Widening Participation: The St George’s approach

1. Kenton Lewis – Head of Widening Participation & Student Recruitment Widening Participation:The St George’s approach

2. OverviewWhat I will talk about • Widening Participation – some basics • Alternative approach to WP ‘thinking’ • Contextualised assessment • www.tasteofmedicine.com

3. OverviewWhat I won’t talk about (much) • SGUL as ‘best practice’ to be replicated • Work experience • Multi Mini interviews

4. Widening Participation • Aspiration, facilitation, retention • Strong New Labour connection, but existed long before • Open University, post-92 Universities • Selecting and recruiting institutions • Regulation (e.g. OFFA, WPSA) • Election!

5. Implications of WP

6. Outreach work (medicine and healthcare) 5 Age 18+

8. Academic thinking about WP • Equality or equity? “Treating unequal people equally is just as unfair as treating equal people unequally” • The Govt. position follows a ‘Deficit Model’ • Academic research looks at identity and culture • Sociological models students are “different” not “lacking”

10. Academic thinking about WP • The culture of a University can be (is) a barrier • “I’m not a University type” – no family history of HE • Identify with  comfortable  likely to succeed • not recognise  feel alien  less likely to succeed • Successful WP needs change in HE culture • Elite should not mean Elitist • Be wary of terms “WP Student”, “WP University”

11. Adjusted Entry Criteria “Treating unequal people equally is just as unfair as treating equal people unequally” • In order to measure potential we look at how far you have had to travel • We recognise performance in relation to your peer group, NOT the national average

12. Adjusted Entry Criteria “students from independent schools appear to consistently do less well than students from other schools and colleges, when compared on a like-for-like basis […] For the most highly selective higher education institutions [we] find that students from LEA schools do consistently better than similar students from independent schools “ (HEFCE)

13. Adjusted Entry Criteria • Traditionally assessed on actual and predicted academic performance, then assessed at interview • Guaranteed interview if AABb (AAAb from 2008) • OR if ≥BBCb AND 60% higher than school average • School average data published online by Govt. • All applicants need to perform well in a blind multi mini interview

14. Methodology • Data collected from existing records held by the Institution • Anonymised database created and analysed in SPSS • Looking at examination performance • Three distinct groups of students:-

15. Methodology • Students with lower grades from ‘eligible’ school n=34 • Students with higher grades from ‘eligible’ school n=87 • Students with higher grades from ‘non-eligible’ school n=387(cohorts 2003/4 – 2006/7)(Ongoing research looking at transition into the profession)

16. What did we find? • ‘Adjusted criteria’ students perform just as well on the course as those coming in with higher grades (no statistically significant difference) • A larger proportion of ‘adjusted criteria’ students fail on their first attempt at examination (though not statistically significant) • This scheme has widened participation (in terms of state education and ethnicity)

17. Any questions? klewis@sgul.ac.uk Email if you want a copy of the presentation and/or stats

19. Mean scores

20. Failure at first attempt *n=1