Assessment of access and retention record. 4.1 The University of Bristol is determined to invest additional fee income strategically in order to achieve maximum impact. We have taken an evidence-based approach, analysed current performance and prioritised interventions with a proven track record. As an institution with relatively low proportions of students from under-represented and disadvantaged groups we have focussed activity and investment on those areas in which we need to make progress against targets.
Assessment of access and retention record. The University of Bristol is a highly selective, research-intensive University. For entry in October 2010, we received an average of 10.2 home applications for every place (with some programmes receiving as many as 40 applications per place). The average UCAS tariff score of our 2010 entrants was 478.5 (the equivalent of 3.9 A grade ‘A’ Level passes). By contrast, average secondary attainment in the Bristol area is among the poorest in England, with an average QCA tariff score of 679.6 per student (the equivalent of 3.2 C grade ‘A’ Level passes), compared with the English average of 744.8 per student (NB the UCAS tariff and QCA tariffs are not calculated on the same basis so cannot be directly compared with each other4). Beyond the Bristol area, the University draws its students primarily from the south of England, where average income levels are relatively high. These characteristics create some very specific challenges when it comes to diversifying our own student intake (as opposed to playing our part in raising student aspirations and widening participation in Higher Education more generally). Given this context, the University of Bristol’s strategy for Widening Participation has been deliberately built around a combination of aspiration- and attainment-raising activity in local schools (often undertaken in collaboration with other local HE providers and designed primarily to widen participation in the Higher Education sector generally); more targeted activities, designed to attract the most able students to Bristol and a contextualised approach to admissions, which ensures that poor school performance is taken into account when selection decisions are made. Despite this very comprehensive and well-established approach, the University of Bristol has had only limited success in realising its ambitions in the area of widening participation. (Detailed data are provided at Appendix Two.) Over the three year period from 2008/09 to 2010/11, the proportion of applications from under-represented groups has increased in only three categories (mature students; disabled students and students from low participation neighbourhoods) with the proportion of applications from all other categories (students from low performing schools; socio-economic groups 4-7; minority ethnic groups and local postcodes) declining. Over the same period, progress in diversifying the University’s undergraduate intake has followed a similar pattern, with small improvements in only three c...
Assessment of access and retention record. The University of Bristol is a highly selective, research-intensive University. For entry in October 2011, we received an average of 10.6 home applications for every place (with some programmes receiving over 30 applications per place). The average UCAS tariff score of our 2011 entrants was 489.7 (the equivalent of 4 A grade ‘A’ Level passes). By contrast, average secondary attainment in the Bristol area is among the poorest in England, with an average NQF/QCF tariff score of 685.5 per student (the equivalent of 3.2 C grade ‘A’ Level passes), compared with the English average of 728.3 per student (NB the UCAS tariff and NQF/QCF tariffs are not calculated on the same basis so cannot be directly compared with each other4). A recent feasibility study, undertaken by IntoUniversity noted that: • Bristol has 39 LSQAs (Lower Super Output Areas) in the most deprived 10% nationally. Of these, 14 are in the most deprived 3% and 4 in the most deprived 1%. • In the sub-domain of children and young people, 82 Bristol LSOAs fall within the most deprived 10% nationally in the domain of Education, Skills and Training deprivation. Of these, 17 LSOAs are in the most deprived 100 areas in England and Illminster Avenue West in Filwood is the most deprived LSOA in England. • Of England’s core cities, Bristol has the second lowest proportion of low income children progressing to higher education. • Black and minority ethnic pupils, those children with free school meal eligibility and pupils with English as an alternative language under-perform at all levels in Bristol. • In 2008, it was established that around 21,900 (27%) children live in poverty in Bristol. In Xxxxxxxx Xxxx, this rises to almost 60% - the bottom percentile of all wards nationally. Beyond the Bristol area, the University draws students primarily from the south of England, where average income levels are relatively high. A predominantly traditional subject portfolio also has some impact on attractiveness of programmes to widening participation students. These characteristics create some very specific challenges when it comes to diversifying our own undergraduate intake (as opposed to playing our part in raising student aspirations and widening participation in Higher Education more generally).
Assessment of access and retention record. UCS has a high proportion of under-represented students and on this basis plans to spend 15% of the fee it charges above £6,000 per FTE on additional access and retention measures, in addition to the level of expenditure under UCS’ existing Access Agreement. This assessment is based on the following measures and indicators: 43% of UCS students are from lower-socio economic groups (4,5,6,7) (HESA data 08/09)
Assessment of access and retention record. The assessment of the University’s expenditure on additional access and retention measures was based on the analysis of absolute and relative performance in key HESA widening participation performance indicators. Benchmarks rather than comparisons with the overall sector average were used to compare our performance indicators with the sector average, because benchmarks take account of the University’s subject and entry qualification profile1. Assessment of expenditure on additional student success measures was also based on an analysis of HESA Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education Survey (DLHE) data.
Assessment of access and retention record. The University has a good record of achievement across a broad range of access indicators when compared to the national average and benchmarks. The University remains strong on its recruitment from state schools, low participation neighbourhoods, mature students, students in receipt of disabled students allowance and part time students. HESA Performance Indicators 2013/14
Assessment of access and retention record. King’s College London access agreements have established ambitious targets for the university and good progress has been made towards most milestones. In the most recent monitoring exercise for 2015-16 all intake milestones were secured. We have substantially increased our numbers of full-time first-degree entrants on HEFCE-funded programmes from state schools. The proportion has risen significantly from 74.9% to 77.3%. This has exceeded both our 2015-16 target and our 2019-20 target. As the NS-SEC dataset has now been decommissioned we have replaced this measure with the ACORN socio- geo-demographic dataset. This is particularly useful in an urban, London context as it is a more granular socio- geodemographic profiling tool with a ten household output area. In 2015-16 the proportion of young full-time first-degree entrants from ACORN categories 4 & 5 (financially stretched and urban adversity) was 24%. This is 5% higher than our 2015-16 target and 2% higher than our 2019-20 target. ACORN is wholly integrated into our OFFA benchmarks, widening participation selection processes and admissions systems. During this period we have also managed to exceed our benchmark for students from low-participation neighbourhoods. The proportion of students at King’s College London from these neighbourhoods stands at 4.8% reaching our 2015- 16 target and setting us on track to reach out 2019-20 targets. Our flagship widening participation scheme: K+ has a linked milestone. Excellent progress has been made on this front as we have already met our 2019-20 target with 546 students enrolled at King’s College London in 2015-16. It is important to note that his milestone relates to all applicants from these schools, not just students involved in the K+ scheme. In 2014-15 the number of students from ethnic groups defined as non-white at King’s College London has increased to 44% from 41% meaning we have exceeded our 2019-20 target and fulfilled our 2015-16 scaled milestone. Our performance in relation to retention now stands at 92.6% of students continuing into their second year of study. This represents a modest reduction from our 2014-15 performance of 93.2%.
Assessment of access and retention record. The University meets all its benchmarks around access and is ranked above the national average for all 2012 HESA participation performance indicators with one small exception4 4 The percentage rate for ‘Young FT Other UG entrants (Participation) from specified socio-economic classes’ needs to be considered against the small size of the whole group. It also performs well with regards to retention performance indicators, particularly in terms of first degree entrants (young and mature).5 The increase in non continuation rate for young FT First Degree entrants from low participation neighbourhoods informs our retention strategy and resulting action plans for 2013/14. The University is aware of the unknown impact of the introduction of higher fees in 2012 on access and subsequent retention, which may result in amended priorities once 2012 entrant data becomes available.
Assessment of access and retention record. The University of Suffolk has a high proportion of under-represented students. In 2017-18 the University plans to spend 25% of higher fee income on additional access and retention measures. This assessment is based on the following measures and indicators of students at the University of Suffolk: • 45.3% (14/15) of young full-time undergraduate entrants are from low socio-economic groups (NS-SEC classes 4, 5, 6, 7) (HESA data) (benchmark 42%) • 27% (14/15) of young full-time undergraduate entrants are from low participation neighbourhoods (POLAR3 Quintile 1, students aged under 22 on entry) • 21.4% (14/15) of mature full-time undergraduate entrants have no previous HE and are from low participation neighbourhoods (POLAR3 Q1) (benchmark 13%) • 27.3% as of March 2016 of the University’s students are part-time (2015-16 academic year) • 22% (14/15) of part-time young undergraduate entrants have no previous HE and are from low participation neighbourhoods (POLAR3 Q1) (benchmark 17.6%) • 12.4% as of March 2016 (2015-16 academic year) of the University’s students come from ethnic minorities • 97.6% (14/15) of young full-time students come from state schools • In Suffolk the number of young people in Local Authority Care (LAC) progressing to university each year is consistently very low and there is considerable work to do in this area. At the University of Suffolk in 2014/15, 11 Care Leavers were studying at UCS. • Deprivation levels in much of Suffolk and Great Yarmouth remain high. 72 of Suffolk and Great Yarmouth’s Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs) are ranked in the most deprived 20% of the country, and 37 LSOAs are ranked in the worst 10% of deprived areas in the country8 • A high number of students in Suffolk and Great Yarmouth in low participation groups are first generation HE students
Assessment of access and retention record. UCS has a high proportion of under-represented students. In 2016-17 UCS plans to spend 30% of higher fee income on additional access and retention measures. This assessment is based on the following measures and indicators P31: • 47.6% of young full-time undergraduate UCS entrants are from low socio-economic groups (NS-SEC classes 4, 5, 6, 7) (HESA data 2012-13) (benchmark 39.7%) • 29.1% of young full-time undergraduate UCS entrants are from low participation neighbourhoods (HESA data 2012-13, P3) • 18.2% of mature full-time undergraduate UCS entrants have no previous HE and are from low participation neighbourhoods (HESA data 2012-13, P3) (benchmark 11.3%) • 28.4% of UCS students are part-time (2014-15) • 17.9% of part-time young undergraduate UCS entrants have no previous HE and are from low participation neighbourhoods (HESA data 2012-13, P3) (benchmark 18.1%) • 12.7% of UCS students come from ethnic minorities (2014-15) • 99.6% of young full-time UCS students come from state schools (2012-13)
