Enhancing the degree attainment of Black and Minority Ethnic students in higher education

Professor Jacqueline StevensonHead of ResearchSheffield Institute of EducationSheffield Hallam UniversityJacqueline.stevenson@shu.ac.uk

Overview of the session• The National picture• Data and possible causes/explanations• Three research projects

1. Images and degree attainment

2. The HEA research

3. Comparison with the USA

• Implications for your own practice?

Background and context• Although attainment is improving across all groups, the gap has

not narrowed significantly over recent years• 2012/13: 57.1% of  UK-domiciled  BME students received a 1st or

2:1; 73.2% of White British students – gap of 16.1% (ECU, 2014)– 64.4% of Indian students were awarded a top degree (a degree attainment

gap of 8.8%)– 63.9% of Chinese students (a gap of 9.3%)– 54.2% of Pakistani students (a gap of 19.0%)– 43.8% of Black Other students (a gap of 29.4%)

• BME degree attainment gap narrower for SET• DfES (2007) and HEFCE (2012) - controlled for the majority of

contributory factors; Being from a minority ethnic group has a statistically significant and negative effect on degree attainment;

3

4

One institution: variance to average

1st class Variance to average (9.63%)

Upper Second Variance to average (43.64%)

All Other Variance to average (46.73%)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

Asian or Asian British

Black or Black British

Chinese or Other Ethnic Group

Mixed

White

5

OU ‘good’ course grades(Prof John Richardson, OU)

Why does it matter?• Black graduates, are x3 more likely to be

unemployed within six months of graduation than White.

• 80%+ applications for very graduate job; 3/4 of large graduate employers now demand applicants have a minimum of a 2:1.

UK causes? (Singh, 2011)• Externally:

– significance of gender, disability, social deprivation, previous family educational experiences of HE, type of institution; home or campus-based

• Internally: – racism; time in paid employment; problems of segregation; low

teacher expectations; lack of role models; staff expectations/prejudiced attitudes associated with linguistic competence; students’ expectations; discriminatory practices - TLA and student support; undervaluing/under-challenging BME students

• Contribution of the curriculum and forms of pedagogy• But - being from a minority ethnic community is still statistically

significant in explaining final attainment.

7

Project oneImages, imaginings and marginalisation: the representation of BME students in HE

Institutional promisesStudents uninterested in institutional mission or internal

valuesHighly influenced by the promises implicit in the way the

university represents itself including:◦ the proportion of the institution's students that (appear to)

come from ‘non-traditional’ backgrounds◦ the ways in which academic success and post-graduate

opportunities are represented

Bennett and Ali-Choudhury (2009)

Focus on one HEI (not Derby!)

• Website: 224 images: Faculty front pages ; faculty pages relating to Summer Graduation (images of students in graduation gowns only)

• Leaflets, prospectuses and information guides: 388 images

• Did not include……

Representation

Academic or non-academic?

Implications• Implications for BME attainment• Institutional self-deception• What do students and staff consider to be

‘real’/possible?

Project twoInstitutional case study research for the HEA

Considerations

• Race/ethnicity• BME students not a homogenous group • Contested understandings within

institutions of what constitutes a ‘BME student’

• BME students also contest definitions• Intersectionality: Gender; Religion; Familial

responsibilities

15

Contribution of the ‘curriculum’• EGDA Project (2008) + HEA ‘What works?’ -

engagement in the academic sphere vital to high levels of student retention/success

• The EGDA final report recommended further research:–How students experience marking practices, assessment, feedback; student-lecturer and peer interactions; specific support schemes–How departmental and subject differences might affect attainment variation–An exploration into course designs and pedagogic activities that could maximise student attainment

16

Methodology

• 11 HEIs purposefully selected• Initial contact with V-Cs; suggestions for

interviews• Staff

–36 staff and 7 SU representatives –Demographics; awareness; explanations; responsibilities; TLA strategies

• Students–22 interviews (14 individual; 8 in small groups); 14 ‘home’ BME students–Demographics; past, present, future; explanations

17

Key findings: staff• Strong commitment to diversity at all levels, including

strategic and operational; proliferation of special interest groups designed to implement issues around diversity

• Patchy staff awareness of BME numbers, attainment, staff

• Issues ‘discussed’ but many staff not specifically involved

• Senior managers, in general, aware of the issues and (some) plans were in place to address

• Lecturers, in general, didn’t believe senior managers were aware of the issues; not aware of any institutional strategies

• Not all felt BMEs should be singled out (unlike other groups e.g. international, disabled, mature learners)

18

Teaching, learning & assessment• Lack of knowledge of TLA strategies that had affected

change• Some staff believed such activity was taking place

(though were unable to provide specific information)• Tensions in some of the Russell Group institutions• Issues around who teaches first years• Recognition of need for diverse forms of assessment;

blind marking received mixed comments• Belonging and ‘fitting in’ frequently raised• Staff training seen as critical; PGCHE courses

addressing issues of diversity in the curriculum

19

Location of ‘the problem’ - staff

• Student based– Academic background– English language deficits– Mode of Access

• Societal/institutional/staff based– Socioeconomic barriers– Systemic racism– Rhetoric and political correctness– Devaluation of teaching and learning

20

Location of ‘the problem’ - students

• Academic– Preparedness for learning– ‘Appropriate’ academic behaviours– Student Support– Inter-ethnic relationships/Integration– Role models– Self-image/Possible futures

• Non-academic– Intersectionality– Families/cultural differences

21

I don’t know, I would say that we don’t get the same grades as white students. I’ve never seen our (sic) students get 2:1s we are... I don’t know why but maybe just my work is but I’m always on the 67 to 68 borderline. I’m not saying that they say because our names are different I wouldn’t say that. Maybe we’re just not clever enough, maybe their work is a better standard than us…Maybe the feedback they get, stuff like that. They go see the tutors a lot more than we do, they e-mail the tutors a lot more than we do so on our hand as well we should be a bit more…proactive

Student 5 (male, 21, Asian Pakistani, 1st generation, HR)

If you go on the website of the university there’s a photo at the beginning of like a black guy, with a white girl, and a Chinese guy and you think ‘wow’ but when you get here [the others are all laughing] ...there is some people who kind of mix like that. But if you see a lecture theatre sometimes in tutorials you see the African students sitting together…it [images] shows that everyone kind of chills with each other when they don’t. People get on perhaps but they don’t socialise that much, I don’t think.Student 10 (male, Black Other, 28, 2nd generation, Chemical Engineering)

The moment you racially profile in such a way that you say ‘there are not enough role models’ people feel that there should be more role models and the moment that they feel there aren’t enough role models for them to look up to they then don’t look up to anyone and therefore actually that leads to a failure in their own perceptions and about why black people aren’t doing well enough, ‘oh, I don’t have anyone to look up to, what should I do?’ which isn’t necessarily the case... I think the argument for role models is very annoying because no-one ever talks about white role models Student 14 (male, 23, Black African, 2nd generation, History)

Overall findings

• Areas of similarity– Variable awareness of attainment gap/equality– Intersectionality– Student support and preparedness– Modes of assessment– Inter-ethnic integration

• Areas of difference – Location and/or cause of ‘the problem’ and

responsibilities

25

'Addressing' the attainment gap

Issue How seen in action Result

Lack of awareness of attainment gap

Data unknown so not discussed; 'we'd know if there was a problem'

No action taken

Lack of understanding/misunderstanding

BME = international; language problems

Wrong action taken

Blaming society Poverty etc. No action taken

Blaming students Deficit models Action taken to 'fix students'

Awareness but avoidance

Fear of accusations of racism; cost; scale of addressing

Little or no action taken

Awareness but reluctance

Not seen as an issue or a priority Other action taken e.g. access or retention activity

Flawed perception Belief that action is being taken by others

Belief that action is being taken

Recognition of need/ belief its being acted on

Implementation of activity to raise attainment of all students

May not affect or even increase the gap

Recognition of need for action

Known, recognised, prioritised Action taken

How does the UK compare to the US?• Focus is on the achievement gap; differential

access; un/employment

Qualification Median weekly earning in $ (2011)

Unemployment rate % (2011)

Doctoral degree 1,551 2.5

Masters degree 1,263 3.6

Bachelors degree 1,053 4.9

Associate degree 768 6.8

High school diploma 638 9.4

Less than high school diploma

451 14.1

Correlation between achievement and employment and earnings

Approximate grade conversions between UK results and US GPA

UK class UK percentage US grade US GPA First 70-100 A 4.0 Upper second 60-69 B+/B 3.0-3.33 Lower second 54-59 B/B- 2.67-3.0 Third 42-53 C 2.0 Pass 38-41 D 1.0 Fail 0-37 F 0

Little is known about the attainment gap

• Roth and Bobko (2000): college GPA for white students 0.26 points higher than for black (only one specific institution)

• McKinney (2009): GPA data over three years– GPA at the end of the first semester 2.69 overall– black students 2.65– white students of 2.72 – Asian students 2.47– Native-American students 2.43

• Massey’s (2006) drawing on National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen– grades for Latino/as averaging almost a quarter point below (0.24)

those of whites, and those for blacks more than a third of a point lower (0.37).

So what does all of this mean for your own institutional practice?

Where do we go from here?

Institutional reflective questions 1. To what extent does the institution monitor the retention, progression, completion and

attainment of all groups, including specific groups such as BME students? What plans are in place to enhance retention, progression, completion and attainment?

2. To what extent are staff and students across the institution, at all levels, aware of the BME attainment gap? Is the evidence openly available, regularly monitored and discussed?

3. To what extent have targets been set to reduce the attainment gap? What strategies are in place to ensure success?

4. To what extent are strategies based on clear evidence? Have plans to monitor and evaluate the impact of any such strategies been put in place?

5. To what extent have teaching and learning practices, in particular those relating to assessment, been evaluated, including by students, to minimise possible bias and discrimination?

6. To what extent do staff feel skilled and empowered to build effective relationships with all students? Is high quality learning and teaching rewarded within the institution?

7. To what extent have approaches designed to improve the success of all students been mainstreamed? To what extent are all students accessing academic, pastoral and other support services?