.png)
Leading universities are failing to recruit enough teenagers from poor families, the official regulator warns today, despite spending hundreds of millions of pounds attempting to boost access to courses.
Currently, all universities are expected to set targets designed to increase applications among students from state schools, poor homes, disabled candidates and those from postcodes with a poor record of university entry.
Next year, targets must be applied to actual admissions.
The Russell Group, which represents 24 leading universities in England, including Oxford, Cambridge and University College London, condemned the move.
Wendy Piatt, director-general, said: “Universities themselves do not have the power to solve the root causes of the under-representation of students from disadvantaged backgrounds: under-achievement at school and poor advice on the best choices of A-level subjects and university degree course.
“So it is hard for universities to make rapid progress on achieving demanding and really quite specific targets which relate to much broader and complex socio-economic problems.”
Data published by OFFA showed how much money each university invested in so-called access measures – and the number of students claiming a full or partial bursary.
It emerged that more money was invested by the 33 mainstream English members of the Russell Group and 1994 Group, which represents smaller research institutions such as Lancaster, Bath and Royal Holloway.
Some 23 institutions increased the number of students admitted with a full bursary, while numbers dropped at a further 10.
However, fewer students were admitted with some form of support – covering full and partial bursaries. Figures suggest the total number of bursary holders dropped at 24 universities and increased at just nine.
Just 19.5 per cent of students at Durham claimed a bursary, followed by 25 per cent at Cambridge and 25.7 per cent at Imperial. Some 28.6 per cent of Oxford students were eligible for some form of support, while the largest number was at East London University, where 82 per cent of undergraduates were bursary holders.
The number of disadvantaged students admitted to sought-after institutions remained flat last year, it was claimed.
The Office for Fair Access said attempts to attract more applicants had been too “slow” and all institutions would be expected to set more ambitious targets for 2012/13.
It emerged that fewer students from disadvantaged backgrounds were admitted to England’s 33 leading universities last year with some form of financial support.
But more undergraduates claimed a full bursary, figures show, suggesting that a far larger share of available cash is being concentrated on the very poorest students at the expense of partial subsides handed to those from lower middle-class households.
Figures also showed that the amount of financial help being invested in deprived students increased across the English higher education system from £403.7m in 2009/10 to £424.2m last year.
Sir Martin Harris, outgoing director of OFFA, said universities were “making good progress in attracting and retaining under-represented students", but added: “However, as previous research by OFFA has already shown, progress is slow at the most selective universities despite significant investment and efforts on their part.”
The Office for Fair Access said attempts to attract more applicants had been too “slow” and all institutions would be expected to set more ambitious targets for 2012/13.
It emerged that fewer students from disadvantaged backgrounds were admitted to England’s 33 leading universities last year with some form of financial support.
But more undergraduates claimed a full bursary, figures show, suggesting that a far larger share of available cash is being concentrated on the very poorest students at the expense of partial subsides handed to those from lower middle-class households.
Figures also showed that the amount of financial help being invested in deprived students increased across the English higher education system from £403.7m in 2009/10 to £424.2m last year.
Sir Martin Harris, outgoing director of OFFA, said universities were “making good progress in attracting and retaining under-represented students", but added: “However, as previous research by OFFA has already shown, progress is slow at the most selective universities despite significant investment and efforts on their part.”
Currently, all universities are expected to set targets designed to increase applications among students from state schools, poor homes, disabled candidates and those from postcodes with a poor record of university entry.
Next year, targets must be applied to actual admissions.
The Russell Group, which represents 24 leading universities in England, including Oxford, Cambridge and University College London, condemned the move.
Wendy Piatt, director-general, said: “Universities themselves do not have the power to solve the root causes of the under-representation of students from disadvantaged backgrounds: under-achievement at school and poor advice on the best choices of A-level subjects and university degree course.
“So it is hard for universities to make rapid progress on achieving demanding and really quite specific targets which relate to much broader and complex socio-economic problems.”
Data published by OFFA showed how much money each university invested in so-called access measures – and the number of students claiming a full or partial bursary.
It emerged that more money was invested by the 33 mainstream English members of the Russell Group and 1994 Group, which represents smaller research institutions such as Lancaster, Bath and Royal Holloway.
Some 23 institutions increased the number of students admitted with a full bursary, while numbers dropped at a further 10.
However, fewer students were admitted with some form of support – covering full and partial bursaries. Figures suggest the total number of bursary holders dropped at 24 universities and increased at just nine.
Just 19.5 per cent of students at Durham claimed a bursary, followed by 25 per cent at Cambridge and 25.7 per cent at Imperial. Some 28.6 per cent of Oxford students were eligible for some form of support, while the largest number was at East London University, where 82 per cent of undergraduates were bursary holders.
Original source here
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Grace A Comment!