Sustaining the postgraduate sector in the UK

Michelle Morgan Phillip LewisKingston University Coventry UniversityProject Leader Institutional Lead

A HEFCE Postgraduate Support Scheme funded project

Aims and objectives

• Setting the scene • Expansion and retraction in the postgraduate sector• Background research to the HEFCE Postgraduate Project

• The Postgraduate Experience Project• Aims and objectives• Outcomes

Broad types of PG qualifications

• Doctorates by Research• Masters by Coursework also known as ‘Taught’ Master • Professional /’Taught’ doctorates• Masters by Research• Masters of Business Administration (MBA)• Integrated Masters (UK)• Postgraduate Diplomas and Postgraduate Certificates

QAA suggests that Postgraduate qualifications at present can broadly be classified into two groups: those that are substantially taught (TPO) and those with a significant research component (Research).

Smith et al., 2010

Setting the scene

UK Postgraduate growth - enrolments

Bekhradnia, B. (2005) Postgraduate Education in the UK: Trends and Challenges Higher Education Policy Institute. In: The Future of Postgraduate Education, Supporting the Students of Today and Tomorrow: London, March 2005

UK growth been underpinned by EU and Non-EU students

Source: statistics derived from HESA

UK qualification changes

Type of qualification awarded

1994/5 2003/4 2007/8 2011/12

Other Higher Degrees (e.g. Taught Masters)

43.6% 52.4% 58.9% 65.8%

Doctorate 8.4% 8.4% 8.2% 7.4%

Other postgraduate qualifications (e.g. Certificates and Diplomas

48.0% 39.2% 32.9% 26.8%

PercentageOverall total

100%90,329

100%182,085

100%202,010

100%264,090

Other higher degree includes masters degrees obtained/not obtained primarily through research, Masters in Teaching and Learning, pre-registration masters degrees leading towards obtaining eligibility to register to practice with a health or social care or veterinary statutory regulatory body and postgraduate bachelors degrees at level M.

Other postgraduate qualifications includes supervised research at level D, E and L for institutional credits, National Vocational Qualifications (NVQ) at level M and E, other postgraduate qualifications obtained primarily through research, fellowships, diplomas and certificates at level M, Scottish Vocational Qualification (SVQ) 5, professional taught qualifications at level M other than a masters degrees, Level M Diplomas in Teaching in the Lifelong Learning Sector, and other taught qualifications at level M.

Postgraduate conferment in the UK in 1994/5 to 2011/12

‘Other Higher Degrees ‘ have increased at the expense of ‘Other PG’ qualifications

% Change between 03/4 and 12/13

+12.9%

+0.1%

-13%

+79,930

2012/13

65.3%

8.5%

26.2%

100%262,015

Source: statistics derived from HESA

PG expansion- International comparison

Source: Morgan (2013)

+17.9%

+2.5%

+19.5%

+19.1%

Note: 2003/4-2010/11+12.3%

Qualifications awarded in 2000/1 and 2007/8

Type of qualification growth

‘Other higher degrees’All types of masters qualifications

‘Other PG qualifications‘

Australia = Other PG quals

Canada= Graduate diplomas

USA = First Professional Degree

UK = Other PG quals and PGCE

Source: Morgan (2013)

Why the expansion and retraction?

Research to-date• Not possible to make general comparative conclusions

although intuitive

• Research may not be applicable to other international HE environments

• No international comparative research

Introduction Growth Maturity DeclineTime

Reve

nue/

Profi

tNoticeable growth in PG started in mid 90sWhy?• Government commitment to increasing PGT market?• For career advancement rather than self-fulfilment?• Creeping notion that PGT required for a career?• Employers raising the qualification bar due to pool of well qualified graduates/ employer demand?• When downturn in economy, increase in uptake in HE?

Growth• 03/4-10/11 PG enrolments grew by 45%• PG= Other Higher Degrees (e.g. Taught Masters) + 13.1%, Doctorates -1%, Other PG -12.4%• In 2011, Higher degrees account for approx 66% of all PG enrolments• In 2010, fulltime mode became most popular mode for the first time in the UK• All Engineering and Technology PG +10.3% between 06/7-10/11

DeclineEnrolments between 11/12 and 12/13 • UK Domiciled -5.9% • EU Domiciled -7.3%• Non-EU -4.5%• Overall mode split FT 55.3%:PT 44.7% Fulltime -4.2 Part-time -7.4

Question mark

Postgraduate Taught Courses over 20 years using the product lifecycle

(Statistics derived HESA, 2013)

Star Cash Cow Dog

UK Science Engineering, Maths and Technology

PGT and PGR HESA2010/11

HESA2011/2

HESA2012/13

Computing 22,480 19,075 16,510

Engineering and Technology

44,955 41,995 38,865

Mathematics 5,865 5,925 5,765

Source: Statistics derived from HESA , 2013 http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php/content/view/1973/239/

PGT and PGR Full-time % change between 10/11-

12/13

Part-time % change between 10/11 and

12/13

Computing -28.5% -21.2

Engineering and Technology -12.7% -15.4%

Mathematics +5.9% -24.5%

% change between 10/11 and 12/13

-26.5%

-13.5%

-1.7%

Introduction Growth Maturity Decline

Time

Reve

nue/

Profi

tReasons for decline• Visa requirements?• Overseas competition?• Declining number of 18 Year olds thus smaller pool of undergraduates?

Question mark

Postgraduate Taught Courses over 20 years using the product lifecycle

Reasons for decline• No adaption of the product?• Not listening to needs of market?• Not taking account of competition?• No new question marks?• No new Cash Cows?

Reasons for decline• Perception of real value of PGT qualification in market place?• Employers require different skills?

Reasons for decline• Impact of UG study debt?• Lack of course funding?

(Statistics derived HESA, 2013)

Star Cash Cow Dog

BEng (Hons) BEng (Hons) SW BSc (Hons) BSc(Hons) SW MEng FT MEng SW2007/08 784 161 129 30 24 272008/09 800 166 189 75 25 222009/10 854 153 232 64 23 122010/11 802 149 303 90 36 122011/12 781 148 412 119 29 162012/13 580 138 525 96 43 18

UK applicant

M Integrated full-time?

4 years @ £9K per year = £36K funded via a student loan

+Cost of living for 4 years = £48,224Grand total study debt = £84,224

UK applicant

M Integrated Sandwich?

4 years x £9K and 1 year placement fee x£1000 =£37K funded via a

student loan+

Cost of living for 4 years = £48,224Grand total study debt = £85,224

UK applicant

BSc/BENG?

3 years @ £9K per year = £27K via a student loan

+Cost of living for 3 years = £36,168Grand total study debt = £63,168

Study debtand courseChoice in England

*UK average cost of living expenditure per year of UG study = £ 12,056 £4,834 for rent (£92.96 per week), £1,956 for food (£37.61 per week, £316 for household goods (£6.07 per week), £42 for insurance (80p per week), £2,074 for personal items (£39.88 per week), £1,524 for travel (£29.30 per week) and £1,310 for leisure (£25.19 per week). http://www.nus.org.uk/en/advice/money-and-funding/average-costs-of-living-and-study/

UK applicant

BSc/BENG Sandwich?

3 years @ £9K per year (£27K) and 1 year placement fee x£1000 =£28K

funded via a student loan+

Cost of living for 3 years = £36,168Grand total study debt = £64,168

UK applicant

BSc/BENG with a Foundation and Sandwich?

1 year @ £4600, 3 years @ £9K per year (£27K) and 1 year placement fee x£1000

=£32,600K funded via a student loan+

Cost of living for 4 years = £48,224Grand total study debt = £80,824

UK applicant

BSc/BENG plus MSc?3 years @ £9K per year (£27K) via a

student loan+ 1 year MSc @ £6K= £33K

+Cost of living for 4 years = £48,224Grand total study debt = £81,224

KPM SME Postgraduate approach

Company HEBSc/EngMSc/EngPHd

HE CompanyStudent

Pre objective training

BSc/EngMSc/EngPHd

Company

Vendor University•Students•Hobbyists•Kids in bedrooms•Professionals.

Global Internet

EngineeringCommunity

• GRABCAD

9 year olds in Japan

High School vendor Graduates USA, Germany, France, India, Portugal, Brazil etc

GIEC

KPM employing Fast Adopters

Train

Thick Sandwichor OU

Key findings of an HEA STEM ITG Report

• Conducted over a year, 8 schools, 233 completed questionnaires (90% of attendance at Sept Orientation, focus group

• Sample = 48% UK dom and 35% Non-EU dom, 42.7% =F and 57.3%=M, 47%= 1st and 53%= 2nd generation,36.5%= work and 39.5% =work

• Major funding issues • Primary funding method for 2/5s of sample= parents• Entry route, generational and domiciled differences

• Study anxiety• 2/3s of sample anxious but domiciled and entry route differences• Women and those coming from work less likely to believe had very strong study skills

• Expectation of quality increased with age and generational status (first expected higher)

• Belief employers value a PGT qualification more than UG but evidence suggests not the case (e.g. Connor et.al., 2010).

See hard copy report or access via http://www.improvingthestudentexperience.com/library/PG_documents/Individual_Project_Report_Morgan_2013_Final_August_2013.pdf

Key issues from the report• Entry route (work or uni)

• Cultural capital• Different skill base• Outcome expectations

• Reasons and value• Student belief gives advantage in

workplace• Employers state no indicator of

leadership or work wisdom (Connor et al, 2010: Leitch, 2006)

• Do employers want PGT graduates?

• Study and life demands• Balancing life demands with study

modes available• Poor support for different modes of

study• Different needs and expectations to

UGs• Greater pressure at this level than

UG Commuting impacts on retention

• Expectations and experience of study

• Need to define PGT attributes as different from UG

• Need toolkits for support (HEFCE developing)

• Feedback needs to be fit for purpose

• Less tolerance at this level of poor feedback

• Face to face• One size fits all teaching

problematic

• Finance• Fee levels important• Poor access to funding

especially for UK dom and 1st generation

• Reliance on ‘Bank of Mum and Dad’

• Is the funding arrangement sustainable?

HEFCE funded PG SchemeGrant pot of £25 millionTest options for finance and activity to support PGT studySupport transitionsPostgraduate Experience Project PEP – 11 UK institutions, STEM

Project titleInvestigating the expectations and attitudes towards postgraduate taught (PGT) STEM study, and post study Outcomes from the perspective of students’, universities and employers to support and sustain PGT growth in the UK – A collaborative project

The broad project outcomes are to:• Obtain local and national baseline data on student perceptions, motivations, expectations and experiences of PGT study as well as exploring the enablers and barriers to study through a range of data collection processes;• Obtain local and national baseline data on university and employers perceptions, attitudes, expectations and experiences of PGT study;• Look at the big picture by drawing out broad themes through pragmatic research and by ‘sewing’ the different strands of data together to create a collage of knowledge allowing further detailed research to be undertaken;• Achieve a practical understanding and deliver practical and pragmatic outcomes;• Recognise the research limitations for the project.

Postgraduate Experience Project

Collaborators

Applicants and students

Business and industry (B&I)

Universities and community

• Understand the employers expectations of the skills PGT graduates should possess

• Identify the employer outcome expectations of recruiting a PGT graduate

• Look at their perception of the value of PGT study

• Explore experiences of employers on university industrial advisory groups in terms of influencing curriculum changes

• Identify employer needs locally and nationally

• Explore experiences of PGT graduate employers in general and of members and employment specialists on the SG

• Explore university attitudes, planning and development approaches to PGT study

• Look at university responses to PEP findings

• Explore approaches to PGT supporting the local economy

• Explore applicants and student perceptions, motivations, expectations of PGT study

• Explore the barriers of applicants and students to PGT study

• Explore the experiences of students undertaking PGT study

• Explore the outcomes of students as a result of undertaking PGT study

• Explore which variables impact on attitudes, expectations , the retention of PGT students (e.g. part-time, full- time, domiciled and generational status, age, gender, social class, ethnicity, discipline and route into study such as from work or University);

Aims and objectives for the different key stakeholders

Capturing applicant and student behaviour across

STEM MSc courses

Group A. Potential

applicants who enquire but do not

apply

Group B.Applicants who

apply, get an offer but decline

Group D.Applicants who

apply, accept, do not enroll and do

not notify the university of non-attendance before commencement

Group E.Applicants who

enroll but withdraw after

commencement

Group F.Applicants who enroll, stay the

course and complete

Data collection for group A

This group of applicants will be

contacted by the 0.5 researcher at each

institution and asked to complete a short anonymous survey.

Data collection for group B

This group of applicants will be

contacted by the 0.5 researcher at each

institution and asked to complete a short anonymous survey.

Data collection for group D

This group of applicants will be

contacted by the 0.5 researcher at each

institution and asked to complete a short anonymous survey.

Data collection for group E

This group of students for all

participating universities will be contacted by the

Primary Research Hub at Kingston and asked to complete a

short anonymous survey.

Data collection for group F

This group of students within each institution will be given the opportunity to engage in the:• Sept 2014 questionnaire• Focus groups•End of course and exit survey• Each institution provides the Primary Research Hub with their STEM DHLE statistics for the Full cohort finishing in late 2015 who complete DHLE in Jan 2016.

Data collection for applicant/student groups (A/S) below will be collected under ethic guidelines. Each group will produce a dataset. Each dataset aims to capture A/S behaviour.

These are critical groups in understanding student behaviour as there is so little intelligence on these groups.

Groups C to F are the applicants who could produce A/S Dataset 6 through the allocation of fee scholarships (FS). In return for the FS, applicants/students will be required (as far as is possible) unlike Group F to engage in a range of data collection activities throughout the duration of their course in order to obtain a dataset for the characteristics of Group F. See the Schedule for Scholarships and Research activities for more information. This creates dataset 7.

A/S Dataset 1 A/S Dataset 3 A/S Dataset 4 A/S Dataset 5

Group C.Applicants who

apply, accept but notify the

university of non-attendance before commencement

Data collection for group C

This group of applicants will be

contacted by the 0.5 researcher at each

institution and asked to complete a short anonymous survey.

A/S Dataset 2 A/S Dataset 6

Thank you for listening

Any questions?

Phillip Lewisaa5041@coventry.ac.uk

Michelle Morganmichelle.morgan@kingston.ac.uk

Author and Editor of www.improvingthestudentexperience.com

Editor and Contributor to Improving the Student Experience-A practical guide for universities and colleges (Routledge, 2012) and Supporting Student Diversity in Higher Education (Routledge, 2013)

ReferencesHigher Education Statistics Agency (2013) http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php/content/view/1973/239/Morgan, M. (2013) Supporting Student Diversity in Higher Education- a practical guide, Oxon: Routledge.Smith, A., Bradshaw, T., Burnett, K. Docherty, D., Purcell, W. and Worthington, S. (2010) One Step Beyond: Making the most of Postgraduate education. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.