Improving the Degree Attainment of Black and Minority Ethnic Students

UNIVERSITY OF GREENWICH

‘IMPROVING THE DEGREE ATTAINMENT OF BLACK AND MINORITY ETHNIC STUDENTS’

REFLECTIVE PAPER

ABSTRACT OF WORK BEING UNDERTAKEN

The aims of the Project are to:

• Establish better understanding of barriers to achieving higher degree attainment amongst some BME groups.
• Trial a range of pedagogic and support strategies involved with raising expectations of BME students.
• Continue to internationalise the curriculum.

A cross-university team involving three academic schools, Education and Training, Humanities and Social Sciences and Science, several student support areas and educational development staff are working to:

• Raise awareness/provide staff development within three schools regarding BME degree attainment.
• Undertake curriculum development focussing on an inclusive approach by utilising the diversity of BME students’ cultural experiences and embeddingthese within pedagogical practices.
• Establish new waysfor collaboration between student support areas, schools, working with groups of students within a co-curricula framework to develop skills and raise aspirations.
• Create a more substantial knowledge base through use of a student questionnaire, qualitative interviews and a literature search and analysis relating to particular BME groupings - Black African, Afro-Caribbean, Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian and Chinese.

The first phase of the Project takes place from March 2009-June 2009 (planning phase)and the second phase from July 2009- July 20010 (action phase).

The Project Team includes:

Christine Rose:Director of Student Affairs.

Mark Webb:Associate Teaching Fellow, School of Education and Training.

Caroline Ukoumunne:Senior Lecturer, School of Education and Training.

Linnell Secomb:Programme Leader, Sociology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences.

Solomon Habtemariam:Programme Leader, Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Science.

Lucie Pollard:Director of Learning and Quality, School of Science.

Simon Walker:Head of Educational Development.

Kirsteen Coupar:Equality and Diversity Manager.

Suzanna Stein:Head of Welfare and Student Support.

INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT AND HISTORY/RATIONALE FOR INITIATIVE

The University of Greenwich is a post -92 university with 25,000 students and over 2000 staff. The University has three campuses which extend from Maritime Greenwich to Medway, serving South East London, Kent Thameside and West Kent. There is a strong commitment to widening access through locally available educational provision as well as working in partnership with a large number of local and international providers.

The University is made up of a diverse student body from non-traditional backgrounds with a significant number of mature students (19% are25-29 years, 36% over 30 years). 48% of the student body is BME (2008-9 statistics) which breaks down as: 5% (1,369) Asian other; 4% (971) Bangladeshi; 16% (4,080) Black African; 4% (1,076) Black Caribbean; 1% (367) Black Other; 3% (657) Chinese; 9% (2,321) Indian; 3% (904) Mixed; 3% (668) Pakistani; 48% (11,908) White; 2% (501) Other and 5% (1,294) Not given. There are 3500 international students (with China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria and Mauritius accounting for 70% of overseas students). Most minority ethnic communities are over-represented in higher education when compared to the majority community. 2007/8 HEIDI (HESA) data show a BME figure nationally of 16.1%. The significantly higher proportion of BME students at the University of Greenwich reflects the fact that London hosts nearly half (46%) of England’s BME population.

With increasing stratification of the HE sector the perceived ranking of the institution attended may play an important role with respect to both employers’ recruitment efforts and perceived marketability of the graduate. What has become more critical is an ever-increasing crowded graduate market is the degree classification achieved. There is a premium attached to an upper second or firstclass degree result and many employers select potential recruits against this criterion.

Broecke and Nicholls (DFES Research Project2007) Ethnicity and Degree Attainment show that all minority ethnic communities are likely to have lower attainment levels than white students, with mixed race students achieving the highest performance and Black African the lowest at upper second/first level.

Table 1: Attainment of Students According to Ethnicity (Broecke and Nicholls; 2007)

Source: Conor et al (2004) “Why the Difference? A closer look at higher education minority ethnic students and graduates” DFES Research

The University’s corporate plan establishes a focus on expanding opportunities for students of all ages and many backgrounds together with the promotion of equal opportunities, including building on existing links to promote race equality. The Learning and Teaching Strategy (2006-2011) puts emphasis on, ‘developing an inclusive curriculum and appropriate pedagogies to support the needs of students with diverse educational backgrounds’and in particular sees an experience of the international dimension as a significant means of challenging students to expose and challenge their implicit assumptions and to view their subject matter from different perspectives. The aim is to develop in students a set of attitudes and knowledge to enable them to develop skills to operate in international and cross-cultural contexts. Added to this is an emphasis on employability and the application of enterprise.

The University’s performance in the proportion of firsts and upper second undergraduate degrees is comparatively poor nationally. A University wide funded project was undertaken between 2007-2009 on Feedback to Students on Assessed Items of Coursework, to establish good practice in the area of tutor feedback as one means of addressing this. It has been acknowledged that in particular the attainment levels of Black and Minority Ethnic students should be raised across all academic schools. The differential rate in degree attainment is approximately 25% in relation to first class and upper second degrees. Findings from the Assessment and Feedback Project indicated that drivers must be provided from a cross-university team and through targeted initiatives before sufficient momentum is achieved for developments in practice to be realised.

STRATEGY

Publication of the ECU/HEA Report, Ethnicity, Gender and Degree Attainment project (Jan 2008) was timely in the University in stimulating a rebalancing away from pre-entry issues and widening access issues to performance outcomes. As the report highlights in the area of Learning, Teaching, Assessment and Student Support, most learning and teaching strategies refer to inclusion and diversity but more in relation to widening participation than degree attainment variation. In student support study skills and mentoring may be useful but there is a growing interest in extending the curriculum to include cross cultural capabilities. Within this institutional context the Project took its shape and holistic approach from the earlier Assessment and Feedback project. Sponsorship in terms of some financial support was sought from the University. Academic schools self-selected because staff were interested to be involved. The Office of Student Affairs (OSA)already targets area of intervention for BME students – through guidance and employability initiatives, counselling support, through accredited courses developed in particular schools and through involvement with the national Mentoring Consortium and the Black Mentoring Scheme. This Project was therefore seen to be significant for OSA. The approach used in the Project was intended to link to the development and implementation of the Single Equality Scheme and relevant equality impact assessments related in particular to assessment and review and validation. A strategic, university wide approach based on action research, continuous evaluation, further enquiry through questioning student views and undertaking literature reviews and analysis was intended to establish a shared frame of reference for the team. This would give the team tools to challenge any problematic social construction of the ’BME Student’ based on a deficit framework and under achievement as well as for developing and integrating new pedagogic methods into the subject and with a focus on student success.

The strategy was to:

• Disseminate knowledge about the BME Project within the three schools.
• Raise awareness of the Project amongst staff and students at university-wide level and to create a critical framework for dialogue and discussion at a multiplicity of levels focussing on teaching, learning and assessment.
• Capture the wide range of BME student experiences which could illuminate differentials in degree attainment.
• Explore pedagogical approaches and curriculum developments that focus on enhancement of the BME student learning experience.
• Establish collaborative working between central professional services and academic staff in order to develop strategies that acknowledge the impact of racialisation on BME students.

Although the various Schools and support departments took on different functions coherence was gained by establishing three strands to drive all the initiatives, with deployment of mixed teams.

Strand 1: Knowing and raising expectations.

Strand 2: Curriculum design and pedagogical development.

Strand 3: The legislative context.

Thisphase of the Project is due to be completed in July 2010.

ACTIVITIES COMPLETED (OR CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS)

This is detailed in terms of curriculum and pedagogy; communication, development and dissemination; enquiry and research and policy and auditing.

1. Curriculum/Pedagogy: Interventions in three schools

The academic staff in the three Schools chose to work in different ways in relation to institutional structures, the selection of students and the kind of interventions made. The organisational location of the team members in their Schools (two were programmes Leaders and one was an Associate Teaching Fellow) determined to some extent how interventions were planned.

i.)School of Education and Training

In this School an Associate Teaching Fellow with specialist knowledge in the field of critical race theory chose to work across the School rather than within Programme structures. A series of workshops were targeted at BME students focussing on identity, being heard and developing the BME student voice. Other workshops were open to academic staff as part of Black History Month. These focussed on the problematic social construction of the BME student and ways of overcoming barriers to achievement. With students a range of pedagogic methods were used including the development of posters within a group based collaborative setting.

ii.) In the School of Science, the focus was on the BSc Pharmaceutical Science programme,a programme largely made up of BME students. A core part has been a review focussed on improving the experience of all students on the programme. The curriculum, whilst never overtly ethnocentric, was looked at to ensure that opportunities to discuss ethnicity and cultural difference were available, particularly in tutorials.

A strong focus was placed on the need to communicate high expectations. Motivationaltalks given by individuals from industry wereembedded into taught courses in order that students did not perceive them as an ‘added’ extra. Another means of ensuring student engagement was the introduction of personal response systems in lectures. These enabled student to assess their own understanding as they went along and helped them identify areas where they are weak. The feedback from students has been very positive to date. The effectiveness of these enhancements to the programme will be judged partly by whether success rates from BME students have improved both in comparison to previous years and in comparison with other programmes.

iii)School of Humanities and Social Sciences

In the School of Humanities and Social Sciences changes were implemented within one undergraduate programme, Sociology, relating to curriculum, teaching styles and pedagogy. This was undertaken as a trial with the possibility of broadening these changes to other programmes if they were found to be successful. In curriculum terms changes included more focus on issues of ethnicity and global politics and the use of more texts written by BME academics; the changes to study skills and employability provision were embedded in courses to ensure that all students were required to undertake skills development; there was provision of course readers in a selection of courses to ensure that students have better access to text. Also there was a greater focus on pedagogy and teaching practice involving peer review and increased use of personal tutoring. These changes are part of the strategy for Sociology designed to take place over three years.

As a starting point what appears to be useful to all BME students is to tell them about differential degree attainment early on, whilst being explicit about raising expectations and improving skills.

2. Student Support

The model for working with students within the welfare and student support section of the Office of Student Affairs before the project involved highly skilled professionals working with students in crisis or failing in their studies. There were a significant proportion of BME students seen usually in one-to-one settings involving approximately 450 students per year.

The aim of the new model was to give access to larger groups of students, to plan work in advance together with academics within a co-curricular framework and to focus on students currently functioning at 2:2 level. The student support team worked on the specified programme with academics so far as possible. Essentially the ‘Acceleration Programme’ which was voluntary and targeted particularly at BME students, offered a range of workshops – study skills, time management, communication skills and team working. Levels of student engagement were fairly low but important insights were gained from the trial - students want learning interventions that are context specific; the presence of academics is vital. The skills audit undertaken indicated that students rated themselves highly in communication skills and team working, moderately for time management and poor for language and study skills. Their focus was on the need for on the spot help with the specifics of their assessment. An OU Project Report of 2008 identified that 47% of their students show a need for language development support in an area of language skills that was shown to have high relevance to attainment. The researchers identified a strong relationship between English language competency and academic attainment. It will be important to refine the skills audit used in this work in future years and act upon the results.

3. Communication/Development/Dissemination

• Dialogue amongst the Project Team:This was a new team, all keen to be involved with the Project from across different areas. Team meetings included sharing research and materials in the area, sharing plans for practice and debating some of the major dilemmas (BME students only or inclusive of white students, time management, maintaining student engagement).

• Dissemination of project outcomeshas been through two key committees and through the Schools involved. There is also a short description on the University’s project web page. However, further dissemination (and in particular when the research has been fully analysed) will include presentations at internal and national conferences and the production of papers.

• Meetings in the three Schools: Presentations were delivered at School Boards and at an all staff conference regarding BME degree attainment and the BME Project. This led to lively debate about the issues with strong support for the initiatives taken as well as some concern that focussing on ethnicity, without taking into account class, may be ineffective. Concern was also expressed about focussing exclusively BME on students as this may create the impression that these students are a problem group.

• To raise awareness amongst all staff, a staff development programme of equality and diversity awareness training was planned, delivering three different levels of equality courses at each of the three University campuses. These were delivered by the Equality and Diversity manager and have been very well attended with positive feedback from all attendees.More academic staff are being attracted to the courses, which have traditionally been attended by administrative support staff only.The online training modules in Diversity and Equality Essentials has been further publicised and highlighted to staff who are not able to attend face to face training.

• Training with Office of Student Affairs staff:This was undertaken by a member of the Project Team to establish common critical understanding of BME students’ needs. The work undertaken here revealed that staff expertise had been shaped by experiences of addressing particular needs of BME students who are failing or are in crisis. The social construction and related expectations of BME students in this context provides OSA staff with a very challenging role where the impact of racism (one aspect amongst the complexity of students’ lives) was often about failure and retention rather than maintaining or promoting the opportunities for (academic) enhancement. The impact of the training illustrated the unintentional focusing on this aspect or role of OSA staff at the expense of seeking students’ opinions about support to maximise their (academic) potential, and focussing on raising aspirations.

• Academic staff training on inclusive pedagogy: a large number of Schools were represented at theworkshops and these were well received. A series of practical workshops are now to be included in University wide training. This training was designed and delivered by two BME academic project members who explored critical questions of how to engage with and reflect the diversity of BME (all) students. Blended e-learning and creative examples of curriculum development were examined. The first phase of training allowed for discussion about project findings/aims. There has been a demand from academic staff for practical pedagogical workshops where approaches to ‘Inclusivity’ and their different disciplines can be identified/further explored.

4. Inquiry/Research

This research focuses on obstacles that students face in relation to academic success using questionnaires and focus groups to obtain the views of BME students. Responses from the questionnaire have been partially analysed so far.

There were four aspects to this work:

• Clarification of data
• Student questionnaire
• Qualitative research with high achievers
• Literature reviews and analysis

Clarification of Data

The Project Team did recognise the problems of getting too involved with categorisation in relation to student demographics. Indeed it was recognised that too strong a focus on categories and student achievement/performance would actually take attention away from institutional structures and pedagogical practices. In particular in the context of the student body at Greenwich the challenges of ‘superdiversity’ could make all explanatory/interpretative frameworks appear simplistic. As Vertovec highlights: