Teaching and Learning > DOCUMENTS
Socioeconomic disadvantage and PRS
Gary Bunt
Summary
In this review of Alasdair Forsyth and Andy Furlong's Socioeconomic disadvantage and access to higher education (Bristol: The Policy Press/Joseph Rowntree Foundation 2000 ISBN 1 86134 296 9, price £12.95), Gary Bunt highlights key issues in the research relevant to PRS practitioners.
Article
According to the Government's latest figures, contained in their document The Excellence Challenge, "only 28% of entrants to HE are from disadvantaged backgrounds (social classes III-manual, IV and V), a figure which has changed little during the 1990s. Only one in six of all young people from disadvantaged backgrounds enter HE compared with approaching half of those in the middle and upper groups."1 There is no data reflecting the percentage of entrants to HE in PRS from disadvantaged backgrounds, but widening access is a priority issue for many PRS institutions. In part, governmental funding has influenced this interest, with substantial amounts being made available to support disadvantaged students and encourage their institutions to provide assistance. However, the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals' and the Joint Associations Curriculum Group (CVCP & JACG) believed that The Excellence Challenge was " ... overly concerned with whether state school pupils gain access to 'the 5 leading universities'. For CVCP & JACG, the key issue is attracting people with no background of (or current aspirations to) study in HE to courses and universities that will meet their needs and interests, and help them achieve their maximum potential."2
The broad interest in, and the diverse approaches towards, widening access are of particular significance to PRS departments (whether located in 'the 5 leading universities' or not). There can be a lack of clarity as to what 'widening access' and 'disadvantage' really means.3 In the light of these and other issues, 'Socioeconomic disadvantage and access to higher education' is a significant report for PRS practitioners, highlighting issues surrounding the qualification and predisposition of school leavers for higher education. The report is based around a study of school-leavers in Scotland, conducted by Alasdair Forsyth and Andy Furlong of the University of Glasgow. Through fieldwork, the report examines the factors influencing 'disadvantaged' young peoples' participation in full-time higher education, and the barriers inhibiting opportunity and ambition. The writers also make recommendations for increasing the levels of participation for disadvantaged groups. The report notes that inequality has "negative consequences for both economic efficiency and social justice" (p.3), and that "the greatest barriers may be facing the most academically able disadvantaged pupils." (p.35)
Any analysis of such issues is relevant for PRS departments attempting to increase the number of undergraduates taking their subjects, as well as addressing the under representation of school-leavers from 'disadvantaged backgrounds'. There is much talk of widening access, without necessarily the awareness of its full meaning or potential for academic departments. This is particularly true in departments in which disadvantaged groups are under-represented. Assumptions may be made regarding financial influences on student decisions, without consideration of the social and cultural factors influencing disadvantaged peoples' decisions as to whether to study in higher education. The term 'disadvantage' itself requires definition: the report recognises that there can be pockets of relative prosperity within neighbourhoods that are deemed 'deprived', and that postcode analysis applied in determining levels of disadvantage can be erroneous (p.47).4
Non-academic factors can have the greatest influence on the most disadvantaged amongst young people (p.4). Barriers to participation may be financial, social, and/or geographical. What does this mean to PRS practitioners? It could be that your department runs inclusive courses, but lacks the framework to support wider access. Consideration has to be made of students' models of self-worth in relation to their aspirations, and that ambition may be tempered by non-academic factors. The report notes that disadvantaged students may not take a direct route into Higher Education, and may enter it through Further Education routes, including Access and Foundation Courses (p.22).
Enhanced institutional and PRS departmental awareness of these routes towards Higher Education may increase the level of participation amongst disadvantaged students. The National Organisation for Adult Learning (NIACE), in a response to 'The Excellence Challenge', stated that:
Universities need to develop a pro-active approach to working alongside communities to develop the basis of learning from which choice is exercised. This means becoming actively involved in supporting educational providers in the post-16 sector working with parents and peer-groups and developing learning opportunities, such as taster programmes, which enable adults as well as young people to connect with higher education and to share their experience with those they influence.5
These comments can be linked to a theme contained in 'Socioeconomic disadvantage and access to higher education', which questions whether teachers actually encourage students from disadvantaged backgrounds to participate in Higher Education (p.36). This may be particularly relevant in PRS subjects, which may not be considered natural academic avenues for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Encouragement may be required from Higher Education Institutions to remedy such a barrier, for example through outreach visits, open days, and directed publicity to potential students. The benefits of undertaking PRS subjects, in terms of employment outcomes and precedents of former students, could be highlighted here. Students may be the first from their family to enter Higher Education, and could encounter cultural and social resistance in the light of their decision to study a PRS-related subject. Does this mean that PRS might require a 'public relations' exercise in order to develop an appropriate image in the higher education marketplace?
It will not be surprising to PRS practitioners that this report highlights that finance is the main barrier to participation in Higher Education, including factors such as payment of fees, accommodation, travel and books (p.38). Elsewhere, CVCP & JACG notes that potential students require assurance of funding well before the application process commences, and "that the benefits will significantly outweigh the costs. Financial support has to be available regardless of the HEI applied to, and on the basis of clear and simple criteria which leave the potential applicant in no doubt of eligibility."6
'Socioeconomic disadvantage and access to higher education' also mentions that research respondents see the length of courses as being a barrier to participation. PRS departments might see changing the traditional structure of courses, with shorter vacation times, as one means of encouraging wider participation. However, this would raise other issues that are important to academic staff within the disciplines, which require substantial research time in order to fulfil publication quotas and other assessment criteria, as well as updating and developing individual knowledge bases. PRS practitioners may resist a shift away from a research-centred academic culture, in order to meet the needs of a broader student base.
Whilst not directed towards PRS subjects, this report does raise some interesting issues, some of which will be discussed in further detail on the PRS Subject Centre pages. Discussion could be initiated relating to participation in PRS and perceived 'social class'. Issues relate to all institutions, whether located in 'top 5 universities' or not. The image of PRS may require a 'makeover', to encourage people deemed as coming from disadvantaged backgrounds to apply. However, the institutional stereotyping of disadvantage is itself one barrier that PRS academic departments may need to challenge, if there is to be wider access for disadvantaged students in its subject areas in the future.
Further Reading
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation's site includes a summary of 'Socioeconomic disadvantage and access to higher education's' findings, and ordering information.
http://www.jrf.org.uk/knowledge/findings/socialpolicy/N110.htm
Notes
1. Department for Education and Employment, The Excellence Challenge: The Government's proposals for widening the participation of young people in Higher Education (Department for Education and Employment, 2000, http://www.dfee.gov.uk/excellencechallenge, p.3
2. CVCP & JACG, The Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals' and the Joint Associations Curriculum Group' response to The Excellence Challenge: the Government's proposals for widening participation of young people in Higher Education", December 2000, point 2, http://www.UniversitiesUK.ac.uk/Consultations/response/response.pdf
3. For a discussion on 'widening access' and 'participation', see Maggie Woodrow, (Executive Director, European Access Network, University of Westminster), "Widening Participation: What's It Really All About?" Action on Access, 2000, http://www.brad.ac.uk/admin/conted/action/Context/Whatsitabout.htm.
4. Also see Julia Preece, Combating Social Exclusion in University Adult Education, (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1999)
5. NIACE, "The Excellence Challenge, NIACE Response", November 15th 2000, http://www.niace.org.uk/Organisation/advocacy/Excellence/
6. CVCP & JACG, op.cit, point 36
This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.
