53
`I
Call Myself a Mature Student. That One Word Makes All the Difference': Reflections
on Adult Learners' Experiences
SAGE Publications, Inc.200510.1191/0967550705ab023oa
RichardWaller
University of the West of England, Bristol, UK, richard.waller@uwe.ac.uk
Address
for correspondence: Richard Waller, Centre for Research in Education and Democracy,
Faculty of Education, University of the West of England, Frenchay Campus,
Coldharbour Lane, Bristol BS16 1QY; Email: richard.waller@uwe.ac.uk
This article discusses
findings from a longitudinal study of 20 mature students from a broad range
of backgrounds that joined a full-time Access to University programme at an
English urban FE college in September 2001. The fieldwork involved repeated
interviews — up to five times each — over a two-year period, covering
the Access course and first year at university for those progressing as intended
(13 of the 20). The interviews explored the impact of returning to study
on the lives and biographies of those involved, particularly changing personal
relationships, negotiations of risk and the (re)construction of class and
learner identities. I seek here to highlight the social context of the interviewees'
lives, and to draw heavily upon their stories and self-representations to
ground the theories underpinning the analysis offered.
INTRODUCTION
This article explores experiences of life changes for a group of mature learners
on an Access to Higher Education (HE) course. The students contest, negotiate
and reframe aspects of their identity and subsequent bio- graphical narratives
whilst returning to study as adults. In some cases, this return is many years
after a childhood engagement with formal education now viewed with a mixture
of resentment, regret and a sense of wasted opportunities. This is especially
true where schooling left them with a fragile academic self-esteem, a consequence
of being labelled `a failure' as a child (see Waller, 2004, for a more detailed
analysis). For some, this
54
contributes
to a desire to `make good' perceived deficits through re-engagement with
formal education as an adult learner (Archer, 2003), leading to what McFadden
(1995) termed `second chance education'. Bloomer and Hodkinson (2000) wrote
of a `learning career' amongst (younger) further education (FE) students,
which I also find a useful way of viewing older people returning to formal
education, as it assumes a (learner) identity in a state of flux, under constant
(re)construction. The theories used here to conceptualize identity see it
as fragmented (Woodward, 1997), and never `complete' or finalized, but continually
in a state of transition (Ball et al., 2000; Green and Webb, 1997). As such,
this understanding of `identity' can be traced to earlier influences including
Beck (1992), Giddens (1991) and Hall (1992; 1996). It is also seen as subjectively
experienced (Chappell et al., 2003), embodied in the individ- ual (Charlesworth,
2000), and, in a time of gradually weakening class affiliations, family ties
and traditional expectations (Bauman, 2004), determined to an increasing extent
by consumption and lifestyle choices (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2002; Furlong
and Cartmel, 1997). The decision to become a mature student is one such `lifestyle
choice' and the impact of this upon identity (re)formation is what I seek
to explore in this article. The idea from Bloomer and Hodkinson (2000) of
an individual `learning career' was further developed by Crossan et al. (2003:
59), who proposed that it is `frequently contingent and associated with rather
fragile and experimental changes in identity' as opposed to a necessarily
`lasting and unilinear change' (my emphasis). These studies focused upon
the learning experiences of people younger than those in mine, but I consider
the approach to be of equal, if perhaps not greater, merit when applied to
older students. For instance, the recognition that the trajectory of `learn-
ing careers', can be forwards, sideways or in reverse helps us to under- stand
the impact of (frequently negative) earlier encounters with formal education
upon the learner and general self-identity of students prema- turely leaving
an academic programme, as some in the wider study did. None of the seven considered
here left during the Access year, although one, Meg,1 gave up her studies
after a few weeks at university. I have indicated elsewhere how the negotiation
of various risks influ- ences the biographical construction of mature students
(Waller, 2002). I have also written on how the changing sense of selfhood
plays out for these mature students in terms of class, gender and learner
identities (Brine and Waller, 2004). Here I focus upon two other components
of an individual's biographical construction, which we can employ as lenses
through which to view someone's life. These lenses often overlap and reinforce
one another, and move in and out of focus at different times. The first lens
is the shifting notion of `self', particularly through growing
55
self-esteem,
maturing world outlook and improving academic abilities. The second is the
lived experience of be(com)ing a student, with particu- lar reference to changing
lifestyle, contestations over the appropriateness of the label `student' and
processes of `othering'/being `othered' in both public and private spheres.
Several recently published studies have used longitudinal humanistic research
like that employed here to explore changes in the lives of Access students
(see, for example: Bowl, 2003; Burke, 2002; Warmington, 2002a; 2002b). In
so doing, they have sought to `give voice' to adult learners. However, they
have not employed the combination of analytical frameworks or tools used here – the focus upon relationships, and the exploration of evolving aspects of personal
identity for instance. Similar longitudinal studies of younger people on the
transition from school into work and/or further study have occurred too, for
example in the UK, Hodkinson et al. (1996) and Ball et al. (2000), and, in
Finland, the ongo- ing study of Gordon and Lahelma (2003). But, at the risk
of stating the obvious, whilst these also deal with a transitory period in
peoples' lives, they were/are of a rather dissimilar nature due to the ages
of those involved, and the consequential differential experiences and responsibili-
ties of the people within the studies. That said, there are some areas of
commonality with such studies, for instance that Ball et al.'s (2000: 17)
account `blends fairly detailed narrative with a degree of conceptual focus.'
I will be highlighting further similarities later. ACCESS TO HIGHER EDUCATION
Access to HE programmes have flourished from their inception in the mid-1970s
(West, 1996), and attract increasing numbers of mature stu- dents from a range
of backgrounds to study within a further education college setting (Britton
and Baxter, 1994; Reay et al., 2002; Ross, 2003). Access courses do more than
provide adults with few or no formal quali- fications a route into university.
Peters (1997) for example writes of how supporting activities within a similar
pre-HE writing skills course pro- vided `scaffolding' to assist students'
academic development. An Access course curriculum has this as a central purpose,
with the usual `core activ- ities' of study skills, numeracy, literacy and
communication skills in addition to subject specific knowledge. There is an
informal curriculum too, with the course aiming to raise the confidence level
of students, and to develop transferable generic `soft' skills including time
management, handling work-related stress and effective group working. Parry
(1996) suggests Access programmes traditionally combine two main features:
a curriculum concerned with preparation for HE, and a course of study aimed
at those otherwise unable to qualify for university
56
entry
in `traditional ways'. Parry also suggests Access courses redress educational
exclusion amongst low-participating groups – primarily mature students
from working-class backgrounds – who account for the majority of those
considered both here and in the wider study. More recent studies have often
criticized how the reality for the majority of `non- traditional' students
such as those from an Access course is `an inferior, vocational HE for the
masses', in `this new, cold climate' (Sinfield et al., 2004: 142–43).
Charlesworth (2000) amongst others has highlighted the apparently growing
division between (elite) pre- and (mass) post-1992 universities,2 whilst Brine
and Waller (2004: 110) noted that `widening participation has meant in practice
(A)ccess to new universities'. However, student experiences of Access courses
usually compare favourably to those of compulsory schooling, where emergent
learner identities may have been first damaged. As Crossan et al. (2003) suggest,
for non-traditional learners prior negative experiences of studying can result
in a position of hostility towards educational institutions. Such antipathy
is one reason identified by Archer et al. (2003) for the non-participation
of some (predominantly working class) people in post- compulsory education.
As well as being considered preferential to the experience of school, Access
courses have traditionally been considered of greater benefit and more enjoyable
than the subsequent time at university too. This was usually the outcome of
research before the implementation of the UK Labour Government's widening
participation agenda that recent studies cited above have criticized as leading
to a poorer university expe- rience. Both Wakeford (1994) and Betts (1999)
for instance suggested Access programmes give mature students a yardstick
against which to measure their experience of HE, and many compare favourably
the `supportive' environment of Access with that of a larger, more `anonymous'
university course. I interrogate interview data here to explore how a group
of adult learners reflect upon the impact of post-compulsory education on
their identities and wider lives, including personal relationships. The education
system purports to offer individuals the chance to develop intellectually,
equipping them for work, and adding to their sense of personal fulfilment
whilst increasing their knowledge and understand- ing (Dearing, 1997). However,
not everyone achieves all of this satisfac- torily at school, and some writers
suggest that an Access course offers a `second chance' to revisit previous
`failings' within or by the educational system, as Paul Willis put it, `settling
old scores' (cited in McFadden, 1995). This position, which privileges subcultural
or resistance theories, is not without its critics. Warmington (2002a), for
instance, has illustrated how circumstances behind educational disaffection
are usually more complex than such largely deterministic theories suggest,
and that an indi- vidual's response to their experience is informed by factors
far beyond
57
their
socio-economic situation alone. I am certainly not dismissing the importance
of structural factors in framing peoples' lives and even their understanding
of how to `improve' them. I would for example support Roberts' (1994: 51)
position when he proposes that: `… even when indi- viduals have moved
consistently towards pre-formulated goals, these aims themselves and the individuals'
ability to realise them, were products of their structured locations'. Yes,
an understanding of individual agency is important in a study like this, but
we must acknowledge that structures limit the extent to which individuals
can act. My interview cohort seemed to understand this to a far greater degree
than the youths in the study by Ball et al. (2000). Those young people conveyed
the impression of being largely autonomous actors in control of their biographical
trajectories (Beck, 1992; Giddens, 1991) and not restricted by social factors
such as class, gender or ethnic identities, as many subsequent commentators
would in fact argue (see, for instance, Lash, 1994). By re-engaging with formal
education, mature students are involved in changing their learner identity,
a process that may also challenge class and/or gender identity/ies. Several
post-war studies, most notably perhaps Jackson and Marsden (1962), highlighted
the problematic learner–class relationship by showing that changing
learner identities among grammar- school-educated working-class boys produced
conflict within families and their lived class identity, culture or habitus
(Bourdieu, 1977). Hoggart's (1958) largely autobiographical study The uses
of literacy revealed similar tensions, whilst the more recent edited work
of Mahony and Zmroczek (1997) demonstrates the frequently contradictory position-
ing of women academics with working-class backgrounds. Education- induced
class uncertainties and tensions (Lawler, 1999) mean progression to university
does not simply involve the straightforward adoption of an unproblematic new
learner identity, but frequently involves risk and reflexivity, contradiction
and confusion regarding class and other identi- ties too (Brine and Waller,
2004; Davis and Williams, 2001; Reay, 2003). THE RESEARCH STUDY This article
reports aspects of an ongoing project focusing upon experi- ences of mature
students during an Access course and subsequent transi- tion into university.
Whilst the themes addressed here sometimes appear in the life stories of the
wider cohort, the findings are primarily from seven of the 20 interviewees.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted up to five times with each student,
around the end of term times, for two years. The interviews, which lasted
between 25 and 90 minutes and usu- ally took place either on the college premises
or at the home of the respon-
58
dent,
were tape-recorded and subsequently transcribed. The author of this article
undertook them all. Similar questions were asked of each respon- dent for
a given set of interviews, and whilst some themes such as whether they considered
themselves a student were revisited, others only arose during one set of discussions.
Informed consent was gained at the start of the project and again before each
interview, and individuals were reminded that they were free to withdraw from
the study at any time, which some chose to do before the period of fieldwork
was over, includ- ing Meg here. In September 2001, the students had joined
a multi-pathway Access to HE course in an urban FE college with close links
to neighbouring univer- sities. The 20 people in the bigger study, and the
seven under considera- tion here, were chosen to reflect the diversity of
their Access cohort, rather than to construct a representative sample from
which generalizations could be attempted. Bertaux (1981) refers to the notion
of `representativ- ity', and recommends researching until we possess sufficient
information to understand the pattern of `sociostructural relations' making
up people's lives. In the data presented here, students contemplate experiences
of adult education, specifically its impact upon biographical (re)construc-
tions through their developing learner and other identity/ies. This enables
an exploration of what Crossan et al. (2003) suggest are tensions and dilemmas
experienced by adults occupying positions generally associated with youthful
dependency. Semi-structured one-to-one interviews focused on issues of reflexivity,
risk and identity, although the interviewer did not necessarily use these
precise terms. The chosen research method enabled the direction of con- versations
to change and subjects be explored as they arose, and was con- sidered the
most appropriate method of obtaining rich data from which we might best understand
student experience. For the wider study, and to an extent here, narrative,
life story and other forms of biographical represen- tation are being explored
for their utility (Erben, 1998; Hatch and Wisniewski, 1995; Sparkes, 2002).
The data presented now are drawn pri- marily from the first three interviews
with each respondent, that is, whilst they were on the Access programme, although
occasional reference is made to events at university for some of the cohort
where it is felt useful in aiding our understanding of people's experiences.
The interviewees knew I worked as an Access tutor, and was involved in educational
research at a local university. At times, it felt appropriate to point out
that, in common with most of them, I too was a mature student balancing academic
studies with family responsibilities and part-time work commitments. This
aided the development of rapport necessary to produce the richly detailed
qualitative data sought. None of the respondents knew me before the project
commenced, and the
59
only
formal points of contact were the interviews from which extracts are selected.
Whilst these discussions may not necessarily coincide with `turning-points'
(Strauss, 1962) or key decision-making moments, they do demonstrate `doubts
and indecisions, changes of mind, vague possibilities' (Ball et al., 2000:
15) as the interviewees reported and reflected upon their experiences. The
seven students whose stories are presented here were chosen because they in
particular referred to experiences of Access in terms of a changing sense
of identity including the meaning of being `a student'. Other respondents
also sometimes referred to these topics, but not to the extent of those considered
now. All seven here successfully completed their Access year and progressed
to university – usually the local post- 1992 institution – although
one, Meg, left within a month. Those abandon- ing their studies nevertheless
remained part of the larger project, and are discussed elsewhere. As accounts
of developments in mature students' lives, those presented here are not necessarily
unique. I am also aware that there is not just one `correct' interpretation
of the stories and lives introduced, which it is my responsibility as a researcher
to reveal, and I am caught between presenting a highly theorized account of
them, perhaps `rendering the complexity of the lives of (my) subjects less
and less visible' (Hodkinson et al., 1996: 158), and in simply letting the
accounts `speak for them- selves', permitting the reader to construct their
own understandings and meanings (Barone, 1995). I have tried to develop an
accommodation between the two ends of this continuum, since for most in the
study, particularly the respondents considered here, major changes have arisen
in their lives and sense of identity through re-engaging with formal education
as an adult learner. It is thus incumbent upon me to seek to offer at least
a framework for understanding contributory factors and the effects of such
changes upon the individuals concerned, which is what I have tried to do.
Ball et al. (2000) distinguish between `active' and `inert' choices to enter
FE amongst their youth cohort. The Access students in my study have been far
more `active' than `inert' on this binary measurement. Given the sacrifices
usually made and risks undertaken (Davis and Williams, 2001; Reay, 2003) by
adults returning to education, it is unlikely to be through mere serendipity
or `happenstance' (Baumgardner, 1996a; 1996b; Miller, 1996), and they did
not just `drift' into FE for want of something more attractive to do when
faced with leaving school. In contrast, whilst many of the group in Ball et
al.'s (2000) study were `guided', sometimes reluctantly by parents and/or
teachers at school, sometimes reluctantly, into `staying-on', most Access
students made the decision to return to education, in some cases after a `break'
of decades, themselves. As one
60
of the
respondents in my wider study, Elizabeth, suggested, Access students have
`all given up something to be here' (Elizabeth, 1st interview, December 2001).
The return to formal learning has for some been a long cherished aim, often
requiring changes in personal circumstances, for instance a child reaching
school age, before going back to study was fea- sible. Others came back to
education after encouragement from those closest to them, or, in some cases,
as a result of an `epiphanic' insight (Barone, 1995) regarding the direction
their life should take. This was often after a traumatic personal event such
as the death of a loved one, a relationship breakdown, or redundancy at work
had caused them to `take stock' of their lives. And whilst they may tend to
share the view of `Lucy' in Ball et al.'s (2000) study, who cites getting
a degree as significant in improving her prospects in the job market, all
of the above distinguishes the situation of the adult learners in my study
from the youth cohort followed by others. Drawing upon, amongst other influences,
Gidden's (1991) ideas of construction of the self through lifestyle, and Bourdieu's
(1977) concept of habitus, Hodkinson et al. (1996) have usefully indicated
how even supposedly rational, pragmatic decisions are still largely socially
grounded. They propose a notion of careership, `… formed by the indi-
vidual, constrained and/or enabled by the historical, socio-cultural and economic
contexts within which that individual lives' (1996: 145). Whatever the reason,
what is clear from the vignettes below is that the motivating factor(s) behind
a radical and potentially life-changing move like returning to study as an
adult informs significantly the type of experience the mature learner will
have during their re-engagement with formal education. REFLECTIONS UPON MATURE
STUDENTS' EXPERIENCES As explained above , the major themes – identity
and `studentship'(James, 1995) are discussed in turn. For ease of analysis,
the themes are further divided as previously suggested in the introduction
above. To be consis- tent, for each of the themes the accounts of two of the
cohort are used to illustrate the topic in question. (Re)constructing learners'
biographies – developing self-esteem I discussed above how increasing
students' self-esteem is an essential, albeit usually unstated, aim of a
programme of study such as Access. As Peters (1997) suggests, success outside
an educational setting, through work for instance, does not guarantee similar
inside academia, and older learners particularly may experience a lack of
confidence or sense of disempowerment upon entering an unfamiliar and potentially
threatening
61
environment.
For many Access students, the potential for failure is risking further harm
to an already low academic self-esteem, a result of an unsuccessful and perhaps
unhappy time at school. As Shah (1994: 261) suggests, returning to education
as an adult `… is a public exposure of one's ignorance', although this
fear of exposure is not necessarily well founded. Jo, a 31-year-old single
mother, demonstrated this when she said towards the end of her course I'm
a lot more confident in my abilities now than at the start, and I'm a lot
more focussed, I know what I want to do. … I've gained skills on the
course, and have more belief in my actual abilities. You imagine that everyone's
going to be really good, and you're going to be really dumb … but you
gauge your abilities against other people around you, and that gives you confidence.
(Jo, 2nd interview, March 2002) Yet, whilst those who are unsuccessful on
the course may leave with a further damaged sense of self-esteem (see, for
example, Brine and Waller, 2004), the successful ones can discover their confidence
greatly enhanced. Finding they can cope with the challenges of studying can
strengthen more than just a student's learner identity. Its impact can affect
other areas of their sense of self. Lyndsay, a 30-year-old mother of two,
demonstrated this at the end of the Access course when claiming My confidence
has shot through the roof. I've done something for myself for a change, and
I achieved what I think are very good marks. … With all the problems
I've had, I've done it, and that's really boosted my confidence. My family
and friends are all really proud of me. So I've come out of it feeling a lot
better than a year ago. (Lyndsay, 3rd interview, July 2002) So, whilst for
Peters (1997) confidence from life outside of formal edu- cation does not
necessarily translate into confidence on the course, academic success may
yet give students the self-belief to tackle other problematic areas of their
lives. Jo reflected upon this when she commented Since starting course I had
the strength to say I wanted to finish with my partner. I wanted to before,
but was happy to let things `go along' … (but) since starting the course,
I don't know if it's a confidence thing … things that you thought
of as difficult before, you just realise that `I can do these sort of things' … push myself or motivate myself … to make things how you want them
to be. (My ex-partner) sees the reason for breaking up as because I've started
college … but that's just given me the confidence to finally do it.
(Jo, 1st interview, December 2001)
62
Lyndsay
also finished her long-term relationship, between completing her Access course
and starting university. (Re)constructing learners' biographies – changing
personal outlook Many students in the study reported changes in their opinions
of other people, or their world outlook. Akhtar for instance talked of being
`more accepting of what people do … be it good or bad'. Elaborating,
he suggested Now, I see things from others' perspectives, and I think I'm
better for it. … I'm much more tolerant of their views. I now sit down
and think `why is that their view?' rather than `that's their view and that
is wrong'. … I've definitely changed as a person, and I hope to continue
to. (Akhtar, 1st interview, December 2001) Akhtar has, it seems, carried on
experiencing personal changes. I have spoken to him since he finished his
first year at university, and Akhtar is happy to report that the process of
change, of `personal growth', continues. Such developments tend to be evolutionary,
and not revolutionary or instantaneous, which partly explains why I chose
to employ a longitudinal research method for the project, to explore the process
as it occurred. In some cases biographical changes have been actively sought,
whilst for others they were an unintended consequence of returning to study.
For instance, Maria, a married, middle-class woman of 48, thought her view
of the world had altered since starting the course. She suggested she had
become more aware of politics and social affairs as a consequence of both
the formal curriculum of her Access to Nursing course, and mixing with students
from a range of backgrounds. The process of Maria's developing social awareness
can be tracked during the course, as illustrated by the fol- lowing extracts
from her responses to the question as to whether she felt she had changed
as a result of being on the course: I'm beginning to change. I think it makes
you look at a lot of things that you would never really consider. It opens
up your mind to an awful lot of things that you probably wouldn't bother thinking
about before. (Maria, 1st interview, December 2001) Mostly the changes have
been having my eyes opened to a different world. No, not so much a different
world – because I think the world is the same – but understanding
more perhaps about how things work, certainly from the psychology and sociology
point of view [sic], finding out about things which perhaps you just ignored
or never really thought about before. (Maria, 2nd interview, March 2002)
63
I certainly
read a newspaper in a different light. It probably opens your mind to a lot
of things that you didn't bother thinking about before, especially things
like sociology. … It's good. … I read a whole article whereas
before I might have only read the headline. … I take more notice now.
(Maria, 3rd interview, July 2002) For Maria it seemed to be that both the
formal curriculum and the wider social, political and economic context of
the course contributed to her changing world view. She suggested that, for
example, she had not really known many people who had lived on state benefits
before enrolling on the Access programme, and that her opinion of them was
now informed by personal relationships, no longer just popular media discourses.
This personalized form of information is similar to Ball and Vincent's (1998)
`hot knowledge', which they found to be more valued in decision making over
parental choice of schools than the `official' sources including school prospectuses
and open evenings. (Re)constructing learners' biographies – improving
academic abilities As suggested previously, a student's self-esteem and self-confidence
often improve in tandem with their academic abilities. This could fall under
both what Parry (1996) suggested was preparation for HE, and what he identified
as a course of study for those otherwise unable to qualify for HE in more
traditional ways. It is an example of how the categories or factors highlighted
here are not mutually exclusive. They can overlap, and, in so doing can reinforce
or contradict one another. Their inclusion here high- lights how an adult
learner's experiences of returning to study can impact upon their auto/biographical
self, albeit via the `vehicle' of their changing learner identity. Akhtar
passed the Access course with little difficulty, and anticipated the prospect
of university with confidence.3 The course, had, he felt, given him something
to support his belief that he was `quite intelligent'. Others in the wider
study expressed similar opinions. But whilst Akhtar's pri- mary aim in enrolling
on the programme was self-development, his suc- cess was measured by more
than just passing the course: If I can't do it purely because it's above me
then I've lost nothing. I've grown as a person. … I've become what
I really want to be. I've tried. If I die trying, then that's fair enough,
but what I've done more than anything is become a positive role model for
the young people in my family, and that's all that really matters to me.
If I've failed, and I've done everything
64
that
I can and I just don't have the ability, fair enough. But if I fail because
I've only put 50% effort into it, that's something I've got to live with.
How could I then ask my daughter to sit at home and study. … or my
nephew and nieces? (Akhtar, 2nd interview, March 2002) Akhtar's idea of being
a positive influence upon his daughter and other younger relatives was a common
theme amongst the cohort, and in other studies of mature learners. It chimes,
for example, with what Bamber et al. (1997: 24) called `role models and trail-blazers
for others'. Max, like most others in the study, was initially worried about
his ability to cope academically at university. He thought that it might be
`quite a lot harder'. Akhtar had also been concerned about not being ready
for HE during the Access course itself, but as suggested above, was confident
by the end that he was prepared for the next challenge. Max too expressed
this confidence when reflecting on his academic progress. His self-belief
is evident in the following extract from discussions after the successful
completion of his FE studies I feel confident that I can sit down and write
an essay. I'm still not very good at presentations … but I've done
them, and I could do them again. I feel that I can analyse things a lot better
now. Even sitting down to watch a film, I could write an essay on that … I feel though I could write an essay on almost anything – it might
not be very good, but I'd know what to do. (Max, 3rd interview, June 2002)
(Re)constructing learners' biographies – be(com)ing a student Another
topic explored during interviews was the meaning of being `a student', and
whether they felt comfortable with this identity at various stages of their
academic development. There was much evidence from my research, both from
the seven people here and the wider cohort of twenty, to support suggestions
of `othering' taking place. This will be discussed later. First, we will
consider what a couple of the respondents said regarding whether they felt
they were `a student', and what the term meant in light of their experience
of Access. Again, discussions revealed tensions over the meaning of the term – with inter- views demonstrating it was not an objective category equally appropriate
to anyone on a full-time programme of study. It is not an identity assumed
uncritically or even willingly by all, with resonances of what Skeggs (1997)
termed `dis-identification' with the label `working class' in her study of
women in (low-grade) caring roles, and we will also consider this further
below.
65
(Re)constructing
learners' biographies – `student' lifestyle Most people on the course
and in the wider study are from working-class family backgrounds, with the
majority having been employed in predom- inantly manual or routine clerical
jobs. This is the case for five of the seven focused on here. We will shortly
consider one of the exceptions, Kirti, from a family with strong links to
HE. Her father is a senior aca- demic, and her two older brothers, having
like Kirti left school with few qualifications, had followed the Access programme
and now both study at prestigious universities. But we first consider Meg,
who, following her upbringing in a large working-class family headed by a
single parent, effectively changed her classed identity by working in a white-collar
occupation and marrying a middle-class graduate. For Meg, to a greater extent
even than Maria discussed above, the Access course meant `regrounding' herself
in `real life': I've really enjoyed it, it's been a lovely experience, and … like an introduction back into real life. … I worked in an environment
where I haven't mixed with people from outside of the office, and I'd forgotten
what other people do in life … when I was working, people were talking
about houses and holidays, the lovely things in life. Here people are struggling
a bit more. This is real life – I used to work in marketing, which
is all just `surface', trying to make everything look wonderful. (Meg, 3rd
interview, July 2002) This cogent observation is a reversal of the usual popular
discourse that academia is not real life, but work is, in that it gave Meg
links to people much less financially secure than herself, perhaps people
more like she used to be in terms of class positioning. In an earlier discussion
Meg had suggested she could not understand how wider public opinions of `students'
were so negative. She defined one thus: Someone who stays focussed on what
they want … knows where they are going, is enjoying their course, enjoying
learning. … If somebody says to me `what do you do?' and I say `a student',
their face drops, and I think `what's wrong with being a student?' It's like
they go blank, and they go `right, a student'. But I don't see it like that,
so I'm quite surprised by people's reaction in a way, because it's so important.
(Meg, 1st interview, December 2001) Meg's representation of studying being
valuable for its own sake links to wider discourses of lifelong learning,
but despite official rhetoric (DfES, 2002) is perhaps contrary to many educational
initiatives of the UK's government. For instance the recent higher education
reforms
66
(HMSO,
2004), which permit the introduction of variable tuition fees by universities,
will arguably further narrow educational opportunities for already disadvantaged
groups (Archer et al., 2003). Kirti was also amongst the minority of the cohort
in suggesting she was a student for `the joy of studying' itself, had `a strong
interest' in the sub- jects she applied to read at university, and `really,
really wanted to find out more about them' (Kirti, 2nd interview, March 2002).
Few mature learn- ers in my study adopted the position of the process of learning
being more important than the outcome that is, a place at university, or,
in the case of Max, Akhtar and Meg, becoming a positive role model for younger
family members. This may be reflected in the falling numbers opting to study
the social science and humanities subjects at the college, and the increase
in those choosing vocational Access routes, for example into teaching, nurs-
ing or law, like Jo, Maria and Lyndsay respectively here. Many students suggested
they had enjoyed their courses, and whilst they were glad of this, it had
not been an essential requirement, since their primary motive was not necessarily
that of traditional liberal education, learning for its own sake. Rather,
they adopted an instrumental approach to their studies – wanting a
better job or career out of education, or perhaps to address a self-perceived
deficit in their learner identity. Given the risks they exposed themselves
to and the sacrifices each made, this is perhaps understandable. It may be
something attributable to class or other social positioning, for instance
Kirti being middle class, relatively young at 23, and unencumbered by relationship
commitments or parenthood. Kirti identified during the Access programme how
she now resented things – or people – getting in the way of
her studies: I used to love waking up late … but now I hate wasting
time. … I want to get up and read this book, or I want to get up and
do this bit of work. Sometimes it's to do with a deadline … but more
often than not, it's for me. … I'm doing this for me … having
done things like giving up work and having to cope on very little money, you
don't want to risk anything, because you're doing it for yourself. There's
no other reason that I'm studying apart from for me. I'm not studying to get
this really good job. … I'm doing it because I'm really interested
in the course. (Kirti, 2nd interview, March 2002) Biographical representations – `othered' voices For some mature learners, the very term `student' may be
problematic in terms of self-definition because of its aged and classed connotations.
It may well be primarily of use pejoratively when describing the frequently
privileged youth associated with `the university', rather than themselves.
67
Stuart
(2002: 77) talked of the local `elite' university, generally being seen in
the city as somewhere that `local people may go to work, but not necessarily … to study'. Tett (2000) also writes of mature students coming from working
class communities where, far from their classed identity being a source of
deficiency, it was one of pride, and not being middle class was valued, with
a careful self-policing of associated bourgeois behaviour and pretensions
taking place, with similarities here again to Skeggs (1997). Max perhaps
best illustrates this position within my study. He was a milkman before joining
the course, and suggested `some of my mates at work are a bit shocked that
I'm reading Shakespeare … they think that people like us don't do
that!' (Max, 2nd interview, March 2002). He constructed his friends as being
only really interested in popular – rather than (what they considered)
elite – culture. Such representations demonstrate how class still
deter- mines cultural aesthetics (Bourdieu, 1984), despite the claims of post-
modernists and thinkers such as Bauman (2004) who suggest otherwise, that
demarcations between `high'- and `low'-culture are of minimal significance
or use. This sense of (often mutual) `othering' between `mature' and `traditional'
students appears frequently throughout the literature, but may well have its
roots primarily in social class rather than age differentials. I will explore
this idea elsewhere as it is beyond the focus of this paper. Biographical
representations – differentiating mature and `traditional' students
Such `othering' is reinforced by the activities of younger students, as examined
below, by college staff, and by the mature learners themselves. Avis (1997:
83–84) refers to the representation of the motivated and committed
mature student as `the preferred and celebratory Access dis- course'. This
representation applies equally to academic literature and the discursive practices
of those working and studying in both further and higher education. The view
from Access students of their younger peers can sometimes be damning, as Akhtar
suggested during our earliest meeting: What are students? They're middle class
kids that don't have a clue about life. They don't struggle … the whole
higher education system is set up for the middle classes … and kids
that `make it' (from other backgrounds) are the exception to the norm … some students like to `dress down', they've got this image to maintain, but
they still get picked up at the end of term in a Volvo. (Akhtar, 1st interview,
December 2001)
68
Akhtar,
by representing students in such a manner is also reinforcing popular discourse.
His comments strike a chord with theorists and commentators when referring
to the education system being set up for the middle classes (see, for example:
Ball et al., 1996; Bourdieu, 1974; Bowles and Gintis, 1976). Akhtar and his
fellow Access students showed a keen awareness of the binary divide between
pre- and post-1992 universities (Charlesworth, 2000). When travelling to a
(mature students') Open Day at `Churchill University', the local pre-1992
institution, he spoke of how he was `a bit in awe going up there', and feeling
that he `did not belong' (Reay et al., 2002). Akhtar suggested he expected
the behaviour of the younger students he would meet at university to be different
to that of peers on the Access programme: I've been told not to expect the
18 year olds to talk too much during the seminars, that they don't really
voice an opinion … it's the 3rd year before they really start arguing,
because they are afraid of being `shot down'. That concerns me, because I'm
not a `shrinking violet' myself, so I'll be there, voicing my opinions, however
misguided they might be. … And that'll make me stand out from them,
as well as the fact that I'm older. (Akhtar, 2nd interview, March 2002) Whilst
outwardly self-confident, this statement reveals an inner self- doubt for
Akhtar, illustrating nicely the differences between mature and younger university
students referred to by Avis above. Lyndsay also referred to differences between
her self-image and how she saw `typical' students – `the image I have
of students is not what I portray myself as'.44 Lyndsay proposed `students'
were `teenagers at school or college', and suggested `I class myself not as
a student, but as being on a training course' (Lyndsay, 1st interview, December
2001). Unlike some of the cohort, Akhtar, possibly because he had a younger
brother who had just graduated himself, understood reasons why those in their
late teens or early twenties may be `different', albeit expressing himself
in a rather deterministic manner: When you go to university, I think we're
all aware that we're older, and that might be a barrier within us, rather
than the way we're viewed by `the 18 year olds'. The thing is that these kids
have moved away from home, and the last thing they want to see is people older
than them who look like authority figures. … It's their first excursion
away, and they just want to enjoy it … they're probably not too happy
with the mature students, who remind them of mum and dad. We've got to accept
that. … I don't think that we should be too hard on the younger kids,
it's a brand new experience for them, and we're jealous of them to a degree,
because we wish we'd have done it then. (Akhtar, 2nd interview, March 2002)
69
Whilst
not all his peers would accept the final assertion, most upon reflection may
concede it is in part their attitude too that causes `othering' to take place,
and not just that of the younger students – the `18 year olds' or `younger
kids' as Akhtar called them. Other mature students such as Maria – discussed below – did express regret over not having studied `at the
right time', that is, in their late teens or early twenties. This also suggests
that government rhetoric of widening participation and lifelong learning has
not entered fully into public consciousness, or perhaps even more worryingly,
even that of people who have chosen to return to education in later life.
Biographical representations – differentiated as mature learners The
data presented in this paper is primarily from before the cohort joined university.
As well as differentiating themselves from younger students, they were anticipating
being treated in a particular manner by them, and in some cases had already
experienced differential treatment by university staff in this regard too.
Akhtar felt the admissions process at the most prestigious local institution,
`Churchill University' discriminated against older applicants: Had they offered
me a place, no, I wouldn't have gone. I don't feel the support network's there
for me, and I still believe it's quite an elitist place, especially in the
more `traditional' subjects. And also they were asking older people for CVs,
and I wouldn't do that, on principle, if they're not asking 18 year olds
for CVs. If Access isn't good enough, then turn me down, but don't change
the criteria because I'm a mature student, that isn't fair. (Akhtar, 3rd interview,
June 2002) But being a mature student was central to Akhtar's sense of identity.
At university he sought to differentiate himself and other ex-Access peers
from `typical' younger undergraduates, as outlined above, and spoke of how
being an older learner has a specific meaning to him: I don't see myself as
an archetypal student, because I'm so much older that the majority. Do I call
myself `a student'? I call myself a mature student, and I think that one word
makes all the difference, not because I'm `mature', but because of people's
perceptions of what you are [sic]. First thing you think about of a student
is a layabout who doesn't wash, is always out drinking, that sort of thing,
whereas a mature student has made a conscious decision, not because the choice
was `get a job or go to university' … but someone who thinks `I will
do this, and I will do it to the best of my ability'. I think that's what
sets us apart. (Akhtar, 3rd interview, June 2002)
70
Akhtar's
comments chime with those of Meg, discussed above, as well as theorists including
Avis (1997), Bowl (2003) and Warmington (2002b) in terms of privileging mature
students in respect of their approach to studying. Maria amongst others mentioned
a change in how people treated her return to college as she approached 50
years of age with children at uni- versity. Of her family, she exclaimed:
`Do my sons see me as a student? They think it's hilarious. … I'll
always be `Mum' won't I?' In terms of other people too she also noticed a
change in attitudes towards her: I think people do see you differently when
you tell them what you're doing. They think that's really good, and brave
and all the rest of it, at my age … my mother-in-law said `what do
you want to do that for?' I think she was a bit bemused that at my age I wanted
to put myself through it. (Maria, 2nd interview, March 2002) And like others
in the study, Maria revealed her own approach to the subject was perhaps not
so different to that she had just commented upon a little disapprovingly when
proclaiming, in a manner similar to Akhtar at the end of the course: Being
a student is something that would have been lovely if I had done it at the
right time in my life. But I'm glad that I've managed to do it at all if
you know what I mean, that I'm lucky enough to … have that opportunity.
(Maria, 3rd interview, July 2002) The idea that now was `the right time',
as mature students, for going to university rather than when they were 18
or 19, was rarely suggested by the interviewees. All but a couple in the
wider study presented the younger student as the ideal, apparently in contradiction
to their general approval of Avis's `celebratory discourse' of mature studenthood.
This may be due to their acceptance of the dominant public perception of
education being primarily for the young, and in contrast to discourses of
lifelong learning. CONCLUDING THOUGHTS The people enrolling on the Access
to HE course in September 2001 have all undergone major changes in their lives.
I have highlighted some of them elsewhere, and focused here upon how their
autobiographical repre- sentations change in respect of self-esteem, personal
outlook and develop- ing academic abilities. I have also illuminated how those
involved have experienced, and to varying degrees actively contributed to,
processes of differentiating between themselves as mature students and the
younger,
71
more
`traditional' student generally found at university. This has involved the
process of `othering', both in terms of how the mature learners see younger
HE students, and how they themselves are viewed by longstand- ing friends
and family, younger students and college staff. The impact of these processes
will vary from one person to another, and is informed by factors such as the
individual's social class, age and familiarity with the habitus of further,
and more particularly higher, education (Reay et al., 2002). Dilemmas over
the extent to which the people here identify with the label of `student' are
apparent in the interview extracts. Jo, Meg, Max and Maria accept the term,
but for some adult learners including Kirti and Lyndsay here, the label seems
an ill-fitting one. Akhtar insists upon pref- acing it by the word `mature',
and is only comfortable with the modified term as a form of biographical representation.
Another group perhaps acknowledge a hybrid or liminal (learner/`student')
identity, what Bhabha (1994: 219) described as `neither One nor the Other,
but something else besides, in-between'. James (1995) suggests the notion
of mature student as a `species' of learner at university is inappropriate,
and I would agree. Mature students being a distinctive but fairly homogenous
group with specific attributes and needs was the dominant portrayal within
early research literature on the subject (for example, NIACE, 1993; Woodley
et al., 1987). The term or label is too general, too inclusive and insufficiently
nuanced to be of much practical use. It is probably as much for institutional
convenience than for a meaningful method of representing peoples' experiences,
as I seek to do. Instead, as discussed in the introductory section above,
I find Bloomer and Hodkinson's (2000) suggestion of a `learning career' valuable
since it assumes a (learner) identity in a state of flux and under constant
(re)con- struction and reconfiguration. Crossan et al. (2003) develop this
further by suggesting it is fragile, experimental and contingent component
of someone's identity, and not necessarily a permanent one either. This recognition
that `learning careers', can go both forwards and into reverse helps us to
understand the experience of Meg here, probably now with a weaker learner
identity than before returning to study by virtue of having dropped out of
university. It also acknowledges that the (frequently contested) process of
constructing learner identities is a complex one, as Burke (2002) reminds
us, since mature learners are `multiply positioned' in terms of class, gender,
ethnicity and numerous other social factors. Warmington (2002b) has also usefully
written on mature student identity, from a position influenced by the `biographical
trajectory' ideas of Giddens (1991) and Beck (1992), and incorporating the
discourse of mature students referred to by Avis (1997). Warmington (2002b:
583)
72
proposes
(mature) studenthood to be a `surrogate occupation', characterized by `a quasi-vocational … instrumental, transferable and discursive tech- nique, employed to make (people)
viable actors in further and higher education'. For the students in his longitudinal
study of an Access cohort, identification with, and adoption of, such a `mature'
approach is deemed necessary to succeed on their study programme. Those who
do not adapt their behaviour accordingly are, he found, more likely to fail
the course. This is akin to an informal directive – contained within
the hidden curricu- lum perhaps – `conform to the requirements of the
course or suffer the consequences'. There is ample evidence from my research
cohort that adopting such a role, and reconstructing one's biographical make-up
accordingly is a widespread practice, and whilst not necessarily essential,
certainly aids the successful transition into full-time studies as an adult
learner. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS An earlier version of this paper was presented at
the Auto/Biography annual conference in July 2003, and I would like to thank
participants for their interest in my work and useful suggestions. I would
also like to thank Jacky Brine, David James, Andrew Sparkes and the two anonymous
reviewers of Auto/Biography for their help. Finally, I wish to acknowl- edge
my gratitude to all who have made the wider study from where this data has
been drawn possible, particularly the 20 interviewees.
NOTES
1 The respondents chose
their own pseudonym. One or two minor biographical details have been changed
in some instances to further disguise their identity.
2 Prior to 1992 degrees
gained through polytechnics and colleges of HE were awarded by the Council
for National Academic Awards (CNAA).
3 Akhtar fared well academically,
finishing with a borderline 2(i)/1st class assessment profile at the end of
year one. All but one of his peers from the wider study who progressed to
university (13 of the 20) also got a 2(i) at the end of the year, a better
than average profile of results.
4 This incidentally has
interesting implications for what we/she mean(s) by `identity', but is rather
beyond the remit of our discussion here.
REFERENCES
Archer, L.
2003: The `value' of education. In Archer, L., Hutchings, M. and Ross, A., editors, Higher education and social class: issues of exclusion and inclusion, London : RoutledgeFalmer, 119—36.
73
Archer, L.,
Hutchings, M.
and Ross, A. 2003: Higher education and social class: issues of exclusion
and inclusion. London: RoutledgeFalmer .
Avis, J.
1997: `What's this got to do with what I do!' Contradictory
views: students in further education. Journal of Vocational
Education and Training 49, 81—106.
Ball, S., Bowe, R.
and Gerwirtz, S.
1996: School choice, social class and distinction: the
realisation of social advantage in education. Journal of Educational
Policy 11, 89—112.
Ball, S.,
Maguire, M.
and Macrae, S. 2000: Choice, pathways and transitions post-16: new youth,
new economies in the global city. London: RoutledgeFalmer .
Ball, S.
and Vincent, C.
1998: `I heard it on the grapevine': `hot' knowledge
and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education 19, 377—400.
Bamber, J., Tett, L., Hosie, E.
and Ducklin, A.
1997: Resistance and determination: working class adults
in higher education. Research in post-compulsory education 2, 17—29.
Barone, T. 1995: Persuasive writings, vigilant readings and reconstructed
characters: the paradox of trust in educational storysharing. In Hatch, J. and Wisniewski,
R., editors, Life History and Narrative, London: Falmer, 63—74.
Bauman, Z. 2004: Identity: conversations with Benedetto Vecchi. Oxford: Polity.
Baumgardner, S.
1996a: Vocational planning: the great swindle,
In Hodkinson, P., Sparkes, A. and Hodkinson, H.,
editors, Triumphs and tears: young people, markets and the transition
from school to work, London: David
Fulton.
———— 1996b: Coping with disillusionment, abstract images and
uncertainty in career decision making. In Hodkinson, P. , Sparkes, A.
and Hodkinson, H., editors, Triumphs
and tears: young people, markets and the transition from school to work,
London: David Fulton.
Baxter, A.
and Britton, C.
2001: Risk, identity and change: becoming a mature student . International Studies in Sociology of Education 11, 87—102.
Beck, U.
1992: Risk society: towards a new modernity.
London: Sage.
Beck, U.
and Beck-Gernsheim, E. 2002: Individualization.
London: Sage.
Bertaux, D.
1981: From the life-history approach to the transformation
of sociological practice. In Bertaux, D.,
editor, Biography and society — the life history approach to
the social sciences. London: Sage .
Betts, S.
1999: From Access through HE: a gendered journey.
Journal of Access and Credit Studies 1, 124—36.
Bhabha, H.
1994: The location of culture. London : Routledge.
Bloomer, M.
and Hodkinson, P.
2000: Learning careers: continuity and change in young
people's dispositions to learning. British Educational Research
Journal 26, 578—97.
Bourdieu, P.
1974: The school as a conservative force: scholastic
and cultural inequalities. In Egglestone,
J., editor, Contemporary research in the sociology of education , London: Methuen.
———— 1977: Cultural reproduction and social reproduction.
In Karabel, J. and Halsey, A., editors, Power and ideology in education,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———— 1984: Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste , Harvard, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Bowl, M.
2003: Non-traditional entrants to higher education: `they
talk about people like me'. Stoke-On-Trent,
UK: Trentham Books.
74
Bowles, S.
and Gintis, H. 1976: Schooling in capitalist America: educational reform and
the contradictions of economic life, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Brine, J.
and Waller, R.
2004: Working class women on an access course: risk,
opportunity and (re)constructing identities. Gender and Education 16, 97—113.
Britton, C.
and Baxter, A.
1994: Mature students' routes into higher education.
Journal of Access Studies 9, 215—29.
Burke, P. 2002: Accessing education: effectively widening participation.
Stoke-On- Trent, UK: Trentham.
Chappell, C.,
Rhodes, C.,
Solomon, N.,
Tennant, M.
and Yates, L. 2003: Reconstructing the lifelong learner: pedagogy and identity
in individual, organisational and social change. London : RoutledgeFalmer.
Charlesworth, S. 2000: A phenomenology of working class experience. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Crossan, B., Field, J., Gallagher, J.
and Merrill, B.
2003: Understanding participation in learning for non-traditional
adult learners: learning careers and the construction of learning identities . British Journal of Sociology of Education 24, 55—67.
Davis, P.
and Williams, J.
2001: For me or not for me? Fragility and risk in mature
students' decision-making. Higher Education Quarterly 55, 185—203.
Dearing, R.
1997: Higher education in the learning society: the report
of the national committee of enquiry into higher education (The Dearing Report) . London: The Stationery Office .
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) 2002: The learning age: a new renaissance for a new Britain . London: DfES.
Erben, M., editor, 1998: Biography and education: a reader. London:
Falmer.
Furlong, A.
and Cartmel, F.
1997: Young people and social change: individualization
and risk in late modernity. Milton Keynes,
UK: Open University Press.
Giddens, A.
1991: Modernity and self-identity: self and society in
the late modern age. Oxford: Polity .
Gordon, T.
and Lahelma, E.
2003: From ethnography to life history: tracing transitions
of school students. International Journal of Social Research
Methodology 63: 245—54.
Green, P.
and Webb, S.
1997: Student voices: alternative routes, alternative
identities . In Williams, J., editor,
Negotiating access to higher education: the discourse of selectivity
and equity, Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher
Education /Open University Press, 130—52.
Hall, S.
1992: Introduction: identity in question. In Hall, S., Held, D. and Grew, T., editors,
Modernity and its futures, Oxford:
Polity, 1—11.
———— 1996: Introduction: who needs identity. In Hall, S. and du Gay, P., editors, Questions of cultural identity , London: Sage, 1—17.
Hatch, J. and Wisniewski,
R., editors, 1995: Life history and narrative . London: Falmer.
Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO) 2004 : Higher Education Bill. London:
HMSO.
Hodkinson, P., Sparkes, A.
and Hodkinson, H.
1996: Triumphs and tears: young people, markets and the
transition from school to work. London: David Fulton.
Hoggart, R.
1958: The uses of literacy. Harmondsworth , UK: Pelican.
Jackson, B.
and Marsden, D.
1962: Education and the working class. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul.
75
James, D.
1995: Mature studentship in higher education: beyond
a `species' approach. British Journal of Sociology of Education , 16, 451—66.
Lash, S. 1994: Reflexivity and its doubles: structure, aesthetics, community . In Beck, U., Giddens, A. and Lash, S.,
editors, Reflexive modernization: politics, tradition and aesthetics
in the modern social order, Oxford: Polity, 110—73.
Lawler, S.
1999: `Getting out and getting away': women's narratives
of class mobility. Feminist Review 63, 3—24.
McFadden, M.
1995: `Second chance' education: settling old scores . Journal of Access Studies 10, 40—59.
Mahony, P.
and Zmroczek, C. 1997: Class matters: `working-class' women's perspectives on
social class. London: Taylor & Francis.
Miller, M. 1996: The role of happenstance in career choice. In
Hodkinson, P., Sparkes, A. and Hodkinson, H.,
editors, Triumphs and tears: young people, markets and the transition
from school to work, London: David
Fulton.
National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (England and
Wales) (NIACE) 1993: An adult education: a
vision. Leicester: NIACE.
Parry, G.
1996: Access education in England and Wales 1973—1994:
from second chance to third wave. Journal of Access Studies 11, 10—33.
Peters, H.
1997: An exploration of a group of mature students' perceptions
of and approaches to writing at university, carried out on a twelve week pre-entry
course. Journal of Access Studies 12, 198—211.
Reay, D.
2003: A risky business? Mature working class women students
and Access to higher education. Gender and Education 15, 301—17.
Reay, D., Ball, S.
and David, M.
2002: `It's taking me a long time but I'll get there
in the end': mature students on access courses and higher education choice' . British Educational Research Journal 28, 5—20.
Roberts, K.
1994: Flexibility and individualisation: a comparison
of transitions into employment in England and Germany. Sociology 28, 31—54.
Ross, A.
2003: Access to higher education: inclusion for the masses? In Archer, L., Hutchings, M. and Ross, A.,
editors, Higher education and social class: issues of exclusion and
inclusion, London: RoutledgeFalmer , 45—74.
Shah, M.
1994: Kaleidoscopic people: locating the `subject' of
pedagogic discourse. Journal of Access Studies 9, 257—70.
Sinfield, S., Burns, T.
and Holley, D.
2004: Outsiders looking in or insiders looking out? Widening
participation in a post-1992 university. In Satterthwaite, J., Atkinson, E.
and Martin, W., editors, The disciplining
of education: new languages of power and resistance, Stoke
on Trent, UK: Trentham, 137—52.
Skeggs, B.
1997: Formations of class and gender. London : Sage.
Sparkes, A.
2002: Telling tales in sport and physical activity: a
qualitative journey. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics .
Strauss, A.
1962: Transformations of identity. In Rose, A.M., editor, Human behaviour and
social processes: an interactionist approach, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Stuart, M.
2002: Collaborating for change? Managing widening participation
in further and higher education. Leicester:
NIACE.
Tett, L.
2000: `I'm working class and proud of it' — Gendered
experiences of non-traditional participants in higher education. Gender and Education 12, 183—94.
76
Wakeford, N.
1994: Becoming a mature student: the social risks of
identification . The Journal of Access Studies 9, 241—56.
Waller, R.
2002: `Everybody gets one or two chances in life, this
is my second': risk and the construction of mature students' biographies. Auto/Biography X, 77—84.
———— 2004: `I really hated school and couldn't wait to get out!':
reflections on `a wasted opportunity', and subsequent desire to `put things
right' amongst Access to HE students. Journal of Access Policy
and Practice 2, 24—43.
Warmington, P.
2002a: The complexity of disaffection: mature returners
and the narrative tensions of inclusion, hierarchy and access. Journal of Access and Credit Studies 4, 5—19.
———— 2002b: Studenthood as surrogate occupation: access to
higher education students' discursive production of commitment, maturity and
peer support. Journal of Vocational Education and Training 54, 583—600.
West, L. 1996: Beyond fragments: adults, motivation and higher education; a biographical analysis. London: Taylor & Francis .
Woodley, A.,
Wagner, L.,
Slowley, M.,
Hamilton, M.
and Fulton, O. 1987: Choosing to learn: a study of adults in education. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
Woodward, K.
1997: Introduction. In Woodward, K., editor, Identity and difference, London: Sage/Open University Press, 1—6.
NOTE
ON CONTRIBUTOR RICHARD WALLER lectures in lifelong learning and post-compulsory
education at the University of the West of England in Bristol. He has taught
widely in further and higher education since 1994, following a career change
that saw him leave the Civil Service. In addition to his ongoing doctoral
study of mature students from which this paper stems, his research interests
include social justice, identity, qualitative research methods and popular
culture. Much of his non-working time is spent between his young family and
watching, playing and thinking about sport, particularly football.