Expenditure on Access and Retention. The University considers that it has achieved a good level of performance in terms of access and widening participation. We have consistently outperformed our benchmarks in relation to recruiting students from state schools, and although marginally below our benchmark in respect of participation by lower SEC groups, we are particularly pleased with our actual and comparative performance in relation to attracting students from low participation neighbourhoods. We have also increased significantly our recruitment of students in receipt of DSA in both absolute and comparative terms. We therefore characterise ourselves within the band of institutions that might justifiably spend 15% of their additional resource on Access Measures, as defined in the OFFA guidance 2011/01. We do, however, also recognise that there are areas of performance which we would wish to target for further improvement, for example, around SEC participation rates and certain of our retention and completion rates. There are also examples of particular good practice which we will seek to cascade more widely, such as the successful pre-entry work on support for Disabled students under the ‘Get Ahead’ initiative. These are reflected in our access measures and also in our expenditure on access and retention activity. The University has given serious consideration to the future of Aimhigher Derbyshire which we have housed and for which we have supplied the APC Chair and Vice-Chair. We recognise that it has developed a highly successful model for intervention over the last ten years, whilst noting that the model has relied on a central infrastructure which has been resource intensive. The University has made a considerable investment into outreach activity over the past five years – going forward, this work will form part of the core access activity taking place within the institution. We also plan to increase our commitments in this area through additional targeted investment on outreach over and above our existing commitment, as outlined below. The broad categories for our countable outreach and retention expenditure are as follows* – Outreach – continuation of existing expenditure on core access activity £250,000 Outreach – additional posts 2FTE Development Officers (Sept 2011 –) (retention of Aimhigher staff) Outreach – additional activity budget £63,000 Additional ambassadors student role models (Sept 2011 –) £16,750 Non pay costs (Sept 2011 –) £53,900 Outreach – additional activity budget X...
Expenditure on Access and Retention. 4.1 Estimated expenditure on access and retention measures for 2014-15
Expenditure on Access and Retention. 3.1 Assessment of the College’s Access Record Between 2002/03 and 2009/10, the percentage of young full-time first degree entrants from NS-SEC classes 4 – 7 increased from 11.3% to 29.1%, compared with the sector-wide marginal increase from 28.4% to 30.0% Over the same period, the percentage of young full-time first degree entrants who had attended state schools increased from 66.1% to 80.3%, compared with the sector-wide increase from 87.2% to 88.8% This represents significant progress and, particularly given our subject mix, further significant improvements will present a major challenge. Recruitment of students from low participation neighbourhoods has shown more limited improvement. We believe this reflects our catchment areas, that continue to be rural, semi-rural and suburban, whilst low participation neighbourhoods are concentrated primarily in inner city areas. We are reviewing our target areas with a view to opening the LPN target to POLAR quintiles 1 and 2, which might reflect our catchment more appropriately, and have set targets for improved performance in this area. The majority of our outreach activity already engages schools from low participation areas, but success in working with such pupils has been largely reflected in progression to higher education in other disciplines. Much of this outreach activity engages BME groups, but has yet to be reflected fully in BME representation in our student body, something that is replicated in all UK veterinary schools (and in those outside the UK). The proportion of students from BME groups has increased from 5% to 7% since 2002/03, and we are committed to increasing this further. Increased work with BME groups from 2011 onwards may bear fruit and show a relative increase, though absolute figures are likely to remain low. Given that large numbers of BME students from certain London boroughs regularly attend our outreach work we believe that the end result of much of our activity will continue to contribute to increased BME participation in Science and Medical subjects in partner institutions. We recognise, too, that we have made little impact on the under- representation of males in general in the student body, again, a common phenomenon in veterinary schools in developed countries.
