SRHE Blog

The Society for Research into Higher Education


Leave a comment

How can PhDs support solutions to local challenges?

by Rachel Handforth and Rebekah Smith-McGloin

Recent news headlines highlight the range of social and economic challenges faced by cities and counties across the UK (BBC, 2024; Financial Times, 2024; Guardian, 2024), reflecting wider predictions of ongoing economic challenges for the UK as a whole (OECD, 2024). Recent local election results seem to indicate public desire for change in their communities – and whilst we await the national democratic process later this year – the devolution process to combined local authorities indicates a positive shift towards increased funding, resources and power for those working to achieve positive change in their local communities.

What is the role of universities in all this? And how might the highest-level qualification that they offer hope to address any of the complex, systemic issues faced by local communities, and those that live and work within them?

The answer to these questions is not clear-cut, but exploring the ways in which the doctorate might lend itself to addressing locally relevant challenges – in theory and in practice – may offer a vision for how universities might enact their civic mission, and consider themselves ‘truly civic’. Yet whilst undergraduate curricula often contain elements of civic engagement through service learning, volunteering, and policy discussions (McCunney, 2017), work on civic and community-informed practice has been slow to emerge at doctoral level.

The last decade has seen an increase in the number of doctoral researchers in the UK (Smith-McGloin and Wynne, 2022) and in the proportion of doctoral graduates working beyond academia (Vitae, 2022). Yet the capacity of the doctorate to contribute to positive place-based change has not been fully explored. Indeed, a recent report from the National Civic Impact Accelerator highlights the ongoing positive economic and social impacts of doctoral graduates; boosting research productivity across sectors, contributing to cutting edge research and development, as well as adding to research capacity through a highly skilled workforce.

Existing literature on doctoral education and wider engagement with communities focuses predominantly on praxis in the context of industrial and professional doctorates (see Boud et al, 2021; Terzioğlu, 2011; Wildy, Peden and Chan, 2015). Too often, doctoral education is still conceptualised as an instrumentalist tool of neoliberal higher education, producing highly-skilled postgraduate researchers and knowledge for the economy. For example, professional doctorates are viewed as a mechanism by which the university can realise its potential, through close interaction with industry and government, to deliver innovation and economic development in a knowledge society.

At the last Society for Research in Higher Education conference in December 2023, we presented our early thoughts on how place-based partnership programmes such as the Public Scholars Initiative and Co(l)laboratory might seek to address socioeconomic challenges, and legitimise broader conceptions of scholarship within doctoral education. Following Gibbons et al’s (1994) consideration of knowledge production modes in relation to university knowledge transfer, and drawing on recent literature relating to modes of knowledge production (Liyanage et al, 2022; Miller et al, 2018; Peris-Ortiz, 2016), we considered how discussions around doctoral education and the public good (Deem, 2020) may be reimagined in the context of these programmes.

Our own experience of leading and working within Co(l)laboratory, a new Nottingham-based doctoral training programme which recruits a diverse range of candidates to co-created research projects, developed with local employers to address place-based issues, has shown the great potential of doctoral education to drive positive change locally. We have seen in practice how programmes such as Co(l)laboratory can act as a node in a wider civic knowledge and innovation system, and produce an expansive network currently involving two universities, 12 civic agreement partners, 30 community organisations, as well as current doctoral students and supervisors on 20 distinct research projects. This new model for doctoral training positions the doctorate as an agile, socially responsive and community-engaged catalyst to enable local people to tackle local problems.

Whilst it is clear that the complex and persistent challenges faced by communities across the UK require significant regional and national investment to resolve, the capacity of place-based doctoral education, shaped by civic partners and their local universities, should not be underestimated.

Dr Rachel Handforth joined Nottingham Trent University as Senior Lecturer in Doctoral Education and Civic Engagement in January 2023 to work on the Co(l)laboratory programme, working with local employers to build a community-informed model for developing place-based PhD research projects. Her research interests include gender inequality in higher education, and belonging, access and participation in doctoral education. She was recently funded by the Society for Research in Higher Education to explore public attitudes to, and engagement with, doctoral research programmes.

Dr Rebekah Smith McGloin is Director of Research Culture and Environment and Director of the Doctoral School at Nottingham Trent University. She provides strategic leadership in the area of inclusive research culture, environment and doctoral education. She is currently principal investigator on two major projects in the field of inclusive doctoral education; the Universities for Nottingham Co(l)laboratory Research Hub and Equity in Doctoral Education through Partnership and Innovation. She is an executive committee member and trustee of the UK Council for Graduate Education.  She was a member of the UKRI Bioscience Skills and Careers Strategy Panel (2015-2022) and an expert panel reviewer for the UK Concordat for Researchers (2019). Her research interests lie in higher education management, postgraduate research student experience, widening participation and access to higher education.


Leave a comment

Making space for representations of Gypsy, Traveller, Roma, Showmen and Bargee Communities in higher education

by Natalie Forster and Martin Gallagher

Did you know that June is Gypsy, Roma and Traveller History Month? Chances are, this may have passed you by, as it often goes more un-noticed in society than other awareness raising events. The theme for the month is #MakeSomeSpace and it seems timely therefore to give an update on our SRHE Scoping Study, which considers the representation of Gypsy, Traveller, Roma, Showmen and Bargee (GTRSB) communities in the spaces of higher education and widening participation.

There is growing scrutiny of universities in both the media and the academy for their failure to robustly challenge the racism and inequality which pervades in these settings, and move beyond passive and purely performative gestures (such as black squares posted on social media in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder) to implement concrete action leading to lasting change.

GTRSB communities are minority ethnic communities who are particularly under-represented in higher education. Figures must be treated with caution, as many GTRSB students avoid self-identifying for fear of discrimination. However, the most recent data suggests that 3-4% of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller young people aged 18-30 participated in higher education in 2014/15, compared to 43% of this age group nationally, and only 70 Gypsy, Traveller or Irish Traveller students entered higher education in 2018 (Atherton 2020). Recent research (Mulcachy et al 2017, Forster and Gallagher 2020) and media coverage also highlights the isolation and exclusion felt by GTRSB staff and students in higher education, due to the invisibility of GTRSB contributions within university environments and curricula.

Initiatives to increase representation of GTRSB communities in higher education are gaining momentum. A national ‘Good Practice Pledge’ was recently launched for example, through which institutions can demonstrate and enact their commitment to supporting GTRSB communities into and within higher education. However, work in this area is still in its infancy, and confusion surrounding the appropriate definition and targeting of GRT communities in widening participation schemes forms a key barrier to progress (Forster and Gallagher 2020).

Our SRHE scoping project aims to provide clarity around how Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities are currently defined and represented in widening participation policy and practice, and arrive at some common recommendations for future work in this field. The project involves three arms: a systematic literature review; a documentary analysis of Access and Participation Plans (APPs); and a Delphi study involving GRT students, widening participation specialists, and academics.

Headline findings point to the dominance of an individual hero type narrative which represents GTRSB students as ‘trailblazers’ and positions GTRSB participation in HE as an atypical event, requiring personal triumph over adversity. While this narrative recognises the determination of GTRSB students in overcoming barriers to higher education access and participation, it may also serve to reinforce the falsity that that GTRSB culture is incompatible with academic success, and downplay the need for structural change, instead placing the onus on GTRSB students to act as ‘role models’ and ‘give back’ to the broader community.

Narratives of GTRSB participation in HE as an unusual event are reflected in, and potentially reinforced through the treatment of these groups in Access and Participation Plans. Only 86 of the 245 plans reviewed (35%) make any reference to GTRSB communities, and of these, only 14 (16%) target GTRSB communities explicitly. Reasons for a lack of action to address inequalities experienced by GTRSB communities included the absence of data to assess performance for these groups; the small size or limited resources of institutions; and/or low numbers of GTRSB students. However, without systemic action, barriers to self-identification and the low numbers of GTRSB students in higher education are likely only to be reproduced. These findings reflect current Office for Students guidance, which frames the inclusion of GTRSB communities in APPs as optional, and experts consulted in our study strongly supported the addition of GTRSB communities as groups that higher education institutions must assess their progress for.

Our work highlights important and potentially troubling absences of GTRSB experiences within discourses on widening participation. This GRTHM and beyond, we urge higher education and widening participation professionals to #MakeSomeSpace to reflect on their current understandings and representations of GTRSB communities, and the ways these may promote or hinder the realisation of GTRSB educational rights.

Dr Natalie Forster is a Research Fellow in the Department of Social Work, Education and Community Wellbeing at Northumbria University, Newcastle. Follow Natalie on Twitter @ForsterNatalie

Martin Gallagher is a PhD Candidate and Research Assistant in the Department of Social Work, Education and Community Wellbeing at Northumbria University, Newcastle. Follow Martin on Twitter @GallagherGRT

References

Atherton G. (2020) More than Luck: enabling access and success in Higher Education for Gypsy, Romany and Traveller (GRT) communities. London: Sir John Cass’s Foundation.

Forster N, and Gallagher M. Exploring how Gypsy, Roma and Traveller students can best be supported to participate and thrive in higher education. Newcastle: Northumbria University. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342570864_Exploring_how_Gypsy_Roma_and_Traveller_students_can_best_be_supported_to_participate_and_thrive_in_higher_education

Mulcahy E, Baars S, Bowen-Viner K, Menzies L. (2017) The underrepresentation of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils in higher education: A report on barriers from early years to secondary and beyond. London: Kings College London

Julie Bounford UEA


Leave a comment

It’s about the (academic) community, stupid!

By Julie Bounford

This blog first appeared on 23 February 2014 on Julie Bounford’s personal blog at http://jebounford.net/its-about-the-academic-community-stupid/

I recently had a conversation about my doctoral research with an acquaintance I met at a dinner dance who asked, ‘what are you doing it in, what are you doing it for?’ Not an unreasonable question. I began my reply by saying that it was in the sociology of education and whilst I was conjuring up an answer to the latter question (it changes from day to day), they retorted in a jocular fashion, ‘the sociology of vegetation? You’re researching vegetables?’ The acquaintance laughed, a little uneasily. Perhaps they had misheard me.

My sense of humour is reasonably well honed but at that particular moment I was not in a frame of mind to see the joke; on them or on me. Continue reading