Earning and learning:the influence of secondment

on retention rates in part-time social work qualifying

education

Jo MoriartyJill Manthorpe

Shereen Hussein

Outline

Background Aims and methods

Looking at DipSW students Findings

Seems like a social work success story!

Implications for the futureChanges since new degree

Background - HE

Part time students make up 40 per cent of all students in higher education (Ramsden, 2006)

Concerns that part time students are less likely to achieve their intended qualification (National Audit Office, 2001, 2007)

Background – social work

Early interest in part time educationFrom educationalists (Everett, 1989,

1990)From employers (Balloch et al, 1999)

All three DipSW routes offered opportunities to study part timeMainly on non-graduate programmes

Aims

GSCC asked Social Care Workforce Research Unit to look at progression among DipSW students in 2005Start of ongoing programme of work

Aim to look at demographic and HEI factors influencing progression (Hussein et al, 2007)

Methods (1)

Methodological challenges in deciding what constitutes progression on part time programmesPurpose is to offer more flexible timingDanger of comparisons with full time

students when option to study full time not necessarily to them (Callender et al, 2006)

Methods (2)

GSCC provided details on all students registering for a DipSW 1995-1998Advantage is that need a longer

period to measure progression for part time students

1209 on part time non-graduate DipSW programmes

Demographics

Similar to full time students in terms of their demographics73 per cent women48 per cent aged 30-3920 per cent from a black and minority

ethnic group10 per cent had a disability

Funding

Differences in funding between full time and part time students36 per cent seconded16 per cent sponsored26 per cent self funding

Progression

Overall progression rates were high81 per cent awarded a DipSW1 per cent failed14 per cent withdrew(<5 per cent no information)

87 per cent of full time non graduate students awarded a DipSW

Analysis

Logistic regressionDistinguishes between effects of each

factor after controlling for all the other risk factors

No assumptions about independent variables (e.g. distribution)

Likelihood of withdrawal (1)

No differences by type of HEINAO suggests that it does differ by

HEI across all part time students No differences by previous

educational attainmentExtensive literature suggests that

generally students with higher educational qualifications do better in HE

Likelihood of withdrawal (2)

No differences by gender or disabilityHussein et al found men/students with

disabilities had poorer progression on full time programmes

Small differences by ethnicityHussein et al found BME students had

poorer progression on full time programmes

Likelihood of withdrawal (3)

Seconded and sponsored students less likely to withdraw(‘blindingly obvious’ school of

research) Referred/deferred students as likely to

continueSuggests that they received

appropriate institutional support

Who gets seconded?

Slightly older?’Reward’ for service

Less likely to have a disability?Reluctance to disclose to employer

(McLean, 2003) Strong regional differences

?Effective way of solving local shortages

Social work success story?

Results seem better than for part time students as a wholeNAO (2007) suggested that 45 per

cent left early Fits into widening participation agenda

Many students from ‘non-traditional’ backgrounds

Since new degree (1)

Evaluation of social work degree qualification in Englandhttp://www.dh.gov.uk/en/

Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_086079

Small declines in proportions of part time students and in students supported by an employer

Since new degree (2)

?Some evidence that employers now more interested in traineeships than sponsorshipsMay disadvantage ‘older’ students

where salary is an essential part of the household income

Would some full time students find part time study easier?

Issues

How should HEIs and employers work in partnership to develop flexible routes into higher education?

Should there be more flexible study options?Opportunities to switch between full

and part time? Are mature students neglected in

widening participation strategies?