Burns, J. and Slack, K. (2015) ‘What are the consequences of the newly implemented 24+ Advanced Learning Loans on retention of adult Access to Higher Education students?’, Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 20(3): 344-356.
DOI:10.1080/13596748.2015.1063807

What are the consequences of the newly implemented  24+ Advanced Learning Loans on retention of adult Access to Higher Education students?
BURNS, J M & SLACK, K			September 2014
Key words
Retention, Access, Loan, Further Education
Abstract
This article discusses the previous literature on student retention in the post-compulsory education sector. Adult students participating in the Access to Higher education course are at particularly high risk if non-completion. The “24+ advanced learning loan” is described. The literature indicates that whilst stake-holders may require factual statistics regarding education, the reasons for student withdrawal are often multiple and complex, hence this research was conducted via a mixed methods approach. 
This study took place at a large inner-city college of further education in Staffordshire, England. A full population sample of the college’s existing data was analysed, tutors participated in short, informal, unstructured one-to-one interviews, the author produced field notes relating to retention and twelve adult students from the Access to HE diploma in health, self-selected to participate in short semi-structured interviews about student retention. 
Data showed that students aged 24 years and over were already less likely to withdraw from their course prior to the introduction of the advanced learning loan, and that the introduction of the loan had little impact on this data. Interview transcripts and field notes indicated mixed opinions amongst students regarding the 24+ loan, that the application process had been overly complex and that the introduction of loans had produced an increased divide between older and younger students. 
Recommendations for students, college staff, managers and policy writers are discussed in light of the findings of this study.

Introduction
There has been a plethora of research into student retention and withdrawal in the post compulsory education sector over the last 20 years.    In current literature there continues to be an interest in research into retention.    The vast majority of the published literature in this area relates to A-level, BTEC and NVQ students or those taking apprenticeships. Numerous surveys have been carried out relating to retention in the FE sector   but these largely focus on the 16-19 age group. Although student retention in further education has been increasing as colleges implement strategies in order to meet targets, in comparison with other courses, the rise in retention has been particularly low in long adult courses1.
The Access to Higher Education diploma is a 1 year, level-3 qualification, the major aim of which is to provide a progression route to university for adult students who lack traditional A-level qualifications. UCAS indicate that the majority of university courses are not available to students who have not completed a level 3 qualification, and competition for places on some courses is fierce, therefore students who do not complete their Access to Higher Education course may be unable to progress to university and may seriously limit their future career options. 

In order to achieve the Access dipoma, students are required to complete an extensive portfolio of coursework consisting of 18 units worth three credits each at level 3, with deadlines spread throughout the year. In practice, this equates to completing the equivalent of a 1,500 word assessment approximately every 2 weeks. In addition to this enormous coursework load, students are required to attend approximately 500 hours of guided learning activities throughout the year. Hence, the course is very demanding and time-consuming, and there is a risk that students may drop-out.

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education states that approximately 45,000 students are currently studying the Access to Higher Education diploma across England and Wales each year compared to at least 300,000 students taking A-level courses each year.   However, it appears that the volume of research published does not represent these figures proportionately. The Access to Higher Education course becomes more popular each year and is now a widely recognized route into many university courses. There is a distinct lack of published educational research relating to Access to Higher Education diplomas. Where literature does exist, the lack of previous research into retention on the Access to HE diploma is commented upon.
“Studies that focus on learner persistence, in particular mature students are relatively rare and very scarce on entrants with an Access to Higher Education (HE) qualification.” 				
It is currently an interesting time to be conducting research into this area. The government in England introduced a new funding structure, known as the 24+ Advanced Learning Loan, for students aged 24 years and over, in September 2013. Hence, there is now a different situation compared to the circumstances under which previous research was carried out, and a research gap has become apparent. 

The literature suggests that a clash of priorities between educational commitments and the demands of paid employment are a major contributing factor in student withdrawal. At least 20%  of early leavers from FE cite “not being able to cope with combining work and study” as a reason for dropping out of their course. A small qualitative analysis of coping strategies of Access to HE students described the difficulty that students face in balancing education, family responsibilities and other social commitments.  For mature students, financial commitments and family responsibility may produce irreconcilable demands on time, causing students to withdraw from their course of study.  All of these studies took place before the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loan (2013) which has drastically changed the financial situation for students in the age group 24+ years, therefore, created a gap in the research literature whereby the previous literature is not necessarily entirely relevant to the current circumstances. Prior to 2013, students, both above and below 24-years-old were entirely government-funded if they were in receipt of any one of a range of benefits or if their household income was below a threshold level (see appendix 1). Students not in receipt of benefits and with a household income above the threshold level were known as co-funded and were required to contribute in the region of £700 towards the cost of their course. Since September 2013, for students aged less than 24 years at the start of their course, the funding situation has not changed. For students aged 24 years and over at the start of their course, regardless of their financial situation, for any level 3 course (including the Access to HE diploma) the student is required to take out a loan for the full cost of the course (approximately £3,000). If the student progresses on to university and completes their degree program, the loan is cancelled and the student is not required to pay anything back, meaning that their access course has effectively been free of charge 

Whilst the 24+ advanced learning loan was primarily introduced by the Department of Education as an austerity measure. It provides a significant financial incentive for students to complete their courses, which should logically have a positive impact on retention rates. The authors are not aware of any research yet published into the effects of the 24+ advanced learning loan on student retention rates. 
Many studies into retention focus on just one aspect or one reason for student’s attrition, and where multiple aspects are covered, they are discussed in separate distinct sections. However, there may be complex interconnections between the factors affecting student retention, making it a more complex issue to resolve than the simple analysis of one aspect or separate distinct sections. Gooderham proposed a model of dropout rates in adult education which included interactions between psychological, social, external and institutional factors as causes22. It has been long known that students continue with their program of study when the perceived benefits of continuing outweigh the perceived ‘costs’ of studying . However, the relative importance of various benefits (e.g. better job prospects) and costs (e.g. time, effort, financial costs) depend upon the subjective priorities of the individual. 
“Actual reasons for leaving the course were rarely single or simple, and often a small change tipped the balance between positive and negative factors and led to a decision to leave”. 

Wyn suggests that a simple quantitative analysis is not sufficient to investigate student retention and he gives a well-reasoned explanation as to why a multi-method model is required when trying to resolve complex problems. In agreement with the latter, this study will be using a mixed methods approach to investigate the retention of mature Access to HE students.  

Research Methodology
In the field of education, where there is a demand for ever-increasing achievement on an ever-decreasing budget, managers and budget-holders like the apparent certainty and comparability that quantitative methods produce. However, as research into education is a complex subject involving interconnections of human, social, political and psychological factors, quantitative methods are unable to produce the rich depth and breadth of information required to fully understand all of the subtle complexities that make up a particular aspect of education; this is the forte` of the qualitative technique. Qualitative techniques, which may involve producing comprehensive descriptions following interviews and observations, are able to give a full and detailed picture of a small sample of participants in a particular set of circumstances. Whilst qualitative methods are able to measure the complex subtleties of a situation, qualitative research is often inconclusive and may not be suitable for generalisation to other scenarios. Therefore, it is advantageous to conduct research via the mixed methods approach, drawing on aspects of quantitative and qualitative research within the same study in order to capitalise on the advantages of both techniques. 
In this study, a mixed methods approach will be used, including statistical analysis of data, both from the college records and from questionnaires administered for the purpose of the study, alongside a more descriptive approach of using information from interviews with staff and students combined with field notes.  

Procedure
This study took place at a large inner-city college of further education in Staffordshire, England. It is set in a department which provides an OCN Level 3 Access to Higher Education Diploma in Health to adult students who lack traditional qualifications. The course is a 1 year qualification, the major aim of which is to provide a progression route to university for adult students who lack traditional qualifications. 
This location was chosen, firstly, because the Access to Higher Education diploma is of great value to the local economy at this location. In the local area, in 2012, only 51% of those leaving school achieved 5 A*-C grades at GCSE. In previous years, this figure has been much lower - 35.8% in 1999 and 33.3% in 2006. Therefore, a large number of adult students left school with insufficient GCSE grades to progress onto further education. Unemployment in the local area is quite low, at 5.9% compared to the national average of 7.8% and the NHS is a major employer in the area. NHS employees without university level qualifications are generally paid a basic salary of up to £14,153 per annum, whereas university-qualified NHS employees are paid £21,176 and above. Therefore, it is likely that students in the local area who leave education without good GCSE or A-level grades enter into a low paid job as a result. Those with the need and motivation may return to education as college students to take the OCN Access to HE diploma in order to progress onto university and, eventually, to acquire employment with better pay and conditions, more responsibility and opportunities for promotion. 

Secondly, this location was chosen because it is beneficial for a mixed methods study as it is one of the largest providers of the Access to HE health diploma in the Midlands region, so a large sample size can be used when generating quantitative data. The larger the sample size, the more valid the results. In addition to the size of the department, one of the authors has six years of experience with this particular college. Being familiar with the processes and procedures within the college can be of great benefit when trying to interpret qualitative information. There are advantages and disadvantages of a researcher having close links with the educational establishment in which he or she carries out research. It is easier for a researcher with close links to the college to understand the context in which the research is taking place because they have a better understanding of the social dynamics that take place within the setting and a greater knowledge of the procedures and logistics which may make the research process more efficient. The results, analysis and conclusions will therefore be more meaningful. Such a researcher may have insight into data and access to students in their natural setting that an external researcher would not. However, such data and access must be handled responsibly and ethically in order that student’s personal information is not divulged to third parties and to comply with the Data Protection Act. Staff and students may feel more comfortable talking to a teacher or a colleague than to a stranger. Conversely, where the participant is already known to the researcher, they may display ‘demand characteristics’ where the participant tells the researcher what they think they want to hear in order that the researcher thinks more highly of them. If every effort is made to be as objective as possible and non-judgemental, on balance, the insight and understanding gained by a researcher working in a setting that is well-known to them is highly valuable. 
	This study was carried out as part of a larger research project into the retention of adult Access to HE students. The college’s existing data was used (with permission of the assistant director), a full population sample was used in order to maximise the amount of data collected. The sample included data from all full time Access to HE health students from the 2012-2013 cohort (Pre 24+ advanced learning loan) and from the 2013-2014 cohort (post introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loan). In order to protect the identities of the students, the raw data, which includes personal information (e.g. student names, birth dates), will not be included in this report, but the total numbers counted from those data lists will be included.
Two tutors participated in short, informal, unstructured interviews. In order to conform to ethical guidelines tutors were informed that their participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time. Interviews were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the Access to Higher Education staff room at convenient points during the working day when the room was not busy in order to maximise discretion and professionalism. Short written notes were taken during the interviews and documented immediately afterwards. In addition to this, the author, who was a tutor on the Access to HE diploma, kept field notes regarding student retention, for the purpose of this study. 
Twelve adult students from the Access to HE diploma in health, self-selected to participate in short semi-structured interviews about student retention. Students involved in these interviews were informed about the nature of the study, that their participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time. They were asked for their opinions relating to retention on the Access to Higher Education (health) course. Although this sampling method was not random, those students who self-selected to participate clearly were interested in this topic and felt that they had ideas to contribute. It should be considered that the students who self-selected to participate in interviews are likely to have different experiences than those who would have been chosen via a random sampling technique. 
Results
The primary aim of this research was to investigate the effects of the introduction of “24+ advanced learning loans” on retention of adult students taking the OCN Access to Higher Education Diploma in Health. Field notes indicated that some students felt that those who had contributed financially towards the cost of their course took the course more seriously and were therefore more likely to complete the course compared to students who were not required to contribute financially to their course. For example one student (2012-13) commented;
	“The course is really hard, but those of us who have paid, if we drop out now [March] we will lose our money and come away with nothing. Those who didn’t pay, and dropped-out, they shouldn’t have started the course in the first place, they could have made room for someone who really wanted [a place on the course].” 
The college’s existing data (2012-13) was used to establish if funded students (who did not contribute to the cost of their course) were more likely to withdraw from their Access diploma compared to those students, known as co-funded, who had contribute (approximately £600) towards the cost of their course.
Table 1 Student numbers 2012-13 (pre introduction of  24+ advanced learning loan)
	Students who completed their Access to HE diploma	Students who withdrew from their Access to HE diploma	Total	
Fully-funded students	39	18	57	
Co-funded students	22	4	26	
total	61	22	83	

When a 2x2 chi-squared test was conducted to compare the completion and withdrawal proportions of fully-funded and co-funded students (for the 2012-13 Access to HE diploma in health cohort) before the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loans, 
χ2= 2.404, N= 83 students, for 1 degree of freedom, p=0.121. 
Software such as SPSS, Graphpad and quantpsy.org report a 2-tailed probability, appropriate for a non-directional hypothesis. In this case the hypothesis was directional (“Were fully funded students MORE likely to drop out compared to co-funded students?” As opposed to testing if there was ANY difference in withdrawal rates between the 2 groups) hence a 1-tailed probability would be reported, in this case p= 0.0605. As this value was larger than 0.05, the null hypothesis was supported, suggesting that there was NO significant difference, and students are NOT more likely to withdraw just because they are not contributing financially to the cost of their course. 
Investigating 24+ advanced learning loan: Student age and retention
Using the college’s existing data, it was possible to compare the completion and withdrawal numbers for students aged 23 years and under, with those aged 24 years and over, for the 2012-13 cohort (before the introduction of “24+ advanced learning loans” ) and for the 2013-14 cohort (after the introduction of “24+ advanced learning loans”). 
Table 2 Student numbers 2012-13 (pre introduction of  24+ advanced learning loan)
	Student age	Students who completed the Access diploma	Students who withdrew from the Access diploma	Total		
	23 years and under	20	13	33		
	24 years and over	41	9	50		
	Total	61	22	83		

For the 2012-13 cohort, before the “24+ advanced learning loan” was introduced, it is apparent from the data that more than the expected number of students aged 24 years and over completed the course than would be expected numerically, (41 actual completing students compared to 36.7 as an expected value) and more of the younger students withdrew (13 actual withdrawals compared to an expected value of just 8.7 in the 23 years and under category). 
A 2x2 chi-squared test was conducted to compare the completion and withdrawal proportions of students aged 24+ years, with the proportion for students aged 23 years and under, for the 2012-13 Access to HE diploma in health cohort, (before the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loans)
χ2=4.671, N= 83 students, 1 degree of freedom p=0.0307. 
This result is statistically significant and indicates that students 24 years and over were statistically less likely to withdraw from the Access to HE diploma even before the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loan. 
Calculations were carried out for the 2013-2014 cohort to evaluate any changes that have taken place since the introduction of the “24+ advanced learning loans”
Table 3 Student numbers 2013-14 (post introduction of  24+ advanced learning loan)
Observed values for the 2013-2014 cohort
	Student age	Completed	Withdrawn	Total		
	23 years and under	19	8	27		
	24 years and over	33	3	36		
	Total	52	11	63		

The “expected” values for the 2013-2014 cohort
	Student age	Completed	Withdrawn	Total		
	23 years and under	22.3	4.7*
See below	27		
	24 years and over	27.7	6.3	36		
	Total	52	11	63		

In agreement with the 2012-13 data, this data for the 2013-14 cohort follows a similar pattern, with more than the expected number of older student completed (33 students compared to the expected value of 27.7) and a higher than expected number of students in the younger category withdrew (8 compared to 4.7)
It is also notable that the number of students participating in the Access to HE health diploma at this particular college was less for the 2013-14 cohort than for 2012-13 (63 students rather than 83). Possible reasons for the reduction in numbers are discussed in the subsequent section of this article.
The retention rate for the 2013-14 cohort was conspicuously higher (52/63x100 = 82.5%) than in 2012-13 (61/83x100= 73.5%) 
The reduced student numbers and increased retention rate led to a very low predicted value for “withdrawn” students in the “23 years and under” category; as indicated by an asterisk* in the table above, hence, Fischer’s exact calculation should be used instead of Chi squared. 
When a Fischer’s exact calculation was carried out for this data (Graph-pad Quickcalcs) The two-tailed P value =0.0432. A Fisher’s exact test was then carried out for the 2012-13 data in order to compare the two, this gave a two-tailed P value = 0.0424 As these two values are similar, it could be concluded that the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loan has not had a major impact on retention rates of students aged 24years and over.
12 students self-selected to complete a short open-question interview regarding student retention; of the 12, most mentioned the day-to-day financial pressures of juggling college, employment and family, four students mentioned the 24+ advanced learning loan specifically. One student was quite positive about the loan; 
“Without the 24+ loan I would not have been able to do the course. I would not have been able to afford the tuition fees (she explained her husband’s work situation)...We get no benefits to help us.”
In contrast another student was rather negative about the whole 24+ advanced learning loan process referring specifically to the complex application process; 
“24+ loans are not very good...and all the mess about the applications...the college suspended some students [asked them not to come to class until their loan application was agreed] and some never got to do the course because it didn’t get sorted.” 
One older student felt that the system for paying for college courses was unfair; 
“Everyone should have to pay for their course or get the loan, some of the young people [who didn’t pay towards their course] they had no interest, they stop attending and then they drop out, but it’s hard for everyone and they have no excuse.”
There was an example, from field notes, of a student who stated that he wanted to drop out of the Access to HE course, however as he was over 24 years old he had an advanced learning loan and eventually caught up and completed his course as he did not want to have to pay back the loan. 

One student referred to the divide between younger and older students.
“As a younger student, I often feel victimised [by the older students who are in the majority] for having more time and less commitments than other students.”
It was noted that on two occasions where major disagreements had occurred between students (these are usually very rare in the Access to HE department) during the academic year 2013-14, on both occasions students raised the issue of age. This data could indicate that the introduction of the 24+ loan has created more of a divide between younger and older students that was not previously so apparent. 
Tutors noted that during the academic year 2013-14 additional administration tasks had been created as a result of the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loans, tutors, supervisors and the students finance team had been given work, that they would not have otherwise had to do, as a result of the introduction of the loan. 
Discussion
Rationale` behind the 24+ Advanced Learning Loan 
 The 24+ advanced learning loans were introduced by the government in September 2013 for students aged 24 years and over on all level 3 and some level 4 courses. According to staff at the college where this study took place and field notes on the college’s internal literature, the loans were introduced as an austerity measure; information published on 24+ advanced learning loans by the British government’s education department appears to concur that the loans were introduced as an austerity measure. For Access to HE students, if they complete the course and progress successfully to university, the loan is wiped and the students do not have to repay it at all. This should, in theory, improve retention, as students who drop out will be responsible for paying back their loan. 

Did the 24+ Advanced Learning Loan meet its objectives?
The results, indicate that for the Access to Higher Education diploma in Health, whilst there was an improvement in student retention from 2012-13 (pre 24+ loan) to 2013-14 (when the 24+ loan was introduced) the vast majority of this improvement was in the under 24 year-old category. Retention percentages for students in the 24 years and over category are similar in both years (pre 24+ loan and post 24+ loan introduction) moreover chi squared and Fischer’s exact analysis show similar retention patterns between the 2 age groups before and after the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loan, indicating that the loan had not made a major impact on student retention.
Why is retention higher in the 24 year-old+ age group?
For the Access to Higher Education diploma, retention was much higher amongst students in the 24-years and older category, compared to the younger age group, perhaps indicating that the loans were targeted at the wrong age group. This is contrary to previous findings regarding age and retention for other courses. It can be speculated that older students could have more difficulties, than younger students, in completing a course. Older students may have busier schedules due to additional responsibilities such as childcare commitments, and may have more demanding work schedule due to financial commitments. Tutors interviewed for this study stated that the majority of Access to HE students have robust plans in place for dealing with such logistical difficulties and this is supported by the data from field notes. Moreover, older students may have more life experience which could lead to better skills such as time-management, prioritising and coping strategies. As the purpose of the Access to HE diploma is to allow students to progress to university, progression is a major motivating factor for Access to HE students. The higher retention rates amongst older students could be linked to them having more definite career plans and generally a greater wealth of work experiences, leading to enhanced chances of career progression. These findings are tentative and additional research into this area could be recommended.
Negative effects of the 24+ Advanced Learning Loan 
Staff interviews and field notes describe an increased tension between younger students (age under 24 years) and older students (24 years and over) as a result of the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loan. Students and, in some cases staff, felt that if some students are required to take a loan to pay for their course, this should not evaluated on the basis of age. Some students felt that all students should be required to take out a loan to pay for the cost of their course. It is not clear in the Government’s education department literature why the age 24 was selected as the cut-off point for funding purposes, however during the spring and summer of 2014, consultation is taking place between the education department, FE colleges and students who wish to participate, regarding the possibility of lowering the age for advanced learning loans to 19 years and over. 
Interviews and field notes indicate that students and, in some cases, staff agree with some aspects of the current loan system; it seems fair to students that those students who complete the course and progress successfully to university do not have to repay their loan whilst those who drop out may have to do so. Student interviews and field notes gave the impression that the most Access to HE students were hard-working and determined to progress to university. The vast majority of students (2013-14) who took out 24+ advanced learning loans subsequently completed their course and progressed to university, hence they will not be required to pay back the loan. If this pattern were to be repeated across numerous colleges it would mean that the whole system had also not been an effective austerity measure. 
When comparing the data from before and after the introduction of the loan system, a reduction in student numbers can be seen. This is not because students are deterred from applying for the course (application numbers continue to increase) it is due to some students being unable to obtain a 24+ advanced learning loan. The loan application process is reportedly somewhat lengthy and complex, with a number of students having difficulty in verifying their identity with required evidence. As the academic year 2013-14 was the first time that this loan system operated, it is possible that the application process may become smoother in subsequent years and colleges may be able to provide support for students in completing applications and proving their identity.  
With the 24+ advanced learning loan system still in its early stages, having been implemented within the last year, there continues to be an absence of literature on this subject. Hence this current investigation represents an initial study of what is essentially a new area for research, and it is anticipated that it will contribute to the literature on this subject. 
Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusion
In conclusion, the current study found that the introduction of the 24+ advanced learning loans did not have a major impact on student retention rates at this particular FE College. It did however, produce additional administration tasks for college staff and disadvantage students who have difficulty in documenting their identity, many of which come from the most vulnerable sections of the student population. As this year was the first cycle of 24+ advanced learning loans, these difficulties could be reduced in future years. The arbitrary cut-off age of 24 years deepened divisions between older and younger Access to HE students and created some tension and resentment. 
Individual factors such as employment patterns, childcare responsibilities and transport arrangements were not found to lead to student attrition, rather a balance of complex factors lead a student to decide to leave their course.
For Access to HE students, the opportunity for successful progression to university was a strong motivating factor in encouraging students to stay and complete their course.
Due to the timing of this study, it was not posible to collect extensive, detailed information from Access students who subsequently withdrew from their course; this was one objective of the study that was not met. 
In addition, the way in which students’ mental health effects their decision to stay or withdraw, was not an intended aim of this study, however it was raised as an important point during interviews, it was beyond the scope of this study, but would be an area where future productive research could take place. 
Recommendations
To policy writers of the Government  we recommend that, for Access to Higher Education courses, the current system, whereby the loan is wiped when the student progresses to university, is a good idea which is viewed as fair and reasonable by College staff and students. However if it does not support retention and is not an effective austerity measure the Government may need to re-evaluate this system. 
There is a consultation period currently taking place regarding lower in the age for Advanced Learning Loans to 19. For Access to HE diplomas, this is a good idea, and should reduce tension between younger and older students. We would recommend to Managers of FE colleges that they get involved in this consultation.
Loan providers should make the application system shorter and simpler, however this leaves the system open for some individuals to abuse (taking a loan when are not entitled to). FE colleges will need to provide additional support to students in completing their applications and verifying their identity. Although this requires some administration, it reduces the need for teaching staff and managers to become involved in the student loan process, hence is more efficient in the long term.
At this point in time when many FE Colleges are trying to phase out the tutorial system, instead they should invest time and staff in a good tutorial system. This risks reducing time for taught content, it is vital in producing good relationships between staff and students, which in turn encourages students to stay. Moreover, tutorial time is often used for careers advice, completion of UCAS application and interview techniques, thus enhancing progression chances, which in turn may motivate students to continue with their course.
Finally we would urge students to seek as much information and advice as possible before committing to the enormous challenge that is completing an Access to HE diploma within one year. Students should also try to form good working relationships with tutors and seek help if they are having difficulties.

References
Access to HE joint statistical report (2013)
AQA (2012) online www.aqa.co.uk [Accessed 21/09/13]
Basit, T. N. (2010) Conducting Research in Educational Contexts. London : Continuum.
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. routledge.

BMRB Social Research (2006), FE Learners Longitudinal Survey Wave 1: Findings from Quantitative Research, DfES Research Report 768

Carter, D. F., Locks, A. M., & Winkle-Wagner, R. (2013). From when and where I enter: Theoretical and empirical considerations of minority students’ transition to college. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (pp. 93-149). Springer Netherlands.

Clarke-Carter, D (2007) Quantitative Psychological Research: The Complete Student's Companion Taylor & Francis Ltd

CULLEN, M.A. (1994) "Weighing It Up": A case study of discontinuing Access students. (Occasional Papers, 2.) Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh Centre for Continuing Education.

Department of Education (2001) http://education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/archive/shlea1_99?lea=861&type=b [online Accessed 28/09/13]
GOODERHAM, P. (1994) ‘Evolving a framework for the study of dropout’,
International Journal of Lifelong Education, 13 (6), 441–455.

Gray, D (2009) Doing research in the real World (2nd edition) Sage London.
Guardian (2012) http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/oct/18/gcse-english-rates-local-authority#data  [online] Accessed 28/09/13
Hall, A (2001) Scottish Executive Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Department

Hinsliff-Smith, K, Gates, P, and Leducq, M, (2012) : Persistence, how do they do it? A case study of Access to Higher Education learners on a UK Diploma/BSc Nursing programme NURSE EDUCATION TODAY Volume: 32 Issue: 1 Pages: 27-31 DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2011.01.015 Published: JAN 2012

IFF Research (2003) Study of Learners in Further Education, DfES Research Report 469

Khajah, M. M., Lindsey, R. V., & Mozer, M. C. (2014). Maximizing Students' Retention via Spaced Review: Practical Guidance From Computational Models of Memory. Topics in cognitive science, 6(1), 157-169.

MACDONALD, C., KARKALAS, A. and MACKENZIE, A. (1996) ‘Potholes in the
Access Road: drop-out from a university-based Access course’, Journal of Access
Studies, 12, 66–84.

MARTINEZ, P. (1995) Student retention in further and adult education: the evidence. (Mendip Paper.) Bristol: Further Education Development Agency.

Martinez P and Munday F (1998), 9,000 Voices: Student Persistence and Drop-out in Further Education, Further Education Development Agency

McGivney, V. (1996) Staying or leaving the course: non-completion and retention of mature students in further and higher education. Leicester: NIACE.
National Careers service (2013) online nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk Accessed 21/09/13
LSC (2006), National Learner Satisfaction Survey: Further Education 2004/5, LSC 

OFSTED (2013) online http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/common-inspection-framework-for-further-education-and-skills-2012 Accessed 28/09/2013
Quality Assurance Agency for H.E. (2012) 
Royal College of Nursing (2012) http://www.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/444941/Pay_Scales_2012_Final270312.pdf  [online] Accessed 28/09/13
Simm, C, Page, R and Miller, L, (2007) Reasons for Early Leaving from FE
and Work-Based Learning Courses, Institute for Employment Studies
Steele, R; Lauder, W; Caperchione, C (2005)  An exploratory study of the concerns of mature access to nursing students and the coping strategies used to manage these adverse experiences NURSE EDUCATION TODAY Volume: 25 Issue: 7 Pages: 573-581 DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2005.05.009 Published: OCT 2005 

UCAS 2013 online www.ucas.ac.uk [Accessed 28/09/2013]
Wyn (2009) Towards a Pragmatic and Philosophical Basis for a Multi - Methods Approach to Investigating English Further Education Colleges' Performance as Measured by Student Retention and Achievement8th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management StudiesLocation: Univ Malta, Valletta, MALTADate: JUN 22-23, 2009

Appendix 1 - Access to Higher education diploma fees and funding information 2012-13

IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING FEES FOR ENROLMENT 
If you are 19-23 years of age at the start of the course the fees are:
Access to Higher Education Diploma in Health (Modular) and Science £850.00
Access to Higher Education Diploma in Health (Fast Track) £600.00

You will get your fees remitted if:
•	 this is your first level 3 qualification 

Or if you are unemployed and in receipt of:
•	Job Seekers Allowance, 
•	Employment Support Allowance, 
•	Universal Credit
•	Income Support, Housing/Council Tax Benefit, 
•	Pension Credit, 
•	Working Tax Credit (qualifying threshold £15,910)

You will need proof of benefit at the time of enrolment
If your household income is below £20,000 you may qualify for financial assistance please contact Faye Taylor on 01782 603604.
If you are 24 or over at the start of your course you will need to apply for a 24 plus Advanced Learning Loan or pay for your fees in full which are:
Access Modular Health	£3350.00 
Access Science		£3350.00
Access Health Fast Track	£2395.00
If you pay full fees these can be paid in monthly direct debit instalments for which there is an additional £10 charge – this will be discussed at enrolment.
Any queries please contact the Admissions Team on 01782 603678.
Yours faithfully
Marie Mould – Admissions Adviser