for example, is currently very small in the UK. All of these factors together mean that
it is not possible to differentiate robust patterns for specific minority backgrounds
from the ‘noise’ generated.
Table 2 - Percentage of students with known ethnicity, UK, 1994/95-2004/05
|
1994/95 |
1999/00 |
2004/05 | |
|
All undergraduates |
^^80 |
^^90 |
-91 |
|
Full-time first degree |
^83 |
^94 |
^97 |
|
Part-time first degree |
^80 |
^87 |
-87 |
Source: HESA
The proportion of students with known ethnicity who are non-white has increased
slightly over a decade in the UK (Table 3). This decline is approximately in line with,
but ahead of, an overall increase in reported ethnic minorities in the population as a
whole. The populations as a whole is 92% white, according to the 2001 census.
Therefore, one could argue that the HE system somewhat over-represents the minority
groups, if we can assume that all ethnic groups are equally likely to answer the
question about ethnic backgrounds. But the third largest ethnic group in the UK, after
white and not known, is Indian and this group is one of those obtaining higher
qualifications at NQF levels 2 and 3 than white students, making them differentially
eligible for HE acceptance. Nor does this simple comparison between population and
HE take into account ethnic differences between age cohorts, or potential inequalities
between subjects, institutions, regions, and specific backgrounds. We can say, though,
that existing figures give us no reason to assume that ethnic minorities, in general, are
under-represented in the HE systems of England or Wales. As far as WP is concerned,
we do not, and probably could not, have the robust evidence needed to highlight any
under-representation of specific ethnic minority groups (each mostly representing
only a fraction of 1% of the population). However, we would have a reasonably
strong case in arguing that the majority white group is the most obviously under-
represented at present.
12