Search Results

To better understand how accountability for performance against equity policy goals and funding operates across the Australian higher education system, this research involved four strands of activity: (1) theoretical perspectives on equity and accountability, through a review of the literature - this process informed research design, data collection and analysis; (2) analysis of secondary data to identify how equity and accountability is embedded within relevant legislation, regulation, statistics, strategic plans and annual reports; (3) interviews with leaders from across the sector, including current and former Vice-Chancellors, to understand their perspectives on student equity and accountability; and (4) surveys of managers from across the sector to understand the perspectives of staff within institutions on equity and accountability.

In looking at systemic changes to the way in which equity in higher education can be advanced, the report does not focus on isolated recommendations of an incremental nature - instead, it proposes a framework through which four priorities for change can unleash significant and continuous system-wide reforms. These priorities are: refine equity goals; improve information management; embed student equity goals across the higher education system; and analyse, report and communicate outcomes. The report proposes that the Australian Government is the only authority that can lead this process, one that requires cooperation and coordination in a process-based consultation and consensus building exercise with all stakeholders. Two significant recommendations consistent with this position are made: (1) the Australian Government adopts an Operational Framework for Student Equity that integrates system, national, local and individual dimensions of student equity across Australian higher education; and (2) processes for developing pathways for each of the four strategic priorities for change be developed and implemented, with reference to each other, and in consultation with all stakeholders.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

In June 2018, the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) set out to develop a long-term strategic vision for student equity in Australian higher education through a national collaborative process under the banner of Student Equity 2030. The core outcome of this process is The Best Chance for All, a proposed national policy statement for student equity in Australian tertiary education. Over 150 stakeholders directly shaped this policy statement and key recommendations to achieve a more equitable higher education system. Stakeholder consultation commenced with a workshop conducted with sector experts. A discussion paper formed a reference point for written submissions and public roundtables held in every state and territory and regional centres.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This report details the findings of the 'Enabling programmes for disadvantaged student groups project', which was funded as part of the Australian Government Department of Education and Training National Priorities Pool funding 2014 round with the research undertaken in 2015. The project team conducted a review of current enabling programs and reported on: (1) the extent to which current enabling courses offered by Australian higher education providers are an effective means of increasing access to, participation and success in undergraduate courses for domestic students from disadvantaged groups; (2) the appropriateness of enabling courses as a pathway to university for disadvantaged groups compared to other pathways; (3) the variability in quality between enabling courses that impacts on their effectiveness for disadvantaged student groups; and (4) what, if any, particular practices or means of delivery should be incorporated into enabling courses to enhance their effectiveness for people from disadvantaged groups. For the purposes of this report, 'disadvantaged students' were primarily defined in line with the six officially recognised equity groups of students ('the equity group of students'): low socio-economic status (low SES) students; students from regional and remote areas; Indigenous students; students with a disability; students from a non-English speaking background (NESB); and women in non-traditional areas of study (WINTA).

In relation to their reasons for choosing the pathway they did, both enabling and vocational education and training (VET) students shared similar motivating and driving factors. The distinction between the two was evident in that enabling students were primarily seeking a way to access and prepare for university, while this was a secondary consideration for most VET students who were seeking vocational skills or access to a specific vocation. When asked how their chosen pathway could have been improved, the majority of enabling students were satisfied with the enabling program and how it prepared them for university, while VET students were less satisfied with their pathway and saw room for improvement. By and large, the VET and enabling pathways serve distinct cohorts of students and act in a complementary, not contrasting fashion. It is a case of enabling and VET, not enabling or VET.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This discussion paper forms the basis for the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education's (NCSEHE's) submission to the 2020 Review of the Disability Standards for Education 2005, submitted on 25 September 2020. The NCSEHE's set of recommendations to the Review reflects its core purpose and activities, which centre around enhancing the participation, success and outcomes of marginalised and disadvantaged people, particularly in relation to identified equity groups in Australian higher education: (1) students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds (Low SES); (2) students with disability; (3) Indigenous students (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Students); (4) women in non-traditional areas (WINTA); (5) students from regional, rural and remote areas (RRR); and (6) students from non-English speaking backgrounds (NESB). The paper examines issues that the Standards were developed to address, including: institutional responses to disability; the identification of disability; curriculum development, accreditation and delivery; student support services; and harassment and victimisation.

Edited excerpts from publication and publisher's website. 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

It is a decade since the last major review of the role that equity plays in Australian higher education was undertaken, the 'Bradley Review of Higher Education' [available in VOCEDplus at TD/LMR 85.696], and over 30 years since the core framework for equity was first defined in the 1990 White Paper 'A Fair Chance for All' [available in VOCEDplus at TD/ERD 87.195]. This paper seeks contributions from key stakeholders in preparation of a strategic long-term vision for student equity in Australian higher education. This paper aims to outline the key concepts, challenges and contradictions associated with achieving student equity in higher education in an era of near universal participation and point out possible options for resolving these challenges and contradictions. Eight big questions are articulated to prompt discussion and feedback from the sector.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

A key mechanism for avoiding unlawful discrimination is the provision of reasonable adjustments. Most commonly in higher education, reasonable adjustments are required and provided around matters of assessment. Extensions of time for assignments and examinations is a way of avoiding indirect discrimination for students whose disability results in taking longer to complete tasks within a fixed time frame. Inherent requirement statements have emerged as a mechanism for making clearer the reference point against which reasonable adjustments can be determined. Despite the rapid recent growth in university participation of students with a disability, there has been little research conducted on the prevalence, consistency and characteristics of inherent requirement statements across Australian institutions and fields of education. Assessing the nature, extent and impact of inherent requirement statements is therefore central to understanding how Australian universities are promoting the participation of students with disabilities while complying with their legislative obligations and upholding academic standards.

This report represents the first stage of this research and analyses the prevalence, accessibility, and form of inherent requirement statements within the Australian university sector. The authors begin by considering the broader national context for this project, including the increasing participation of students with disability in higher education, and recent developments in employment law, education standards, and professional registration requirements. The origins of inherent requirement statements are examined with reference to key milestones associated with Curtin University, the University of Melbourne and Western Sydney University, and relevant literature is explored to situate university activities in relation to historical policy, legislative, and research trends. International literature is also examined to reveal the significant influence of overseas policies, particularly in the United States, on Australian legislators and educators.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

This research study examines regional student participation and migration, using novel data sources and analytic techniques. It seeks to progress knowledge of regional student participation and mobility through quantitative analysis of: factors associated with regional student progression through school and into higher education, using data generated by the Longitudinal Survey of Australian Youth (LSAY); and factors associated with the migration of students with a commencing regional home address to major cities and other regional areas using customised data obtained from the Department of Education and Training.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less