does access work? the relative performance of access students at a scottish university

Higher Education 33: 155–176, 1997. 155c 1997 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Does access work? The relative performance of access students ata Scottish university

MICHAEL OSBORNE, JOHN LEOPOLD & ALISTAIR FERRIEUniversity of Stirling, Stirling, UK

Abstract. Since the mid-1980s there have been very considerable changes in participationrates of all age cohorts in higher education courses within higher education institutions andfurther education colleges in Scotland. In particular there have been disproportionate increasesin the number of entrants aged 21 and over to full time undergraduate and sub-degree courses.

The increasing heterogeneity of the undergraduate population raises questions of perfor-mance of the different populations of students. Whilst some research has previously beencarried out on the performance of mature, ‘non-standard’ and ‘non-traditional’ students, exist-ing data is constrained by the restricted data sets of national admissions systems, and thelimitations of institutional record-keeping. In particular, little information exists on studentswhose entry route is the Access Course despite its designation as the ‘third’ route into highereducation (DES 1987) and its increasing popularity as a mode of entry from the late 1980s tothe present day.

In this study the performance of students admitted to the University of Stirling with avariety of traditional and non-traditional qualifications is compared. Using detailed studentrecords, fine distinctions by type of Access programme or other mature entry qualificationsand by points scores in GCE ‘A’ levels and SCE ‘Highers’ are compared. We show thatperformance of former Access students bears a relationship to the extent of control that theuniversity exerts on the particular type of Access programme. We confirm that non-Accessstudents who didn’t enter the university direct from school, but who came in with a varietyof qualifications perform at least as well as ‘standard’ entrants. Our studies of entrants with‘standard’ qualifications confirms previous research that points scores are important indicationsof success or failure. Finally study of a discrete sub-set of former Access students studyingMathematics and Science courses at the university shows that their performance is slightlypoorer than all Access students.

Introduction

Since the mid-1980s there have been very considerable changes in partici-pation rates of all age cohorts within higher education courses both withinhigher education institutions (HEIs) and further education institutions (FECs)in Scotland.1 In particular, there have been disproportionate increases in thenumbers of entrants aged 21 and above to full-time undergraduate and sub-degree courses; during the period 1987 to 1994 whilst the overall increase inrecruitment to all such full-time courses of higher education was 104.7% theequivalent figure for mature entrants was 201.7% (Scottish Office Education

156

Table 1. Entrants to higher education courses (year 1) in Scotland by mode of study and age,1987 and 1994

1987 (% of whole 1994 (% of whole % Changenumber cohort) number cohort) 1987–1994

Full-time 26737 54727 104.7Full-time (HEIs) 21637 80.9 36622 66.9 69.3Full-time (FECs) 5100 19.1 18105 33.1 255.0Full-time 21+ 6978 26.1 21051 38.5 201.7Full-time 21+ (HEIs) 4889 18.3 11626 21.2 137.8Full-time 21+ (FECs) 2089 7.8 9425 17.2 351.2

Source: SOED (1992) and SOEID (1995)

Department (SOED) 1992 and Scottish Office Education & Industry Depart-ment (SOEID) 1995). Table 1 shows that as a result of the differential rateof expansion over this period mature entrants share of total new enrolmentsmoved from 26.1% to 38.5%.

Although these changes have not been as accentuated in HEIs as in FECs,the HE sector, within which the following study is situated, nonethelessdisplays a population change of dramatic proportions. In HEIs between 1987and 1994 total enrolments to full-time undergraduate and sub-degree coursesincreased by 66.9%; entrants aged 21 and above rose by 137.8% over the sametime, taking their share of total new enrolments in the sector from 22.6% to31.7%.2

At the University of Stirling, the institution being considered in this study,there has been a particularly rapid increase in mature entrants to full-timecourses, with the most spectacular changes occurring in 1992 and 1993. Inthe period 1988 to 1993 mature entry to full-time courses has increased from17.5% to 32.1%.

Much of this rise can be ascribed to a policy within the institution to increaserecruitment through Access3 routes both through the creation of in-houseprovision and through the setting up of fixed link courses with FECs under theumbrella of the Scottish Wider Access Programme (SWAP). From a modestlevel of recruitment in 1990 of 19 students representing 2.3% of all new full-time entrants, in 1993 all Access entrants to full-time programmes numbered155, 13.3% of all new enrolees. The remaining 18.8% of 1993 entrants whoare mature possess either ‘non-traditional’ qualifications, primarily those ofthe Scottish Vocational Education Council (SCOTVEC)4 and the Businessand Technician Education Council (BTEC), and Open University credits orwith ‘standard’ qualifications, namely Scottish Certificate of Education (SCE)Highers or General Certificate of Education (GCE) ‘A’ levels.

157

With this increase of entrants with Access qualifications and with a rangeof other qualifications deemed as ‘non-traditional’, it is of interest to deter-mine in detail what proportions of entrants hold particular qualifications, andwhether the capacity of these different cohorts to perform at university andtheir completion rates match that of traditional entrants through school-basedexaminations. Furthermore, because traditional entrants themselves are a het-erogeneous group in terms of entry qualifications, holding a range of SCEHigher and GCE ‘A’ Level points scores, comparisons are likely to be morevaluable if this group can be further differentiated for purposes of intra- andinter-comparison.

In the study described in this paper the performance of all students whoentered full-time courses at the University of Stirling in 1992 and 1993 hasbeen analysed in relation to the qualifications they held at entry. Entrants havenot only been distinguished by broad categories such as Access, SCOTVEC,BTEC, SCE Higher and GCE ‘A’ level, but also using finer distinctions includ-ing entry through the university’s in-house Access programme, SWAP Accessand UK Access outside Scotland in order to determine whether differences inperformance relate to the extent of input made by the university to preparatorycourses. Finer distinctions have also been applied to traditional qualificationsso that performance can be related to bands of SCE Higher and GCE ‘A’ levelpoints scores.

Because of the relative scarcity of Access courses leading to Mathematics,Science and Technology programmes in the UK as a whole, and the particulardifficulty in preparing mature students for such disciplines where a substantialbody of specific and sequentially learnt knowledge and skills is required(Osborne and Woodrow 1989), the performance of students in these subjectareas was investigated as a subset of the whole.

The classification of mature, ‘non-standard’ and ‘non-traditional’ students

One of the difficulties of investigating the participation of mature students inHE is associated with definitions (Gallacher and Wallis 1993). The pejorativeterm ‘non-standard’, although historically frowned upon by bodies such as theCouncil for National Academic Awards (CNAA), is used in many studies, butalong with ‘non-traditional’ is variously defined in different subjects. In somework these terms are synonymous with mature status, but in others refer toqualifications held at entry. Consequently in many cases the ‘non-standard’or ‘non-traditional’ entrant is one who holds qualifications other than thenormal minimum entry qualifications measured in terms of GCE ‘A’ levels,SCE Highers or the equivalent, and so in some instances may be younger thanthe minimum age that defines ‘mature’. Additionally, ‘mature’ operationally

158

has been defined as 21 and over, 23 and over, or 25 and over in differentstudies.

In practice the commonly accepted age of delineation between ‘non-mature’and ‘mature’ is 21, and this has been used in Scotland by the Scottish Uni-versities Council on Entrance (SUCE). Furthermore, for statistical purposes,SUCE has defined ‘non-standard’ entrants simply as those not holding GCE‘A’ levels or SCE Highers. It is these definitions that are applied in this study.

Trends in the participation of mature ‘non-standard’ and ‘non-traditional’students

Since the mid-1980s there has been a steady increase in the proportions ofnon-traditional and mature entrants into higher education throughout the UK.This emphasis on increased participation has been documented extensivelyand reflects national, local and institutional desires both to increase and tobroaden access. Detailed discussions of the factors that have been instrumentalin promoting the growth of access to higher education in the UK are providedby both Lieven (1989) and Smith, Scott and Mackay (1993) amongst others.Within the UK as a whole Lieven suggests four ideological positions that areadopted by those concerned with promoting access: the liberal commitmentto providing equal opportunities for individual self-fulfilment; the radicalempowering of disadvantaged groups in society; the drive for survival byeducational institutions in part associated with demographic pressures; andthe drive by government in particular to retrain the adult population for newprofessions as part of increasing economic efficiency.

In Scotland, particularly, Osborne and Gallacher (1994) have identifiedthree principal factors in Scotland that have contributed to widening accessand encouraging adult students to participate in HE since the late 1980s: likeLieven (1989) the economic argument which had been a theme of successiveUK governments since the 1970s; demographic trends pointing to a radicaldecrease in school-leavers in the mid 1990s (SOED 1993); and ‘social justice’arguments which can be traced back to longstanding traditions of a Scottishhigher educational system that is ‘democratic’ and accessible to the localcommunity (Anderson 1983). The former two factors were clearly elementsunderpinning Scottish Education Department (SED) (1988) support for theScottish Wider Access Programme (SWAP) initiative (Gallacher and Osborne1991) and the latter may have been influential in obtaining support from allScottish universities who themselves have had a history of offering their ownAccess Course provision which can be traced back to 1981 (Dalgarno andHart 1987).

SWAP is the most high profile and well documented adult access develop-ment within Scotland. Set up in 1988, as a response to the 1987 White Paper,

159

Table 2. Non-standard entrants (NSEs) to full-time under-graduate degrees in the right ‘old’ universities, 1990, 1991 and1992

Qualification 1990 1991 1992

Scotvec NCs 58 77 88Scotvec HNC/HND 309 372 434BTEC NC/ND 57 68 103BTEC HNC/HND 129 70 139Scottish Access course 260 364 477Other UK Access course 31 51 73Partially completed UK degree 182 169 197Other UK qualifications 72 80 74No formal qualifications 44 93 94Total NSEs 1142 1344 1679Total entrants over 21 2314 2556 3265Total entrants 13521 14541 16413

Source: SUCE (1991, 1992a and 1994)

Higher Education – Meeting the Challenge which had focused on the impor-tance of widening participation to vocationally relevant education (Depart-ment of Education and Science (DES) 1987), this Access course initiativeillustrates the strength of central government in Scotland with programmesnow offered as part of the normal provision of all FECs. SWAP coursesare mainly full-time and are based on nationally recognised qualifications,namely modules of study drawn from the extensive National Certificate (NC)catalogue of the Scottish Vocational Education Council (SCOTVEC).

However, despite its popularity Access provision alone cannot accountfor the phenomenon of increased adult participation in Scotland. Accordingto data gathered by the Scottish Universities Council on Entrance (SUCE1991, 1992a and 1994), for the ‘older’ scottish universities, Access is thesecond largest contributor to the ‘non-standard’ typology in each of the years1990, 1991 and 1992 (Table 2). Nevertheless this represents only 2.2%,2.9% and 2.9% respectively of all entrants to full-time degrees. In theseyears, other principal ‘non-standard’ routes, as defined by SUCE, includeSCOTVEC HNC/HNDs and partially completed degrees. It is also of notethat approximately a half of mature entrants to the ‘older’ universities overthis period possessed ‘traditional’ qualifications, namely GCE ‘A’ Levels orSCE Highers.

Further analysis of related information (SUCE 1992b), which shows break-downs of these figures by institution, indicates substantial differences inrecruitment practice which may in part accord with the findings of Smith,

160

Scott and Mackay (1993) who suggest that the position of institutions inrelation to access bears some relationship to their historical status as ‘old-er’ universities, former polytechnics or colleges. In 1991 in Scotland, ‘non-standard’ entrants as a proportion of all entrants varied from a low of 1.7%in one ‘ancient’ university to an upper extreme of 15.2% at another institu-tion established in the 1960s. Furthermore differences in emphasis within the‘non-standard’ ‘typology’ exist across universities with the SCOTVEC routebeing the most popular in the technological-orientated institutions founded inthe 1960s, and with Access to the fore in older institutions and those with anarts, social science and business studies leaning.

The performance of undergraduates in relation to traditional entryqualifications

As previously indicated the majority of entrants to the ‘old’ Scottish univer-sities do so on the basis of their performance in SCE Highers and GCE ‘A’levels (SUCE 1994). Whilst these qualifications remain the ‘standard’ routeto HE they are the benchmark for comparison. However, the validity of pointsscores derived from grades obtained from these qualifications as a methodof selective entry to universities has been the subject of some controversy,there being a debate that such scores are poor indicators of subsequent degreeperformance.

Bourner with Hamed (1987) analysed the degree performance of 24032UK graduates from CNAA full-time and sandwich courses in 1983 and foundthat those entrants with high GCE ‘A’ level points scores were most likelyto obtain the highest degree results. Smithers and Robinson (1989), also,in the case of GCE ’A’ level scores, have demonstrated a strong associationbetween high points scores and high degree classes, and low points scores andhigh non-completion rates for two cohorts of 2104 and 3268 students drawnfrom a range of UK higher education institutions. Their study, however, alsodemonstrates that overall passes at any class of degree are remarkably similarfor those with high scores (24 or above points) and medium scores (14–22points) at GCE ’A’ level (97.6% and 95.3% respectively). By contrast thosewith low scores (less than 14 points) achieve lower pass rates (83.2%). Thiswould seem to point to the extremes of points scores as being importantindicators of success or failure.

Within Scotland performance based on ‘standard’ qualifications must takeinto account entrants with both GCE ‘A’ levels and SCE Highers. The differ-ences between entrants with each of these qualifications has been exploredin a survey by Entwistle et al. (1991). A major finding of the research, whichused data derived from the Universities Statistical Record, was that within‘old’ universities, ‘at every grade level, ‘A’ level entrants obtained a high-

161

er proportion of good Honours degrees than did SCE entrants’. This trend,however, comes with cautionary notes: for instance, the researchers suggestthat GCE ‘A’ level entrants to Scottish universities are ‘to some extent, atypical both of Scottish entrants and of ‘A’ level students elsewhere in theUnited Kingdom’, being on average older, more likely to have parents fromprofessional occupations and to have attended public schools.

When considering SCE Highers in isolation nonetheless these researchersdo show a high points score is more likely to lead to a ‘good’ degree (first orupper second) than a low points score.

The performance of mature, ‘non-standard’ and ‘non-traditional’ studentsin HE

The performance of mature students within higher education began to attractsignificant attention in the mid-1980s when for the first time significant num-bers of ‘non-traditional’ (in sense of age at entry and under-representation inhigher education) students began to be admitted to undergraduate provision.Questions of ‘standards’ were first raised by government within the LindopReport (Department of Education and Science (DES) 1985) which suggestedthat these might have been lowered for Access entrants. Other statementscontradicted this view, particularly that within the 1987 White Paper (Meet-ing the Challenge) which states that government ‘sees no evidence in generalthat standards are impaired by the admission of students through this route’(DES 1987). Although both views had significant impacts on policy towardsAccess, neither is based on empirical evidence since little research on theperformance of ex-Access students in HE or their effect on ‘standards’ hadbeen undertaken, a situation that still holds to a large degree today becauseof the lack of appropriate data sources.

Furthermore, as Capizzi (1996) reports, the data that does exist on com-pletion rates for mature students in further and higher education can beproblematic. She quotes McGivney who reports ‘problems of comparabilityand compatibility between national sets of data provided by different centralbodies such as Universities Statistical Record (USR), Further Education Sta-tistical Record (FESR)’ (Capizzi 1996, p. 35) and Webb et al. (1994) whofound significant levels of error in institution’s own methods of processingentry qualifications of students.

A comprehensive review of the research in the field of the performance ofnon-traditional entrants has been carried out by Gallacher and Wallis (1993) inwhich they conclude ‘that non-traditionally qualified students perform at leastas well as, and in some cases better than, traditionally qualified students whendegree performance (measured by percentages achieving ‘good’ degrees) isconsidered’. Furthermore their survey indicates that older students perform

162

better than those under 21 in arts and social sciences, but that this tendency isless likely in science, engineering, health studies and medicine. Of particularnote is the work of Bourner with Hamed (1987) who report that 39.5% ofthose graduating from CNAA full-time or sandwich degrees in 1983 who hadentered with ‘non-standard’ entry qualifications obtained ‘good’ degrees, (i.e.firsts or upper seconds), while only 34.9% of graduates who were GCE ‘A’level entrants achieved this level of performance.

Molloy and Carroll (1992), in their smaller scale study of 1533 graduatesfrom five HEIs, report that whilst 30.1% of ‘non-standard’ entrants gain a‘good’ degree as against 32.1% of ‘standard’ entrants, this represents onlybetween two and four more in every 100 ‘standard’ as entrants that are likelyto graduate with good degrees. On this basis they suggest that their ‘at leastas well’ (ALAW) hypothesis holds for ‘non-standard’ versus ‘standard’ entryperformance.

Although the term ‘non-standard’ applies to a variety entry routes, it isthe Access course which has grown to become the doyen of this category ofadmission from the mid to late 1980s onwards; even so the performance ofthis particular subgroup of non-traditional entrants is still largely unknown.

Some data was gathered by Yates and Davies (1987), who studied some ofthe early cohorts of Access entrants in England (largely London), and showedthat of a group of 619 students in 12 HE institutions at least 74.3% had atthe time of the survey progressed satisfactorily. Overall the researchers inthis study concluded that the performance of ex-Access students comparedfavourably with other entrants, though there was evidence of differences bydiscipline area. Whilst the highest satisfactory completion or progressionrates were in non-science vocational areas such as Social Work (81.6%),there was a notable contrast in science, technology and engineering where thecorresponding figure was 44.9%. Even so this latter figure should be treatedwith caution as they represent a cohort of only 69 students largely drawn fromone FE college who had progressed in the main to one HE institution, thelimitations of the sample being due to the relative paucity of Access provisionat the time of the survey.

Surprising no similar national survey of performance has been carriedout since this time despite the rapid increase in Access programmes in thelast ten years. Other studies have been undertaken, but have been eitherlimited to a few institutions or certain disciplines. For example, Molloy andCarroll (1992) have considered the performance of entrants to five HEIs inYorkshire and have compared ‘standard’ to ‘non-standard’ entrants, and haveseparately considered former Access students. Of note is their finding thatwhilst the overall completion rates of the Access cohort is relatively high,the proportion of ‘good’ degrees obtained by this group is lower at 25.4%

163

than the 32.1% of ‘standard entrants’. The work of Osborne (1988) wasfocused on mathematics, science and technology, and although it consideredmuch of the existing provision, this constituted only a small sample forwhom progression data within HE could be obtained. The study showed that60% of 123 students from four London FE colleges had either completed orsuccessfully progressed in their HE studies.

The ‘dearth of data’ on the performance of ex-Access students has beenattributed by Davies (1994) to the omission by the Universities Central Coun-cil on Admissions (UCCA) (and until recently the Polytechnics and CollegesAdmissions System (PCAS)) of Access as an entry category and data specif-ically related to the performance of ex-Access students in Scotland is evenmore limited.5 Lack of data in the case of Access courses can possibly beexplained by the relative recency of such initiatives. Those studies that existrelate to single institutions and report variable success for ex-Access students.For instance, a recent investigation at the University of Stirling shows that87.9% of a cohort of 58 Access entrants to secondary teacher training havesuccessfully completed part one of their degree programme (Osborne, Copeand Johnstone 1994).

Access students performance compared

In an attempt to address the lack of data about the relative performance ofAccess students compared with traditional entry, the authors present findingsbased on the exam performance of two complete cohorts of students whoentered the University of Stirling in academic years 1992–93 and 1993–94.The 1992–93 cohort were under degree regulations which required them tocomplete successfully part I of the degree after three semesters before beingpermitted to move on to part II. The regulations governing the 1993–94 cohertrequired a progress assessment point after for two semesters of study. Thusfor both cohorts we have a complete set of unit grades which were used tojudge progress formally. In addition we have complete data from the Accessstudents who entered the university in 1991–92, but not for all the otherstudents as the data set is incomplete in significant respects.

Relevant data were extracted from the University’s computer records and,after checking and coding, were analysed using SPSS-X. The basic unit ofanalysis for this paper is the semester unit grade, rather than the individualstudent. This is due to the way the data is organised. Students normally studythree units per semester and receive a grade in each subject in each semester.Grades A, B and C are all pass grades, D and E are fail grades, although D iscompensatable in certain circumstances. Grade X is awarded for students whofail to complete a unit. We have a total of 17,796 unit grades which represents

164

approximately 2,400 students, but as the data record is not compete for everyvariable, in some cases the analysis is based on fewer unit grades, usually15,451. The analysis is presented in terms of the combined 1992–93 and1993–94 data, with commentary where either year was different, or wherethe results from 1991–92 Access students were different.

Students gain access to the University of Stirling from a wide range ofsources. For the purposes of this study we differentiate the following groups.

Access students: Stirling

Linked – SWAP (The University in partnership with

FE Colleges)

Other Scottish FE (non-linked SWAP)

Other Scottish HE

School leavers: GCE ‘A’ Level

SCE Highers – 5th year entry

SCE Highers – 6th year entry

SCE Highers – 6th year, but qualifications gained in 5th

College leavers Open University (OU)

BTEC

SCE Highers – not direct from School

SCOTVEC

From the above list it can be seen that Access students themselves come froma variety of sources, over which the University has varying degrees of controland influence. This ranges from complete control over the teaching, gradingand entry decision with the University’s own Access course, through somecontrol with linked Access courses in FE Colleges, through to having little orno control over the qualifications and standards as with other Scottish or UKAccess.

School leavers come in a variety of shapes and forms; the main differentia-tion being between GCE ‘A’ level and SCE Higher entry. Even with the SCEHighers category there are fine degrees of variation between 5th and 6th yearentry and with people who have SCE Highers but have not come to Univer-sity straight from school. This latter point requires us to differentiate maturestudents from Access students. Mature students are defined as people agedover 21 on entry to university, but need not necessarily have come throughan Access route but could enter with SCE Highers or with vocational quali-fications obtained in the FE sector. Virtually all Access students are maturestudents, but not all mature students are Access students.

165

Table 3. 1992 and 1993 entry. Semester unit grades by entry qualification

Unit grades (%)Pass grades Fail grades No grade

Entry qualification A B C Pass D E X N. unit(A+B+C) grades

School entryA Level 17.2 62.9 16.5 96.6 1.3 0.6 1.6 4062Higher 6th year,5th year exams 10.5 59.7 25.1 95.3 2.2 0.9 1.5 1423Higher 5th year. 6.3 58.4 29.4 94.1 3.3 1.3 1.3 632Higher 6th year 5.4 54.1 34.2 93.7 3.1 1.0 2.2 4409

All school 10.7 58.5 25.9 95.0 2.3 0.8 1.8 10526

College entryHigher, not direct 10.0 60.5 22.4 92.9 2.4 0.8 4.0 1100OU 25.8 53.8 19.2 98.8 1.1 0 0 182BTEC 9.6 53.4 28.6 91.6 3.9 2.4 2.1 674SCOTVEC 8.2 56.8 27.8 92.8 2.8 1.9 2.6 1173

All college 10.2 57.2 25.6 93.0 2.8 1.5 2.8 3129

Access entryStirling 6.7 62.5 27.1 96.3 1.0 0.7 2.0 299Linked Access 8.3 50.1 29.0 87.4 4.7 1.6 6.3 924UK Access 17.3 56.9 20.4 94.6 3.6 0.4 1.3 225Other Scottish FE 4.8 47.2 36.2 88.2 4.8 2.2 5.7 229Other Scottish HE 7.5 43.4 39.6 90.5 3.8 0 5.7 53

All Access 8.7 52.5 28.8 90.0 3.8 1.3 4.8 1730

All students 10.3 57.6 26.2 94.3 2.6 1.0 2.3 15451

Source: University of Stirling student records.

Given the diverse background of our students how can we compare per-formance? For the cohort of students we have 15,451 unit grades from thefirst part of the relevant degree schemes where we have data for both entryqualification and grade. The combined for 1992 and 1993 results are set out inTable 3.6 Of these grades, for all students 94.3% were at a pass level; 10.3%As, 57.6% Bs, 26.2% Cs. A further 2.6% were Ds which could, under the reg-ulations covering the 1992–93 entry students, be compensated by a grade B orabove in another unit. So, overall a very high proportion of the grades award-ed are pass grades and only one per cent of grades are complete fails (Es),with about 2.3% of grades signifying that students have withdrawn from, ornot completed units. How do grades awarded to students with different entrybackgrounds compare?

166

Overall it must be repeated that Stirling students do well. Over 94% ofgrades awarded are pass grades and allowing for compensation this rises to97%. There is not a great deal of differentiation within these figures. Studentsentering directly from school perform slightly better than the average level ofall students. College, but not directly Access, entrants have a profile that is onlymarginally weaker than that of all students although there were some markedvariations in performance between the two years. Access based students havea lower (4.3 percentage points) overall pass rate and are less likely to obtainAs and Bs, and more likely to obtain Cs and Ds. There is, however, somedifferentiation within the Access group of students. Overall students fromthe University’s own Access course have the second highest overall passrate (96.3%), whereas students from Scottish FE SWAP courses have thelowest (87.4%, linked; 88.2% non-linked). Further analysis shows that theperformance by students from the internal Access course remains consistentover the period 1991–93 and that the lower pass rates for FE linked coursesare attributed in the main to one particular institution’s students.

However, there is a much greater differentiation when we look at the stan-dards of the passes. Former OU students do outstandingly well, but this isbased on a small number of cases. Of more importance is the relatively supe-rior performance of GCE ‘A’ level entry students, gaining 17.2% A grades,compared to the average of 10.3% and the relative weaker performance ofSCE Higher entry students entering directly from completing their schoolexams, whether in the fifth or sixth year at school. SCE Higher entry studentswho spent a further year at school or who didn’t enter University direct fromschool performed around the average. In short, the students for whom oursystem is designed performed less well, whereas GCE ‘A’ level students who,arguably, may have covered some of our first year material in their GCE‘A’ level syllabus, performed exceptionally well. Whether that differential ismaintained or levelled out over a four year degree programme will be thesubject of a further study in two years time, when these cohorts of studentsgraduate.

In summary, the data supports the view that Access entrants can performas well as those with traditional qualifications, but within the Access groupstudents from courses where the University has some control over the contenttend to do better than those from courses which the University has lessinfluence over. There should however be some concerns about the differentialperformance of SCE Higher school leavers compared with GCE ‘A’ levelentrants. These differences will be explored further in a later section in lookingat the differential performance of such students based on SCE Higher and GCE‘A’ level points scores.

167

Mature students

As stated earlier, about one third of Stirling students are mature (over 21on entry) and this includes nearly all Access students, but also a significantproportion of other entrants. The performance of mature students comparedwith the average is shown in Table 4. While mature students are marginallyless likely (by two percentage points) to pass overall, by the same figure theyare slightly more likely to obtain an A grade pass but are also more likely notto obtain a grade.

Table 4. Semester unit grades (%) by mature students 1992 and 1993 entry

Pass grades Fail grades No gradeEntry qualification A B C Pass D E X N. unit

(A+B+C) grades

Student TypeAll students 10.3 57.6 26.4 94.3 2.6 1.0 2.3 15451Mature students 12.3 55.8 24.2 92.3 2.8 1.1 3.9 4997


Sex

We can also compare the relative performance of the different sexes. Essen-tially Table 5 shows little variance in the relative performance of male andfemale students. By 2.1 percentage points females are marginally more likelyto pass overall, and males are slightly more likely to obtain no grade awards.While this relationship is consistent over time, the proportion of studentsgaining A grade passes varied. Females in the 1993 cohort scored more Asthan males, whereas in 1991 and 1992 the position was reversed.

Table 5. Semester unit grades (%) by sex 1992 and 1993 entry

Pass grades Fail grades No gradeEntry qualification A B C Pass D E X N. unit

(A+B+C) grades

Male 10.8 57.2 24.8 92.8 2.7 1.3 3.3 8315Female 11.0 58.2 25.7 94.9 2.3 0.7 2.1 9481All 10.9 57.7 25.3 93.9 2.5 1.0 2.6 17796


168

Performance by GCE ‘A’ level and SCE ‘H’ point scores

As discussed in our introduction, earlier studies of GCE ‘A’ level and SCE‘H’ point scores have suggested a strong association between high pointsscores and high degree classes, and low points scores and non-completionrates. However in terms of obtaining any class of degree those with high andmedium scores are as likely to succeed. These results relate to final degreeclassifications; our results, presented below, relate to the completion of Part Iof a four year degree programme, but we are able to examine both GCE ‘A’level and SCE ‘H’ point scores. It must be stressed, as it has been in othersimilar discussions, that the points score from the two different educationsystems are not to be taken as directly comparable.

In Table 3 we saw that overall 96.6% of unit grades awarded to Stirlingstudents who entered with GCE ‘A’ levels were pass grades. On examining theGCE ‘A’ level entrants classified by points scores, all points score groupingsabove 20 points obtained that pass rate or above. On points scores below 18,students had a lower pass rate. Students between 18 and 20 points achievedaround the average.

In the total population of GCE ‘A’ level entrants 17.2% of grades awardedwere As. Students with points scores of 21 and over had an even greaterproportion of A grades, rising to 48.5% for those with 30 points. GCE ‘A’level students with less than 20 points had fewer A grades than the GCE ‘A’level cohort as a whole, but were above the average of all students (10.3%).

A similar pattern emerges when we examine SCE ‘H’ point scores; overall93.9% of grades awarded to students with SCE Higher entry qualificationswere passes. Students with 16 or more SCE ‘H’ points obtained that rate ofpass or better. With less than 16 points there was a lower pass rate.

7.1% of all SCE ‘H’ grade entrants obtained A grade passes. However thosewith 24 points or above obtained figures comparable with the overall GCE ‘A’level entrant A grade rate of 17.2%. This compares with the top GCE ‘A’ levelentrants. Those with 18 points (7.1%) and 20 points (7.2%) obtained aroundthe SCE ‘H’ grade average score of 7.1% As. At all the lower points scores,students did less well in obtaining A grade passes and were more likely toobtain fail grades.

In summary, the SCE ‘H’ grade entrants with the highest points scores(22 and above) were more likely to pass overall and to obtain A grades.Their performance was comparable with the higher point scores of GCE ‘A’level entrants. For both types of entrants there is a grouping in the middlepoints scores who perform around the average. In both cases there is a middleband of solid performance around the entry route average (GCE ‘A’ level18–20 points, SCE ‘H’ grade 16–20). Below these points scores there is aweaker group who tend to perform less well in both passing overall and in

169

obtaining A grade passes. However in the case of GCE ‘A’ level entrants theperformance of this latter group is around the average for the University asa whole, whereas for weaker SCE Higher grade entrants the performance isbelow average, particularly for obtaining A grade passes. Nonetheless, over90% of grades obtained by these students are pass ones.

Comparisons between subjects

Previous studies (Yates and Davies 1987; Osborne 1988) suggest that Math-ematics, Science and Technology based Access students perform less wellthan those in arts and social science. Our data permits us to analyse separatelythose pursuing science based degrees, or taking science based units within anarts or social science degree. It has to be said that the science base at the Uni-versity of Stirling is somewhat narrow and this analysis contains four broadgroupings – Biological & Molecular Science, Environmental Science, Math-ematics & Computing and Psychology even though the latter two subjectsare not taught within the boundaries of the University’s School of NaturalSciences.

The results from Mathematics and Science based students are presented inTable 6 which is comparable with Table 3. Overall the pass rate in Mathematicsand Science units is slightly less than in the University as a whole (92.9% cf94.3%). A grades are more common (13.4% cf 10.3%), but the proportionsbetween Bs and Cs are somewhat different, there being less science Bs andmore Cs.

In terms of the relative performance of students with different entry qual-ifications, the picture for students taking Mathematics and Science units isbroadly similar to that for all students. Science students entering directly fromschool perform around the level of all students. College Science entrants hadslightly fewer overall passes (by 1.8 percentage points), but more A grades (by5.7 percentage points) Access students taking Mathematics and Science unitshave a somewhat lower (by 6.8 percentage points) overall pass rate comparedwith school leavers and are less likely to obtain As and Bs, and more likely toobtain Ds, Es and no grades. Unlike the overall Access population, Sciencestudents from Stirling’s own Access course and linked Access courses, do notperform as well.

In terms of A grade passes, the patterns are also similar. Former OU studentsdo best of all, but students from all UK sources (GCE ‘A’ Level, BTEC, UKAccess) do better than their Scottish counterparts. Students direct from 5thyear Highers taking Mathematics and Science do better than the same groupin the University as a whole. Overall we must conclude that in Mathematicsand Science units, Access students do not perform as well as in all units.

170

Table 6. Science students semester unit grades by entry qualification 1992 and 1993 entry



School entryA level 26.0 54.1 16.5 96.6 1.5 0.4 1.4 1275Higher 6th year,5th year exams 12.7 53.7 27.7 94.1 3.3 1.2 1.5 671Higher 5th year 10.1 53.5 30.2 93.8 3.5 0.3 2.4 288Higher 6th year 6.0 46.7 40.0 92.7 4.1 1.0 2.2 2036

All school 13.3 50.4 30.4 94.1 3.1 0.8 1.9 4270

Non school entryHigher, not direct 15.7 50.4 23.2 89.3 4.3 1.2 5.2 345OU 37.0 44.0 18.0 99.0 1.0 0 0 100SCOTVEC/BTEC 12.2 48.5 30.4 91.1 3.3 2.2 3.3 540

All non school 15.9 48.7 26.6 91.2 3.5 1.6 3.7 985

Access entryStirling� 10.3 51.4 24.7 86.4 5.5 3.4 4.8 146Linked access 7.7 44.6 33.5 85.8 6.3 2.1 5.8 520UK access 24.1 50.0 20.7 94.8 3.4 0.9 0.9 116Other Scottish HE 0 20.0 80.0 100.0 0 0 0 5

All access 10.5 46.5 30.2 87.2 5.7 2.2 4.8 787All 13.4 49.7 29.8 92.9 3.5 1.1 2.5 6042

�Including one linked FE College for 1993Source: University of Stirling student records

The performance pattern of mature students taking Mathematics and Sci-ence units is similar to that of mature students overall (less likely to pass,but more likely to obtain an A grade). Female science students are marginal-ly more likely to pass overall, but less likely to obtain As, and more likelyto obtain Bs and Cs. This relationship is not robust, as in 1993 the femalesobtained more As, whereas in 1992 males obtained more.

Relating the Mathematics and Science performance to GCE ‘A’ level andSCE Higher point scores, a similar pattern to the general one emerges. Above20 GCE ‘A’ level points students taking Mathematics and Science performabove the GCE ‘A’ level average, for Mathematics and Science at 18 and 20points they perform around the average, on 16 or below they are much less

171

likely to score As and slightly less likely to pass overall, but still perform aswell as all students taking Mathematics and Science.

In terms of SCE Higher points scores, a similar pattern emerges, exceptthat the better than average performance starts at 20 points, while those on 16points perform better than those in either 18 or 20 points in the 1993 cohort.While those below 16 points are much less likely to obtain A grades, theiroverall pass rate is similar to the SCE ‘H’ grade average, albeit with more Cs.The weaker ‘H’ point scores entrants have a pass rate similar to the average,but their grade profile is more skewed to the right, that is more Cs and Ds,than As and Bs.

Overall then the evidence suggests that Access based Mathematics andScience students has a slightly poorer performance compared with all Accessstudents in part I of the degree programme at Stirling.

Conclusions

In this paper we have set out to examine the relative performance of ‘non-traditional’ entrants to the University of Stirling compared with entrantsholding ‘traditional’ GCE ‘A’ level and SCE Highers qualifications. Withinboth the ‘traditional’ and ’non-traditional’ categories we have been able tofurther sub-divide entrants. At this point we only have data for the first partof students’ study, but the data base is substantial.

With regard to Access students we question the hypothesis that Accessstudents perform at least as well as ‘traditional’ entry students; there were5 percentage points difference in pass rate between Access students andall school leaver entrants and 3 percentage points between Access studentsand college entrants. However, a more detailed analysis of Access entrantsrevealed that students from the University’s own course had pass rates onlymarginally lower than GCE ‘A’ level entrants and students from non-ScottishAccess courses had both high pass rates and a large proportion of A gradepasses within these. There is some indication that the more influence andcontrol the University has over Access courses, the better students will per-form subsequently, but that FE entrants performed less well that HE basedAccess students, even where the University had some control over the coursesthrough a linked college scheme.

Non-Access students who didn’t enter the University direct from school,but who came in with a variety of qualifications including Highers, BTECand SCOTVEC, confirm the ALAW hypothesis.

The data also permitted us to examine differences in performance betweenGCE ‘A’ level and SCE Higher entrants, and within both of these categories,in terms of points scores. With the exception of the very small number of OU

172

entrants, GCE ‘A’ level entrant students performed best overall, both in termsof overall pass rates and in terms of achieving A grade passes. This confirmsEntwistle et al.’s (1991) study for degree results, but we don’t have data toexplore the atypical nature of the Stirling GCE ‘A’ level entrants. However,it is noticeable that the Access entrants from England also performed well atthis stage in their studies, although the BTEC entrants performed below theaverage from all non-school entrants.

This study confirms Entwistle et al.’s (1991) finding that Higher entrantswho pass their SCE Highers in 5th year, but stay on at school for a furtheryear do better than those coming to university immediately after their highers,whether they are sat in fifth or sixth year at school.

For both GCE ‘A’ level and SCE Higher students there is confirmation ofthe view that the points scores are important indicators of success or failure.For both sets of entrants, three groups of students could be identified. Thosewith high points scores (GCE ‘A’ level 21 and over, SCE Highers 22 andover) were more likely to pass overall and to obtain a greater proportion of Agrades. A middle band (GCE ‘A’ level 18–20, SCE Higher 16–20) performedaround the average for the particular entry route, while a third group belowthese points scores tended to perform less well in both passing overall and inobtaining A passes.

Finally, we used data which allowed us to examine whether Mathematicsand Science based Access students performed differently from all Accessstudents. The pattern which emerged showed that such students had slightlypoorer performance compared with all Access students.

This study has been based on the performance of students in one Universityand only for part of their degree programme. The analysis is confined largelyto one variable, the entry qualification, and it is recognised that none of thecategories of qualifications that have been differentiated consists of homoge-neous sets of students. Many other variables, not least of all socio-economicones, could be incorporated into a model that would produce a fuller pictureof the factors affecting performance. If, however, Access is truly a third routeinto HE, of equal merit to the vocational routes, as was implied by the 1987White Paper (DES 1987), evidence of performance simply based on the pos-session of this qualification alone compared to the other routes is needed tosustain the assertion of equality. We have gathered a data set that is substantialand these cohorts of students will be followed through to graduation in twoyears time. Overall the figures give some confidence to those who supportAccess and non-traditional entry in that such students can perform at leastas well as, and in some cases, much better than ‘traditional’ entrants, espe-cially where the University has some control over the cohort and delivery ofthe Access course. However, this confidence does not apply to all routes in

173

Access entry and the evidence from this study suggests that universities needto work more closely with FE colleges in order to better prepare students foruniversity entry through non-traditional routes.

Notes

1. Provision in HEIs largely takes the form of degree programmes with some Scottish Voca-tional Education Council Higher National Certificate (HNC) and Higher National Diploma(HND provision. HNCs & HNDs are nominally equivalent to years 1 and 2 respectivelyof the three year Scottish general degree. Provision of HE in FECs is almost exclusivelyof HNCs and HNDs.

2. For a more detailed analysis of the differential changes across HEIs and FECs see Osborneand Gallacher (1994).

3. Access courses are programmes that are specifically designed for mature student entryto Higher education, often with a focus on students under-represented in the sector (e.g.socio-economic groups, women especially in science and technology and ethnic minoritygroups).

4. SCOTVEC is a national body responsible for the development, validation and award ofvocational qualifications in Scotland. For more details in the range of SCOTVEC provision,see Osborne and Gallacher (1994).

5. To an extent this omission in the data set will be remedied by the Higher Education Sta-tistical Agency (HESA), though it does not provide fine distinctions of Access categories.

6. Separate results for each of the years 1992 and 1993 are set out in an appendix (Tables 7and 8)

References

Anderson, R. (1993). Education and Opportunity in Victorian Scotland: Schools and Univer-sities. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Capizzi, E. (1996). ‘Measuring the effectiveness of Access: methods and minefields’, Journalof Access Studies 11(1): 34–58.

Davies, P. (1994). ‘Fourteen years on, what do we know about Access students? Some reflec-tions on national statistical data’, Journal of Access Studies 9(1): 45–60.

Dalgarno, M. and Hart, L. (1987). ‘Access courses to higher education’ in Jordinson, R. (ed),Access by mature students to higher education. Edinburgh: SIACE.

Department of Education and Science (1985). Academic Validation in Public Sector Education:The Report of the Committee of Enquiry into Academic Validation of Degree Courses inPublic Sector Education. Cmnd. 9501. London: HMSO.

Department of Education and Science (1987). Meeting the Challenge. Cmnd. 114. London:HMSO.

Department of Education and Science (1991). Higher Education – A New Framework. Cmnd.1541. London: HMSO.

Entwistle, N., Wall, D., Macaulay, C., Tait, H. and Entwistle, D. (1991). School to HigherEducation: Bridging the Gap. Interchange Report No2. Edinburgh: SOED.

Gallacher, J. and Osborne, M.J. (1991). ‘Differing national models of Access provision’,Journal of Access Studies 6(2): 147–164.

Gallacher, J. and Wallis, W. (1993). The Performance of Students with Non TraditionalQualifications in Higher Education: a Review of Research Literature Commissioned bySCOTVEC. Glasgow: SCOTVEC.

174

Lieven, M. (1989). ‘Access courses after ten years: a review’, Higher Education Quarterly43(2): 160–174.

Molloy, S. and Carroll, V. (1992). Progress and Performance in Higher Education – A Reporton Performance of ‘Standard’ and ‘Non-Standard’ Entrants to Undergraduate Courses.London: CNAA.

Osborne, M.J. (1988). ‘Access courses in mathematics, science and technology: selected casestudies’, J. Access Studies 3(2): 48–63.

Osborne, M.J. and Woodrow, M. (1989). Access to Mathematics, Science and Technology.London: Further Education Unit.

Osborne, M.J., Cope, P. and Johnstone, R. (1994). ‘The backgrounds and experiences of adultreturners to an Access to Secondary Teaching scheme’, Continuing Higher EducationReview 58(1/2): 41–63.

Osborne, M.J. and Gallacher, J. (1994). ‘Access to Higher Education in Scotland’ in Davies,P. (ed), Access to Higher Education – Some International Perspectives. London: JessicaKingsley.

Scottish Education Department (1988). Scottish Wider Access Programme. Letter from Secre-tary of State for Scotland, 22 April 1988.

Scottish Office Education Department (1992). Adults in Schools and Colleges. StatisticalBulletin K1/1992/2. Edinburgh: SOED.

Scottish Office Education Department (1993). Review of the Scottish Wider Access Programme.Edinburgh: SOED.

Scottish Office Education & Industry Department (1995). Personal communication with H.Clifford, 25 November 1995.

Scottish Universities Council on Entrance (1991). Report for 1990–91. St Andrews, SUCE.Scottish Universities Council on Entrance (1992a). Report for 1991–92. St Andrews, SUCE.Scottish Universities Council on Entrance (1992b). Minutes of Committee on Access. St

Andrews, SUCE.Scottish Universities Council on Entrance (1994). Final Report. St Andrews, SUCE.Smith, D.N., Scott. P. and Mackay, L. (1993). ‘Mission impossible? Access and the dash to

growth in British higher education’, Higher Education Quarterly 47(4): 313–333.Webb, S., Davies, P., Thompson, A. and Williams, J. (1994). Alternative Entry to Higher Edu-

cation – Summary Report. Leicester: National Institute for Adult & Continuing Education.Yates, J. and Davies, P. (1987). The Progress and Performance of Former Access Students in

HE, 1984–86. London: Roehampton Institute of Education.

175

Appendix

Table 7. 1992 semester unit grades by entry qualification




All school 10.2 58.6 26.2 95.0 2.4 0.8 1.8 6825


All college 12.0 57.5 24.5 94.0 2.7 0.9 2.3 1809

Access entryStirling 6.4 66.0 24.8 97.2 0 0.7 2.1 141Linked access 8.0 51.9 31.8 91.7 3.9 0.6 3.9 308UK access 19.3 57.8 19.3 96.4 2.2 0.7 0.7 135Other Scottish FE 4.9 50.0 35.1 90.0 3.7 2.0 5.3 245

All access 8.6 54.5 29.6 92.7 2.9 1.1 3.4 829

All students 10.4 58.1 26.1 94.6 2.5 0.9 2.0 9487


176

Table 8. 1993 unit grades by entry qualification




All school 11.5 58.2 25.2 95.0 2.3 0.8 1.9 3701


All college 7.7 56.7 27.0 91.4 2.9 2.3 3.5 1320

Access entryStirling 7.0 59.5 29.1 95.6 1.9 0.6 1.9 158Linked access 8.7 48.5 27.8 85.0 5.2 2.2 7.7 600UK access 14.4 55.6 22.2 92.2 5.6 0 2.2 90Other Scottish HE 7.5 43.4 39.6 90.5 3.8 0 5.7 53

All access 8.9 50.8 28.2 87.9 4.6 1.6 6.0 901

All students 10.2 56.8 26.2 93.2 2.7 1.3 2.8 5964


does access work? the relative performance of access students at a scottish university

Documents