31
Higher Education Data and Information Improvement Programme The Unique Learner Number in HE A roadmap to implementation July 2013
Higher Education Data and
Information Improvement Programme
The Unique Learner Number in HE
A roadmap to implementation
July 2013
Page 2 of 31
Contents
1 Executive summary 4
1.1 Introduction 4
1.2 Vision and Benefits 4
1.3 Current Position 4
1.4 Moving towards full implementation 5
1.5 Conclusions and Next Steps 6
2 Introduction 8
2.1 Background to the project 8
2.2 Background to the ULN 8
2.3 Project Aims, Scope and Approach 9
3 Current position 10
3.1 Schools 11
3.2 Further Education 12
3.3 Higher Education 13
4 The Vision 15
4.1 A joined-up learning landscape 15
4.2 A benefits driven approach 16
4.2.1 Simplifying student records 16
4.2.2 Reduction in the administration associated with collecting and verifying qualifications data 17
4.2.3 Supporting widening participation 19
4.2.4 Improved learner support 19
4.2.5 Ease of use for lifelong learners 19
5 Moving towards full implementation 20
5.1 Issues requiring further work 20
5.1.1 Data model and standards 20
5.1.2 Identity Verification 21
5.1.3 Data Quality 21
5.2 Projected Timeline 22
6 Conclusions and next steps 24
6.1 Conclusion 24
6.2 Next Steps 24
7 References 26
8 Appendices 27
8.1 Steering Group Members 27
8.2 List of Participants 28
8.3 Glossary of Terms 29
8.4 Timeline for ULN 30
8.5 Participants in 2010/11 JISC MIAP pilots 31
Page 3 of 31
Foreword
The Unique Learner Number (ULN) has its origins over a decade ago as part of a planned strategy to improve
the management of information within the education sector with the objective of providing better services
both to students and to organisations involved in education and training.
There has been steady progress in further education and in schools. Redesign of the higher education data and
information landscape provides a significant opportunity to extend the efficiencies gained elsewhere into the
HE sector and beyond.
A range of pilots in 2010 has proved the potential usefulness of the ULN in higher education: entry qualification
verification, analysis of student progression across the school/HE/employer boundaries, and more efficient
targeting of student support are among other potential benefits from the adoption of the ULN.
It is time to commit to the adoption of the ULN in higher education and to realise both the benefits that it will
provide to students and the efficiencies that it will provide to our HE institutions.
Sir Tim Wilson,
Chair of the HE Better Regulation Group and
Chair of the Steering Group for Redesign of the HE Data and Information Landscape
About this report
This report was commissioned by the Regulatory Partnership Group as strand 4b of the broader project
Redesigning the data and information landscape; it was delivered by Gill Ferrell and Graham Fice in March 2013.
Strand 1 of this project led to the creation of HEDIIP and the ULN work is now being taken forward by HEDIIP. This
report was published on the HEDIIP web site in July 2013.
Page 4 of 31
1. Executive Summary
1.1 Introduction
Since 2008 there has been a publicly funded shared service through the Learning Records Service (LRS) to manage
the allocation of a Unique Learner Number (ULN) across 14 to 19 education in many parts of the UK.
There is a strong business case for the adoption of this standard person identifier across the HE sector to serve as
a key enabler of better data sharing to the benefit of learners, HE providers, HE sector agencies and regulators
and the wider public sector.
This report considers whether the time is now right to plan the rollout of the ULN in HE and looks at the practical
steps that would need to be taken in order for such an implementation to deliver the desired benefits.
1.2 Vision and Benefits
The ULN is the linchpin of a vision of a joined up learning landscape in which a robust dataset supports effective
decision-making at national policy and individual institution level. Key elements of that vision include:
• a holistic and learner-centred approach;
• a collect once, use many times approach to data;
• learner control of their Personal Learning Record;
• improved information, advice and guidance (IAG) that delivers good, contextual advice to assist student
choice;
• targeted and joined up support that improves student retention;
• a rounded picture of each individual learner to support them in achieving their full potential;
• data that is sufficiently longitudinal and granular to support effective policy-making at national level and
strategic decision-making by individual HE providers.
Benefits identified by stakeholders on introduction of the ULN are not only still valid but their importance has
increased:
• enhancing learning opportunities by providing the key to link learner data for progression, achievement
etc to create a comprehensive record supporting decision making by learners as well as others users of
learning management information;
• enabling joined up support for learners, including joint cooperation for meeting learner needs;
• the availability of longitudinal data for policy formulation and evaluation;
• many stakeholders will not be able to operate in future without a ULN that crosses sector boundaries;
• administrative savings through avoiding future proliferation of identifiers and ultimately reducing the
number of identifiers in use;
• fraud and error reduction by reducing or avoiding double counting and incorrect payments.
1.3 Current Position
There are currently in excess of 17 million ULNs allocated but the number is only used widely in the FE sector,
where its use is compulsory.
While school record systems can hold the ULN, knowledge of the ULN and its purpose currently appears to be
limited or non-existent amongst pupils and also amongst staff in schools. A similar situation pertains to the
Personal Learner Record (PLR) which offers access to verified participation and achievement records of individual
learners from when they were at school, college or a recognised further education training provider from 14+
years.
Page 5 of 31
A number of agreed developments will result in significant change for schools in the near future greatly expanding
knowledge and use of the ULN including:
• use of the ULN as a preferred candidate number by the major awarding bodies from 2013;
• direct population by the awarding bodies of PLR data from 2013;
• mandatory use of the ULN in English schools from 2014.
There are currently 17 student identifiers in use in HE and a single common identifier would add value by
integration of data and services. Pilot activity in HE has shown the potential benefits from use of the ULN and the
PLR although the business case for immediate adoption has, to date, been undermined by the lack of a consistent
volume of data flowing through from schools and further education. HESA and UCAS have provided for the
collection of ULNs, where available, for a number of years and the major student record systems in use in the HE
sector all provide the ability to handle the ULN.
Currently among senior managers in HE with responsibility for widening participation and planning there is
growing interest in the ULN as a key to tracking progression and monitoring the effectiveness of widening
participation and outreach activities.
1.4 Moving towards full implementation
Despite agreement at national and senior management level on the value of the ULN, progress on
implementation has been modest (with the exception of the FE sector and schools in Wales). HEDIIP now has a
key opportunity to establish momentum on implementation in HE.
The following enablers have been identified:
• the existence of HEDIIP provides the means to facilitate this type of collaborative working;
• there is widespread support beyond RPG member organisations including support from the HE sector, the
NHS and the National Union of Students (NUS);
• the recent developments in relation to schools and awarding bodies will represent a sea change in
awareness and use of the ULN in the immediate future;
• the Learning Records Service has not indicated any significant extra central cost in further roll out of the
ULN across HE;
• most of the relevant administrative systems already have the capacity to hold the ULN;
• there are appears to be a ready mechanism to link to the candidate number already widely used in
Scottish schools;
• UCAS is willing to take on both retrieval and allocation of ULNs as a shared service for its customers.
The following issues still need to be addressed:
• confidence in the reliability of the ULN as a unique identifier;
• establishing robust data sharing and data protection agreements to cover use of the data;
• establishment of an identity verification mechanism that would allow UCAS and HEIs to allocate ULNs;
• ensuring that allocation of ULNs to learners outside the scope of the statutory framework does not
impose a significant operational burden on HE providers;
• confidence that the planned changes will improve the timeliness and accuracy of data in the PLR.
Page 6 of 31
“The train has left the
station ... now is the time to
get involved.’’
(Mary Curnock Cook, Chief
Executive UCAS)
The following pose significant risks requiring careful management throughout the implementation:
• the long gestation of the ULN and the evolution of its form and function mean that many misconceptions
persist and the implementation will need to be supported by an effective communications plan;
• related to the above - the benefits of the ULN are significant but benefits realisation is medium to long
term and expectations (e.g. around the feasibility of an immediate reduction in the number of identifiers)
need to be carefully managed;
• effective operation of business processes to allocate the ULN universally may involve convergence of data
standards (e.g. around name and postcode) to an extent that has not yet begun to be addressed by strand
2 of this programme of work;
• given the likely duration of full roll-out the sector needs to keep a watching brief on whether other
developments in citizen identity management might overtake the ULN implementation.
1.5 Conclusions and Next Steps
Recent developments have strengthened the business case for the ULN as a
universal personal identifier to improve opportunities for data sharing
amongst sector bodies, reduce burden on HE providers, and improve the
quality, scope and timeliness of information, and the time appears right
for the HE sector to capitalise on the momentum and plan the
transition to full implementation.
The primary audience for this report is as yet unformed because it is
assumed that the report will inform the work of whatever future
entity emerges from strand 1 of the wider work programme which is
putting in place effective mechanisms for the governance of the HE
data and information landscape. In the interim, the Steering Group is
asked to consider the report and make some recommendations in
principle to HEDIIP as to how the implementation should be approached.
In order to adopt the ULN a major project will be needed:
• to be overseen by HEDIIP;
• within the context of a clearly defined sector-level data model and
• involving any organisation that is collecting relevant individual level data from providers (as identified
through the inventory;
• with provision for active review under HEDIIP, such that funders, regulators and other data collectors
seek to phase out other identifiers at the earliest opportunity.
The general impression from sector bodies and staff within HE providers, principally responsible for planning and
widening participation (as well as MIS managers), is that the added value of complete coverage makes this the
preferred implementation approach. We have not heard any advocates of a 'mixed economy' whereby some
groups of learners remain without a ULN.
The key question is thus whether implementation in HE should be phased or whether effort should be expended
to ensure complete coverage of the ULN in HE to the shortest possible timescale.
• A phased approach would allow the ULN to penetrate HE over time by flow through from schools and
colleges allocating the ULN. As a consequence categories of students, such as those from independent
schools, mature applicants, distance/part-time students, international students, would remain with no
ULN until such time as mandatory coverage was extended to these groups. Such an approach would
reduce the immediate operational burden on HEIs and allow the robustness and value of the ULN (and
PLR) to be proven prior to full implementation.
Page 7 of 31
• The alternative is to require HE institutions to ensure the allocation of the ULN to all students from a
particular date and it is necessary to weigh the effort required against the potential benefit of complete
coverage.
The Steering Group is asked to consider and make a recommendation to HEDIIP in principle:
• whether the ULN is allowed to penetrate HE over time by flow through from schools and colleges
allocating the ULN with full implementation to all student groups being phased over a number of years or
• whether HE institutions be required, with UCAS’ support, to ensure allocation of a ULN to all students
from a certain date e.g. by replacing the HUSID with the ULN
and also to consider and make a recommendation to HEDIIP in principle:
• on the preferred timetable for implementation
• endorsing the proposal that UCAS should take on the role of retrieval and allocation of ULNs as a shared
service for its customers.
Page 8 of 31
2. Introduction
2.1 Background to the project
The Regulatory Partnership Group (RPG: formerly the Interim Regulatory Partnership Group IRPG) was
established in 2011 to consider and advise on the development of new regulatory arrangements for the English
HE system as outlined in the White Paper 'Students at the Heart of the System' (BIS 2011). The RPG is a non-
statutory body that includes the Chief Executives of the main funding and regulatory bodies in higher education
and other agencies involved in regulation, plus the Chief Executives of HE sector representative bodies, the
National Union of Students (NUS) and the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS).
IRPG commissioned two projects to inform the developments that would enable the implementation of the new
funding arrangements and regulatory framework:
• Project A: Mapping the Higher Education funding and regulatory system in England whose outcomes can be
found in the report ‘Mapping the Higher Education funding and regulatory system in England’ (IRPG 2012a)
• Project B: Redesigning the Higher Education data and information landscape whose outcomes can be found in
the report 'Redesigning the HE data and information landscape: a pathway to reform' (IRPG 2012b)
Following publication of the reports, its successor, the RPG, commissioned a programme of work, consisting of
four strands of activity, to implement their recommendations.
Strand 1 – Governance of HE data and information exchange, which set out the recommendation
to create HEDIIP
Strand 2 – Sector-level data model, lexicon and thesaurus
Strand 3 – Inventory of data collections
Strand 4 – Specific areas of data standards
4a Joint Academic Coding System (JACS) development
4b Unique Learner Number (ULN) implementation
Overseen by the Steering Group (Appendix 8.1), this is the report from strand 4b of the work programme which
set out to create a roadmap for the implementation of a single common learner identifier across the HE sector
building on existing developments.
There is a strong business case for the adoption of a standard person identifier across the HE sector to serve as a
key enabler of better data sharing to the benefit of learners, HE providers, HE sector agencies and regulators and
the wider public sector.
Since 2008 there has been a publicly funded shared service through the Learning Records Service (LRS) to manage
the allocation of a Unique Learner Number (ULN) across 14 to 19 education in many parts of the UK.
This report considers whether the time is now right to plan the rollout of the ULN in HE and looks at the practical
steps that would need to be taken in order for such an implementation to deliver the desired benefits. It also
refers to the Personal Learner Record (PLR). The PLR offers access to verified participation and achievement
records of individual learners from when they were at school, college or a recognised further education training
provider from 14+ years.
2.2 Background to the ULN
In 2002 the (then) Department for Education and Skills (DfES) established the Managing Information Across
Partners (MIAP) programme aimed at reducing bureaucracy and providing better services across the whole of the
education and training sector. Over a ten-year period MIAP evolved a set of products that are now delivered
under the auspices of the Learning Records Service (LRS).
Page 9 of 31
The Learning Records Service (LRS) is a UK shared service (currently operating in England, Northern Ireland and
Wales). A timeline showing key events in the development of the service is included as appendix 8.4 of this
report. LRS delivers three key 'products'.
• The ULN: a randomly assigned 10-digit reference number designed to ensure that no additional meaning
can be inferred from its structure, for example, geographical location, level of learning etc (so far over 17
million ULNs are registered.
• The UK Provider Reference Number (UKPRN) for every recognised learning organisation operating in the
sector.
• The Personal Learning Record (PLR), a record of verified qualifications and other learning events, via
school, college or a recognised further education training provider, from 14+ years recorded since 2009
(so far 6.1 million learners have a PLR).
Although the potential relevance of these developments to the HE sector have been recognised since the original
inception of the MIAP programme, it was not until 2008 that the practicalities of implementation across HE began
to be actively pursued with the creation of an HE Advisory Group chaired by Professor Sir Robert Burgess, Vice-
Chancellor of Leicester University.
In 2009 a strategic outline business case for expansion of the services to HE (MIAP 2009/LRS 2010) was approved
by the HE Advisory Group. HEFCE and Jisc funded a series of small-scale pilots in order to test that business case.
A total of seven universities along with HESA and UCAS explored various aspects of data sharing via the ULN and
the PLR. A summary of these pilots is given in appendix 8.5. The pilots made various recommendations for
improvement in order for HE to derive full benefit from the services and those recommendations within the scope
of LRS to deliver have since been implemented.
To take implementation of the ULN forward in higher education it is necessary to establish impetus and ensure
coordination between key bodies including LRS, UCAS and the SLC.
2.3 Project Aims, Scope and Approach
Given that the business case for the implementation of the ULN in HE has previously been made and tested, the
main purpose of this project was to look at the practicalities of implementation and, in particular, to look at how
any barriers, identified in the pilot studies and still remaining, could be addressed. Whilst the overall cost of any
change must continually be reviewed against the benefits, the focus of this work was mainly on identifying any
'showstoppers' to implementation.
A clear message from the earlier phase of the Redesigning the Higher Education data and information landscape
project was that the sector views itself very much as a UK HE sector hence the devolved administrations are now
represented on the Steering Group for the various work streams. The project has specifically looked at the
differing levels of commitment to, and implementation of, the ULN in each of the four home nations.
Project B consulted widely with HE providers and the costs/benefits of ULN implementation were discussed at a
number of workshops. The initial focus of stakeholder engagement in this project was therefore with RPG
member organisations in order to determine their perspectives on the practicalities and timescales of
implementation. This allowed us to develop an initial 'roadmap' which has subsequently been validated by
consultation with HE providers and their representative professional organisations.
This report is focused on HE providers and the major HE data collection bodies (HESA, UCAS and SLC). However it
does review the allocation and use of the ULN in schools and FE colleges.
Page 10 of 31
3. Current Position
There are currently in excess of 17 million ULNs allocated and the following diagram illustrates penetration of the
ULN in schools, FE and HE across the UK.
The ULN is, however, only one of many identifiers used in the UK education sector and, in examining the
feasibility of adoption of the ULN as a single and unique identifier, it is necessary to review the situation across
the various parts of the sector. The main identifiers are shown in the diagram below.
Page 11 of 31
“... pupils may need to use
their ULN throughout their
lifelong learning in a
similar way as the
National Insurance
number is used for
employment."
DfE 2012
3.1 Schools
Current Status: low awareness and adoption but a clear mandate and timetable for change.
There are a range of identifier fields available in schools systems including (typically):
• a local admission number used for day-to-day administrative purposes
within the school;
• the Unique Pupil Number (UPN) allocated in primary school and
key to the school census - this number is related to sensitive
personal information and its use is strictly limited to data
exchange between schools and DfE;
• a local examination candidate number - this may alter when a
pupil changes schools;
• the Unique Candidate Number (UCI) used by the national Award
Organisations (AOs) - this is allocated when students first take
national examinations and appears on certificates;
• the ULN.
Of this range of identifiers, the ULN is the only one that may not be well known to the
school. The LRS generates ULNs on the basis of school census data provided to it by the DfE. Schools have the
capability to access this information on demand but it is not routinely fed back to them by LRS. There may be
some instances where the LRS needs to make direct contact with a school in order to verify pupil identity. The LRS
estimates that the current process generates ULNs accurately for 95% of school pupils but there are some
difficulties with common names.
Until recently the only requirement for schools to use the ULN was for candidates for the 14-19 Diplomas and
Functional Skills. Knowledge of the ULN and its purpose appears therefore to be limited, or non-existent, amongst
pupils and also amongst staff in schools, unless they are directly connected with systems or examinations. UCAS
could help promote the ULN through its engagement with schools and colleges.
The 2011 UCAS study conducted as phase 2 of the 2010 Jisc/MIAP pilots of the ULN1 showed a slightly better
situation with 50% of schools involved in the study able to provide students with their ULN. None however shared
knowledge of the PLR with pupils and low awareness of the ULN amongst schools and school leavers appears to
be borne out by the experiences of the FE sector in collecting this information.
A number of recently announced developments mean that the situation can be expected to change significantly in
the near future.
• The Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) awarding organisations have started to request ULNs, in addition
to unique candidate identifiers (UCIs), for examination entry. The ULN will therefore be part of the data
exchange between examination centres and awarding organisations with immediate effect and JCQ has
identified that from September 2014 the ULN will be its the preferred candidate number (although it will
not mandate its use).
• 137 awarding bodies have signed up to direct data exchange with the PLR2 (rather than via a DfE interface
as formerly). From January 2013 vocational qualifications obtained under the qualifications and credit
framework (QCF3) are being uploaded to the PLR and from August 2013 the PLR will be populated with
GCSE qualifications within 10 days of award.
1 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/eadministration/ucaspilots.aspx
2 http://www.learningrecordsservice.org.uk/newsandupdates/news/AOs-registered-to-use-PLR.htm
3 QCF http://qcf.skillsfundingagency.bis.gov.uk/
Page 12 of 31
"Implementation of the
ULN has not been an easy
road for FE ... Presently we
are putting work in but
getting nothing back."
(Interview with
FE College)
• The DfE has announced4 the mandatory use of the ULN in English schools for pupils from age 14. The
collection of the ULN within the school census will become mandatory from January 2014 (in Wales ULNs
were rolled out to pupils from age 14 in state schools in April 2012).
DfE5. has underlined:
'… it is very important to inform pupils so that they know their ULN. This is distinct from a pupil’s UPN, where
the guidance remains clear that pupils should not routinely be told of their UPN as it should remain a ‘blind’
number. However, pupils may need to use their ULN throughout their lifelong learning in a similar way as the
National Insurance number is used for employment. It is also important to give pupils a copy of the standard
schools Privacy Notice [from LRS] which includes information about ULNs' (DfE 2012)
These developments will represent a sea change with regard to the awareness of, and need for, the ULN in
schools and into further and higher education. The developments relate to the English grant-maintained sector
only but Wales has already mandated the ULN in schools while Northern Ireland is likely to follow suit shortly.
There remains some debate about the extent to which the independent schools sector is likely to adopt the ULN
whilst they still have the option to use the UCI but this sector is likely to be driven to adoption by UCAS'
commitment to the ULN.
3.2 Further Education
Current Status: to date the 'squeezed middle' which has allocated the ULN without apparent gain but starting
to reap benefits in terms of non-proliferation of IDs.
The ULN is a mandatory field in the individualised learner record (ILR) funding
returns made by FE colleges in England and all college systems have a field to
hold the ULN. The LRS works with system suppliers and supports colleges
through extensive manuals and guides, including identification of good
practice.
The small number of colleges contacted in preparation of this report
underlined:
• lack of awareness means the ULN does not flow through the
system from schools and colleges are obliged to retrieve ULNs for
their learners;
• resolution of exceptions/errors generated from the batch submission to
LRS to acquire the ULN can require considerable resource6;
• some colleges noted the provision for learners to choose not to share data in their PLR as a barrier to use
although LRS has observed that many colleges unnecessarily ask learners to 'opt in' to data sharing when
the existing privacy notice issued to all learners already covers the sharing of information with other
education providers such that an 'opt out' clause would amount to significantly less administrative effort;
• staff effort is needed to verify learner ID to the necessary level in order to enable the learner to access
their own PLR.
4 http://www.education.gov.uk/a00220050/uln
5 http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/i/ices%20bulletin%20-%20issue%2060v1-0.pdf
6 Newcastle College Group (NCG), the largest provider of further education in the UK, allocates ULNs to all of its 70,000 learners and estimates that the effort amounts to one member of staff slightly less than full-time although NCG notes that the nature of its student population means that it has fewer issues than some other colleges with very common names.
Page 13 of 31
"The pilot work has
demonstrated proof of concept
and confirmed that the ULN
and PLR services and support
provided by the Learning
Records Service are fit for
purpose and able to meet the
needs of HE institutions."
(London South Bank
University)
Although some colleges do use the ULN in routine communications with students, generally the small sample of
FE colleges contacted echoed findings in schools i.e. that students have no knowledge of their ULN or the PLR
because the ULN is not needed by the student and knowledge of the ULN appears to be largely restricted to staff
in the MIS and Examinations Offices.
The FE sector has thus until recently been in a position of having to expend resources to retrieve ULNs, because
the data is not flowing through naturally from the school system, without commensurate benefit from access to
verified qualifications data through the PLR (indeed in the colleges contacted, awareness of the PLR was low). The
changes in the schools sector however mean that the data flow will improve in the near future. Other benefits are
beginning to become increasingly apparent: one obvious example being that the availability of the ULN has meant
that the introduction of student loans in FE can take place without the SLC having to create a new identifier as it
did in HE.
3.3 Higher Education
Current Status: a track record of interest and largely successful pilot work but no clear driver for change.
There are currently 17 student identifiers in use in HE and a single common identifier would add value by
integration of data and services. Pilot activity in HE has shown the potential benefits of both the ULN and PLR
although the business case for immediate adoption has, to date, been undermined by the lack of a consistent
volume of data flowing through from schools and further education.
There has been activity within the HE sector to investigate the implementation
of the ULN, and potential benefits from access to the PLR, for a number of
years. HESA has provided for collection of the ULN since 2007/8
(compulsory only for those students issued with a ULN). UCAS has
provided for the collection of the ULN, where known, since the 2009
application cycle. Consequently all of the major student record
systems in HE can hold the ULN along with a range of other
identifiers.
In 2009 a business case was developed by the (then) MIAP
Programme for adoption of its services throughout the HE sector.
Representatives from key organisations in HE, including UCAS, Jisc,
HEFCE, HESA, Universities UK, HE Academy, GuildHE and a number of
HEIs, were brought together to form an HE Advisory Group (HEAG) chaired
by Professor Sir Robert Burgess Vice-Chancellor of the University of Leicester.
With the support of Jisc, HEFCE and other agencies in HE, a pilot programme was initiated in 2010 to inform the
strategy of the Learning Records Service (then MIAP) in the higher education sector. Some of the evidence of
tangible benefits is discussed further in section 4. Full details are on the Jisc website7 and participant bodies and
institutions are listed in Appendix 8.5. The pilots were undertaken before the recent moves to mandate the ULN
in schools and provide a direct link which between awarding bodies and the PLR. Even without these significant
developments, they provided an endorsement of the services and evidence that they would deliver significant
benefit for the HE sector (although this workstream has not explored the extent to which any pilot initiatives have
been sustained).
7 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/eadministration/ucaspilots
Page 14 of 31
Conclusions from the pilots were:
• the LRS can help to create a more transparent system in HE, and one that bridges from school and college
to higher education;
• the ULN can be a significant enabler in relation to the widening participation agenda;
• legal and data protection issues do not present a barrier to use of the ULN for widening participation
monitoring;
• use of the PLR can result in administrative savings;
• applicants to HE, and staff in schools supporting the application process, welcomed the improvements
offered by automatic capture of verified results from the PLR.
Concerns remain about the operational aspects of implementing the ULN universally and these are discussed
further in section 5. This and the lack of widespread adoption of the ULN has meant that, despite the potential
benefits, there has been no clear driver for change and activity appears to have stagnated since the end of the
pilots. UCAS does however report continued growth in young applicants providing their ULN details e.g. during
the 2012 cycle there were 46,629 ULN records entered and in 2013 there were 55,163 to the end of January.
In implementing changes to its student number controls in 2012, HEFCE encouraged institutions calculating AAB+
equivalent status of students to make use of the PLR data by means of a special agreement with the LRS. In the
absence of the forthcoming improvements to data quality and, without a specific programme of communication
and support, the experiences of institutions in accessing the PLR and using the data were not entirely successful.
Although the expectation is that all of these issues will be resolved, communication will be needed to rebuild the
confidence evidenced at the end of the pilots.
Page 15 of 31
4. The Vision
4.1 A joined-up learning landscape
Aim: adding value through integration.
A report by the European University Association (Gaebel et al 2012) highlights the kind of landscape in which
higher education now operates:
• a shift to student-centred learning in mass higher education environments and the growth of student
numbers;
• employability and entry into the labour market becomes a more important criterion for assessing higher
education provision;
• new requirements for transparency, accountability and evidence-based policy making;
• growing international competition and positioning of higher education institutions and systems;
• enhanced technical possibilities for data collection and management open new possibilities.
The report is one of the outputs of a project known as TRACKIT8 looking at how data collection and analysis is
being used to ensure the provision of high quality student-centered learning opportunities for a large and
diversified studentship and respond to the changing needs of the labour market.
Strategic use of data and information has rapidly shot up the list of priorities for higher education worldwide in
recent years. Since publication of a study by Educause in 2005 there has been growing interest in a field known as
'Academic Analytics' or 'Learning Analytics'. The UK has generally taken a broader view of the approaches and
benefits than the more strongly retention-oriented approach in the US. Many universities (e.g. Derby9) are
already developing significant capabilities in this area and recent work is summed up in a series of publications by
CETIS10
.
The ULN is the linchpin of a vision of a joined up learning landscape in which a robust dataset supports effective
decision-making at national policy and individual institution level. Key elements of that vision include:
• a holistic and learner-centred approach;
• a collect once, use many times approach to data;
• learner control of their Personal Learning Record;
• improved information, advice and guidance (IAG) that delivers good, contextual advice to assist student
choice;
• targeted and joined up support that improves student retention;
• a rounded picture of each individual learner to support them in achieving their full potential;
• data that is sufficiently longitudinal and granular to support effective policy-making at national level and
strategic decision-making by individual HE providers.
8 TRACKIT http://www.eua.be/eua-work-and-policy-area/building-the-european-higher-education-area/projects/tracking-learners-and-
graduates-progression-paths.aspx
9 http://www.derby.ac.uk/ssis/jisc-setl/objectives
10 http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/c/analytics
Page 16 of 31
“The ULN is not
necessarily an internal
enabler: it is about
transmission between
organisations.’’
(Stakeholder
interview)
4.2 A benefits driven approach
Benefits identified by stakeholders on introduction of the ULN are not only still valid but their importance has
increased. The current summary differs little in essence from that identified in a 2003 feasibility study (PA
Consulting 2003a, 2003b)11
although it perhaps better reflects a more learner-centred approach.
• Enhancing learning opportunities by providing the key to link learner data for progression, achievement
etc to create a comprehensive record supporting decision making by learners as well as others users of
learning management information.
• Enabling joined up support for learners, including joint cooperation for meeting learner needs.
• The availability of longitudinal data for policy formulation and evaluation.
• Many stakeholders will not be able to operate in future without a ULN that crosses sector boundaries.
• Administrative savings through avoiding future proliferation of identifiers and ultimately reducing the
number of identifiers in use.
• Fraud and error reduction by reducing or avoiding double counting and incorrect payments.
The table below provides a brief overview of the benefits of the ULN and the PLR and identifies the primary
beneficiaries for each aspect. Whilst the national bodies are at pains to point out that they are already confident
of the robustness of data on which they take decisions, it is evident that the ULN could reduce some of the cross-
referencing and manipulation that takes place. The following sections look at the evidence already available to
show that these benefits can be realised.
Learners Schools FE HE
National
bodies
Common identifier � � � � �
One record of achievement � � � � �
Verified qualifications � � � � �
Easier application through UCAS � � � �
Easier data sharing � � � � �
Reduction in administration � � �
Personalisation of service delivery � � �
Enhanced data linking and analysis for policy � � � �
4.2.1 Simplifying student records
Implementation of the ULN is unlikely to result in an immediate reduction in the
number of individual identifiers used in HE. The identifiers currently in use are
well known and embedded and remain fit for their individual purposes hence
their phasing out is likely to occur over a long period of time as part of the
ongoing development of legacy systems. Such a phasing out is however part
of the overall vision for the ULN: as an example it could at a relatively early
stage be a replacement for, rather than an addition to, the HUSID so long as
it was implemented universally across all HE students.
UCAS has stated a firm commitment to implementation of the ULN although it
will need to maintain parallel operation of the UCAS ID until such a time that
identified risks have been addressed.
11 PA Consulting report for DfES Feasibility Study of a Unique Learner Number http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9298/5/ACF192.pdf and Report on
Stakeholder Views for a Unique Learner Number http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9298/6/ACF196.pdf
Page 17 of 31
"'Early indications are that
verified qualifications data,
where populated in the PLR, is
robust and has the potential
to underpin and improve
admissions and enrolment
processes in the HE sector."
(London South Bank
University)
The most immediate benefit is likely to be seen in terms of non-proliferation of IDs. This is already in evidence in
FE where the SLC has been able to adopt the ULN for its new system of FE loans rather than having to create a
new identifier as it did in the case of HE. There are other examples of agencies looking for the means of better
meeting their information requirements and seeing the ULN as a possible solution.
The Scottish Executive has set up a group looking at the idea of a data hub that can facilitate sharing between the
Scottish Funding Council (covering FE and HE), the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) and Skills Development
Scotland (involved in funding modern apprenticeships and college learning programmes) with the aim of tracking
people through jobs and the voluntary sector as well as post-compulsory education. Although Scotland already
has a well established Scottish Candidate number (SCN) used for SQA qualifications, there is no universal
identifier that could support this goal. The ULN was developed in the context of an existing SCN and discussions
with LRS suggest it would be readily possible to create a mapping such that the two could be used relatively
seamlessly.
It has been identified that implementation of the ULN across the HE sector could also provide considerable
benefit to the NHS. The NHS does not currently use any form of unique ID to identify students. Learning providers
supply the NHS with the student IDs used in their internal systems. When students transfer across programmes of
study and/or learning providers, there is no mechanism for transferring the data and the NHS is obliged to try to
match on personal details which can change (e.g. name change on marriage). The ULN could help provide better
linkage between the commissioning side of NHS and information about the labour force as well as providing a
robust audit trail to support the work of the NHS bursary unit.
Some Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies already use the ULN to manage the award of professional
qualifications, for example the Association of International Accountants (AIA), the British Computer Society (BCS)
and the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD).
4.2.2 Reduction in the administration associated with collecting and verifying qualifications data
The PLR offers access to an authoritative qualifications history consisting of structured qualification details, with
the correct subject title, all presented in the same way.
Where applicants do not come through the UCAS Apply process, HE providers
expend significant time and energy obtaining and reviewing evidence of
qualifications. Pilot work by the University of Keele12
suggests technical
linkage between the PLR and HEAR, using the ULN, opens the possibility
of an integrated record of achievement from age 14 onwards. Whilst it
will be some time before the PLR is sufficiently comprehensive to
reduce the effort associated with checking qualifications for mature
students, the checking of equivalent or lower qualifications (ELQs),
which poses a headache for many institutions, could be facilitated if
an integrated record of achievement from age 14 onwards were
available.
For both UCAS and non-UCAS applicants there are many instances where
HE providers require further verification of qualifications, often based on
producing original certificates at the enrolment event. There are already examples
of where use of the PLR can deliver substantial cost savings in terms of checking essential GCSE and other relevant
qualifications (such as NVQs and Level 2 qualifications). In its pilot, London South Bank University identified access
to verified qualifications through the PLR as a 'big win' particularly in its Faculty of Health and Social Care where
such verification is often a professional body requirement and hence it verifies qualifications for c.10,000
applicants per year: 'Access to this data in the PLR has the potential to deliver substantial cost savings as
administrative staff currently chase a significant percentage of applicants for further information.'
12 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearning/Case%20Studies/keelecasestudy.pdf
Page 18 of 31
“'Being able to track
people's learning journeys
is the holy grail in terms of
widening participation
research.’’
(Stakeholder
interview)
The University of the West of England (UWE) attempted to put some figures on savings as a result of its pilot work
and concluded that access to verified qualifications in the PLR resulted in a saving of c. 45 days for 4,000
applicants. It is not difficult to imagine the scale of such savings across the entire HE sector. UWE has produced an
estimator tool for calculating the savings available from the Jisc website.
4.2.3 Supporting widening participation
Some of the most enthusiastic support for universal adoption of the ULN is
currently from senior managers responsible for widening participation
(WP) in universities and the national union of students (NUS) has voiced
support for the ULN as a significant enabler to improve widening
participation.
It is currently difficult for universities to measure the effectiveness of
many WP activities because there is no means of identifying school
pupils involved in outreach activities and tracking their progress into
higher education13
. Effective monitoring of outreach activities could
therefore be greatly facilitated by the sharing of ULNs in relation to pre-
application/outreach engagement.
A pilot project by the University of Keele investigated this with very encouraging results. The project looked at
both the legalities and data protection issues and at the practicalities of sharing ULNs across partners in schools
and colleges. The use of the ULN to look at the reach of specific WP activities (including follow-up contact with
learners to evaluate specific initiatives) and track learner's progress into HE was discussed with the Information
Commissioner's Office (ICO). The ICO expressed the view that such activities are reasonable and provided
guidance on developing good practice protocols. Investigation into the willingness of school and college partners
to provide ULNs to universities was similarly positive although, unsurprisingly at that time, awareness of whether
the school actually held the ULN and where to find it, was variable.
Better data will improve the design of widening participation initiatives in ways that improve outcomes and
reduce the cost associated with any ineffective interventions. The ULN is not the only means to achieve this kind
of tracking: HEFCE's work in support of its AAB policy used sophisticated methods of matching NPD, ILR and HESA
data and HEFCE is currently working on protocols to allow researchers access to this linked data. The ULN could
however be a significant enabler.
13
DfE has also been looking at this with the publication of its Key Stage 4 and 5 destination measures. Data sources include the National Pupil Database, the Schools Census, the ILR and HESA. In the absence of a common identifier across sectors, personal characteristics such as name, date of birth and postcode had to be used. http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/youngpeople/participation/a00208218/key-stage-4-and-key-stage-5-destination-measure
Page 19 of 31
“The benefits present
themselves very clearly.
Students and applicants at
various stages have to have
lying around, and constantly
dig out and refer to, various
IDs. A single ID would make a
lot of people's lives easier.’’
(Stakeholder
interview)
4.2.4 Improved learner support
A combination of the use of the ULN in tracking progress across the learning
landscape and the improved granularity of qualifications data in the PLR will
make a significant difference to HE providers ability to develop a full
picture of their learners in order to better support them. This data will
form essential underpinning to support the considerable advances
being made in the field of learning analytics at present.
Key objects of interest include understanding the impact of prior
qualifications (including level 2 qualifications) on conversion and
progression and being able to correlate these in ways that enable
institutions to put in place better information and advice and guidance
(IAG) to enable students to make the right choices in the first place and
additional support mechanisms for students who may be at risk of
dropping out or failing to achieve their full attainment potential.
4.2.5 Ease of use for lifelong learners
Although many of the ways in which the ULN can enhance individual life chances by opening up learning
opportunities are invisible to the learners themselves, there are some very tangible benefits in terms of
supporting the practicalities of the learning journey. A single identifier eliminates the need to keep a record of
multiple IDs that are required for different purposes relating to the same episode of education and to identify
which of them may need to be stored for future use. The PLR also cuts out many issues relating to the need to
replace lost or damaged certificates many years after they are issued. The ability for learners to share selected
qualifications with third parties has been developed and will be implemented as soon as learners are accessing
the online service in sufficient numbers and should potentially be very helpful in the employment market again
streamlining the process for both the applicant and the potential employer.
In a second phase of pilot activity in 201114
UCAS undertook a study involving students and staff from six schools
and both student and staff participants greatly preferred automatic capture of verified results from the PLR to the
current system of manual entry in UCAS Apply. Lessons learned from this exercise have been built into
development of UCAS systems in various ways however and it should not necessarily be assumed that the PLR will
play a future role in enhancing the admissions process in the ways explored in the pilot.
14 http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/eadministration/ucaspilots/ucaspilotpage.aspx
Page 20 of 31
“We have big problems but
we know where to start
solving them. Just give us a
single ID.’’
(University MIS Manager)
5. Moving towards full implementation
To date, despite agreement at national and senior management level on the value of the ULN, progress on
implementation has been modest (with the exception of the FE sector and schools in Wales). HEDIIP now has a
key opportunity to establish momentum on implementation in HE.
The following enablers have been identified:
• the existence of HEDIIP provides the means to facilitate this type of collaborative working;
• there is widespread support beyond RPG member organisations including support from the HE sector, the
NHS and the National Union of Students (NUS);
• the recent developments in relation to schools and awarding bodies will represent a sea change in
awareness and use of the ULN in the immediate future;
• the Learning Records Service has not indicated any significant extra central cost in further roll out of the
ULN across HE;
• most of the relevant administrative systems already have the capacity to hold the ULN;
• there are appears to be a ready mechanism to link to the candidate number already widely used in
Scottish schools;
• UCAS is willing to take on both retrieval and allocation of ULNs as a shared service for its customers.
Indications from HE providers are that this service would be greatly welcomed and would be a significant
factor in accelerating universal implementation.
5.1 Issues requiring further work
There are a number of issues which will have to be addressed in order to achieve implementation of the ULN
across the whole of HE and ensure that it delivers the desired benefits. Many of these cross sectors thus requiring
high level impetus.
Critically, while work for this report has underlined the finding of the 2003 feasibility study (PA Consulting 2003a),
that there is general acceptance of the value of the ULN, it has also underlined concerns at operational level
about issue of the ULN (also identified in 2003). The stakeholder report supporting the feasibility study (PA
Consulting 2003b) noted that support grows the further the organisation is from the point of provision of the ULN
and that support is highly correlated with the use of the data for management planning and assessment
purposes.
5.1.1 Data model and standards
The adoption of the ULN as a universal identifier has implications that need to
be considered in the context of the data model being developed under
strand 2 of this programme of activity. The model will need to achieve
clarity on the point at which the major entity 'Person' should be
allocated a ULN where they fall outside the current allocation process.
Achieving this clarification and designing the business processes to
support it effectively is no trivial matter. In very broad terms the
overhead of allocating ULNs to mature or overseas applicants who may
never go on to enter HE and the potential complexities of individuals
engaging in more than one instance of higher education in parallel need
to be considered. The latter situation may become increasingly prevalent
with changing career pathways resulting in more 'bite sized' chunks of
professional development and the rise of new forms of learning such as
MOOCs.
Page 21 of 31
Getting these processes right in order to limit the operational overhead and deliver confidence in the robustness
of the ULN as a unique identifier may involve convergence of data standards to an extent that has not yet begun
to be addressed by this programme of work. As an example the different formats in which various bodies hold
information on name and postcode currently represent a significant barrier to validation of demographic data and
ambiguities remain in mapping LRS qualifications data to UCAS Apply. Changing some of these legacy systems will
take time: UCAS is in the process of extending the number of characters in its 'Given Name' field as this was
previously limited by the number of characters on the paper form which had to run in parallel with the online
system for a while.
It is also possible that the business processes may involve interactions with bodies beyond the RPG e.g. should the
point at which overseas entrants require a ULN be related to their visa application, there will be a relationship
with UKBA activities. UKBA requires the name to reflect that on the person's passport which may not match the
name given to universities or on their qualification records and there are known issues with UKBA using a
different Unicode set to other bodies. Resolving these issues will undoubtedly address some of the most
significant pain points in data management for HEIs at present but the enormity of the task must not be
underestimated.
5.1.2 Identity Verification
Student use of the PLR is currently hampered both by lack of awareness and by the relatively limited number who
are able to meet the level 1 identity verification requirements in order to access their own PLR online. This is of
course essential if they are to make use of their PLR in their interactions with the HE sector (or indeed in any
other way). One suggested solution is that LRS ought to accept 'relationship with school' as level 1 verification.
This would appear to be compatible with the statutory duty of local authorities to verify the identity of school
pupils.
It may however be that forthcoming developments by the Skills Funding Agency, which has developed an ID
Assurance Service, will support the learner accessing their PLR. The service is expected to be launched in April
2013, and will be part of the National Careers Service.
The issue of identity verification will also need to be addressed as part of the development of business processes
for universal adoption of the ULN e.g. if UCAS is to take on the role of allocating, as well as merely retrieving,
ULNs as a shared service for the sector and in relation to HEIs allocating ULNs to non UCAS applicants.
Given the likely duration of full roll-out, there is a risk that the ULN/PLR implementation could be overtaken by
other developments in citizen identity management; the sector therefore needs to keep a watching brief on
whether other developments in citizen identity management might impact this work.
5.1.3 Data Quality
All HE stakeholders will want to be confident in the robustness and reliability of the ULN before adopting it as a
primary key for administrative purposes. Working with LRS to establish a robust set of data quality indicators
should form an early priority for any implementation project and LRS has indicated its willingness to work with
whichever body the new governance body deems appropriate to guide the HE sector on how to maintain ULN
data quality.
Page 22 of 31
5.2 Projected Timeline
Section 5 identified the key enabling factors in implementation of the ULN. The developments identified will
initially impact schools but will flow through to further and higher education and the following scenario for a
potential entrant to HE can be presented.
• Academic year 2013/14: The learner is allocated a ULN for the first time at age 14.
• Academic year 2014/15: The learner is entered for GCSE examinations and the ULN provides a second
(supporting) identifier for data exchange with the Award Organisation in addition to the UCI. The learner
completes GCSEs and their PLR is populated with qualifications obtained (end of Key Stage 4).
• Academic year 2015/16: The learner starts Key Stage 5. The ULN can be supplied if studying in a FE
College.
• Academic year 2016/17: The learner applies for entry to HE supplying their ULN to UCAS. The learner
completes Key Stage 5. Verified A level results could be available from the PLR for university/college use.
• Academic year 2017/18: The learner enters HE. The ULN has been captured during the application
process (or is obtained from LRS via UCAS). The ULN is returned to HESA in the institution’s 2017/18
student return.
The flow of ULNs through the state school system can be illustrated as follows:
Stakeholder responses to discussion of this timeline in relation to when full implementation could be achievable
in HE have been mixed.
Some see aiming for widespread adoption for 2017 entry as too slow. The argument in this case is that, as the
school cohort is not the complete picture, the case for waiting for it to flow through in this manner is weakened.
The point has been made that entrants from English FE and Welsh FE and schools will have ULNs from 2013 and
that changes for the 2014/15 HESA record are due to be considered at end of this calendar year hence an
announcement about full adoption of the ULN could be made in the near future for the 2014/15 reporting year.
Page 23 of 31
The alternative view is that there is clearly merit in delaying the start of any implementation until 2017/18 when
the majority of young entrants will have a ULN and that a further phased approach makes sense to allow
institutions to gradually adapt to the new process.
One suggested timetable is:
2017/18 – 18 year old home UG entrants
2018/19 – All home UG entrants
2019/20 – All home and EU entrants
2020/21 – All Entrants
2021/22 – All students
The rationale behind the proposal for the timetable above is that it allows the sector to progressively tackle
harder and harder groups. In year 1 the majority of young home applicants would already have a ULN; in year 2
the additional need would be to deal with mature home students; year 3 would reach part of the overseas
population, year 4 would be the proof of concept for all entrants and year 5 would mop up the relatively small
number who had not previously acquired a ULN.
Page 24 of 31
6. Conclusions and Next Steps
6.1 Conclusion
This project was initiated on the premise that the business case for the ULN had been made and that this report
would focus on implementation. Work for this report has found that the business case has indeed strengthened.
The ULN provides an opportunity for the HE sector to adopt a universal personal identifier for HE students in
order to improve opportunities for data sharing amongst sector bodies, potentially reducing burden on HE
providers, and improving the quality, scope and timeliness of information. Equally the ULN provides an
opportunity to provide access to more robust and complete qualifications information through the Personal
Learning Record (PLR).
Establishment of the new governance framework now provides a key opportunity to establish momentum on
implementation. The commitment of UCAS to adoption of the ULN and its willingness to take on the role of
retrieval and allocation of ULNs as a shared service for its customers will be a significant enabler and will
accelerate uptake e.g. in the independent schools sector. UCAS will also take on a significant role in terms of
communicating the uses and benefits of the ULN to entrants to HE.
The 2003 PA Consulting feasibility study found strong support for the concept of a ULN as an ‘enabling device’ and
progressive implementation of the ULN was envisaged. The pyramid below was put forward as an illustration.
This report has identified achievement, or achievement within the short term, of stages IV-II in the school and FE
sector and attention must now focus on ensuring implementation of the ULN in HE.
Achievement of the ULN as a single common identifier will take time.
6.2 Next Steps
Section 5 reviews the implementation of the ULN in HE and sets out a timeline for the developments already
agreed.
The primary audience for this report is as yet unformed because it is assumed that the report will inform the work
of whatever future entity emerges from strand 1 of the wider work programme which is putting in place effective
mechanisms for the governance of the HE data and information landscape. In the interim, the Steering Group is
asked to consider the report and make some recommendations in principle to HEDIIP as to how the
implementation should be approached.
Page 25 of 31
In order to adopt the ULN a major project will be needed:
• to be overseen by the governance process (strand 1);
• within the context of a clearly defined sector-level data model (strand 2) and
• involving any organisation that is collecting relevant individual level data from providers (as identified
through the inventory – strand 3);
• with provision for active review under the governance process (strand 1) such that funders, regulators
and other data collectors seek to phase out other identifiers at the earliest opportunity.
The ULN will flow through into HE from schools and colleges but it is necessary to consider whether effort should
be expended to ensure complete coverage of the ULN in HE including for categories of students without a ULN
such as mature, part-time and distance learners and international students. The effort required to ensure
complete coverage has been a concern in HE since the inception of MIAP. It is necessary to weigh effort against
the potential benefit of complete coverage.
The general impression from sector bodies and staff within HE providers, principally responsible for planning and
widening participation (as well as MIS managers), is that the added value of complete coverage makes this the
preferred implementation approach. We have not heard any advocates of a 'mixed economy' whereby some
groups of learners remain without a ULN.
The key question is thus whether implementation in HE should be phased or whether effort should be expended
to ensure complete coverage of the ULN in HE to the shortest possible timescale.
• A phased approach would allow the ULN to penetrate HE over time by flow through from schools and
colleges allocating the ULN. As a consequence categories of students, such as those from independent
schools, mature applicants, distance/part-time students, international students, would remain with no
ULN until such time as mandatory coverage was extended to these groups. Such an approach would
reduce the immediate operational burden on HEIs and allow the robustness and value of the ULN and PLR
to be proven prior to full implementation.
• The alternative is to require HE institutions, with UCAS’ support, to ensure the allocation of the ULN to all
students from a particular date. The effort required to ensure complete coverage has been a concern in
HE since the ULN's inception and it is necessary to weigh that effort against the potential benefit of
complete coverage.
The Steering Group is asked to consider and make a recommendation to HEDIIP in principle:
• whether the ULN is allowed to penetrate HE over time by flow through from schools and colleges
allocating the ULN with full implementation to all student groups being phased over a number of years or
• whether HE institutions be required to ensure allocation of a ULN to all students from a certain date e.g.
by replacing the HUSID with the ULN
and also to consider and make a recommendation to HEDIIP in principle:
• on the preferred timetable for implementation;
• endorsing the proposal that UCAS should take on the role of retrieval and allocation of ULNs as a shared
service for its customers.
Page 26 of 31
7. References
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (2011) Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System Available
at http://discuss.bis.gov.uk/hereform/white-paper/ [Accessed 6 June 2012]
Department for Education (2012) Information about children, education and schools (ICES) Bulletin No.60. Available at:
http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/i/ices%20bulletin%20-%20issue%2060v1-0.pdf [Accessed 15 February
2013]
Educause (2005) Academic analytics in the future of higher education. ECAR Research Study 8 Available at:
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0508/rs/ers05089.pdf [Accessed 16 February 2013]
Gaebel, M., Hauschildt, K., Mühleck, K. and Smidt, H. (2012) Tracking Learners’ and Graduates’ Progression Paths:
TRACKIT. EUA Publications. Available at:
http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Publications_homepage_list/EUA_Trackit_web.sflb.ashx [Accessed 16 February 2013]
Interim Regulatory Partnership Group (2012a) Mapping the higher education funding and regulatory system in England:
summary report. Report produced by Deloittes. Available at:
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/about/intro/wip/interimregulatorypartnershipgroupirpg/ [Accessed 20 May 2012]
Interim Regulatory Partnership Group (2012b) Redesigning the HE data and information landscape: a pathway to
reform. Available at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/about/intro/wip/rpg/redesigningthedatalandscape/ [Accessed 29
November 2012]
Jisc (2011) UCAS Learner Record Services Pilot Summer 2010-11: phase 1 and 2 reports. Available at
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/eadministration/ucaspilots/ucaspilotpage.aspx
[Accessed 11 February 2013]
Learning Records Service (2010) Pilot studies in higher education: summary report. Available at:
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/eadministration/ucaspilots.aspx [Accessed 29 November
2012].
Learning Records Service (2010) Strategic Business Case for HE Adoption of the Learning Records Service. Available at
http://www.learningrecordsservice.org.uk/documentlibrary/documents/Strategy.htm [Accessed 12 February 2013]
Milburn, A. (2012) University challenge: how higher education can advance social mobility: a progress report by the
independent reviewer on social mobility and child poverty. Cabinet Office. Available at:
http://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-activity/education-skills/cabinetoffice/university12.aspx [Accessed 15
February 2013]
PA Consulting (2003a) report for DfES Feasibility Study of a Unique Learner Number
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9298/5/ACF192.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2013]
PA Consulting (2003b) report for DfES Report on Stakeholder Views for a Unique Learner Number
http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9298/6/ACF196.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2013]
UCAS Admissions Process Review (2012) available at http://www.ucas.com/reviews/admissionsprocessreview/
[Accessed 11 February 2013]
Universities UK/GuildHE (2012) Bringing it all together: introducing the Higher Education Achievement Report
http://www.hear.ac.uk/assets/documents/hear/institution-resources/HEAR-Bringing-it-all-together.pdf [Accessed 15
February 2013]
Page 27 of 31
8. Appendices
8.1 Steering Group Members
Redesigning the HE data and information landscape steering group
Sir Tim Wilson (Chair)
Alison Allden Chief Executive, Higher Education Statistics Agency
David Barrett Assistant Director, Office for Fair Access
Dr Iain Cameron Head of Research Careers, Research Councils UK
Ian Child Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Chichester University
Matthew Dean Technology Policy Manager, Association of Colleges
Steve Egan Deputy Chief Executive, Higher Education Funding Council for England
Cheryl Emerton Operations Manager, Office of the Independent Adjudicator
Hannah Falvey Head of Statistics, Higher Education Funding Council for Wales
Martin Furner Head of Data Assessment and Market Intelligence Team, Teaching Agency
Dr Elizabeth Halford Head of Research, Information and Enquiry, Quality Assurance Agency
Kerry Hemsworth Assistant Director of Education and Commissioning, Department of Health
Nick Johnstone Senior Policy Adviser, GuildHE
Steven Quigley Academic Registrar, Regents College
Paul Smith Head of Business Development, Student Loans Company
Martin Smith Deputy Director - Funding Policy, Scottish Funding Council
Will Spinks Registrar, Secretary and Chief Operating Officer, University of Manchester
Julie Tam Head of Analysis, Universities UK
Bethanie Williams Assistant Director, Policy & Research, Universities and Colleges Admissions
Service
Page 28 of 31
8.2 List of Participants
Name Surname Organisation Job Title
Chris Bilton St Vincent College Information Officer
Mike Coulson Learning Records Service Business Development Manager
Leslie Currie SPA Senior Project Officer
Christine Giles University of Portsmouth Deputy Academic Registrar
David Glover OCR Head of Business Transformation
Tim Hall UCAS Senior Data Steward
Sean Lee Newcastle College Group Director MIS, Funding & Compliance
Graeme Lindsay SLC Product Consultant
Sue Longden University of Chichester Director of Registry and Admissions
John Lumley University of Chichester Head of Planning
Susan Maguire SLC Partner Services Manager
Donna McClung Bridgemary School Information Officer
Peter Mudd South Downs College Information Officer
Andrea Robertson UCAS Director of Implementation
Bryony Rogerson Havant Academy Information Officer
Dan Shaffer SPA Senior Project Officer
Daniel Walker UCAS Data Quality Audit Manager
Simon Walton University of Portsmouth Registry Systems Officer
Jane Wild HESA Director of Operations
Graeme Wise National Union of Students Assistant Director
Page 29 of 31
8.3 Glossary of Terms
ABL Award Board Linkage (UCAS)
AO Award organisation
DfE Department for Education
DfES (former) Department for Education and Skills
FE Further Education
HE Higher Education
HEAR Higher Education Achievement Report
HEDIIP Higher Education Data and Information Improvement Programme
HEFCE Higher Education Funding Council for England
HERRG Higher Education Regulation Review Group
HESA Higher Education Statistics Agency
HUSID HESA Unique Student Identifier
ID Identifier
ILR Individualised Learner Record
IRPG Interim Regulatory Partnership Group
JCQ Joint Council for Qualifications
JISC Jisc
LRS Learning Records Service
MIAP Managing Information Across Partners
MIS Management information system
MOOC Massive Open Online Course
NHS National Health Service
NUS National Union of Students
OFFA Office for Fair Access
Ofqual Office for Qualifications and Examinations Regulation
PLR Personal Learner Record
PSRB Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies
QCF Qualifications and Credit Framework
RPG Regulatory Partnership Group
SCN Scottish Candidate Number
SLC Student Loans Company
SQA Scottish Qualifications Authority
UCAS Universities and Colleges Admissions Service
UCI Unique Candidate Number
UKPRN UK Education Provider Reference Number
ULN Unique Learner Number
UUK Universities UK
VLE Virtual Learning Environment
WP Widening Participation
Page 30 of 31
8.4 Timeline for ULN
2002 MIAP Established
2003 PA Consulting report for DfES Feasibility Study of a Unique Learner
Number
2005 (Aug) UK Register of Learning Providers launched
2005 (Dec) Delivery of MIAP transferred from DfES to LSC
2007 (Aug) Learner Registration Service and ULN tests & trials completed
2007 (Sept) Learner Registration Service launched to 60 early adopter organisations
2008 (Feb) Learner Registration Service fully launched
2008 MIAP HE Advisory Group (HEAG) formed (Chair Professor Sir Bob Burgess)
2009 (April) Learner Registration Service Strategic Outline Business Case for adoption
of the Service by HE sector approved by HEAG
2009-2010 HEFCE/JISC funded small scale pilots in HE to test business case (Oct 09-
Aug 10)
2010 Delivery transferred from LSC to Skills Funding Agency. Name changed
from MIAP to Learning Records Service
2011 (Sept) LRS access made available to schools in Wales
2012 (Nov) 'Soft start' English state schools use of ULN in pupil census
2013 (Jan) Vocational Qualifications data fed direct to PLR from 135 awarding bodies
2013 (Aug) General Qualifications data fed direct to PLR from 135 awarding bodies
2014 (Jan) ULN becomes mandatory in English state schools pupil census
2014 (Sept) Go Live date for A2C system of data exchange across awarding
bodies/schools/colleges with ULN as preferred candidate number
Page 31 of 31
8.5 Participants in 2010/11 JISC MIAP pilots
Trial area and participants Potential Benefits
UCAS
Admissions
Streamlined process, better matching of results,
Improved data accuracy, better user experience
HESA
Data ‘journeys’ Simplification of data collection
Keele University
Widening Participation Streamlined access to contextual data
University of West of England
Using PLR to verify student entry quals
Streamlined admissions
Costing of possible savings
Southampton Solent, London South Bank,
De Montfort
Integrating systems with LRS
Process improvements
Student access to PLR
Manchester University
Linking HEAR to ULN More complete PLR for students to use
Open University
ID verification Improving security and streamlining online access
