Proceeding contribution from Bill Rammell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 15 March 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Higher Education.
Higher Education
I am off-sound rather than off-message, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My apologies for that. My hon. Friend the Member for Bury, North (Mr. Chaytor) makes a pertinent point, because one of the frustrations in the debate about variable fees and their introduction concerns the obsession of the opponents of variable fees with focusing on full-time students instead of on the many thousands of other students who are rightly accessing higher education. On attainment, despite claims in the media that it is now easier for a person to get the qualifications that they need to go into higher education, the demands of studying and of achieving those qualifications are as high as they have ever been. The gap in attainment between higher and lower social classes goes some way to explaining the relative success that they have in getting to university. Our significant investment in schools since 1997 has helped to raise standards overall. The attainment gap, at age 16, between higher and lower social classes at level 2 is narrowing, and that is welcome, but it is still the case that only about a quarter of lower-social-class 18-year-olds achieve two or more A-levels, compared with around half of those from higher social classes. That is one of the most worrying and troublesome challenges that we face. The research shows that in the 1990s, children with parents whose incomes were in the highest 20 per cent. were about five times more likely to acquire a degree by the age of 23 than children with parents whose incomes were in the lowest 20 per cent. That is simply unacceptable, and we are determined to address the problem. Evidence shows that if someone makes a decision to stay on at school or college at 16, they are much more likely to stay in education after 18. The choice of too many 16-year-olds not to stay in education is the biggest barrier that we have to overcome. Through the development of diplomas, ongoing investment in personalised learning in schools and colleges and, crucially, initiatives such as education maintenance allowances, we are making progress. EMAs have contributed to an increase in participation in post-16 education that we expect to feed through to higher education. The proportion of 16-year-olds in the first post-compulsory year of full-time education at the end of 2005 is estimated to be 76.5 per cent.—the highest-ever rate and an increase of 2.7 percentage points since the end of 2004. It is the biggest step change in participation in full-time education at 16 since 1993. I now turn to aspirations, which are the most important challenge that we face. Significant investment in the Aimhigher programme, which my hon. Friend the Member for Bury, North (Mr. Chaytor) mentioned, and other interventions are raising the aspirations of more young people with the ability and talent to enter higher education. Through a range of activities, such as university visits, master classes, mentoring and summer schools, we aim to show students from disadvantaged backgrounds what study at a higher level involves so that they can experience the realities, challenges and joys of being a higher education student. We welcome the fact that early evaluation of Aimhigher shows that its participants have more positive intentions towards higher education than non-participants. Furthermore, national data indicate that the gap between higher and lower social classes at age 16 intending to go on to higher education narrowed by almost 5 per cent. between 2001 and 2003. I strongly believe that the Aimhigher programme helps to show students from disadvantaged backgrounds that they, too, can strive for entry to universities with the most demanding admission requirements. That work is critical. Evidence suggests that even when their qualification levels are similar, people from lower social classes are slightly less likely than people from higher social classes to apply for higher education—and if they do, they are less likely to apply to the institutions and courses with the most demanding entry qualifications. That is a challenge for all of us, and for the way in which we advance the debate.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 458 c488-90
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Admissions Disadvantaged Finance Fees and charges Higher education Higher Education Funding Council for England Low incomes Loans Standards Universities Students Universities and Colleges Admissions Service
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:34:38 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385561
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385561
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_385561