Review of widening participation research: addressing the barriers to participation in higher education
Report to HEFCE by University of York, Higher Education Academy and Institute for Access Studies

Statement

This review was originally proposed in our widening participation and fair access research strategy (HEFCE 2004/34) as one of our immediate priorities. We recognised that a number of studies had already been conducted to determine the nature, preponderance and scale of the barriers to participation in HE faced by a range of under-represented groups and we had no wish to duplicate existing work. Therefore, we felt that there was a need for the large body of existing work and knowledge on the barriers to participation in HE to be brought together and the data interrogated so that the key messages could be developed and any gaps in the evidence identified.

The review is wide-ranging and serves as a contribution to the wider debate surrounding entry to and progression through higher education, and it is in this spirit that we offer it for consideration. The authors of the review are, of course, responsible for the views expressed within it and it may be the case that some of these views will be contested by others in the field. Indeed, we would welcome such debate especially if this leads to greater engagement from a broader mix of sector colleagues and other stakeholders with the issues and complexities of the widening participation agenda.

How to think about widening participation in UK higher education
Report to HEFCE by Professor Sir David Watson

To add to the debate and provide a contextual perspective, we approached Professor Sir David Watson of the Institute of Education to deliver a paper expressing some of his ideas regarding the concepts, language and issues surrounding widening participation. Professor Watson challenges us to re-examine the way in which we think about and address widening participation in higher education by posing a number of questions regarding the very nature of the WP 'problem'.

As already stated, the arguments and views expressed in both of these documents are those of the authors and, as such, do not represent Council policy.

Downloads