1. Context and overview Gary Loke, Equality Challenge Unit Jane Berry, Higher Education Academy

2. Background  Long standing recognition of differential degree attainment across ethnic groups.  Desire to investigate causal factors: -Since 1996 Connor report.  Two major studies undertaken 2007/08, building on earlier research showing that difference in attainment cannot be explained by age, prior attainment or subject of study:

3. The studies 1.‘Ethnicity and Degree Attainment’ Broecke, S. and Nicholls, T. for (former) DfES (2007):  Wider range of possible explanatory factors taken into account;  Differential narrowed but ethnicity still statistically significant factor in explaining final attainment even after controlling for majority of factors expected to have an impact:  Except in case of ‘Other Black’, ‘Mixed’ and ‘Other’ groups;  Gap widest for Black Caribbean, Black African and Chinese.

4. The studies 2.‘Ethnicity, Gender and Degree Attainment Project’ – Higher Education Academy and ECU – for (former) DIUS, HEFCE, and HEFCW with support from Universities UK and Guild HE (2008):  Focus on ethnicity and gender;  Research outcomes did not contradict findings from DfES study – ethnicity still appears to be a factor in attainment;  Findings offered sufficient basis for immediate action within the sector.

5. What the research told us  No simple answer to ‘why the difference’;  Differentials vary across BME groups;  Unlikely to be reducible to single, knowable factors for Black (or any other) group of students – individuals have multiple identities!  Data collection/analysis has dominated sector response, followed by student support interventions.  Level of response highly variable across HEIs.  Agenda often subsumed within Retention/WP agendas.

6. Some of the challenges  Issues for institutions very context specific: -Size, makeup, distribution of BME student population.  And sensitive!  BME students not a homogeneous group.  Under-achievement not necessarily related to issue under control of HEIs.  Just ‘one more issue’ for staff to address.

7. The sector’s response  Commitment to take forward recommendations: –Local action e.g. improving institutional intelligence; –Cross-sector activity e.g. sharing of practice; –Support from sector/staff representatives and funding councils e.g. to feed into existing work and relevant agendas; –And from sector agencies: ECU/Higher Education Academy e.g. dissemination, institutional support, resource development, integration.

8. ECU/Academy response  Joint programme of activity from 2008/09 to: –Identify more examples of initiatives to address differential attainment of BME students; –Facilitate work within and across HEIs to address issues raised by the project; –Disseminate learning from programme activities; –Promote on-going dialogue across sector e.g. via research seminar series.

9. Summit Programme  For institutional teams;  Provided framework to develop, implement and evaluate policies and/or practices to improve degree attainment of Black and minority ethnic students;  Cross- and inter-institutional working through programme of events and activities;  12 month programme, March 2009 – February 2010;  Sharing of learning with the sector.

10. Summit programme teams  University of the Arts London;  Aston University;  University of Bedfordshire;  University of Bradford;  Coventry University;  University of Greenwich;  University of Hertfordshire;  Leeds Metropolitan University;

11. Summit programme teams  London Metropolitan University;  University of Northampton;  The Open University;  University of Portsmouth;  Roehampton University;  Teesside University;  University of Westminster.

12. Aims of today  bring researchers, practitioners, policy makers, managers and students together to share and discuss best practices;  disseminate action orientated institutional research and development initiatives that offer pointers for making in-roads into reducing the BME attainment gap;  continue to raise the profile of the agenda and generate new ideas for research;  provide teams participating in the ‘summit programme’ with an opportunity to network and disseminate their work to a wider audience.

13. References/resources  Connor, H. et al. Differences by Degrees. Institute for Employment Studies Report 309. http://www.employment- studies.co.uk/pubs/report.php?id=309  Broecke, S. and Nicholls, T. (2007), Ethnicity and Degree Attainment, DfES Research Report RW92.  Ethnicity, Gender and Degree Attainment Project: final report. Higher Education Academy/ECU (2008) http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/projects/detail/inclusion/Et hnicity_Degree_Attainment_project

14. References/resources  Summit programme reflective papers: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/ourwork/inclu sion/EthnicitySummit  Research seminar papers: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/teachingandlearning/i nclusion/alldisplay?type=resources&newid=ourwork/inclu sion/RSS2009MasterPage&site=york  Race Equality Toolkit (revised version forthcoming): www.universities-scotland.ac.uk/raceequalitytoolkit/

15. References/resources  Student ethnicity. Profile and progression of entrants to full-time, first degree study. HEFCE (2010) http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2010/10_13 /