Strategic Options

Document Sample
Strategic Options Powered By Docstoc
					   Towns Like Us

         Sylvia Gibbs
Head of Widening Participation
  University of Huddersfield

                                 1
The geography of University
Life
   Dreaming spires
   Historic cities
   Red brick
   Modernist bubbles
   Local Techs
     or University of Huddersfield


                                     2
Impact in Huddersfield is two-
way
   Physical presence
   Economic impact
   Social impact
   Key to survival and innovation
   Essential part of the town



                                     3
Town Gown Relations
   Long history of fraught relations
   Being replaced by a new community
    and WP role
   Promoted by HEI’s, Gov and RDA’s

   What form does it take?
   What models are emerging?


                                        4
Strategic models in HE
(Layer, 2005)

   Partnership: HE within FE arrangements
   Regeneration: HE access linked to local
    economic change and growth
   Building capacity: use of existing outreach
    centres
   Shared campus: two or more universities
    combine to create a new facility


                                                  5
University of Huddersfield WP
Mission
   Strategic Plan 2006-2010: “The
    University is committed to its local
    community and to actively taking
    education to students in order to widen
    participation, as well as delivering
    excellence in teaching and enhancing
    students success”

                                              6
University of Huddersfield model


2 University Centres in Oldham and Barnsley
 replacing HE in FE

 additional capacity
 regeneration agenda

 Widening participation agenda
 Community engagement agenda

 Own character

 Benefitting from the centre



                                              7
Our approach

   Towns Like Us- transfer Huddersfield
    regeneration and WP experience
   Choose areas in most need
   The objective is to take HE to students
    in their own communities
   Built upon, a genuine partnership with
    willing partners, especially the Colleges
    and the Boroughs

                                                8
Why Oldham and Barnsley?
Worst under representation in HE
 60.0%


                Proportion of wards with young participation index
 50.0%              ,         ,
                <16% 16-24% 24-32% or above 43%




 40.0%
                                                Barnsley
                                                Kirklees
                                                Wakefield
 30.0%                                          Oldham




 20.0%




 10.0%




 0.0%
         <16%       16-24%            24-32%           32-43%        Above 43%



                                                                                 9
Situation been getting worse
             Performance Indicator                 Barnsley Study Area   Oldham and Rochdale
                                                                             Study Area


Projected change in 18-30 year-old population            12,726                30,209
from 2001-02 to 2012-13

Change in HE entrants over the period 2001-02 to          -399                 -1,090
2012-13 if current downward trend in IER
continues

Change in HE entrants over the period 2001-02 to          5,483                 7,353
2012-13 if the study area could meet the
indicative regional target set by HEFCE to drive
its Aim Higher Partnerships for Progression
initiative.




                                                                                          10
The challenge in Barnsley
   Exclusion
            2004 Index of Multiple Deprivation:
             BMBC in 10% most deprived authorities
             (28th)
            56% of BMBC Super Output Areas fall
             within the 20% most deprived SOAs in
             health deprivation and disability
       HE; applications/enrolments
            2001: 88.9% with no degree (19th in
             UK); 41.1% no qualifications (10th in
             UK)
            1991-2001 <4% growth in population
             with degrees: in lowest 10 cities
            5 years from 2000, 20% decline in
             applications and enrolments from
             residents of Barnsley LEA
                                                     11
The Challenge in Oldham
   The highest percentage of the population with a Bangladeshi
    background in the North of England. At 8.6% this percentage is
    almost 16 times the national average.
   Percentage of population from the Pakistani ethnic minority is
    12.4%. It is one of the highest in the North of England and is
    over nine times the national average.
   In some parts a white working-class culture with low
    educational aspirations
   High index of deprivation reflected in a poor health record with
    a relatively high proportion, 19.2%, of those of working age
    who have limiting long term illnesses – this percentage is some
    42% above the national average.
   Low proportion of those in employment in professional and
    managerial occupations (16.7% c.f. national average of 26.3%)


                                                                   12
The Real Challenge – hard to
recruit students in economically
deprived areas
   Widening participation
    in these areas “clearly
    represents a significant
    challenge for schools,
    colleges and HE
    providers as well as
    other stakeholders”
    (KPMG HE Market
    Demand Assessment,
    2003)


                                   13
Academic and Management
Issues at UCB and UCO
   Distinct mission and curriculum – a
    new kind of University
   Responding to local emerging need
    is complex
   Some key on-site staff plus access
    to all services and staff at main site

   Financial support to all Schools and
    Services

                                             14
Achievements at UCB
   New students dramatic increase in 2006
      97% p/t; 64% f/t

   Overall headcount increase 27%
      HESES 2005 (headcount): FT 261 PT 214

             2006 (headcount): FT 299 PT 303
   Widening participation locally
      majority local (within 4/5 miles of campus)

      MOSAIC: ‘Industrial Grit’; ‘Coronation St’




                                                     15
Top 8 postcodes for 06/07 entry. 50% of all new starters come from these 8
                                postcodes
  Key post code areas


                                                 1




                                                                             16
Achievements at UCO
   Overall headcount increase over 3 years is 34%
      HESES 2004 (headcount): FT 384 PT 242

      HESES 2005 (headcount): FT 419 PT 369

             2006 (headcount): FT 436 PT 408

   Widening participation locally
     majority local

     Good ethnic mix

     Increasing numbers at OSFC to feed through




                                                     17
Achievements &
Challenges
   Lots still to learn
   Student numbers up but short of very
    ambitious target for 2006/07
   Need to strengthen the identity of each
    Centre in local communities
   Need different curriculum in each
    centre
   Towns are all different


                                              18
  “Towns Like Us ?”

    People and Place matter
All communities need their own
           solutions.

                                 19

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:33
posted:8/9/2012
language:English
pages:19