Careers Services Unit (HECSU), was carried out by the Centre for Research and Evaluation (CRE) at Sheffield Hallam University and the Centre for Research into Quality (CRQ) at the University of Central England in Birmingham. It ...

4 These surveys were part of a wider HEFCE evaluation which comprises of comprises tracking surveys of young people building on Excellence Challenge cohorts from 2001, an analysis of existing and linked administrative databases and a qualitative analysis of activity in a sample of Aimhigher areas.

The Labour Party's policymaking structures in the United Kingdom have changed in a way that has allowed new ideas to emerge in the party's VET discourse. The trade unions, who wished to return to the Industrial Training Boards financed by employers, have been usurped and the decollectivisation of VET policy is facilitated by thinkers who had no access to the party's policymaking machinery in the past. This is presented as an example of the type of constraints which act on all policymakers, and the changing nature of those constraints in response to changing nature of industrial demand for skilled labour.

This paper argues that the introduction of access agreements following the establishment of the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) has led to changes in the way that higher education institutions (HEIs) position themselves in the marketplace in relation to widening participation. However, the nature of these access agreements has led to obfuscation rather than clarification from the perspective of the consumer. This paper analyses OFFA's 2008 monitoring report and a sample of 20 HEIs' original 2006 and revised or updated access agreements (2008) to draw conclusions about the impact of these agreements on the notions of 'fair access' and widening participation. The authors conclude that institutions use access agreements primarily to promote enrolment to their own programmes rather than to promote HE generally. As a consequence of this marketing focus, previous differences between pre-92 and post-92 institutions in relation to widening participation and fair access are...

A large number of the Business and Administrative Studies programmes are in post 92 HEIs and specialist institutions/colleges, but generally type or size of institution do not seem to influence this variable. There is no particular relationship between model of provision and subject of study.

4 These surveys were part of a wider HEFCE evaluation which comprises of comprises tracking surveys of young people building on Excellence Challenge cohorts from 2001, an analysis of existing and linked administrative databases and a qualitative analysis of activity in a sample of Aimhigher areas.

Over a period of around fifteen years English higher education has become characterised by an increasingly marketise and differentiated system, most recently with the encouragement of new “challenger” providers potentially creating price competition for undergraduate degrees. This paper explores shifting patterns of enrolments between different institution types (those requiring high entry grades and those requiring lower entry grades) for evidence of how these types may be responding to the new market conditions. We introduce the concept of a “dual-pricing” mechanism to model how different institution types may be reacting. Dual pricing would be exemplified as a situation where entry requirements (a “price” based on qualification tariff points required for entry) and tuition-fee are matched in a linear hierarchy of institutions: Only the most prestigious institutions offering the courses demanding the highest entry qualifications (tariff) would command the highest fee (in this case...

Over a period of around fifteen years English higher education has become characterised by an increasingly marketise and differentiated system, most recently with the encouragement of new “challenger” providers potentially creating price competition for undergraduate degrees. This paper explores shifting patterns of enrolments between different institution types (those requiring high entry grades and those requiring lower entry grades) for evidence of how these types may be responding to the new market conditions. We introduce the concept of a “dual-pricing” mechanism to model how different institution types may be reacting. Dual pricing would be exemplified as a situation where entry requirements (a “price” based on qualification tariff points required for entry) and tuition-fee are matched in a linear hierarchy of institutions: Only the most prestigious institutions offering the courses demanding the highest entry qualifications (tariff) would command the highest fee (in this case...

This paper uses critical discourse analysis of English higher education institutions’ policy statements about access to explore the changing ways that institutions have used language to shift their market positionality away from widening participation for all and the process of higher education to ‘fair access’ (i.e. social mobility for the ‘brightest’) and the outcome of producing ‘professionals’. Analysis is drawn from the Access Agreements two sets of sampled institutions (ten large prestigious pre-1992 universities and ten former polytechnics, known as post-1992 universities ) at two points in time: 2006-07 (the first wave of Access Agreements) and 2012-13 (the first set of Access Agreements in the new funding regime).

This paper engages with the continuing emphasis given to evidence-based policy and 'what works' approaches in educational research, highlighting some of the continuing epistemological challenges from a post-positivist perspective. To illustrate these, it draws on a reflective case study provided by a research project commissioned by the Office for Fair Access in England. The aim of this project was to devise an analytical framework to allow universities to explore the impact of the bursaries that they award to students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The experiences of the project team led to a collection of insights which are discussed here alongside a more general account of the limitations of experimental and quasi-experimental designs in complex social fields. The paper concludes that we lack a strong theoretical understanding of the relationships between financial and educational disadvantage prior to and during higher education, and this undermines efforts to prove that certain interventions will 'level the playing field'.

This paper argues that the introduction of access agreements following the establishment of the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) has led to changes in the way that higher education institutions (HEIs) position themselves in the marketplace in relation to widening participation. However, the nature of these access agreements has led to obfuscation rather than clarification from the perspective of the consumer. This paper analyses OFFA's 2008 monitoring report and a sample of 20 HEIs' original 2006 and revised or updated access agreements (2008) to draw conclusions about the impact of these agreements on the notions of 'fair access' and widening participation. The authors conclude that institutions use access agreements primarily to promote enrolment to their own programmes rather than to promote HE generally. As a consequence of this marketing focus, previous differences between pre-92 and post-92 institutions in relation to widening participation and fair access are per...

This document is the author deposited version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it. Published version TAZZYMAN, Sarah, BOWES, Lindsay, MORETON, Rachel, MADRIAGA, Manuel and MCCAIG, Colin (2018). Report: National Collaborative Outreach Programme Year one report of the national formative and impact evaluation, including capacity building with NCOP consortia. Project Report. CFE Research for HEFCE.

Based on the evidence brought together in this report, most HEPs are keen to receive guidance on how to better conceptualise, plan, deliver and evaluate pre-16 outreach activity. There is a strong commitment to working with younger age groups, but less confidence about what forms of practice are most appropriate, leading to extensive experimentation and duplication of effort. 9. The project team therefore also encourage the OfS to continue to support evaluation practice for pre-16 outreach by investing in additional research to determine which 'intermediate steps' have the most utility. There is an existing evidence base (e.g.