Transcript Gender and Pupil Performance in Scottish Schools

Higher Education in Europe: do we
know how socially inclusive it is?
Elisabet Weedon,
Centre for Research in Education Inclusion
and Diversity,
University of Edinburgh
www.creid.ed.ac.uk
Overview







The Bologna Process and its relationship with the EU
The social dimension in the Bologna Process
Participation rates in higher education and labour
market outcomes across Europe – or ‘why is widening
participation important?’
Overview of widening participation in European
countries – with a focus on access
Access and second chance routes: 3 country
Stratification in access – who goes to which institution?
Conclusion and reflections
The role of the EU in higher
education





Education was not part of 1957 Treaty of Rome
Initial emphasis within EEC on vocational training and
free movement of labour > increasing role in higher
education through community programmes
Lisbon strategy – especially research (framework
programmes funding) and modernising agenda –
increased links with Bologna process
EU2020 strategy: 40% of 30-34 year olds to hold tertiary
qualification
Cooperation across countries encouraged through Open
Method of Coordination (OMC) – not legally binding
The Bologna Process:
intergovernmental cooperation
Some key dates:
 1998 - Sorbonne Declaration – 4 national ministers
(France, Germany, Italy and UK)
 1999 – Bologna Declaration signed by 29 countries
 2010 – creation of European Higher Education Area
 2012 – 47 countries signed up to Bologna
 2007 – social dimension in the Bologna Process
‘clarified’
Initial aims of the Bologna
process






Develop comparable degrees based on 2 main cycles
(undergraduate/graduate)
Produce system of credits (ECTs)
Promote mobility
Promote European cooperation in quality assurance
Promote European dimension in higher education in
2001 - Prague
Emphasis on lifelong learning which included the need
to strengthen social cohesion and promote equal
opportunities
European University Association
(EUA) (05.06.2014)

The Bologna Process does not aim to harmonise national
educational systems but rather to provide tools to connect them.
The intention is to allow the diversity of national systems and
universities to be maintained while the European Higher Education
Area improves transparency between higher education systems,
as well as implements tools to facilitate recognition of degrees and
academic qualifications, mobility, and exchanges between
institutions. The reforms are based on ten simple objectives which
governments and institutions are currently implementing. Most
importantly, all participating countries have agreed on a
comparable three cycle degree system for undergraduates
(Bachelor degrees) and graduates (Master and PhD degrees).
Bologna Process: a critique
Undemocratic process which lacks accountability:
It is worrying that many of the most crucial and
influential decisions are taken in intergovernmental
contexts, where there is a power-shift to the
executive at the expense of national parliaments,
and that they are implemented by means of soft law
– of which the democratic legitimacy is doubtful …
(Garben, 2012)
The social dimension in the
Bologna process: London 2007
Higher education should play a strong role in fostering social
cohesion, reducing inequalities … the student body
entering, participating in and completing higher education
at all levels should reflect the diversity of our populations.
We reaffirm the importance of students being able to complete
their studies without obstacles related to their social and
economic background. We therefore continue our efforts to
provide adequate student services, create more flexible
learning pathways into and within higher education, and to
widen participation at all levels on the basis of equal
opportunity.
Why widening access matters –
employment rates by educational level,
2013, percentages
ISCED 0-2
100
80
60
40
20
0
ISCED 3-4
ISCED 5-6
All
Country differences in 30-34 year olds
with tertiary education, selected EU
countries, %
2005
100
80
60
40
20
0
2013
25-64 year olds with tertiary
qualification, by gender %
2005 Female
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2005 Male
2013 Female
2013 Male
At risk of poverty by
educational level, percentage
2008 ISCED 0-2
2012 ISCED 3-4
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2012 ISCED 0-2
2008 ISCED 5-6
2008 ISCED 3-4
2012 ISCED 5-6
Widening participation goals:
2010-11 – vague?




Most EHEA countries have general equal opportunities policies
assumed also to address widening access for underrepresented groups (e.g. relating to financial measures)
Some have targeted policy measures, the most common is
disability followed by low socio-economic status
Some countries focus on specific groups based on ethnicity
relevant to their particular country
BUT lack of targets for increasing participation in most
countries
(Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency, 2012)
Most frequently captured
student characteristics in 2014







Qualification prior to entry (27 jurisdictions)
Socioeconomic status (19 jurisdictions)
Disability (17 jurisdictions)
Labour market status prior to entry (13 jurisdictions)
Labour market status during studies (12 jurisdictions)
Ethnic/cultural/linguistic minority status (8 jurisdictions)
Migrant status (13 jurisdictions)
However, very limited use of such data to monitor change:
‘ … in some national contexts, issues related to diversity are of
marginal national and public interest, … data collected is not being
analysed or not being published’ (Eurydice, 2014, p. 19)
Who is ‘under-represented’ in which
country? Target groups in 2014
(Eurydice, 2014)
Only 9 (EU + associate countries) have some targets:
 First generation HE (Belgium nl)
 Male students (Finland)
 Female students into STEM subjects (Lithuania)
 Mature students and low SE status (Ireland, France,
Scotland, England)
 General study support (Estonia)
 Slovenia has not identified specific target groups but
intends to do so
Vague and lack of comparability?
Routes into higher education:
Bologna countries





Traditional route: achievement of upper secondary qualification
Second chance routes include:
 recognition of knowledge and skills outside formal learning
contexts (APEL);
 Preparatory/bridging programmes – mainly for those who did
not complete upper secondary qualification (e.g. Access to
HE in UK)
In 2012 22 Bologna countries offered alternatives (out of 47) –
mainly western and northern Europe (~same in 2014)
Influenced by school system: comprehensive vs stratified
Stratified systems in the past – low levels of participation among
those not in academic stream
Alternative routes: recognition of
competences in 3 countries
Germany:
 Upper secondary certificate – limited entry based on subject
(fachgebundene Hochschulreife) or Fachhochschulreife
 Entry to HE based on accreditation of prior learning, work
experience and/or special examination
Sweden:
 Adult ed. at upper secondary (Kommunal vuxenutbildning)
 Other education (Annan utbildningsform)
 Work experience (25:4) (Arbetslivserfarenhet) – discontinued
 Recognition of competences (Validering av reell kompetens)
Norway:
 Accreditation of competences
Access to HE by alternative
routes (Orr & Hovdhaugen, 2014)
Germany: Accreditation of prior experience recent and used by:
 0.8% of all students; 3.1% of low ed background and 5.9% of delayed
transitions students
Sweden: Work experience (25/4) (now abolished) was used by:
 5.2% of all students; 8.7% of low ed background and 7.7% of delayed
transitions students;
Recognition of competence was used by:
 2.5% all students; 2.7 of LE background; 3.7% DT
Norway: Accreditation of competences was used by:
 8.5 of all students; 16% of low ed background students and 23.6% of
delayed transitions students
Note: Low educational background = parents with no more than lower
secondary = proxy low social backgroud; delayed transition = 2 year gap
min school – HE = proxy for lifelong learner
Second chance routes: useful in
widening access?
All students
Low ed. background
Delayed trans.
Germany: traditional
82.7
72.2
74.7
Upper secondary – limited entry
3.4
5.8
3.8
Upper secondary – limited entry
13.1
18.9
15.6
Accreditation of prior learning
0.8
3.1
5.9
Sweden: traditional
71.5
58.8
58.1
Adult education
17.0
27.0
25.0
Other education
3.8
2.5
5.5
Work experience (abolished)
5.2
8.6
7.7
Recognition of comp.
2.5
2.7
3.7
Norway: traditional
91.5
84.0
76.4
Accreditation of competence
8.5
16.0
23.6
Lessons from the case studies?
Germany: although the proportion using 2nd chance route is low it
reaches the intended target – highly stratified systems challenge
existing routes to a greater extent than those less stratified
 Sweden: higher proportion but one scheme discontinued and not
as effective at reaching target group – less stratified but
mainstreamed the different options – less effective in reaching
intended target
 Norway: highest proportion using the route and (out of the 3) the
most effective at reaching the target group – but system of
accreditation ‘burdensome’ and therefore used most by ‘recruiting’
institutions and for CPD (e.g. nursing)
To what extent are WP students channelled to certain institutions –
leading to stratification in higher education institutions?

Access and type of institution:
Austria (see Weedon & Riddell, 2012)
Type
institution
of
Low socioeconomic
status
Middle socioeconomic
status
Upper socioeconomic
status
High socioeconomic
status
Scientific
Universities
18.1%
30.2%
33.1%
18.6%
Universities
of Fine Arts
15.1%
25.1%
39.8%
19.8%
Universities
of Applied
Sciences
23.4%
34.8%
31.9%
9.9%
Teacher
Training
Academies
20.9%
34.4%
35.6%
9.1%
Type of institution attended:
Flanders, 1976 cohort, (see Weedon &
Riddell, 2012)
Type of institution
Low socioeconomic
status
Middle
socioeconomic
status
High socioeconomic
status
Total
University
2.1
6.8
23.3
9.8
4-year college
1.7
3.8
8.8
4.5
2-year college
13.7
28.2
27.7
24.4
No tertiary
education
Total
82.4
61.3
40.1
61.3
100
100
100
100
Conclusion and reflection




There are substantial differences in employment rates
and ‘at risk’ of poverty between most and least qualified –
more so in some countries than others – widening
access is important!
Bologna Process shows commitment to widening access,
supported by certain EU measures but there is limited
evidence for any substantial progress
Case study examples of alternative routes show some
success in widening participation but a country’s
compulsory education system has a strong impact on
access to higher education
Mainstreaming of alternative routes can lead to
advantages for non-target group – as in Sweden
Conclusion and reflection cont.
There is variation in target groups for widening access and in data
gathered – to what extent does this affect comparability of data?
 How accurate are the data? For example, Scottish data published
in Eurydice 2014 does not seem to tally with data published by
HESA and SFC
 Some evidence of stratification in access with widening access
students more likely to access low prestige institutions – is this due
to globalisation and league tables etc.?
Future challenges clearly remain in equalising access to education
perhaps particularly at a time of resource scarcity and economic crisis!
Can we have equity with efficiency or have we moved to an era where
the economic agenda trumps the social agenda?

References
Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency 2012) The European Higher Education Area in
2012: Bologna Process implementation report, Brussel: Eurydice
Eurostat: Data in tables on slides 9, 10, 11 and 16 are publicly available from:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2014) Modernisation of higher education in Europe:
access, retention and employability, 2014, Eurydice report, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union
Garben, S. (2012) The future of higher education in Europe: the case for a stronger base in EU law,
London School of Economics: LEQS Paper No 50/2012
Orr, D. and Hovdhaugen, E. (2014) ‘Second chance’ routes into higher education: Sweden, Norway
and Germany compared, International Journal of Lifelong Education, Vol. 33, 1, pp. 45-61
Riddell, S. and Weedon, E. (2014) European higher education, the inclusion of students from
underrepresented groups and the Bologna Process, International Journal of Lifelong Education, Vol.
33, 1, pp. 26-44
Weedon, E. and Riddell, S. (2012) Reducing or reinforcing inequality: assessing the impact of
European policy on widening access to higher education, in Riddell, S., Markowitsch, J. and Weedon,
E. Lifelong learning in Europe: equity and efficiency in the balance, Bristol: Policy Press