Search Results

The second workshop in the series put a spotlight on the higher education participation and completion outcomes of regional and remote students. While Australian universities have engaged in strategic efforts to address the lower participation and completion rates of regional and remote students for many years, there is currently renewed interest by the Australian Government. For equity practitioners, researchers and policymakers, there remain questions about the nature of the problem and the best ways to support people in regional and remote locations to access and succeed in higher education.

This workshop brought together a group of subject matter experts who came at the topic from different perspectives. The following questions were considered: How can universities successfully mitigate the structural challenges faced by their (potential) student cohort, especially regional institutions which themselves suffer from systemic disadvantage? How do universities create both flexibility and consistency in the student experience for a cohort which increases in diversity with increased distance from (metropolitan) campuses? Do these strategies work for Indigenous students who make up a significantly larger share of regional and remote cohorts then metropolitan ones? How do institutions manage critical first encounters, clarify expectations, address the diverse and often complex needs of students and create a sense of belonging in a massified system looking for further efficiencies? Should policy approaches focus on creating scale and critical mass or on delivering local support to smaller and more remote communities? Is it possible to move beyond geographical limitations to create supportive, technology-enabled third spaces?

Edited excerpts from publisher's website. Show less

The Commonwealth provides funding to universities to improve the access, participation, retention, and success of identified equity groups. Referred to as the widening participation agenda, the explicit goal is to increase levels of university participation by students from these underrepresented social groups to levels which reflect their representation in the broader Australian population. This research was concerned with how well Australian universities have performed against the widening participation agenda in relation to the postgraduate cohort in the period 2006-16. The equity groups covered in the report are: Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander students; low socioeconomic status (SES) students; students with disability; students from non-English speaking backgrounds; students from regional areas; and students from remote areas. Progress toward parity targets was compared across the stages of the degree life cycle - access (commencing enrolment), participation (continuing enrolment) and completion (graduation) - for undergraduate, postgraduate coursework and postgraduate research student cohorts. These outcomes were also considered by university group to identify the key trends in access to, participation in, and completion of postgraduate study by students from different equity groups and how these trends differed by university group and type of higher degree.

Excerpt from publication. Show less

The purpose of this report is to provide an understanding of the numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with disability in Australian higher education and the support they currently receive. Further, the report provides a series of recommendations for good-practice in supporting this group of students based on a review of the literature and an understanding of current support practices in the higher education sector. The report comprises four distinct sections. The first section of the report examines the extant literature pertaining to disability services in higher education, disability support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and the supports available for Indigenous students in higher education. The literature review is extensive, though not exhaustive, and seeks to discern the key factors that affect the experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with disability.

Secondly, data were obtained from the Australian Government Department of Education and Training regarding the numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with disability at each Australian university from 2001 to 2013. The data were examined according to students' enrolment status (i.e. full-time vs. part-time); level of degree being undertaken (i.e. undergraduate, postgraduate - coursework or higher degrees by research); and the field of study being pursued. The third section reports on a study in which current disability advisers throughout the higher education sector were asked about the general and specific supports provided to Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander students with disability at their university. Participating universities demonstrated high consistency regarding generic disability support provided, but some variation in the delivery of these services to Indigenous students. This work also highlighted the variation in training provided to disability advisers with regard to cultural awareness and cultural competence. The final section of the report combines all these findings and makes recommendations for working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with disability at Australian universities.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

This research project has focused on success factors for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander university completion rates. While the number of Indigenous students participating in Australian higher education continues to grow, Indigenous student completion rates remain very low relative to non-Indigenous students. The national data indicates that, while Indigenous students typically can take longer to graduate, the nine-year completion rates for Indigenous students remain around 47 per cent - significantly below the 74 per cent for non-Indigenous students. Some universities have higher Indigenous student completion rates than the national average. However, research-based evidence of these universities as 'success models' is limited. The project involved a mixed-methods approach (combining qualitative and quantitative methods) to identify and analyse the multifaceted dimensions and range of strategies used at four [Group of Eight] Go8 (universities A, B, C, D) and one non-Go8 university (university E) to support Indigenous student completions. In compliance with ethical clearance, the universities are not identified within this report. The five universities were chosen because of their high completion rates compared to the national average.

Key findings from the project were: (1) Indigenous centres/units at universities are key for building a sense of community and belonging for Indigenous students; (2) the physical space of Indigenous centres/units is particularly significant to provide a space where Indigenous students can connect with each other, with staff and with their own cultural identities; (3) ITAS (Indigenous Tutoring Assistance Scheme) is an important strategy to assist Indigenous students to complete their degrees; (4) faculties need to collaborate further with Indigenous centres to support Indigenous students to complete their degrees; (5) more Indigenous perspectives in the classroom are needed to support Indigenous students' learning outcomes and to provide examples of engaging with Indigenous knowledges and cultural contexts in teaching and learning; (6) Indigenous students experience racism in the classroom and more work needs to be done to address this; (7) more cultural competency training of staff and students is needed to ensure faculties and classrooms are culturally safe spaces for Indigenous students; (8) non-completed students reported a range of factors influencing their decisions to leave university, including negative experiences living at college, mental health concerns and 'burnout', poor fit of the degree with their interests and a lack of a cohort of Indigenous students; and (9) compared to national Indigenous enrolments, the selected institutions enrolled higher percentages of Indigenous students who were younger, studying internally, studying full-time, from metropolitan postcodes, from high [socioeconomic status] SES postcodes, admitted on the basis of their secondary education, and/or studying in the Society and Culture or Natural and Physical Sciences broad fields of education. They were more likely to disclose their [Australian Tertiary Admission Rank] ATAR and, when they did, their ATAR was likely to be higher. The findings of this project inform eight high-level recommendations under the following two broad categories: key stakeholder recommendations; and Australian Government recommendations.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

There have been expansionary policies aimed at widening participation in higher education in developed countries worldwide. In Australia, increasing participation among underrepresented groups is a national priority. This has led to the formation of six official student equity groups whose access, participation, and outcomes in higher education have been specifically targeted since 2008. More recently, the development of alternative entry pathways has been encouraged to boost higher education enrolments among these equity groups. There is, however, relatively scarce evidence on trends in admission to university study through alternative pathways and on the comparative outcomes of students from various pathways.

This study aimed to fill these policy gaps and addressed four research questions: What are the proportions of students entering undergraduate study through Australian Tertiary Admission Rank (ATAR) and non-ATAR pathways in Australian universities? What are the proportions, numbers, and trends over time - by equity group status - of those who access university education through non-ATAR and ATAR pathways? How are equity students from non-ATAR pathways distributed across courses, and are there observable trends and patterns? Do student outcomes (retention, progression, student experience, academic performance, work readiness) differ based on the type of entry pathway and equity group status?

This study found that, while the ATAR pathway was still the most common pathway to university, there has been a gradual decline in the last decade in the proportion of students accessing university this way. Conversely, alternative pathways, such as the completion of another higher education course, entry via vocational education and training (VET) courses, and other pathways (e.g. access schemes and enabling programs), are increasingly being used by students to gain admission into universities. The growth in alternative entry pathways was stronger for students from all equity groups except for Indigenous students. There were also trends in enrolments by field of study, with disciplines such as engineering seeing a proportional decline in student enrolments while disciplines such as health experienced growth. These enrolment trends were observed for the student body as a whole, and also for the various equity groups examined.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website. Show less

This report argues that first in family (FiF) is an under-recognised cohort who are not included as part of any official equity groupings. FiF students may encompass low SES, mature age, regional and remote, and Indigenous students. Research indicates that these cohorts are highly capable when given opportunities to participate and support to succeed. However, [the authors'] previous research showed that FiF students experience educational disadvantage because their cultural and social capital does not readily align with that of the university. Building on this work, this collaborative research project used a narrative inquiry approach to enrich understanding of the FiF student experience, thereby providing FiF students with advice on how to navigate university life successfully and recommendations to university staff and policymakers on how to improve FiF outcomes.

The project was conducted by academics across the three major universities in South Australia, i.e. University of South Australia, Flinders University and the University of Adelaide. The project was funded by the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) at Curtin University. For the purposes of this project the following definition is chosen to categorise FiF students: students who are the first member of their immediate family, including siblings, to attend university. The research adopted a mixed methods approach and included: a literature review and the development of an annotated bibliography of 155 Australian and international publications on FiF students' experiences in higher education; an examination of survey data from over 5,300 FiF students' expectations and experiences of university study; and in-depth interviews with 18 FiF students who had successfully navigated at least three years of university study.

Through the project, the key areas of focus were: (1) the factors that influence FiF students' decisions to enrol, attend and continue at university, including their realisation of initial aspirations and ambitions; (2) how FiF students experienced university, including the incumbent costs and related constraints of attending university, such as living costs, transport, housing, sacrifices made; (3) the impact studying at university had on FiF students' physical, social and mental health and wellbeing; (4) how FiF students managed points of transition, e.g. how they managed their first few weeks at university or the transition to final years of study, including how they dealt with differences between their expectations and experiences, what support and help seeking strategies they implemented; (5) in what ways their self-image or identity was transformed as a result of their attendance at university, including how these transformative experiences impacted upon their day-to-day lives as well as their impact on relationships with significant others (e.g. partners, children, parents, close friends); (6) how universities supported or hindered their experiences and/or progress in terms of provision of particular kinds of learning spaces and places and access to teaching and support staff; and (7) as these FiF students transitioned out of university, what they considered were the benefits of their university experiences and qualifications for themselves as individuals, for the university and society more broadly. The report makes a number of recommendations in order to provide long-term benefits to widening the participation and success of FiF students.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website. Show less

This briefing note provides an update on domestic undergraduate student enrolment and equity outcomes from 2008 to 2015. In keeping with the earlier editions of this series, the briefing note focuses on undergraduate outcomes for 'Table A providers' in Australian higher education and enrolments in seven equity groups: (1) low socio-economic status ('low SES') students; (2) Indigenous students; (3) students with disabilities; (4) regional students; (5) remote students; (6) women in non-traditional areas (WINTA); and (7) non-English speaking background (NESB) students (also referred to as 'culturally and linguistically diverse' or 'CALD' students). It provides a guide to trends across equity groups during this period, which included substantial changes to Australian higher education, including the introduction of the demand driven system for enrolments and the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Programme (HEPPP) to support low SES undergraduate enrolments.

Results reveal that the rate of expansion in overall undergraduate enrolments in Australia appears to be tapering after several years of growth. However, this growth comes on the back of an historic expansion in enrolments in Australian higher education, one that has seen the system add an additional 184,668 places since 2008, an increase of 34.7 per cent. This has benefited equity student groups in particular, with most groups seeing increases in enrolment above the overall increase in system places, or in the case of regional students, just below average (33.1 per cent). The two exceptions are the WINTA (21.5 per cent) and remote (21.5 per cent) groups who saw substantially lower levels of expansion over this time. This differential growth across equity groups has resulted in a mix of outcomes in participation, with low SES and students with disability groups seeing marked increases in representation, with smaller increases seen in Indigenous and NESB groups. WINTA, regional and remote student groups have seen reductions in their share of total enrolments, albeit in the context of substantial expansions in enrolments among these student groups.

Edited excerpts from publisher's website and publication. Show less

2020 was a particularly challenging year for Australian higher education and student equity. The [Coronavirus Disease 2019] COVID-19 pandemic has had significant and far-reaching consequences for the higher education sector, and particularly impacted on students from equity cohorts. In addition to the initial impacts of the pandemic in 2020, the introduction of the Job-ready Graduates Package (JRGP) also had significant implications for universities in terms of responding to student equity. Given the widespread and deep impacts of these changes, it was timely to explore how universities responded to these challenges in terms of access and admissions, and participation and support for equity cohorts.

Using a mixed method, comparative approach, we sought to gain an understanding of the impacts of the pandemic by exploring how universities responded to equity considerations in 2020, specifically whether institutions developed admissions requirements and pathways, support services, and strategies to increase access for equity students into higher education. The project was designed to develop a broad national account of how universities responded to COVID in terms of equity in 2020, as well to develop more detailed accounts of the considerations and decision-making within institutions through: (1) A survey of equity practitioners across Australian universities; (2) Interviews with senior leaders who represent Australian university executive levels; and (3) Development of institutional case studies, informed by interviews with university staff responsible for the implementation of their institution's COVID response.

Excerpt from publication. Show less

This briefing note reports on recent trends in student enrolment in Australian higher education in key equity groups. Specifically, it reports on the number of domestic undergraduates between 2007 and 2012 in the 38 'Table A providers' in Australian higher education and enrolments in six equity groups: (1) low socio-economic status ('low SES') students; (2) Indigenous students; (3) students with disabilities; (4) regional students; (5) remote students; and (6) non-English speaking background (NESB) students (also referred to as 'culturally and linguistically diverse' or 'CALD' students). The report shows that Australian higher education has seen a major expansion in student numbers since 2007, with the 38 Table A providers seeing a 20 per cent increase in domestic undergraduates between 2007 and 2012, equal to 105,590 more students in 2012. This increase has been accompanied by a larger than 20 per cent increase across all student equity groups except that of regional and remote students.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

This briefing note provides an update on domestic undergraduate student enrolment and equity outcomes from 2007 to 2013, following Koshy (2014). It focuses on undergraduate outcomes for Table A providers, given policy changes in recent years to Australian undergraduate education that affect them, including the full deregulation of undergraduate places in 2012 under the Demand Driven System (DDS). It reports on the number of domestic undergraduates between 2007 and 2013 in the 38 'Table A providers' in Australian higher education and enrolments in seven equity groups: (1) low socio-economic status ('low SES') students; (2) students with disability; (3) Indigenous students; (4) women in non-traditional areas ('WINTA'); (5) regional students; (6) remote students; and (7) non-English speaking background (NESB) students (also referred to as 'culturally and linguistically diverse' or 'CALD' students).

The report shows that between 2007 and 2013, the 38 Table A providers in Australian higher education saw a 26.4 per cent increase in domestic undergraduates, an expansion in student numbers of around 139,821. Increases in equity group numbers have either tracked or exceeded this expansion in terms of growth, with the exception of remote student enrolment which has seen growth of less than half of that of the system as a whole.

Excerpts from publication. Show less