How many of us have questioned the purpose of widening participation? How many of us have looked at the specific ideological and logistical issues that crop up when we embark on ‘widening participation’? And as a result of this naval-gazing, do any of us actually know what it truly means to widen participation in higher education?
On the face of it this is quite a simple question. At university I was told to start by defining the question, so here is the incredibly useful definition of widening participation as offered by the Higher Education Funding Council for England:
[SLIDE]
So HEFCE at the very least are unsure exactly what end goal the sector is strategising for. Impudent of me perhaps, but my point is that we all seem to have agreed that ‘widening participation’ is a good thing without asking the fundamental questions: what is it? Why should we do it? What does it mean for the future? How should we do it properly?
I’m not going to use my time here to argue that widening participation is a totally futile exercise and we should scrap all WP schemes. I do however want to illustrate that the fundamental flaw in the positions that those who work in career guidance hold and that the areas that we are navigating through in today’s conference have far-reaching consequences that can negatively impact on the advice and ultimate success of other disadvantaged young adults.
I think it comes down to a central question
[SLIDE]
What is university for?
Is it to study something that you are academically interested in? Is it to develop skills to get a job afterwards? Is it to whittle away a few years if you don’t know what to do for a career in the big, bad world? Is it all of the above? Or none? The truth, and I think that this is an issue that is right at the heart of most of the debates in higher education policy at the moment, is that no-one really agrees. Just like with the definition of ‘widening participation’. And depending on each individual that goes or considers going to university, their motives can alter how they would answer the question. The NUS do a great deal of work trying to understand the motivation behind students going to university and using this to lobby HEIs to improve student satisfaction levels.
[SLIDE]
A recent survey by them says that when students were asked for the main reasons they wanted to go to university, the most popular responses were: “to gain qualifications” (68 per cent), “to improve my chances of getting a job” (53 per cent), and “to improve my earning potential” (44 per cent).
[SLIDE]
Ironically, the survey also revealed that 84% didn’t feel that university completely prepared them for entering the labour market. Bearing this in mind it is quite strange that the National Student Survey last year reported an 82% satisfaction rating. It seems the students were being satisfied but not for the reasons they originally anticipated! How many of these could have benefited more from not going to university?
[SLIDE]
Two days ago a survey carried out by independent educational charity ‘Edge’ supported this when it revealed that degrees were perceived to no longer offer a competitive advantage in the workplace. Over half of middle income parents believe they can no longer afford to send their child to university. 31 per cent claim it simply isn't worth the investment. 57 per cent believe a university education is less valuable than it was 10 years ago with 47 per cent claiming degrees no longer give you a head start in working life. More than a third of parents admit they used to want their offspring to go to university but now don't think it's the best option. 38 per cent claim they believe their son or daughter may have a better chance of success with a vocational qualification.
[SLIDE]
YouGov, at the launch this week of the annual ‘Universities Week’, revealed that more than half of parents feel that they have not received enough information about the new fees system. This is a startling figure because it falls in line with a lot of the vox populis that we’ve all heard suggests that the increase in fees will deter disadvantaged kids.
[SLIDE]
But at the moment the media and the ‘voice of the people’ has little evidence on which to base their claims. HEFCE last year reported on the ‘Trends in young participation in higher education’ and encouragingly said that:
‘Young people from disadvantaged areas were now substantially more likely to enter higher education since the mid-2000s…’
The proportion of young people from the most disadvantaged areas who enter higher education has increased by around +30% over the past 5 years and +50% in the past 15 years. And bear in mind that this period covers the last time the fees were increased.
It begs the questions: has fear of debt affected the ‘participation’ aspect of higher education? We won’t really know for sure until the new fee level comes into force. Will the number that apply decrease? I think it’s all a matter of individual degrees. Of individual students. Of individual circumstances and individual barriers that need to be overcome.
All people have different reasons for making the choices that they make as they progress through life. And these are influenced heavily by senior figures including careers advisors.
[SLIDE]
But for decades we have all been guilty of pushing, of over egging, the value of higher education and the benefits that you can reap through getting there. It’s an unconscious equation that used to be true but that isn’t any more: work hard, do well, go to university = get a good job.
The reason this no longer works? The equation is ultimately reliant on the workplace a) valuing degrees b) having the vacancies to meet the demand.
[SLIDE]
The Confederation of British Industry released a paper a couple of years ago called ‘Future Fit: Preparing Graduates for the World of Work’. In it they surveyed 581 organisations in total employing over 2.5 million people or 8% of the total UK workforce and they said that they firstly did not rate a degree higher than attitude, experience or employability skills. Secondly When asked what three things they thought universities should prioritise, 82% of employers thought that developing employability skills was far more important than increasing the number of students graduating from university each year. This is a significant view to bear in mind.
Degrees are seen as a nice addition to the important stuff. That being the extra curricular stuff. Basic production economics dictates that the rarer something is the more expensive or valuable it is perceived to be. More degrees in the labour market do not devalue the achievement of succeeding at higher education, but the interest just isn’t there from business.
[SLIDE]
Like with the yo-yo craze or tamagotchi’s – once everyone had them they all become similar and thus less impressive and desirable.
[SLIDE]
Now with the massive expansion in numbers alone, the focus of the value is changing not from just getting to university and being considered bright but the next step. Resource and policy should not be focusing on increasing participation – participation has been hugely increased thanks to the work of hundreds of organisations and thousands of passionate individuals. I believe the crucial step for us now is to devise methods and practices of individually reaching out to all children regardless of background to ensure that the best and the brightest get into our world-renowned institutions. And to do this right means honestly assessing each case on its own merits and not treating higher education as a default option for future progression.
Those that aren’t best suited for higher education should be actively discouraged from entering the system but encouraged to follow was suits them.
From the biased lens of the media to the concerns of the parents who want what’s best for their child. We as a nation, in a typically British way, know and express how important we think Higher Education is. But that doesn’t mean that university is for everyone. It doesn’t mean that university is a panacea for levelling the class playing field.
What does remove class divisions? ‘Oopmh’, ‘the spark’, ‘the element’, ‘the x-factor’. In other words, Aspiration. Each one of us has the potential to achieve greatness, in any way that we seek to invest our personal resources. But how do we find the spark that ignites our desire to better ourselves?
Let’s go back to that equation.
[SLIDE]
It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone tells you that you can only succeed in the world if you go to university then everyone will want to go to university – and that is where we have been going wrong all these years. And that was fine while not everyone had the opportunity to go. Now they do. In truth everyone should be able to go to university if they want to, and communicating the current policies effectively is the most crucial enforcer of this ideological shift in access to higher education.
Widening participation, as it currently is defined, has been a success and is thus (at present at least) a waste of time and resource. Think about one of the biggest obstacles of disadvantaged kids going to university: lack of support from parents, either through a lack of information or a lack of them experiencing it themselves. We’ve been successful in increasing it by 50% in the past 15 years.
[SLIDE]
When that generation have kids, they are statistically more likely to go on to higher education just by familial precedent. And the likelihood of their children going increases. And their children. And so on indefinitely! The sheer momentum would, in most cases, mean that as long HEIs kept increasing to meet the demand, disadvantaged young people would exponentially be more likely to want to go to higher education regardless of WP intervention.
Teachers, careers advisors, parents and academics should all be saying in their contact with young people “What is it that gets you going? What makes you get up in the morning?’ and helping them to decide for themselves whether they should pursue a vocational or academic future.
[SLIDE]
To match what they are with their potential university. If we as adults can encourage children and teenagers to see beyond the perceived barriers to not just higher education, but life hurdles more generally, then they won’t be scared of the perception of fees. They won’t apply for courses that are way beyond their reach or settle for opportunities way beneath their potentially immense abilities. Guiding them to think more critically about why they want to apply to university should be where more resource is allocated.
[SLIDE]
Ultimately information, advice and guidance should be tailored to the requirements of the individual, not the widening participation targets of the state.
Every secondary school should have a lead teacher responsible for higher education information, advice and guidance at every key stage, says the Sutton Trust. Great start but this role is so crucial that it shouldn’t just be restricted to one individual. It should be an attitude that infects every nook and cranny of compulsory education and society as a whole. Do what fits you best; don’t treat higher education as a panacea for curing the worlds social and class divisions. It won’t. And it will only continue in failing to reach our high expectations if we continue down that path.
[SLIDE]
The presentation was delivered at the Institute for Career Guidance 'Higher Education Reinvented' Conference on Thursday 16 June 2011.
