Families and higher education decision making: a day trip to raise awareness, break barriers and widen participation
Ann-Marie Houghton, Lancaster University, UK
Howard Sharples, Blackburn College, UK
Paper presented at SCUTREA, 31st Annual Conference, 3-5 July 2001, University of East London
THIS is but one comment of a day trip to Lancaster University organised as part of the Families And Higher Education Decision-making (FAHED) project, which constitutes the working with families strand of the collaborative Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) widening participation project, the Lancashire Compact. To describe the higher education (HE) context, we will refer to the visitors, venues and itinerary described in current guidebooks published by HEFCE, Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) and others. This will be followed with a summary of the FAHED cycle and university campus day trip and include feedback from the Asian heritage families who participated in this day excursion. We will then consider parental feedback about HE amenities and issues associated with their children's future educational plans including funding and securing a place in their chosen HE venue.
Setting the scene and describing the climate
Like the British weather the widening participation climate is forever changing. Setting the scene remains a challenge due to the increasingly complex institutional funding arrangements and multi-sector partnerships. Widening participation is an increasing priority in further and higher education sectors and is being targeted by government in Education Action Zones (EAZ) and Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) areas. Although there is widespread commitment to widening participation, a diversity of mission and approach often create an unsettled climate and a confusing scene, especially, but not only, for those not currently involved in education.
In this paper we are interested in the views of parents, and in particular parents from Asian heritage families, who have little, or no, experience of higher education. There is increasing recognition that involvement of parents is crucial for combating social exclusion and encouraging young people to consider HE as a future goal (DfEE: 2000). In common with (Vincent and Martin: 2000) we found that there was a gender differential in participation rates with father's tending to get involved when their children reached secondary school and the 'stakes were higher'. Getting some parents involved however is notoriously difficult, with feelings of isolation and difference offered as one explanation for lack of participation (McNamara, et al. 2000). Low parental involvement is not necessarily because parents are any less concerned or interested in their child's education; to the contrary: many parents in disadvantaged circumstances are passionate about their children's education and see it as a way out of poverty (DfEE 2000 para 62).
Paradoxically it is the financial burden of loans associated with HE that is cited as one of the major disincentives to participation.
Higher education is heralded as the vehicle for travelling to new horizons that promise enhanced futures, and life opportunities, for people who are willing to continue the lifelong learning journey beyond the school gates. If HE is to widen participation it needs to make an 'holistic commitment to understanding community and family cultures and exploring with them what value HE has for their lives, as well as exploring what the economic gains might be for society as a whole (Preece and Houghton 2000: 189).
The last few years have seen an increased emphasis in widening participation into higher education with HE institutions required to produce strategy statements, encouraged by funding incentives to collaborate in regional partnerships to develop, deliver and disseminate good practice that will address their current priorities. HEFCE's widening participation priorities focus on under-represented groups, raising aspiration and subsequent success of all students (para 9, HEFCE 00/50). This paper is based on the work of the Lancashire Compact1, which is a collaborative HEFCE-funded widening participation project that is actively working to address these dimensions. It includes four strands: the first focusing on infrastructure issues associated with institutional strategy, policy and practice; and the remaining three covering work with groups of adults, young people and families.
The FAHED Cycle
Based on an action research cycle designed for parents of primary aged children (Preece 1998) the FAHED cycle is intended to encourage families without experience of higher education to consider it as a future destination. This paper presents findings obtained from Asian heritage families whose children attended two East Lancashire 11-6 secondary schools. The cycle enables us to find out about parental knowledge and concerns about HE and explore with them future changes to enhance participation. The cycle involved four interconnected activities. The first was a six week parent course entitled 'Your Child's Future'; this encouraged discussion about the next step, where and how to access HE. The second activity was a parallel course for pupils in year 9 or 10 of secondary school. After these discussion courses, parents, pupils and their local guides (teachers) attended a fact finding day excursion to a university campus that involved meeting departmental and university support staff and role model students (the local residents). The fourth activity consists of feedback (semistructured interviews with parents) about their perceptions of higher education as well as views about their children's future educational plans. Role model tutors, who have already established a rapport with the families, conducted the interviews with parents. Where interviews were conducted in another language the tapes were transcribed into English for the purposes of analysis.
Although the FAHED cycle was not originally conceived of as a journey the notion of traveller, and the activity of travelling, are useful metaphors for exploring the luggage, distance, and type of journey, that some learners have to travel. For some people, travelling to somewhere new is an exciting process, with any uncertainty about what a place will be like, who they will meet, and what they will do when they get there, all adding to the adventure. For others, visiting new places is a potentially threatening activity, with the uncertainty of what the place, people, and practices or customs of their destination, will be like, causing them considerable anxiety. Most people tend to be somewhere in between these two extremes, and the families who participated in the FAHED project were no exception. There were, however, a large proportion of families for whom the notion of going on a day trip to a university was unusual and not something people like them do.
Visitors' feedback from a day trip to Lancaster
Immediate feedback from FAHED visitors collected on the day tended to be very positive but inevitably superficial; since visit days had been previously piloted and had for the most part gone according to plan, the positive response was reassuring, but not unexpected. The individual interviews with parents were therefore the most illuminating form of feedback. It was clear parents and pupils valued the visit; for parents who had been unable to attend the preparatory course, the campus visit played a vital role in raising their awareness.
The pupils' campus visit focused on activities organised by the departments and student union clubs and societies.
This combination of events challenged pupils' perceptions about university lifestyle, as well as the people and facilities that they might expect to find. For example, many arrived with preconceptions of university life as 'all work and no play', and somewhere 'only swots and posh people go'. All pupils were pleased to find out that: People who go to university are like normal people who are just chilling out and living a comfortable life at university. (Year 10, male) I thought University was where people worked all the time. I didn't see the social aspect until the visit. (Year 10, female) Parents also found the visit to the university reassuring.
It appeared to allay many of the fears that they had expressed in the course and increased their awareness of HE. In addition the visit, broke down perceptual barriers in a tangible and more effective way than the standard university prospectus, talks and videos. 'Seeing things for yourself does make a difference' (Ayesha).
The facilities
Many parents expressed surprise at the size of the university and the range of amenities intended to support living on campus - shops, launderette, cafés; social, cultural and religious interests- multifaith chaplaincy, mosque, theatre, art gallery, sports centre, both alcoholic and coffee bars; academic pursuits - library, IT equipment, academic counselling.
I didn't think it was going to be like that; there is a shopping centre and everything. I thought it was just for learning, a bedroom for sleep and work. When I looked around it was really good, its' got everything. I liked the mosque, so they can learn and pray as well.
(Nailah) Parents were very keen to inspect the accommodation and catering facilities available. Although parents were shown rooms that had been 'prepared for visitors' there were mixed views about the facilities. Ayesha expressed some concerns about the cleanliness of the kitchen facilities, but recognised that part of the 'problem' was likely to be the undergraduates: I saw the kitchens and a room but didn't like it at all.
They seemed dirty, but then kids don't keep things tidy, so we will have to teach them from home as well as school. I think my daughter would have to eat out, she wouldn't go into that kitchen, ... they should clean up after themselves to make it easier, but kids don't follow rules.
As a result of the visit some parents recognised that self sufficiency and looking after themselves was important; this was something that they had not even thought about prior to the visit.
Safety on campus was another common concern. Many parents made comparisons between their own community and that created by the college system, which is designed to provide personal support and give a sense of a smaller community and a sense of belonging. Parents were keen to ask if there was a drug problem and many were clearly worried about the easy access to alcohol. This was more noticeable with parents of secondary pupils who were obviously more aware of the temptations that their children would have to deal with if they came to university. Parents welcomed the news that the university was planning a nonalcoholic social space. Since the majority of parents were Muslim the availability of alcohol and their concern was not a surprise.
A distinctive feature of the parents' course, and the whole project, was the use of role model tutors and students. The undergraduate students allayed some parents' fears about the availability of alcohol, the opportunities to socialise and the challenge of retaining their religious and cultural identity. Students explained how they dealt with these challenges and stressed that there was a choice and it was up to the individual. Issues of trust and acting responsibly was a view shared and expressed by one of the pupils: I know what's right and wrong and at home my parents trust me and I don't want to lose that trust. For kids who think 'oh they won't find out' that's wrong. If you are going to do something wrong then even if you're parents don't find out its you you're hurting. (Year 10, female).
Despite her daughter's comments, Ayesha confirmed her ongoing worries about letting he rdaughter go to university: I don't think it would be safe for her. I know parents always feel worried about a girl, but I would prefer her to go in the morning and return in the evening. If the university was far away then she'd have to commute, but it would be better to come to somewhere like Lancaster where she can commute.
Several parents recognised that ultimately it was their children who needed to take responsibility for their own actions and they needed to know they could trust them if they went to university. However as Razza explained: If she's safe to go to high school where she's going for nine hours a day,if she's safe there, I think why not, she's safe in the university ... I think the more educated she is the safer she will be. (Razza)
Meeting the people
As well as looking at the facilities, the visit day provided an opportunity for parents to meet staff who provide many of the student support services. For Mohammed meeting staff was particularly reassuring and went some way to dispelling his fears: We wondered how these people would talk to us.
Because if we get the treatment we get in offices normally we would feel we don't want to come here anymore. But the staff were OK, they spent time explaining things to us, we were made to feel very welcome.
The fact that the parents knew one another and felt comfortable as a group enabled them to enter into dialogue with staff that they had been wary of before the visit.
Although the talks from university admissions and support staff included formal inputs a conscious effort was made to create an informal setting and to address concerns and questions raised during the preparatory course. The willingness of staff to adapt to the group and respond to their questions was important in challenging parents' perceptions about university staff, who they had expected to be distant, aloof, or too busy to spend time with them.
After the campus visit several parents reported that they would feel more confident about visiting other universities in the future, something they would not have considered, prior to the project.
Cultural concerns
All parents involved in the primary-focused FIHEP and secondary-focused FAHED project expressed cultural and religious concerns about allowing their children to attend university in the future. Overall there was considerable range of views expressed. Concerns appeared to be shaped by individual community leaders, the length of time the community had been established in an area, the role, relationship, and responsibility of family members within their local community. Surrya, an elder sister of one of the pupils, suggested that the view in a community depended on the levels of understanding and awareness about current practices in Pakistan: Many parents base their views on what life in Pakistan was like when they were there. If they go abroad now, back to the Asian countries, it's not the way they left it.
My father has changed his ideas since he's gone back, but some people have not gone back, and they've still got these images from the past in their heads.
The visit provided a valuable opportunity to address parents 'cultural concerns especially in respect of their children retaining their religious identity. Amina explained how important it was 'that you can wear your own clothes and that you can go to mosque. And you don't have to give up your religion just because you are going to a university'.
Both groups of secondary school parents were more open to the idea of allowing their daughters to attend than some of the primary school groups previously reported (Preece 1998). As with issues of safety it was important that parents found a rationale that was consistent within their culture.
One tutor explained how the women identified a cultural rationale as to why their daughters, in particular, needed to be educated: As the course went on they changed their mind, they said if we give education to our daughter it will be her you know, dowry ... Education is like jewellery, nobody can take it away. If you buy jewellery from the shop that can be stolen, but this is jewellery that can't be stolen.
Future educational travel plans
Two significant factors permeated discussion about future participation in higher education. Finance was the biggest obstacle and enhancing employment prospects the biggest incentive. Secondary school parents were especially interested in the financial support available to their children and the financial commitment that they would be expected to make. This is not surprising, since the reality of supporting their children through higher education was more imminent than for parents of primary aged children. There was a mixed response to the information provided by the university finance support advisor. The talk about financial arrangements served two purposes. Firstly, it identified parental misunderstandings, and secondly, it helped to explain the funding arrangements at the time of their visit.
The rapid changes, complexity of student funding arrangements and mixed media messages clearly exacerbate and add to the general confusion. For instance, some parents thought that in addition to financially supporting their child it was their responsibility to take out a student loan. Other parents did not realise that the loan was not repaid until the graduate was in employment earning a minimum salary.