Tim Pitman

Reinterpreting Higher Education Quality in Response to Policies of Mass Education: The Australian Experience.

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.

Does accelerating access to higher education lower its quality? The Australian experience

In the pursuit of mass higher education, fears are often expressed that the quality of higher education suffers as access is increased. This quantitative study considers three proxies of educational quality: (1) prior academic achievement of the student, (2) attrition and retention rates and (3) progression rates, to establish whether educational quality suffers when supply is significantly increased. The period of analysis (2009–2011) saw just such an increase in higher education places in Australia, as universities prepared for the removal of all caps on undergraduate domestic student places in 2012. Our analysis reveals that, whilst widening access results in more students with lower levels of academic achievement entering higher education, this does not necessarily equate to a lowering of educational quality. Furthermore, although on average student progression rates dropped slightly, retention rates actually increased in the majority of universities, suggesting high levels of student perseverance. In addition, there were already wide variations in attrition and progression rates between universities, and the changes observed between 2009 and 2011 did not lead to substantial alterations.

Understanding ‘fairness’ in student selection: are there differences and does it make a difference anyway?

Universities are required to adopt ‘fair’ student admission practices, yet understandings of fairness in student selection are contested. This paper uses an analysis of the admission policies of Australias public universities to critically examine the use and application of notions of fairness. A further analysis of enrolment data is used to contextualise policy rhetoric against admission practice. Three broad themes of fairness emerge: merit based, procedural and normative. Discursively, merit-based fairness is the preferred understanding of fairness. The enrolment data, however, indicate no relationship between how fairness is explicated and whether or not a university is more accessible to disadvantaged students. In practice, therefore, normative conceptualisations of fairness are the most influential, when normative fairness is understood as a reproduction of wider social inequities.

Unlocking the gates to the peasants: are policies of ‘fairness’ or ‘inclusion’ more important for equity in higher education?

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.

An Australian study of graduate outcomes for disadvantaged students

Abstract 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.

The use of enabling programs as a pathway to higher education by disadvantaged students in Australia

This chapter explores the use of enabling programs by Australian universities to improve participation and success for students historically underrepresented in the nation’s higher education system. It draws on empirical evidence from a national research project designed to undertake a review of current enabling programs offered by Australian higher education providers and to examine the effectiveness of these programs in increasing access to, participation in, and subsequent success in undergraduate courses for domestic students from disadvantaged groups. This chapter firstly outlines the rationale for providing enabling programs, their history of use in Australia against the wider context of higher education disadvantage, and a review of previous research. Secondly, it provides a typology of enabling programs in Australia detailing: their design and composition; how they are delivered; their prevalence throughout the sector; how they articulate to tertiary degrees; the types of students targeted; and numbers of students using them. Specific attention is on the representation of disadvantaged students throughout. Thirdly, the chapter provides a statistical analysis of the efficacy of these programs, as defined by retention and success. The fourth section details the findings of a national survey of 980 students who transitioned to higher education studies via an enabling program. This survey explores student perceptions, their experience of the program and their reflections on the extent to which it did or did not prepare them for tertiary studies. Finally, concluding comments are made and suggestions to improve the ongoing tertiary success of disadvantaged students are proposed.

Positioning Pathways Provision Within Global and National Contexts

This chapter positions the increase in the provision of pathway programs, including foundation and enabling programs, as a function of global trends shaping higher education and localised responses to social, economic, political and cultural factors. These localised responses play out against a broader global context, in which the increasing mobility of students looms large. Demography, politics, history and economics all contribute to considerable diversity in the structure, financing and market composition of higher education systems. In turn, these factors shape the purpose, design and delivery of pathway programs. This chapter draws upon UNESCO, OECD and World Bank data sets to contextualise relevant examples of African, Australasian, European, Middle East, and North American higher education systems, against each other and other international benchmarks. The trajectory of these education systems across time demonstrates convergence towards higher levels of school participation and massification of higher education participation, but also differential patterns of international student mobility and responsiveness to national contextual factors. The signs are that global forces and national context will continue to shape the evolution of pathway programs internationally.

The Impact of Enabling Programs on Indigenous Participation, Success and Retention in Australian Higher Education

This chapter details the findings from a national project that investigated the efficacy of the enabling program pathway into higher education for disadvantaged student groups. Enabling programs are not-for-degree programs designed to provide the necessary academic and cultural scaffolding for students who do not meet the institution’s usual admissions criteria. The brief given to the project team was to undertake a review of current enabling programs offered by Australian higher education providers and report on the extent to which these courses were effective in increasing access and participation to, and subsequent success in, undergraduate courses for domestic students from disadvantaged groups. This chapter focuses specifically on the findings relevant to Indigenous students, who represent one of six officially recognised equity groups of students in Australian higher education policy. In this chapter the authors detail and discuss the nature and design of enabling programs for Indigenous students, and then provide a detailed analysis of the first year retention and success rates for Indigenous students who transitioned to undergraduate studies via these enabling programs. The evidence from the study indicates that Indigenous enabling pathways provide an important and effective environment in which the students develop a sense of belonging in higher education and develop the necessary resilience to persist in their subsequent studies. However, it is less clear whether Indigenous students are receiving the academic skills development necessary to succeed in their studies at rates similar to other students.