Search Results

In 2014, the Australian Federal Government attempted to de-regulate higher education fees so as to allow universities to set their own tuition fees. The associated public debate offer critical insights into how the identity of a student as a 'customer' of higher education is understood and deployed when developing higher education policy. This paper uses the 2014 Australian higher education reforms as a lens through which to further scholarly research into the student-as-customer metaphor and to see how it is influenced by the perceptions and understandings of policy actors external to the higher education sector. These include politicians, special interest groups, the students and their parents and prospective employers.

This study reveals that the public/private nexus - both of funding and benefit - problematizes traditional conceptualisations of students and others as higher education customers. In turn, this restricts the ability or desire of policy actors to describe how the student functions as a customer as a consequence of market reform. This inability compromises the development of effective and sustainable higher education policy.

Published abstract. Show less

This article explores the relationship between mass education, higher education quality and policy development in Australia in the period 2008-2014, during which access to higher education was significantly increased. Over this time, which included a change of national government, the discursive relationship between mass higher education and higher education quality shifted from conceptualising quality as a function of economic productivity, through educational transformation and academic standards, to market competition and efficiency. Throughout, the student was more often positioned as a servant towards higher education quality, rather than its benefactor.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

Attempts to make higher education more equitable more readily succeed at the aggregate (sector) level than at the institutional, with students from disadvantaged groups being overrepresented in low-status institutions. It is suggested that this is because policies of 'fairness' (i.e. proportional representation) dominate the contemporary policy framework and are strongly resisted by elite universities. However, using the Australian higher education sector as an example, this paper argues that equity policy is actually a mix of 'proportional fairness' and 'inclusion' and elite institutions resist not because the policy is deficient but because it might actually work. An alternative approach to higher education equity policy is proposed; one which requires elite institutions to engage meaningfully with disadvantaged students but allows them to retain their status advantage.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

The Bourdieuian concept of 'position-taking' is applied in this analysis of recognition of prior learning (RPL) policy and practice in Australian higher education. Data from institutional documents and participant interviews indicate that, within RPL policy, the universities selectively employ prevailing discourses of 'quality' and 'equity' to reinforce or potentially improve their reputation and symbolic power in the field of higher education. There is no common consensus about either equity or quality across the sector, as each university interprets the two concepts for its own benefit. The evidence suggests that, despite rhetoric in government policy implying that both are equally important, quality is a far stronger discourse and policy imperative than equity in RPL policy and practice. Also, RPL policies and practices provide an insight into how the key policy priorities of equity and quality are addressed by universities, when applied to a specific educational process or practice.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

Recognition of prior learning (RPL) requires an assessment of the equivalence and transferability of learning acquired in one context to another. However, this study's examination of the institutional policies and practices of three Australian universities reveals that RPL can also be understood as a Bourdieuian process of 'capital conversion', where an individual's economic, social and cultural capital are assessed as being equivalent to 'academic experience'. This approach reveals that, far from being an epistemological assessment of prior learning, universities also consider their organisational identity and status when considering what informal or non-formal learning will be accepted. Ultimately, what counts as prior learning depends as much upon which university is doing the assessment, its motive for doing so and the extent to which it views RPL as a normative threat.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

Whether or not disadvantaged students are realising the same benefits from higher education as their peers is of fundamental importance to equity practitioners and policymakers. Despite this, equity policy has focused on access to higher education and little attention has been paid to graduate outcomes. The Australian study reported here used national data to investigate relationships between disadvantage and graduate outcomes. The study provides critical insights into how access to higher education does, or does not, lead to improvements in post-graduation equity. The study reveals that outcomes are not equal for all students and that higher education disadvantage persists for many students after they have completed their studies. Whilst the specific findings relate to the Australian university sector the broader discussion of the article is relevant to higher education policy more generally, especially in terms of how governments align institutional processes to measure and scrutinise achievement in relation to public policy objectives.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

This report details findings of the [National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education] NCSEHE-funded project, 'Calculating the costs of supporting people with disability in Australian higher education'. The project sought to investigate how the Australian Government and universities invest to support the inclusion of people with disability in higher education. The study recognised that higher education today enrols many thousands of people with disability, that many students with disability require supports to enable their successful participation, and that institutions have different strategic orientations that may influence disability inclusion.

This investigation aimed to provide: (1) critical information regarding the ways in which institutions support people with disability; (2) a better understanding of how policy incentives might best be focused to support the successful participation of people with disability in Australian higher education; and (3) a rationale to develop a rigorous assessment tool for calculating the full cost of supporting people with disability in higher education. As a result of this research, a number of recommendations are put forward.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website. Show less