1. Hybrid qualifications in a credit-based system: Scottish HNCs and HNDs David Raffe and Cathy Howieson University of Edinburgh Seminar on Hybrid Qualifications, London, 7 July 2011

2. OVERVIEW Conceptual issues The Scottish education system and HNs Policy interest Recent evidence: HN leavers’ destinations HN students’ intentions Do HNs prepare students for both destinations? Strategies for doing so Concluding comments

3. CONCEPTUAL ISSUES Hybrid qualifications: to make system ‘seamless’? The vision or ‘intrinsic logic’ of a seamless system l … conflicts with the ‘institutional logics’ of education institutions, the labour market and the social context l … and with variations in institutional logics It also l questions notion of pure-bred (and therefore hybrid) qualification – cannot be defined by destination l raises questions of level and equivalence

4. THE SCOTTISH EDUCATION SYSTEM l On paper, open and permeable l SCQF: levels and credit values l Weak link between qualifications and destinations l … so we must identify hybrid quals on basis of actual progression patterns … l Higher National Certificates and Diplomas (HNs) are the most important

5. HNs l Short-cycle HE, ‘equivalent’ to Year 1 (HNC) or Years 1+2 (HND) of degree l Awarded by SQA, delivered (mainly) in colleges l In broad vocational areas: traditional route into technician and lower-managerial jobs l But increasingly being used to enter university …  To first year (repeating SCQF levels)  With credit/advanced standing: articulation

6. Pathways from HN’s Employment HND SCQF 8 HNC SCQF 7 DEGREE (HONOURS) SCQF 10 DEGREE (ORD) SCQF 9 SCQF 8 SCQF 7

7. POLICY (AND RESEARCH) INTEREST IN HNs l Interest in pathway to degrees (with articulation)  Widening participation agenda  Cost-effective/flexible delivery l Regional Articulation Hubs l Employment role more taken-for-granted (including by recent research) l Policy (and research) framed more by an ‘articulation agenda’ than by a ‘hybrid qualification agenda’ (but these overlap)

8. DATA l East of Scotland survey of articulating students l Interviews with key informants for (BIBB) study of Credit Systems for Lifelong Learning l Other published research  Articulation for All (SFC 2007)  Greater Glasgow HN Tracking Study (Ingram and Gallacher 2011)  Etc

9. HN LEAVERS’ DESTINATIONS l More than half (eg 57%) continue study, usually for degrees (most others enter employment) l Many also work (usually to support study) l Trend towards study as main destination l ‘Continuum’ of HN programmes l Most enter ‘new’ universities – more favourable institutional logics l About two-thirds of degree entrants articulate

10. HN STUDENTS’ INTENTIONS l Majority of those who enter degrees see it as natural progression l But more intend to progress than do so l And some progress after a spell in employment l University places may not be guaranteed; depend on market conditions l Many of those who do not articulate do so through ‘choice’

11. DO HNs PREPARE STUDENTS FOR BOTH DESTINATIONS? l Most entrants to employment appear well prepared (but evidence is indirect – and there is probably variation across HN programmes) l Nearly half of entrants to degrees ‘not well/not at all’ prepared l Problems include  Mismatch in formal curriculum  Preparedness for informal curriculum, modes of learning  Insecurity about standards

12. DO HNs PREPARE STUDENTS FOR BOTH DESTINATIONS? (continued) Problems exacerbated by l 2 nd /3 rd year entry (articulating students)  Mismatch in formal curriculum  Lack of local knowledge (miss induction and familiarisation)  Lack of social support l Social and demographic differences l Potentially, development of more work-based HNs

13. STRATEGIES 1. Differentiating hybrid qualifications  Continuum of HN programmes  Alternative options within HN programme 2. Adjustments within HE  Mainly recruiting universities 3. Institutional collaboration (college-university)  Plan curricula for articulation Implications:  Making pathways less ‘seamless’  Working on (and within) institutional logics

14. CONCLUDING COMMENTS l Tensions between two roles … l Eased by changing skill demands? l Exacerbated by circumstances of articulation and by role as ‘second chance’ pathway l … both of which are reflections of institutional logics l ‘Seamless’ systems unachievable because of institutional logics (and demands of curriculum, pedagogy) l Aim for ‘permeability’ rather than ‘seamlessness’?