Annex D: The development of access and participation targets

Transcription

1 Annex D: The develpment f access and participatin targets Backgrund 1. English higher educatin prviders have made steady prgress t imprve access and participatin ver the past decade, but there is still cnsiderable distance t travel befre equality f pprtunity in higher educatin will be realised. There are substantial gaps between underrepresented grups and ther students at every stage f higher educatin frm entry right thrugh t transitin int wrk and beynd. 2. Our access and participatin cnsultatin cnsidered hw we culd ramp up the pace f imprvement, and drive transfrmatinal change rather than the incremental prgress made t date. 3. In rder t achieve this, the bjectives we identified in the cnsultatin were t: achieve significant reductins in the gaps in access, success and prgressin ver the next five years ensure ur access and participatin regulatin and funding are utcme-based, riskbased, underpinned by evidence and jined up with ther OfS regulatry activities. 4. The cnsultatin respnses highlighted that, given the levels f inequality acrss the student lifecycle, we shuld set ambitius lng-term bjectives fr change, which shuld be reflected in sectr targets. 5. One f the OfS s fur primary bjectives is that all students, frm all backgrunds, and with the ability and desire t undertake higher educatin are supprted t access, succeed in, and prgress frm, higher educatin. 6. In rder t achieve this bjective, we believe that we shuld set an ambitin that future generatins shuld have equal pprtunities t access and succeed in higher educatin, and t achieve successful and rewarding careers. This is necessarily lng term, but t achieve it the sectr needs t make significant prgress ver the five year perid fr which the next rund f access and participatin plans will perate, which runs thrugh t This paper sets ut the prcess we have fllwed t develp the targets fr ur prpsed Key Perfrmance Measures fr access and participatin, and the factrs we have cnsidered. 8. The measures we have develped have been set using the first five f ur key perfrmance measures (KPMs), which we published in September : KPM 1: Gap in participatin between mst and least represented grups KPM 2: Gap in participatin at higher-tariff prviders between the mst and least represented grups KPM 3: Gap in nn-cntinuatin between mst and least represented grups KPM 4: Gap in degree utcmes (1sts r 2:1s) between white students and black students 1 1

2 KPM 5: Gap in degree utcmes (1sts r 2:1s) between disabled students and nndisabled students. The Prcess 9. The prcess we fllwed in develping the access and participatin measures can be divided int a number f stages: 1. Inceptin 2. Intelligence gathering 3. Setting ambitins 4. Understanding ur impact 5. Final trajectry setting 1. Inceptin 10. We have framed the setting f ur targets ver a twenty year perid in rder t reflect ur generatinal ambitin t deliver equality f pprtunity. Within this perid, we have als cnsidered what prgress wuld be needed t , t align with the perid fr the next set f access and participatin plans. 11. The targets have been develped in a way that is sensitive t external factrs that wuld affect the sectr s ability t meet them. 2. Intelligence gathering 12. In rder t set meaningful targets we have made use f bth histrical and peer cmparisn benchmarking: Histrical benchmarking 13. Histrical benchmarks were prduced using data n the prgress the sectr has made against ur KPMs t date. Peer cmparisn benchmarking 14. We cnducted desk research t identify relevant internatinal and hme cmparatrs, t understand the level f ambitin thers demnstrated in setting targets, delivery against them and their impact. The desk research cnsidered: Internatinal cmparisns Australia The Netherlands Sctland Wales United States f America Peer cmparisns Department fr Educatin Nrthern Ireland Department fr Educatin 2

3 Republic f Ireland Department f Educatin and Skills Ofcm Ofgem 3. Setting ambitins 15. A tp-dwn apprach was taken t setting ambitin. We used the infrmatin gathered t lk at what we wanted t achieve ver the medium and lng term and used the histrical benchmarking data t set an initial trajectry. We then used bth the histrical benchmarking and the cmparisn benchmarking t cnsider what was achievable. This resulted in initial targets being set with a trajectry t supprt them. 16. In relatin t the participatin KPMs, ur analysis cnsidered tw ways in which the gap in participatin culd be eliminated ver the next twenty years: Scenari 1: Bradly maintaining the current size f the higher educatin sectr (in line with DfE frecasts f future student numbers) s that the participatin rate fr all quintiles cnverge at the current sectr average. This wuld mean cnsiderably reducing the number f students entering higher educatin frm quintiles 4 and 5 if student numbers acrss the sectr were t remain reasnably stable. Scenari 2: Expanding the size f the higher educatin sectr s that the participatin rate fr quintiles 1-4 increases t that f quintile 5. This wuld mean apprximately dubling the size f the HE sectr ver the next 20 years. 4. Understanding ur impact 17. T add cntext, OfS interventins and wrk streams expected t impact n the KPMs were identified alng with the years in which such impact wuld be greatest. This prvided a picture f the expected rate f prgress and the trajectries ur interventins wuld have in terms f: cntributing t the targets the interactin between interventins the lead in time fr each f them t start impacting behaviur the utcmes t be captured in the data. 5. Final trajectry setting 18. The final stage was t bring the tw appraches tgether, enabling us t set targets that are evidence-infrmed, achievable and wuld challenge the sectr t make transfrmatinal change in clsing the gaps fr underrepresented students. The fllwing factrs were cnsidered when setting targets and trajectries: what the sectr has achieved t date prgress made by high achieving prviders the impact f ur interventins and prgrammes histrical benchmarking internatinal and peer cmparisn benchmarking 3

4 expected grwth f the sectr external factrs that may impact n prgress. 4

5 19. We have used Department fr Educatin student numbers frecasts t infrm ur calculatins, which predict sectr grwth f 5.6 per cent between and Beynd this, we have assumed sectr grwth in line with verall year ld ppulatin grwth frm the ONS. This predicts a grwth f under 5 per cent by Trajectries KPM 1: Gap in participatin between mst and least represented grups 20. Our ambitin fr KPM 1 is t eliminate the gap in year ld participatin between the mst (POLAR quintile 5) and least (quintile 1) represented grups ver the next 20 years. T achieve this ambitin, we have then cnsidered ur tw scenaris in which this gap in participatin culd be eliminated. Scenari 1: Maintaining the current size f the higher educatin sectr (relative t the wider ppulatin) s that the participatin rates fr all quintiles cnverge at the current sectr average. 5

6 Scenari 2: Expanding the size f the higher educatin sectr s that the participatin rate fr quintiles 1-4 increases t that f quintile 5. This wuld mean increasing the size f the sectr by abut half ver the next years. 21. There are significant external factrs that wuld critically impact n the achievement r therwise f any target we set fr this KPM. In particular, we anticipate that the gvernment s respnse t the Augar review will have implicatins fr the size and shape f the higher educatin sectr, which will be pivtal in determining the prprtin f students frm underrepresented grups. As a result, we prpse t defer the setting f targets fr this KPM until we knw the gvernment s respnse t the review. KPM 2: Gap in participatin at higher-tariff prviders between the mst and least represented grups 22. Our eventual ambitin is t eliminate the gap in year ld participatin at higher-tariff prviders between the mst (POLAR Q5) and least represented (POLAR Q1) grups. Hwever, since there is a time lag inherent in this measure (i.e. the behaviur f current 18 year lds nw will cntinue t influence participatin fr the next 12 years), we anticipate this scenari will invlve the gap increasing frm 19.6 per cent t 20.6 per cent in (see Figure 3). 6

7 Figure 3: year ld participatin rates at higher-tariff prviders fr students dmiciled in the UK and registered at higher educatin prviders in England. Quintile 1: least represented grup; quintile 5: mst represented. 30.0% KPM2: participatin 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile We have therefre fcussed n a mre immediate measure f ur ambitin: t eliminate the gaps between the mst and least represented grups in terms f entry rates fr 18 and 19 year lds, and fr 20 t 30 year lds, by This crrelates with ur ambitin t deliver equality f pprtunity in terms f entering within a generatin. Develping ur targets fr KPM DfE frecasts predict that there will be minimal grwth in student numbers acrss the sectr. Therefre, t achieve a reductin in the gap in participatin at higher-tariff prviders between the mst and least represented grups can be dne thrugh tw appraches: Grwth fr higher-tariff prviders: Higher-tariff prviders grw their student numbers, with an increased fcus n under-represented grups, resulting in a decline in student numbers in ther institutins Diversificatin: Higher-tariff prviders diversify their student ppulatins, limiting r reversing the grwth in participatin f students frm POLAR quintiles 4 and 5 at thse institutins. 25. When mdelling KPM 2 trajectries in the higher-tariff sectr, we have cmbined bth appraches, bth allwing the higher-tariff prviders t grw at a rate f 3.5 per cent per annum, and setting entry rates f all POLAR quintiles t cnverge by We will use ur regulatry and supprt levers, including access and participatin plans and transparent data, t make prgress n this KPM. The refrms t the way we regulate and supprt access and participatin will allw us t better challenge higher-tariff prviders t make faster prgress in this area. 7

8 27. We wuld expect the impact f ur interventins t have immediate effect, based n the wrk that has already taken place. Faster prgress wuld be expected frm , as the impact f the refrms t access and participatin plans start t shw in the data. 28. In pursuing this gal, we need t take accunt f the legal basis fr the access and participatin plans, as set ut in the cver paper, and challenge prviders t the extent f the bard s appetite fr risk in this area. 29. The trajectry shwn in Figure 4 is based n cnverging the participatin rates f undergraduate entrants aged by , as this grup represents ver 90 per cent f the students entering higher-tariff prviders. The resulting trends in 18- and 19-year ld entry are illustrated in Figure 4, and the crrespnding numbers f entrants shwn in Figure 5 2. Fr 18 and 19 year lds, ur target by is t reduce the gap in participatin between the mst and least represented grups frm 10.2 per cent in t 8.9 per cent; and fr the quintile 5: quintile 1 rati t decrease frm 5.1:1 in t 2.8: We are currently undertaking sme mdelling t understand the impact f an increase in mature students. This is t accunt fr the ptential grwth in higher and degree apprenticeships, and t reflect ur ambitins t reverse the decline in participatin rates fr mature students, as set ut in the access and participatin regulatry guidance. Once this mdelling is cmplete, we will use the results t infrm ur final target fr KPM2; hwever since mature (age 20+) students represent such a small prprtin f verall entrants t highertariff prviders, the trajectry is unlikely t be significantly affected. Figure 4: 18- and 19-year ld participatin rates (new entrants) t higher-tariff prviders (UKdmiciled students, cming frm areas f least participatin (quintile 1) t highest participatin (quintile 5)) 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% KPM2: 18- and 19-year-ld new entry rates Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 2 Nte that the numbers f entrants frm each quintile d nt meet because the underlying ppulatin sizes in each quintile are nt the same 8

9 9

10 Figure 5: 18- and 19-year ld new entrants t higher-tariff prviders (UK-dmiciled students, cming frm areas f least participatin (quintile 1) t highest participatin (quintile 5)) KPM2: 18- and 19-year-ld new entrants Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 KPM 3: Gap in nn-cntinuatin between mst and least represented grups 31. There is a persistent gap in nn-cntinuatin between thse frm the mst and least represented grups. Sme f the factrs that cntribute t the nn-cntinuatin gap are structural, such as entry qualificatin, subject f study, age f students, and the prvider at which a student studies. Sme f these factrs are particularly intractable, and interventins will take lnger t take effect. 32. Hwever, nce we have taken accunt f the factrs utlined abve that are knwn t influence nn-cntinuatin, there remains a significant unexplained difference in nncntinuatin, which accunts fr arund 40 per cent f the verall figure. As shwn in Figure 6, ur target is t eliminate the unexplained nn-cntinuatin gap by , and t eliminate the verall nn-cntinuatin gap by Unlike imprving access t HE, where there are many external factrs such as attainment and curricula in schls and clleges, and alternative pathways, all f which can impact n a prvider s ability t make prgress, it can be argued that nn-cntinuatin is an issue ver which prviders have mre direct cntrl. Develping appraches t tackle nn-cntinuatin can have a rapid and significant effect. Our analysis prvides an insight int the rate f prgress that can be achieved t imprve nn-cntinuatin in individual prviders. Fr example, we have bserved that several prviders frm different parts f the sectr have decreased the gap in nn-cntinuatin between mst and least represented grups in recent years. Fr example, ne prvider decreased the gap frm 5.3 percentage pints t 0.4 percentage pints between and , while anther reduced the gap frm 7.2 percentage pints t 0.9 percentage pints ver the same perid. 10

11 Percentage pint gap Figure 6: Gap in nn-cntinuatin between least and mst represented grups fr full-time undergraduate entrants aged 18-30, hme students dmiciled in England registered at higher educatin prviders in England Difference between least and mst represented grups (pp) Unbserved change Structural change Implied gap 34. Entry qualificatins play a very imprtant rle in nn-cntinuatin, with higher rates recrded fr thse students with level 3 qualificatins such as BTEC than thse wh have entered with A levels. Students frm underrepresented grups are far mre likely t hld these ther level 3 qualificatins and s there is a risk that in seeking t make prgress against nncntinuatin targets, prviders seek t change the prfile f entry qualificatins they accept. Hwever, this risk can be mitigated t by the cntinued pressure n prviders t make prgress against their access targets. In additin, fr thse prviders with existing gd recrds in respect f access, we wuld nt expect them t becme less equal than they currently are. KPM 4: Gap in degree utcmes (1sts r 2:1s) between white students and black students 35. There is a significantly larger gap in degree utcmes between white and black students. As with nn-cntinuatin, we recgnise that there are structural factrs that cntribute t the attainment gap. Hwever, nce we have taken accunt f thse factrs, there remains a very significant unexplained difference in attainment, which accunts fr three quarters f the verall figure. As shwn in Figure 7, ur target is t eliminate the unexplained attainment gap by , and t have eliminated the verall attainment gap by

12 Percentage pint gap Figure 7: Gap in degree utcmes (1sts and 2:1s) between white students and black students fr full-time undergraduate first-degree hme graduates dmiciled in England btaining classified hnurs degrees frm higher educatin prviders in England Difference between white and black students (pp) Unexplained gap Structural Implied gap 36. There is already a strng fcus n the black student attainment gap, including a jint prgramme led by UUK and NUS, and a number f prviders have made significant imprvements in a relatively shrt perid f time. Fr example, tw universities frm different parts f the sectr, which we knw t have adpted a strategic apprach t addressing the issue, have decreased the gap in degree utcmes (1sts r 2:1s) between white students and black students frm 26.6 percentage pints in 2010 t 3.1 percentage pints in 2016, and frm 26.4 percentage pints in 2010 t 10.4 percentage pints in 2016 respectively. We believe that this can be replicated mre widely, and an analysis f the rate f prgress that these and ther prviders have made t clse the attainment gap has enabled the calculatin f what we believe t be an ambitius but achievable target. 37. OfS activity such as ur Addressing Barriers t Student Success prgramme and the fcus n successful utcmes fr students frm all backgrunds within TEF will supprt prgress against this target, as will the prpsed access and participatin data set, which will expse the perfrmance f different prviders in this area. 38. In pursuing this gal, there is a risk that we stimulate an increase in 1st and 2:1 grades. We will mitigate this thrugh ur regulatin f quality and standards using the principle established fr TEF that successful utcmes fr students frm all backgrunds must nt be achieved by diminishing standards. KPM 5: Gap in degree utcmes (1sts r 2:1s) between disabled students and nndisabled students 39. Our ambitin fr the sectr is t eliminate the verall attainment gap between disabled students and nn-disabled students. Unlike KPM 3 and 4, ur analysis suggests that the majrity f this gap is caused by structural factrs. As the gap is smaller than the ther KPMs, 12

13 Percentage Pint Gap we are actively invlved in sharing practice in this area and there is prgress already, we believe that this is achievable within the perid fr the next set f access and participatin plans. We are, therefre, setting a target t eliminate the attainment gap between disabled students and nn-disabled students by Figure 8 demnstrates the trajectry we wuld expect t see t achieve this. Figure 8: Gap in degree utcmes (1sts and 2:1s) between nn-disabled and disabled students fr full-time undergraduate first-degree hme graduates dmiciled in England btaining classified hnurs degrees frm higher educatin prviders in England Years Difference between nn-disabled and disabled students (pp) Scenari (Difference) 40. The current trend f the data suggests there is already significant mmentum in this area, and while ambitius this shuld be an achievable target. There are examples f successful wrk in the sectr in clsing the gap in degree utcmes (1sts r 2:1s) between disabled students and students with n knwn disability and a number f prviders have managed t eliminate it entirely. Current surces f uncertainty 41. There are a number f factrs that may impact in varius ways and t varying degrees n ur KPM and assciated targets. We will need, therefre, t review ur psitin as these and ther factrs emerge. They include: The Gvernment s Review f Pst-18 Educatin and Funding The impact f the UK s exit frm the Eurpean Unin n the higher educatin sectr, and brader ecnmy Develpments in the Apprenticeship Levy and expansin f degree apprenticeships Diversificatin f higher educatin prviders Expansin r cntractin f student numbers acrss the sectr Demgraphic changes t the ppulatin 13

14 Changes in the patterns f emplyment and the demand fr graduates. 14