1. Access to Higher Education in Wales: devolution, social democracy and equity Gareth Rees Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (WISERD) SRHE seminar, 16 February 2016

2. Overview Provide an account of the policy framework developed by the Welsh Government for higher education. Assess some of the implications of this framework for patterns of access to higher education. Reflect on the implications for ‘social democratic’ strategies for the provision of higher education.

3. The Devolved Policy Framework in Wales The Welsh Government has pursued policies on higher education that are distinctive from those in the other UK countries: Student finance: fees subsidy; maintenance grants and loans; Widening access initiatives: regulated through universities’ fee plans; focused on areas of social disadvantage; Dirigiste approach to institutional restructuring: overall pattern of provision; institutional mergers; further education-higher education relationships; Organisation of research activities to meet government aims, especially economic development.

4. A ‘Social Democratic Consensus’ These policies reflect a broadly social democratic agenda. This is reflected most clearly in the subsidisation of student fees, justified in terms of: Social equity; Planning rather than the market. There is substantial consensus across the party political spectrum in support of this sort of approach. However, there are also increasing concerns about the effects and viability of the policy: Diamond Review; Welsh Government budget for 2016-2017.

5. Is Access to Higher Education More Equitable? There is some evidence that Wales-domiciled entrants to higher education are drawn from a somewhat wider range of social backgrounds than elsewhere in the UK. However, it is very difficult to attribute these limited differences to the effects of policy interventions (either the fees regime or widening access initiatives). More generally, WISERD research suggests that the determinants of access to higher education by Wales-domiciled young people are broadly equivalent to those for their English- domiciled peers.

6. Participation in HE by age 20 MalesFemales Overall30.3%38.7% Eligible for free school meals 12.0%15.4% Not known to be eligible 33.3%42.5% 200528.6%35.8% 200731.1%39.8% Educational achievement (particularly at age 15) is the greatest determinant of participation to HE GCSE points Participation in HE by age 20 0-202.6% 21-305.2% 31-4012.5% 41-5029.3% 51-6055.6% >6081.7%

7. But once we take account of levels of attainment, what other factors are associated with participation in higher education? Female pupils eligible for free school meals are 21% less likely to participate in higher education than equivalent non-FSM female pupils (for males this figure is 12% less likely) Male ‘non-White British’ pupils are 2½ times more likely to participate than male White British pupils Males and females are 6.7% and 7.5% (respectively) less likely to participate if they live in the most deprived areas of Wales compared to equivalent young people in the least deprived areas Young people living in the fourth quintile of most deprived are less likely to participate than those in the 20% most deprived areas – the effect of Communities First policy for widening access?

8. Schools But there are other important institutional effects

9. Tensions within Social Democratic Approaches to Access These limited impacts reflect the restrictions imposed by the nature of the devolution settlement itself: the challenge of responsibility without real power? The Welsh example illustrates the tensions that are inherent in ‘social democratic’ approaches to access to higher education. As well as widening access strategies, the Welsh Government has implemented the Seren Programme, intended to increase entry to Oxbridge and other ‘elite’ universities. This reflects significant ambiguities in the ideals of equity that are being sought and the nature of the merit that is thereby rewarded.

10. Type of University by Communities First area