Heffernan, T. (2022). 'Introduction'. In. Bourdieu and Higher Education. Singapore: Springer. pp. 1-6.

Heffernan seems to be writing and researching in the same area I am. This book is an amalgamation of much of his research in the area of higher education policy and administration and, in particular, inequity in the sector. He is currently based at the University of Manchester, but was previously working in Australia. 

The introduction to the book has prompted me to think that there may be a need for a small section on the history of higher education in my thesis, which could help illustrate how the primary objective of higher education appears to have changed. Some of this appears, on the face of it, to be negative - a shift from institutions focused solely on the acquisition and sharing of knowledge to a business model reliant on revenue generation. However, as Heffernan reminds us, the shift has also been from an exclusionary institution to one that welcomes (and, with widening participation, actively encourages) women, people of colour and those with disabilities and from different cultures. 

I think this book is going to be helpful in providing context for understanding the impact apprenticeships are having on the sector, in particular the perception of the intention of higher education. From my learning to date, I would argue that higher education should be about teaching people how to think, how to learn and how to communicate through the acquisition of knowledge (whether through teaching or research). As things currently stand, it seems the current driver is for higher education purely to deliver knowledge with the intent to increase earning potential and that it is this that creates social mobility and reduces inequality. My argument is that it is actually that 'hidden curriculum' of having the tools to become curious, critical, creative thinkers capable of lifelong learning, development and of communicating to share knowledge (i.e. the original aim of higher education). I would argue that it is the widening participation in higher education that drives social change; not the fact that larger numbers of people know more things and can earn more money.

References

Heffernan, T. (2022). 'Introduction'. In. Bourdieu and Higher Education. Singapore: Springer. pp. 1-6

Gillen-O'Neel, C. (2021). 'Sense of Belonging and Student Engagement: A Daily Study of First- and Continuing-Generation College Students'. Research in Higher Education. 62:45-71

This research is US based but is important to my work firstly because it looks at first generation university students and secondly because of the insights it affords into the concept of 'belonging' and its impact on higher education study. Gillen-O'Neel (2021) discusses the theories that suggest a connection between a sense of belonging and the maintaining of motivation required to succeed, supporting this with a large body of evidence (p. 45-46). 

Her research asked students to record their daily sense of belonging and their daily levels of engagement in order to look for possible connections between the two. She also looked at differences between first- and continuing-generation students. One of the reasons for this is the higher number of first-generation students that report lower levels of sense of belonging as well as differences in the impact of that low sense of belonging. She seeks to explore the hypothesis that first-generation students are more likely than continuing-generation students to experience low engagement when they are feeling a low sense of belonging. This is relevant to me because UK data suggests a far higher proportion of first-in-family students on apprenticeship programmes than in other courses (61% in 2021/22 (Office for Students, 2023); compared to 43% across the sector (Higher Education Statistics Agency, 2024).

Gillen-O'Neel cites work completed by Walton and Cohen (2007) that describes this increased sensitivity to fluctuations in belonging as 'belonging uncertainty' particularly among those from backgrounds associated with negative stereotypes. This suggests that universities must be mindful that coaching students as they 'deschool' is not a 'one and done' action, but should be a long, iterative process over the course of their university time in order to embed a new, stronger way of interacting with their studies. Of course, it is likely all of this will have been impacted by prior educational experiences: if students spent school in the 'bottom sets', how likely is it that they will feel they 'belong' in an environment that has been sold to them as being solely for 'clever' or 'academic' people?

This research found that it may be that increased engagement actually causes an increased sense of belonging. This is relevant for apprenticeship students who are required to attend classes, offering academics golden opportunities to deliver this 'deschooling' work through relationship-building and 'training' in autonomous learning.

Gillen-O'Neel describes the concept of 'student engagement' as something multidimensional, which includes emotional and behavioural elements. To me, this feels a lot like 'mindset', but Gillen-O'Neel writes about it in terms of something that can fluctuate day to day, rather than something fairly static, in the way Dweck (2017) writes about it. Maybe they're not the same but simply closely connected. According to Gillen-O'Neel, the emotional element relates to how students respond to school or university - are they interested and engaged or bored and frustrated? And the behavioural element relates to what students do both in and outside of school. My questions are, as with mindset, where are these things learned and what is HE's role in addressing them? Gillen-O'Neel's findings suggest a reciprocal relationship between all these elements and that sense of belonging, engagement, resilience etc. are all interconnected. Should this mean that university academics need to think of 'deschooling' as a complex, multi-faceted process? Indeed, Gillen-O'Neel argues that many of these challenges facing these students are structural rather than internal to students. Some of this structure will be based within the institution itself but I think there is a need for academics to have a deep understanding of the social structure from which all students are coming and what the impact of those structures can be on people.

Three key theories mentioned in this paper that I want to read more about are Self-Determination Theory (Ryan and Deci, 2000); Stage-Environment Fit Theory (Eccles et al., 1993) and Social Identity Threat theories (e.g. stereotype threat (Pennington et al., 2016)). Gillen-O'Neel puts these three theories together with the hypothesis of belonging and argues that students will have greater success and satisfaction when institutions prioritise meeting students' core developmental needs, one of which is 'belonging' (the third level of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1943)).

References

Dweck, C. (2017). Mindset: How you can Fulfil your Potential. New York: Ballantine Books.

Eccles, J.S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C.M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., Iver, D.M. (1993). 'Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents' experiences in schools and in families'. American Psychologist. 48(2):90-101

Gillen-O'Neel, C. (2021). 'Sense of Belonging and Student Engagement: A Daily Study of First- and Continuing-Generation College Students'. Research in Higher Education. 62:45-71

Higher Education Statistics Agency. (2024). 'Higher Education Student Statistics: UK, 2022/23 - Student numbers and characteristics'. Available at: https://www.hesa.ac.uk/news/08-08-2024/sb269-higher-education-student-statistics/numbers (Accessed: 6 February 2025).

Maslow, A. H. (1943). 'A theory of human motivation'. Psychological Review. 50(4):370–396.

Office for Students. (2023). 'Annex C: Characteristics of OfS-fundable starts on Level 6 degree apprenticeships'. Available at: https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/media/8857/annex-c-characteristics-of-ofs-fundable-starts-on-level-6-degree-apprenticeships.pdf (Accessed 6 February 2025)

Ryan, R.M., and Deci, E.L. (2000). 'Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being'. American Psychologist. 55(1):68-78

Pennington, C.R. et al. (2016) ‘Twenty Years of Stereotype Threat Research: A Review of Psychological Mediators’, PLOS ONE. 11(1)

Walton, G.M., and Cohen, G.L. (2007). 'A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement.' Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 92(1):82-96