Opening The Black Box: Are There Inequalities In Admission to Postgraduate Courses?
Author(s):
Conference:
ECER 2016
Format:
Paper

Session Information

22 SES 01 A, (In)Equalities in Acess

Paper Session

Time:
2016-08-23
13:15-14:45
Room:
NM-Theatre R
Chair:
Jo Rose

Contribution

Within the extensive body of research on inequalities in access and transition to higher education there has been relatively little examination of application and admission processes. Researchers have tended to concentrate on enrolment, focusing on the blunt fact of whether or not an individual entered (or alternatively completed) a higher education degree. However enrolling in higher education in many higher education systems is preceded by a process of application, whereby potential students are judged and selected for a limited number of places. In order to achieve a place, a potential student must first apply and be offered a place. This means that differential rates of entry to higher education for particular groups could be related to different rates of application, or to different rates of application success. The distinction is important if we are to understand the process by which inequalities in higher education transitions might arise. There exist few systematic studies of inequalities in application and admission. However recent work on the UK has pointed to inequalities on the basis of social class and race/ethnicity which cannot be accounted for by ‘meritocratic’ factors such as prior attainment (Boliver 2013, 2015; Zimdars, 2010).

Similarly, while there is a well-developed understanding of entry to initial higher education such as bachelor-level degrees, little research has been conducted on transition to postgraduate study. Such qualifications appear to be increasingly important in securing advantages over and above those enjoyed by first-degree graduates (Lindley and Machin, 2013; Walker and Zhu, 2013). They are also increasingly a requisite qualification for certain professions, including the academic profession. Sociological theories suggest that inequalities in transition are likely to ‘pass up’ from first degree to postgraduate level as access to the former becomes more widespread (Collins, 1979; Raftery and Hout, 1993; Wolf, 2002). Evidence from existing studies in the UK (Wakeling and Hampden-Thompson, 2013), Germany (Neugebauer, 2015), Norway (Mastekaasa, 2005, 2006) and the USA (English and Umbach, 2016; Mullen et al., 2003) point to inequalities of access according to social class and other background factors, including gender. There are also a complex set of field-of-study and institution type influences apparent. However the field remains underdeveloped and there have been repeated calls for more research (e.g. Posselt and Garces, 2014; McCulloch and Thomas, 2013).

In particular, very little prior research exists on the postgraduate admissions process. What little research there is focuses ethnographically on faculty selection practices in particular disciplines or institutions. While this shows some evidence of inequality and inequity, it is not clear whether such issues scale up across whole institutions or systems, nor the relative importance of various factors in predicting admission.

In this presentation, we explore inequalities in postgraduate admissions using comprehensive data from six English universities. We address the following questions:

1.         How does the profile of postgraduate applicants, in terms of key social background characteristics, differ from that of the comparable population from which they are drawn (i.e. first-degree graduates)?

2.         What factors are associated with success in postgraduate application? In other words, are applicants from certain backgrounds more likely to receive an offer of a postgraduate place than others?

3.         Do any identified inequalities remain after taking into account ‘meritocratic’ discriminators?

In answering these questions, we provide new indications of the process of transition from undergraduate to postgraduate qualifications.

Method

Our research is based on comprehensive application data for taught postgraduate courses at six large, research-intensive universities based in the English North and Midlands. Our principal dataset comprises all applications from UK-domiciled individuals for entry to postgraduate courses commencing in 2013 and 2014 at these six institutions (n = 42,888). The dataset contains variables with information about the following aspects of the application: • Year of application • Type of qualification sought (e.g. masters degree, MBA, postgraduate certificate) • Mode of study (full-time/part-time) • Field of study of course • Gender of applicant • Age of applicant • Disability • Whether or not an offer was received In addition, for applicants applying to their alma mater (just under one-fifth of the applicants), we were able to determine: • Type of secondary school attended (state or independent) • Socio-economic class • Socio-economic classification of the neighbourhood (‘POLAR3’) Our analysis is based on univariate, bivariate and multivariate analysis of this dataset. We use descriptive statistical methods to look at the characteristics of those applying in comparison to the population of first-degree graduates from the same set of institutions. We then use bi- and multivariate analyses, including logistic regression, to examine the associations between various characteristics and the probability of receiving an offer.

Expected Outcomes

Initial analyses show that rates of postgraduate offer vary systematically across field of study, type of qualification applied for and institution, but also by gender and socio-economic background measures. While some of the gender differences in offer rate are related to the differential distribution of men and women across fields of study and types of qualification, controlling for these does not remove an apparent disadvantage for women. This finding runs contrary to women’s apparent advantage at undergraduate level but has received significantly less attention in higher education policy and research. Inequalities by socio-economic background also exhibit inequalities after controlling for compositional factors, with those from state schools and disadvantaged family backgrounds having lower offer rates. We consider how these inequalities come about and review the implications for higher education researchers, policy makers and universities themselves.

References

Boliver, V. (2013) How fair is access to more prestigious UK universities? British Journal of Sociology, 64 (2): 344–364. Boliver, V. (2015) Exploring ethnic inequalities in admission to Russell Group universities. Sociology, DOI: 10.1177/0038038515575859 Collins, R. (1979) The Credential Society: an Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification. New York: Academic Press. English, D. and Umbach, P. D. (2016) Graduate School Choice: An Examination of Individual and Institutional Effects. The Review of Higher Education, 39 (2): 173 – 211. Lindley, J. and Machin, S. (2013) The Postgraduate Premium: Revisiting Trends in Social Mobility and Educational Inequalities in Britain and America. London: The Sutton Trust. Mastekaasa, A. (2005) Gender differences in educational attainment: the case of doctoral degrees in Norway. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26 (3): 375 – 394. Mastekaasa, A. (2006). Educational transitions at graduate level: social origins and enrolment in PhD programmes in Norway. Acta Sociologica, 49 (4), 437 – 453. McCulloch, A. and Thomas, L. (2013) Widening participation to doctoral education and research degrees: a research agenda for an emerging policy issue. Higher Education Research and Development, 32 (4): 214 – 227. Mullen, A. L., Goyette, K. A. and Soares, J. A. (2003) Who Goes to Graduate School? Social and Academic Correlates of Educational Continuation After College. Sociology of Education, 76 (2): 143 – 169. Neugebauer, M. (2015) The Introduction of Bachelor Degrees and the Under-representation of Students from Low Social Origin in Higher Education in Germany: A Pseudo-Panel Approach. European Sociological Review, 31 (5): 591 – 602. Posselt, J. R. and Garces, L. M. (2014) Expanding the Racial Diversity and Equity Agenda to Graduate Education. American Journal of Education, 120 (4): 443 – 449. Raftery, A. E. and Hout, M. (1993). Maximally maintained inequality: expansion, reform and opportunity in Irish higher education, 1921 – 1975. Sociology of Education, 66 (1): 41– 62. Wakeling, P. and Hampden-Thompson, G. (2013) Transition to Higher Degrees Across the UK: an Analysis of National, Institutional and Individual Differences. York: Higher Education Academy. Walker, I. and Zhu, Y. (2013) The Impact of University Degrees on the Lifecycle of Earnings: Some Further Analysis. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Wolf, A. (2002). Does Education Matter? Myths About Education and Economic Growth. London: Penguin Books. Zimdars, A. (2010) Fairness and undergraduate admission: a qualitative exploration of admissions choices at the University of Oxford. Oxford Review of Education, 36 (3): 307 – 323.

Author Information

Paul Wakeling (presenting / submitting)
University of York
Education
York
University of York, United Kingdom
University of Sussex, United Kingdom

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.