Transcript Document

Centre for Inclusion and Collaborative Partnerships
Working for social justice in higher education
www.open.ac.uk/accessobservatory
UALL Conference
Making the lifelong learning university a reality
What do we know about part-time
learners and the barriers they face:
Initial findings from a UK-wide study
John Butcher & Wendy Fowle, The Open University
Acknowledgements
2013/14 pilot study: The Open University and NUS
Wales explored the Welsh part-time learner
experience (online survey and ‘phone interviews) ‘It’s About Time’ report (2014)
2014/5 study of part-time learner experience in
England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, funded by
the Higher Education Academy, report end March.
Grateful to our research consultant Kate Thomas who
conducted the interviews & to colleagues in CICP, IET
and Strategy Office at the OU for their contribution
Context: what is the problem?
Contraction
Major decline in part-time UK HE sector since 201o,
especially in England: 47% drop (33% headcount in 3 yrs)
Steep decline in ELQ students and public sector
subjects. Foundation degree numbers dropped by 18%
Major drop (55%) in PT sub degree (credit, Certs,
Diplomas) in last 3 years: increase in study intensity
 Decline in UK PT UG market, initially driven by the
reduction in financial support and austerity,
exacerbated in England by the introduction of higher
fees 7 student loans in 2012/13
The current numbers
2012/13 HE registrations
418,165 PT UGs (23% of total in UK)
Decline of 8% on PT in previous year
‘Severe and critical decline in part-time HE’ (OFFA)
Divergence
Overall decline mirrored in Celtic nations but less…
Wales (24% drop since 2010)
Scotland (7% decrease 12/13-13/14, higher in HE in FE)
N. Ireland (5% decrease 12/13-13/14 but low numbers)
Issues
 Any decline in PT numbers impacts disproportionately
on learners from a Widening Participation background
(the most economically disadvantaged)
HE policy discourse dominated by ideological assertions
about FT opportunities for 18 year olds paying high fees
Knowledge gap around the experiences of, and barriers
faced by, part-time students - policy-makers need to hear
their authentic voices – who they are, their motivations,
barriers they face
Data collection
Online survey with sample of students, identified by OU,
in England, Scotland and NI – 433 responses
Online survey with students in F2F universities & FE
identified as significant part-time cohorts - 1134 responses
1567 responses in total
Respondents invited to volunteer for follow-up phone
interview
21 semi-structured 1-1 interviews and a focus group
conducted by phone, recorded and transcribed
Quantitative findings
Who studies part-time?
PT HE students are a very heterogeneous group:
Majority women, half had caring responsibilities
30% + first in their families to study in HE (60%
non-OU)
Geographical isolation reported (Wales)
Poverty/disposable income affected choice
Impact of disability/long-term health
impairments (22%)
Quantitative findings
Why study part-time?
‘Choosing’ PT is ‘Hobson’s choice’, PT was the
only possibility, many would have preferred FT
 Cost of full-time too expensive (debt-averse)
& FT lacked flexibility to meet personal circs
 Studying to improve employment prospects
 Low risk first steps in HE if missed out at 18
Quantitative findings
What is part-time learning like?
What barriers faced in studying part-time?
Financial – debt/borrow from family/savings
Fewer employers (15%) supporting study
Juggling time commitments v institutional
inflexibility
Lack of advice, or confusing information about
progression, accreditation, funding
Headline findings
As well as the cost of PT study being
regarded as a significant barrier, 5 key themes
emerged:
Flexibility a problem in PT
The necessity to balance time for study with
competing personal/professional demands impacts
on the PT experience: over a third had missed a
formal element of their course, due to work or caring
Claims made for ‘ flexibility’ by policy makers need to
be better understood by providers– some
interviewees felt they were an ‘inconvenience’, were
‘shoehorned’ or ‘side-lined’ and a lack of
differentiation felt like ‘1 size fits all’…and the prior
skills they brought were not recognised.
Motivation(s)
Confirmation that employability is one of the
key drivers for PT study, (aspirations for new
job, change of job, women in particular seeking
to improve current career) but irrelevant policy
discourse aimed at 21 year-olds seeking graduate
careers
However, noteworthy that enjoyment of subject
almost as significant, and intellectual challenge
significant for older (50+) learners.
Part-time culture
There is a vacuum to be filled around notions of a
community of PT learners
Majority of PT learners would not describe themselves
as ‘students’ – those who would, likely to be at
youngest and oldest ends of spectrum, others
indifferent, or regarded themselves as ‘too old to be a
student’ (including a 21-year old), or saw impact only in
the NUS card providing reduced cinema tickets.
Very little interaction with other students reported, and
disengagement from institutional support structures
Information, advice, guidance
There is inadequate public information about PT
qualifications pathways, delivery modes,
workload and financial support. This remains a
barrier, especially funding.
Inadequate IAG can lead to PT students relying
on savings, paid work, or personal debt to pay
fees: this varies by nation
Disciplinary differences
Men more likely to be studying Engineering,
technology, IT, and interviewees described workrelated upskilling
Women more likely to be studying Education, Health,
Humanities, interviewees reporting ‘doing something
for me…falling in love with it’
An interviewee studying Maths reported an aspiration
to ‘overcome disrupted schooling’
Interviewees (male and female) studying Art reported
an immersive experience (even PT) related to personal
lifestyle – insistent not leisure learners
Conclusions
Heterogeneity of PT learners needs to be recognised by
policy makers in definitions and discourses – they are not
a single homogeneous entity
 Greater flexibility needs to be embedded for learners
in PT curriculum design & institutional support:
distance learning can be flexible, but feels isolated
 Employability agendas in HE need to acknowledge PT
adult learners are self-aware about personal
employability aspirations (and employer support need
not just be financial)
 PT learners remain motivated by love of subject and
intellectual challenge
Recommendations
‘The part-time market risks operating in neither the interests of
students, employers, nor the economy’ Universities UK, 2013, 1
 Incentivise Universities to prioritise & promote PT HE
as an attractive choice, not just ‘infill’
 Enhance Information, Advice and Guidance (IAG) to
help PT students make right course/progression
choices, support personalised employability aspirations,
reduce complexity of funding/support
References
Butcher, J & Rose-Adams, J (2015, in press) Part-Time Learners in Open and Distance
Learning: Revisiting the Critical Importance of Choice, Flexibility and Employability, Open
Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 2
Higher Education Funding Council for England (2014) Pressure from all sides: Economic and
policy influences on part-time higher education, [online] :
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/2014/201408d/HEFE2014_08d.pdf
Rees, K & Rose-Adams, J (2014) ‘It’s about time’,
http://www.open.ac.uk/wales/research/nus-wales
Woodfield, R (2014) Undergraduate retention and attainment across the disciplines, Higher
Education Academy:
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/node/10293?utm_source=The+Higher+Education+Academy
&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=5421941_EEDCMar15
Universities UK (2013) The power of part-time: Review of part-time and mature higher
education.
http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Documents/2013/PowerOfPartTime.pdf