Diversity across HE

Just looking at the overall figures, though, misses an important feature of minority ethnic participation in HE. This is their very uneven distribution across the HE sector, both in aggregate, and at individual group level. This is seen in institutional and subject distributions, and also, though to a lesser extent, by mode of study and qualification aim.

4.2.1 Institution

It is very evident that minority ethnic students are much more likely to be found at certain universities, and less so at others. Minority ethnic students are:

z more likely to be studying in a post-92 than a pre-92 university: 22 per cent of the total undergraduates at post-92 universities compared with 15 per cent at pre-92 universities z less likely to be at an FE colleges (representing almost 12 per

cent of total), and even less likely to be at a HE college or the Open University (9.5 per cent and five per cent respectively). At individual ethnic group level, there is also an uneven distribution by type of institution (Further details are shown in Appendix A, Table A2):

• all (including White) ethnic groups except Chinese, are more likely to be studying at a post-92 than a pre-92 university. Overall, the balance is 54:46 (but for Chinese it is 49:51)

z in terms of the percentage share of students, most minority ethnic groups, except Chinese and Asian Other, account for a higher share of post-92 than of pre-92 university students. The difference between the two university sectors is much greater for Black students:

• Black or Black British account for 7.2 per cent at post-92 universities compared with just 2.9 per cent at pre-92 universities (and the gap is similarly large for each of the Black groups: Caribbean, African and Other)

• the representation of Black students is also higher in FE colleges and HE colleges than at pre-92 universities, but not as high as at post-92 universities

• all minority ethnic groups account for lower percentages in HE colleges than universities, the exceptions being the Other group.

This categorisation, especially the pre-92 and post-92 split is an over-simplification of the institutional distribution. In a small number of universities, minority ethnic students comprise over one-half of the home-domiciled undergraduate population (ie excluding foreign students), and at the other end, there is a relatively large number of universities, where it is less than ten per cent. This is illustrated by the shape of the curve in Figure 4.1. There is a regional dimension to this distribution, as most of the institutions with the highest minority ethnic representation are post-92 universities in Greater London. This is not surprising when one considers that almost one-half of all home-domiciled minority ethnic undergraduate students studying in England are

Figure 4.1: Minority ethnic undergraduate students as a percentage of all students (home domiciled only) at individual universities, 2000/01

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

1 _{individual universities ranked in order*}

* Excludes around 30 with small numbers (under 1,000 undergraduates in total) and the OU

at institutions in Greater London (compared with one-fifth of all undergraduate students). Much higher proportions of all minority ethnic groups are found in London universities, compared with England overall, but especially Black students.

Further discussion of the reasons which lie behind the minority ethnic institutional distribution are given later in section 4.4.

4.2.2 Type of course

Overall, minority ethnic groups are slightly more likely than Whites to take degree than other undergraduate courses (referred to in this report in aggregate as ‘sub-degree’), 80 versus 72 per cent. They both mostly study degrees by full than part-time study. At sub-degree level, however, minority ethnic students are much less likely to be taking a part-time sub-degree course. Only 12 per cent of them do so, compared with 21 per cent of the White total (though it is worth noting that the percentage of unknown ethnicity is higher here, which may be lead to some undercounting). This is likely to be one of the main reasons for the lower representation of minority ethnic students studying at HE level in FE colleges, where the majority of HE is delivered at sub- degree and part-time, and also for the lower representation at the Open University (see 4.2.1).

These differences can be expressed another way — in percentage terms:

z the highest representation of minority ethnic undergraduate students is in sub-degree full-time study (22 per cent)

z which compares with 18-19 per cent studying full- and part- time degrees

z and just 11 per cent in part-time sub-degree courses (see Appendix Table A3).

By individual ethnic group, some points of particular note are: z Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese and Mixed ethnic

students are represented better in full-time, rather than part- time, degree courses, when compared with White students (who are fairly equally divided between the two).

z Others, especially Black groups, are better represented in part- time than full-time degree study. The latter is likely to be associated with their much higher representation in post-92 than pre-92 universities, where there is more part-time degree provision.

z Black Africans are much more likely to take full-time sub- degree courses than other modes/qualifications (they represent 6.7 per cent of the total on these types of courses, the highest percentage of any minority ethnic group). This is thought to be

mostly due to the popularity of nursing Higher Diplomas with this ethnic group, which tend to dominate this group.

4.2.3 Subject

When subject of first degree is analysed, there is also a distinctive pattern of participation by minority ethnic students. Considerably higher representations of minority ethnic students at universities are in medicine/dentistry, computer science and law (over 30 per cent in each, double the average). This contrasts with under ten per cent in physical sciences, languages, art and design, humanities, education, veterinary science and agriculture (Figure 4.2). In general, it is Asian students, and especially Indians, who make up the majority of minority ethnic students in those subjects which are the most popular with minority ethnic students. It is also worth noting that some subjects, such as law and medicine, are among the most competitive on entry to universities, and up until recently, medicine/dentistry could only be taken at a small number of pre-92 universities (and is also mainly entered via high ‘A’ level scores).

Figure 4.2: Minority ethnic students as percentage of total degree students in each subject, England, at universities (excluding OU), 2000/01

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Computer Science

Medicine & Dentistry Law Business and Admin Studies Engineering & Technology Mathematical Sciences Subjects Allied to Medicine Librarianship & Information Science Social, Economic & Political Science Biological Science Architecture, Building & Planning Physical Sciences Creative Arts & Design Languages Education Humanities (46,400) (19,600) (28,100) (75,700) (48,900) (11,800) (56,800) (13,600) (58,600) (47,200) (15,900) (34,600) (62,500) (44,000) (35,700) (25,100)

Figures in brackets are total numbers of students of known ethnicity in each subject (small subjects with very low representation are omitted (for further details, see Interim report, Table C1).

The subject profile at sub-degree level at universities is different (so not included with the degree profile above), with a greater emphasis on more vocationally orientated subjects. Here, the highest percentage of minority ethnic students are in computer science (29 per cent) and business studies (23 per cent). Further details of the subject distribution at degree and sub-degree level at universities can be seen in Tables C1 and C2, in the earlier Interim report.