STUDENT EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY PROFILE REPORT 2014/15

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The annual Student Equality and Diversity Profile Report 2014/15 has been developed alongside the Equality and Diversity Annual Report 2014/15, and the Staff Equality and Diversity Profile Report 2014/15.

1.2 It provides a detailed overview of the core representation and achievement levels of University students, by

ethnicity (Black Minority Ethnic (BME)), gender, and disability, in the following areas of activity from 1 August 2014 to 31 July 2015:

Overall student profile; Retention and progression; Degree results.

1.3 Data on additional protected characteristics have been provided to complement the report including

information on:

Religion; Sexual Orientation; Age.

1.4 Information in the report is drawn from our annual student Higher Education Statistical Agency (HESA)

return and the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) higher education statistical report. 1 2. THE EQUALITY ACT 2010

2.1 Whilst this report is partly a response to the University’s duties and obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and the Public Sector Equality Duty, it also supports the core University equality and diversity mission and values as laid out in the University Strategic Plan 2015­2020. These are:

Equality of educational opportunity; Valuing the rights, responsibilities and dignity of individuals through our commitment to equality and

diversity; Valuing probity and ethical behaviour.

2.2 The University is committed to achieving its vision by working towards greater transparency and availability

of equality information, and will continue to do so through the publication of the annual equality and diversity reports.

2.3 In the implementation of its activities the University must demonstrate due regard to:

Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation; Advance equality of opportunity between people from different groups, by considering the need to

minimise disadvantages and meet the needs of people with protected characteristics; Foster good relations between people from different groups.

2.4 The Public Sector Equality Duty applies to students in relation to the protected characteristics of age,

disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, sex, marriage and civil partnership, and sexual orientation.

1 http://www.ecu.ac.uk/wp­content/uploads/2015/11/Equality­in­HE­statistical­report­2015­part­2­students.pdf

1

3. PUBLISHING EQUALITY INFORMATION 3.1 The University is statutorily required to collect and publish equality information to demonstrate its

compliance with equalities legislation. The annual equality reports will be published at the end of the academic year on the University web pages, and a summary will be made available in alternative formats upon request.

3.2 The equality gaps identified within this report, will be used to inform and progress the activities that underpin

the University’s equality objectives for 2015– 2020. These are published on the Keele University equality and diversity web pages in accordance with statutory requirements

4. SUMMARY 4.1 Keele has an increasingly diverse and fluid student demographic profile totalling a headcount of 9,753

which draws from a local, national and international admissions pool. Keele is committed to widening participation and access to higher education and the University will continue to monitor its student profile by ethnicity, gender, and disability in addition to other protected characteristics.

4.2 The following summary outlines the headline student equality information as it applies to the student profile,

retention and progression, and degree results. The full detailed analysis can be found from item 6. onwards.

4.3 Student Profile:

Over the past 5 years the University has experienced an overall increase in numbers and proportions of BME students, with a current representation of 29.5% of students from BME backgrounds (with a 1% reduction since the last reporting period).

Female students remain the largest gender group at 58% and males 42%. This is in line with sector averages, and is unchanged since the last reporting period.

Female students are more likely to be engaged in part­time modes of study. The proportion of disabled students have steadily increased and now represent 12.4%; this is higher

than the sector benchmark of 10%. 4.4 Retention:

Progression rates for first year students based on ethnicity remain broadly comparable to sector averages with 7.3% white (6.5% benchmark) and 6.2% of BME (8.5% benchmark) students not progressing at year one. The proportion of BME students not progressing is clearly lower than the sector average.

Rates of non­progression in year 1 are 7.6% for men and 7.4% for women. The figure for men is broadly comparable to the sector average of 8%. However, the sector average for women is 6.3% and as such Keele women are performing below the sector average.

Non progression rates for disabled students has increased slightly for year 1 students from 8.3% (2013/14) to 10%. For year 2 students non­progression rates have decreased from 7.3% (2013/14) to 4.5%.

4.5 Degree Results:

Overall degree results remain high with a large number of students achieving a first class or upper second class degree classification.

Proportionally fewer UK BME students achieved a first class degree (8.8%) compared to UK white students (22.3%) at Keele. However, the BME degree attainment gap has decreased from a peak of 18.8% in 2005/06 to 15.2% in 2014/15.

2

Women perform significantly better in the first and upper second class degree classification compared to men, whereas male students have a higher representation in the lower second class degree classification. There are minimal gender variations across the remaining degree classifications.

The number of students reporting a disability has increased over the past 5 years. Degree results for students who declare a disability are comparable with attainment for non­disabled students across most degree classifications, although there is a notable variance in the proportion of pass degrees for students with a disability. Disabled students at Keele do slightly better compared to the sector benchmark.

5. SUMMARY OF ACTIONS ARISING FROM THIS REPORT 5.1 The BME attainment gap has reduced nationally and overall is low at Keele. However the gap has

widened at Keele particularly with BME students who receive a first class degree. As part of the University’s equality objectives, the University will examine best practice guidance on addressing BME attainment and develop initiatives to address attainment issues. This work will be led by the University Learning & Teaching Committee (ULTC).

5.2 Attainment data illustrates that women are significantly outperforming men, at first degree undergraduate

level, at Keele. This gap is comparable with the sector benchmark for women, however is lower for men. The University will examine best practice guidance on student attainment, based on gender differences and develop initiatives to address the attainment issues.

5.3 The University supports a wide range of learning styles/modes of assessment and its policy on

assessments outlines these and the benefits of such. It is the recommendation of this report that schools refresh their equality analysis of the impact of assessment methods within their programmes, and establish local actions plans.

5.4 Attainment data shows that disabled students do particularly well at Keele compared to the sector

benchmarks. The rate of non­progression, however, for disabled students remains disproportionately higher than for non­disabled groups in year 2. The University will continue to monitor the rate of progression for disabled students, and continue to provide tailored support to disabled students to ensure they can achieve their full potential whilst at Keele.

5.5 The University is committed to addressing barriers to attainment for all its student groups. As part of the

University’s equality objectives there is an undertaking to examine best practices in teaching and learning and to develop schemes of work to address key inequalities. This data will be presented to the University Learning & Teaching Committee (ULTC) Task and Finish Group on Student Attainment, as part of their ongoing work to identify and address any attainment issues across all groups.

5.6 The equality team are working with Planning and Academic Administration to encourage students to

disclosure equalities data to ensure that a more representative sample can be obtained. It is anticipated that from 2016/17 enrolment, the University will be able to obtain further data to assist with the analysis of data/trends to inform support provision across all groups.

3

6. STUDENT ETHNICITY 6.1 Profile overview The following chart illustrates the overall proportions of students at Keele, by ethnicity. This chart represents an aggregate of both UK domicile and international students for all students in 2014/15. Fig 1 ­ UK domicile and international students in 2014/15:

The following table illustrates the changing ethnicity profile of the student population at Keele, over the past 5 years: Fig 2 ­ Keele Students by ethnicity: 2010/11 2011/2 2012/3 2013/4 2014/5

White 7127 (76.6%) 7207(68.1%) 6847 (67.2%) 6841 (67.4%) 6533 (67.0%) BME 1986 (21.3%) 3146 (29.7%) 3137 (30.8%) 3093 (30.5%) 2874 (29.5%)

Not Known 191 (2.1%) 226 (2.1%) 201 (2%) 215 (2.1%) 346 (3.5%) Total 9304 10579 10185 10149 9753

6.2 For the reporting period the total student headcount was 9,753. During 2011/12 through to 2013/14 the

numbers of BME students at Keele was relatively stable, however BME numbers have fallen in 2014/15 in line with the reduction in total numbers of students and the proportion has decreased slightly to 29.5%. This compares to a sector average of 20.2%. Whilst above the sector benchmarks, the University is committed to continuing to build on the progress it has made to increase BME representation through its ongoing work around enhancing internationalisation and widening participation agendas.

6.3 The chart below illustrates the proportions of UK domicile students (i.e. excluding international students) by

ethnicity.

4

Fig 3 ­ UK Domicile Students 2014/15:

Fig 4: 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 White 7127 (76.6%) 7131 (77.6%) 6757 (77.6%) 6748 (78.5%) 6456 (77.3%) BME 1986 (21.3%) 1922 (20.9%) 1860 (21.3%) 1748 (20.3) 1735 (20.8%) Not Known 191 (2.1%) 138 (1.5%) 96 (1.1%) 103 (1.2%) 175 (1.9%) Total 9304 9191 8713 8599 8366 6.4 The figures illustrate that the proportion of UK domicile BME students has remained steady at

approximately 20% over the past 5 years. Across the UK university sector, 20.4% of UK domicile students are from black and minority ethnic (BME) backgrounds. Local representation therefore reflects the sector average.

6.5 The table below demonstrates the distribution of all Keele BME and white students across each mode of

study. The figures show the proportion of white/BME students as a percentage of the total white/BME population.

Fig 5:

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

White BME White BME White BME White BME White BME

UG FT 70.6% 68.9% 71.4% 70.4% 71.9% 70.4% 71.3% 70.6% 70.4% 72.3%

UG PT 5.5% 4.3% 5.5% 3.4% 4.7% 2.8% 5.8% 2.9% 7.2% 3.0%

PGT FT 5.6% 10.1% 5.2% 11.2% 5.7% 10.7% 6.1% 11.0% 3.8% 6.7%

PGT PT 12.2% 11.7% 11.8% 10.4% 11.0% 11.2% 10.0% 9.8% 11.7% 11.0%

PGR FT 3.4% 3.2% 3.5% 3.1% 4.0% 3.3% 3.9% 4.1% 4.2% 5.3%

PGR PT 2.7% 1.8% 2.6% 1.5% 2.8% 1.5% 2.9% 1.5% 2.7% 1.6%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

5

6.6 The data continues to show a slow increase in the proportion of BME students studying at undergraduate level. There is a reduction in the proportion of BME students studying PGT FT in 2014/15 compared to previous years and may reflect the lower numbers of international students recruited to this mode of study and greater take up of part time programmes. The proportion of white students studying PGT FT courses has also reduced, and this may also be attributable to a greater take up of part time programmes.

7. STUDENT RETENTION (PROGRESSION) BY ETHNICITY 7.1 The chart and table below shows the progression rates for the 2014/5 academic year by ethnicity.

Fig 6:

Fig 7: Year 1 White BME Progress (%) 87.9 84.8 Repeat/progress (%) 5.1 9.0 Not progressed (%) 7.3 6.2 Year 2 White BME Progress (%) 89.2 83.9 Repeat/progress (%) 7.5 11.2 Not progressed (%) 3.4 4.9 7.2 The figures show a similar level of progression between white and BME students, however the rate for

students repeating at both years 1 and 2 is higher in the BME student group. 7.3 The past two years at Keele has seen a significant reduction in non­progression for overseas students. In

2012/13 the number of overseas students not progressing was 17.4%; in 2013/14 it was 14.2% and in 2014/15 it was 10.9%. Whilst the rate of non­progression for overseas students is approximately double that of UK home students (5.8%), and illustrates the additional challenges faced by international students, there is a clear improvement trend.

7.4 The University continues to work proactively to support the transition of international students, through a

comprehensive induction orientation programme and ongoing support services. Services work collaboratively to ensure that international students experience a smooth transition to student life. In addition an online induction resource has been created as a means of assisting students in understanding important

6

univerity systems, expectations and procedures. Sessions within the online programme and through general international orientation include; 'Guidance on Academic Writing and Avoiding Plagiarism (UG session and PG session)', 'Learning Technology (UG session and PG session)' and 'Living and Studying at Keele'.

7.5 The chart below demonstrates the differences in the rates of progression between UK (white and BME)

home students and all international students. The rate of year 1 repeats for international students is comparable to that of UK home students

Fig 8:

7.6 The University routinely evaluates International student wellbeing and attainment to identify the issues

encountered by International students as a means of improving our services and enhancing the student experience.

7

8. DEGREE RESULTS BY ETHNICITY 8.1 The figures below show degree attainment by ethnic group. Fig 9: Degree results 2014/15 ­ Ethnicity

Fig 10:

First Class Upper Second Class

Lower Second Class Third Class Pass

UK White 264 (22.3%) [22.4%]

617 (55.9%) [53.3%]

218 (19.8%) [20.6%]

15 (1.4%) [3.7%]

7 (0.6%) [3.7%]

2

UK BME 18 (8.8%) [13.7%]

112 (54.6%) [46.7%]

64 (31.2%) [31.6%]

9 (4.4%) [8%]

2 (1.0%) [8%]

Non UK White 4 (8.3%) 21 (43.8%) 22 (45.8%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (2.1%)

Non­UK BME 11 (8.2%) 49 (36.6%) 65 (48.5%) 7 (5.2%) 2 (1.5%)

8.2 Figures shown in the square parentheses represent sector benchmarks where they are available. The data

shows that the proportion of UK white students receiving a first class honours degree is in line with the sector and the proportion of UK BME students receiving a first class honours degree is below the sector average for the academic year 2014/15.

8.3 The proportion of first class degrees has fallen across both white and BME UK students compared to

2013/14. In 2013/14, 23.6% of UK white students compared to 14.3% of UK BME students received a first class honours degree. The proportion of UK BME students achieving a first class honours degree in 2014/15 has returned to the level reported in the 2012/13 academic year (8.2%).

8.4 Figures for Keele show that 55.9% of UK white students were awarded an upper second class degree in

2014/15, compared to a sector average of 53.3%, whilst 54.6% of UK BME students were awarded a higher second class degree, comparing favourably with a sector average of 46.6%.

2 ECU benchmarking figures aggregate those students who attain a 3 rd class degree or pass classification, hence figures for 3 rd /Pass are the same for the benchmark figures.

8

8.5 In the lower second class category of award 19.8% of UK white students and 31.2% of UK BME students were represented, comparing with 20.6% and 31.6% across the sector respectively.

8.6 With respect to UK BME students who are awarded a third class or a Pass degree, the Keele average

currently represent 5.4% (4.4% and 1% respectively), whilst the sector average currently stands at 8.1%. This is a favourable position for Keele and reflects the fact that more UK BME students at Keele achieve higher classification of degrees than the sector averages.

8.7 The proportion of Keele international students (non­UK white and non­UK BME) awarded a lower second

classification is higher compared to Keele’s UK students and the proportion of Keele international students achieving first and upper second classifications is below the proportion of Keele’s UK students. There is currently no benchmarking data to demonstrate attainment of International students versus UK students.

8.9 Data will be presented to the University Learning & Teaching Committee (ULTC) Task and Finish Group on

student attainment, as part of their ongoing work to reduce attainment gaps across all groups. 8.10 The University is committed to addressing barriers to attainment for all student groups and refers to

sector­wide best practice in this area, including consultation work with the Higher Education Equal Opportunities Network (HEEON) and the Equality Challenge Unit. Furthermore the University has agreed an equality action to examine degree attainment amongst all groups, and to proactively work through this issue.

9. STUDENT GENDER 9.1 Profile overview (by gender/mode of study). The following table illustrates the gender profile of the students over the past 5 years. Fig 11: All Students ­ Percentage 2010/11 2011/2 2012/3 2013/4 2014/5 Male 42.9% 42.9% 42.7% 42.1% 42.0% Female 57.1% 57.1% 57.3% 57.9% 58.0%

9

Fig 12:

9.2 Keele’s student gender profile has been stable over the last 5 years and is in line with the current sector

figures of 43.9% male and 56.1% female. 9.3 The table below shows the numbers of male and female students on each mode of study. The percentages

are represented graphically in figure 14. Fig 13: By Student Type & Mode of Study 2014/5 Male % Female %

UG FT 3029 43.8 3878 56.2 UG PT 116 20.3 456 79.7 PGT FT 223 49.4 228 50.6 PGT PT 387 33.5 769 66.5 PGR FT 239 54.4 200 45.6 PGR PT 104 45.6 124 54.4 TOTAL 4098 5655

9.4 The following chart illustrates the gender representation by percentage in each of the modes of study and

by student type.

10

Fig 14:

9.5 The chart illustrates that, across all modes of study, a greater proportion of women are studying part time.

Women have higher representation in all areas of part time study, this may be expected and is likely to be linked to the need for flexibility to balance home/childcare responsibilities.

10. STUDENT RETENTION BY GENDER 10.1 The table below illustrates the rates of progression for men and women (NB Full time undergraduates only).

Within Year 1, student progression rates are broadly similar, with women progressing at a slightly higher rate than men. Men have a correspondingly higher rate of repeat/reassessment than women. Rates of non­progression are comparable across male and female students.

10.2 Within Year 2, the proportion of men and women not progressing are 3.5% and 4.7% respectively,

suggesting that proportionately more women do not progress compared to men. The number of non­progressions has reduced compared to 2013/14 figures for men and women at 7.9% and 5.7% respectively. The proportion of males in the repeating/reassess category is correspondingly higher than females in year 2. We note that the latest figures represent an inversion from the previous year and will monitor this moving forward.

Fig 15: Male Female Year 1 Progression 84% 88% Year 1 Repeat/Reassess 8.4% 4.6% Year 1 Not progressed 7.6% 7.4%

Male Female

Year 2 Progressed 85.4% 88.3% Year 2 Repeat/Reassess 11.1% 7.0% Year 2 Not progressed 3.5% 4.7%

10.3 The University recognises that gender differences can account for different preferences in learning styles,

for men and women. This data will be presented to the University Learning & Teaching Committee (ULTC)

11

Task and Finish Group on Student Attainment, as part of their ongoing work to reduce attainment gaps across all groups.

A variety of assessment styles and diversity in assessment practices will benefit all students. These are set out in the University assessment policy alongside the recorded benefits.

10.4 It is proposed that ULTC discuss further actions on this matter. 11. DEGREE RESULTS BY GENDER The chart below illustrates the Keele 2014/15 degree results for full time undergraduate students by gender. Fig 16:

fig 17: Keele Sector Averages Male Female Male Female First Class 15.6% 20.8% 20.1% 20.0% Upper Second Class 51.6% 55.1% 47.2% 52.5% Lower Second Class 28.8% 21.9% 26.2% 22.7% Third Class/Pass 4.0% 2.2% 6.5% 4.8% Notes : Full time undergraduates only, where a degree and classification was awarded. 11.1 The data illustrates that women outperform men in the first class and upper second class degree

classifications. As a result, men are present in higher proportions in the lower second class, third class and pass classifications. While the proportion of Keele male students achieving a first class honours degree is lower than the sector, when the first class and upper second class figures are combined, their performance is in line with the sector. The proportion of Keele female students across the first class and upper second class awards is slightly above the sector figures.

12

12. STUDENT DISABILITY 12.1 Student profile by disability and type/mode of study The following table illustrates the profile of disabled students over the past four years: Fig 18: All Students ­ Total 2010/11 2011/2 2012/3 2013/4 2014/5 Disabled 1128(11%) 1216 (11.5%) 1212 (11.9%) 1193 (11.8%) 1212 (12.4%) Not disabled 8960 (89%) 9363 (88.5%) 8974 (88.1%) 8960 (88.2%) 8541 (87.6%) Total 10296 10579 10186 10153 9753 12.2 The data illustrates a steady/overall increase in the proportion of disabled students at the University over the

past 5 years, and at 12.4% (2014/15) is higher than the sector average of 10%. 12.3 The following chart illustrates the representation of disabled students by type and mode of study over the

past 3 years. Fig 19: Proportion (%) of disabled students by type and mode of study for a 3 year period 2012/13 ­ 2014/15

12.4 There is a positive increase in the representation of disabled students across nearly all areas at Keele. A

small reduction is noted with the % of disabled students studying at postgraduate taught level. However, there is a corresponding increase in the PGR numbers.

Fig 20: 2012/13 2013/4 2014/5 Disabled No Disabled Disabled No Disability Disabled No Disability

UG FT 1010 6273 993 6229 1015 5891 UG PT 28 394 28 473 41 532 PGT FT 57 677 68 691 39 412 PGT PT 68 1051 57 965 63 1093 PGR FT 31 354 29 373 34 405 PGR PT 18 225 18 229 20 208 TOTAL 1212 8974 1193 8960 1212 8541

13

13. STUDENT RETENTION BY DISABILITY The following table illustrates the progression details of year 1 and year 2 students for both disabled and non­disabled students. Fig 21: 2014/15 Year 1 Disabled Not Disabled Progressed 82.6% 86.7% Repeat/Reassess 7.4% 6.3% Not Progressed 10.0% 7.0% Year 2 Disabled Not Disabled Progressed 83.1% 87.5% Repeat/Reassess 12.4% 8.4% Not progressed 4.5% 4.1% 13.1 Progression rates across both year 1 and 2 are higher for students without a disability. There are some

variations across the repeat/reassess and not progressed categories. Proportionately more disabled students do not progress in year 1 but at year 2 the proportion of students across the two groups are broadly in line and the proportion of disabled students not progressing in 2014/15 has reduced from 7.3% (2013/14).

13.2 Reassessment rates between disabled and non­disabled students in year 1 are broadly comparable but the

proportion of disabled students repeating in year 2 is correspondingly higher than non­disabled students and has seen an increase from 9.4% in 2013/14 to 12.4% in 2014/15.

13.3 The University has made significant improvements in recent years in ensuring disabled students access the

appropriate support to ensure a full access to the curricula. There has been a significant increase in the number of students accessing disability related support from Student Support and Development Services, which has enabled early and relevant support to be provided to disabled students at Keele.

14. DEGREE RESULTS BY DISABILITY The following chart and table illustrate the degree results for full time undergraduate students by disability.

14

Fig 22:

Fig 23: 2014/5 data Disabled Non Disabled First Class 19.1% 18.6% Upper Second Class 52.9% 53.8% Lower Second Class 21.3% 25.3% Third Class 1.8% 2.1% Pass 4.9% 0.2% 14.1 The differences in the rates of disabled and non­disabled students attaining either a first or higher second

class degree are marginal. Slightly more non­disabled students obtain lower second class and more disabled students attain a pass degree than non­disabled students.

14.2 The data illustrates that disabled students outperform non­disabled students in the first class degree

category. Comparisons in the upper second class category are broadly comparable, with higher proportions of non­disabled students in the lower second class, third class and pass classifications.

14.3 Across the sector, 68.7% of disabled students are awarded a first or higher second class degree, compared

to 72% of disabled students at Keele.

15

15. ADDITIONAL PROTECTED CHARACTERISTICS 15.1 Religion: The University has obtained data on student religion since 2011/12 however the data collected

has been insufficient to provide meaningful analysis over that period. Whilst the declaration of a student’s religion is optional, the chart below represents 4,900 students who identified their religion as part of their enrolment in 2014/15, the remaining students declined to answer and these represented 52.2% of the student population.

Fig 24:

15.2 Data collected by the ECU represents 57% of UK HEI’s and is included for reference purposes only. It

should be noted that 64.3% of the respondents left the enrolment question blank. Fig 25:

16

15.3 Sexual Orientation: The University data on student sexual orientation represents 4,973 students who identified as part of their enrolment status in 2014/15. As with religion, a large percentage of students, 49% chose not to declare their sexual orientation.

Fig 26:

15.4 Data collected from the ECU represents 57% of HEI’s however the largest proportion of returns 66.2% of

students chose not to disclose their sexual orientation. This information is provided for reference purposes, however we recognise that based on the incompleteness of the sample it is difficult to draw any clear confusions and there is a sense that the LGB proportions are disproportionately low and do not reflect wider social representation of these groups.

Fig 27:

17

15.5 Age: Age profile of the 2014/15 intake for home and overseas students is shown below. Fig 28: (Overseas)

Fig 29: (Home)

15.6 A larger proportion of home students are in the less than or equal to 18 age range compared to overseas

students. This reflective of the more traditional education pathway home students follow of completing A­Levels or equivalent then moving into Higher Education.

15.7 Keele have a higher proportion of students under the age of 21 compared to the the sector average. At

Keele 62% of all students are in this category compared to the national average of 54.4%.

18