Search results

This study assesses the influence of local government reorganisation on health education provision and support in Welsh secondary schools. The study was conducted in two stages, shortly before, and 31 months after, a local government reorganisation. Respondents for the study were a sample of health education co‐ordinators from 23 secondary schools that represented seven of the eight local education authorities prior to the local government reorganisation in April 1996. Findings revealed several obstacles to schools becoming more health promoting. Lack of time, demands of the National Curriculum, low profile and status given to Personal and Social Education programmes, lack of expertise amongst staff, and the pressure exerted by league tables, were commonly reported by co‐ordinators. The importance of in‐service training for all staff and the need for stronger community and parental links was only raised by a few. The research also suggests that schools are becoming more reliant on health promotion units as opposed to the advisory support in their locality.

Purpose – This chapter identifies the reasons why institutions need to undertake transformation to engage a diverse student population: it presents a model of student retention and success, which centres on student engagement pre- and post-entry.

Methodology/approach – The chapter overviews the literature on student retention and success and utilises emerging findings from the meta-analysis of the What works? Student retention and success programme.

Findings – The emerging model puts student engagement at the heart of student retention and success. Institutions should promote engagement by•Provision of a range of opportunities for student engagement of different types, at different levels, across the institution in different sites (academic sphere, social sphere and professional services sphere), throughout the student lifecycle.•Developing students to recognise the importance of engagement and to have the capacity to engage in a range of opportunities.•Developing staff responsibility for and capacity to provide effective engagement opportunities.•Taking responsibility for engagement, including monitoring engagement and acting when there are indicators of lower levels of engagement.•Creating a partnership between students and institutions towards a shared outcome of successful learners and graduates.

Research limitations – This chapter draws on emergent findings from the What works? programme.

Practical implications – This chapter assists institutions to improve student retention and success by focusing on engagement and institutional culture.

Social implications – The model assists institutions to critically consider transformation to engage a diverse student population and improve retention and success.

Originality/value – The chapter pre-views original research about engagement, retention and success, which are international concerns.

Purpose – This chapter provides an overview of the book and discusses student diversity and institutional responses.

Methodology/approach – The chapter draws together literature and conceptual thinking about what student diversity is. It then analyses the drivers for increased diversity within higher education in the case studies in this book. Alternative approaches to diversity are presented, drawing on a synthesis of approaches identified in the literature. Finally, the chapter provides a summary of the other chapters and the associated case studies.

Findings – The chapter finds that diversity incorporates difference across a number of dimensions: education, personal disposition, current circumstances and cultural heritage. There are a wide range of reasons prompting institutions to recruit a diverse student population: a commitment to social justice, expansion and access to new markets, tapping the pool of talent, enhancing the student experience, national and/or regional policy, funding incentives, conforming with equality legislation, institutional research and personal commitment of staff. Institutions can respond to diversity in different ways. The idealised types are: altruistic (no institutional change), academic (little or no change), utilitarian (special access and additional support mechanisms) and transformative (positive view of diversity resulting in institutional development).

Research limitations – This chapter draws largely on the author's work in England and the United Kingdom and the case studies presented in this book.

Practical implications – This chapter is important as an introduction to the book, and providing frameworks to think about diversity.

Social implications – The framework for institutional change assists institutions to critically consider the response they make to a more diverse student population.

Originality/value – The paper provides original perspectives to conceptualising and responding to diversity.

Purpose – This chapter answers the question ‘what does a transformed institution look like’ by presenting a framework for institutional transformation to mainstream diversity. It exemplifies the framework by assessing how well English higher education institutions (HEIs) are doing with respect to mainstreaming. Relevant examples of change from the case studies are identified.

Methodology/approach – Reports from two institutional change programmes in the United Kingdom and the European Universities Charter on Lifelong Learning are synthesised to create a framework for change to mainstream diversity. The framework is used to assess the progress of English HEIs. This analysis is based on data from a thematic review of the Widening Participation Strategic Assessments (WPSAs) prepared by each of the 129 English HEIs. Each WPSA was coded up. Query reports were read and re-read to identify common approaches and themes.

Findings – The 12 item framework for mainstreaming diversity demonstrates that institutions need to attend to both infrastructure (policies, processes and procedures) and the institutional culture (the understandings and implementation of a strategy). The analysis suggests that English HEIs are making good progress towards this challenging agenda of change.

Research limitations – The WPSAs are a subjective account of WP, and claims have not been checked. Furthermore, WPSAs were written at a specific time and so only provide a snap-shot of institutional approaches to diversity.

Practical implications – This chapter assists institutions to think about, plan and evaluate institutional transformation.

Social implications – This approach puts diversity at the centre of HEIs.

Originality/value – The chapter provides an original framework to assist institutions to assess their progress with regard to institutional transformation to engage a diverse student body.