Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Context: Works from notion that moving from TAFE ("second tier" of tertiary education) to university ("first tier") is an equity mechanism because low SES students are over-represented in VET sector. Australian government has pushed to increase VET-HE pathways to widen participation (in name of equity) in policy (e.g. see Bradley et al. 2008), rather than explore whether they do act effectively as equity mechanism
Aim: To test assumptions that underpin the notion that VET-uni pathways support equity (as reported by OECD, 2008)
Theoretical frame: Challenges deficit framing of 'second chance' education ("reinforces the notion that students need a second-chance because of their presumed deficits, rather than the institutional practices of universities and the extent to which they are prepared to accept such students" (p.262). Uses Bourdieu's notion of field to analyse structure of tertiary education sector
Methodology: Analysis of SES profile and institutional destinations of student transfers from VET-HE. Uses DEEWR published/ commissioned unpublished statistics on commencing domestic UG students and limited use of NCVER statistics on VET students. Looks at prior highest qualification at point of entrance into UG studies. Data from 2007
Limitation: no way of knowing if students also have VET qualification because there is no way of accounting for multiple enrolments.
Findings: VET-HE pathways "are shaped by and enacted within a tertiary education sector that is differentiated by status and they do little to act as an equity mechanism as a consequence" (p.262); moreover, "they do little to widen participation of students from low socio-economic backgrounds in HE" (p.262) because they reinforce/ replicate the SES patterns - high/middle SES students more likely to take higher level VET courses and articulate.
Critique of postcode method for ascertaining SES
5/ 37 public universities are dual-sector: RMIT/ SWIN/FED/VIC/CDU = admit more VET articulators than all other universities.
Concentration of privilege: Go8 admit 23 school leavers for every 1 VET leaver; other universities take 3 school leavers for every 1 VET student (Table 2 on p.266 useful for SES% spread across Australian universities). VET-HE pathways do not provide access to elite universities and "this contributes to the exclusivity of these universities" (p.269)
Middle-class are using VET for second-chance progression to HE
Core argument: Equity in HE cannot be considered independently of equity in VET (p.263) - VET and HE are not two separate fields, rather they are a "differentiated tertiary education field" (p.263) - hierarchical structure has elite universities at the top - "characterised by student competition for the limited supply of high status goods at high status universities" (Marginson 1997, cited p.263). Social composition of VET needs more exploration (similar in UK - p.271).

Context: NCSEHE-funded project. Explores completion probabilities of students according to equity (or not) status. Explores combined disadvantage (low SES + other categories). Literature review offers brief international overview of SES and completion for USA, Europe, Australia
Aim: Aims to answer these RQs:
_ For the students who commence a bachelor degree level course, do their background characteristics
(in particular SES) influence completion of that course?
_ If there are substantial differences, what are the size and direction of these differences?
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Uses LSAY data to investigate whether or not low SES students complete university at different rates than their high SES peers (p.6). Number of respondents = 3741 individuals, 2479 of whom started UG degree. Also uses random effects model. Uses 2003 cohort (participants = 25 years of age in 2013). Measurement of SES = include mothers and fathers educational attainment and occupation, the extent of the cultural items held in the home, and the individuals access to study and other resources (p.8).
Findings:
School = responsible for 30% of variation in university completion
¥ Lower SES have lower completion rates than higher SES peers
¥ Students with lower achievement at age 15 (NAPLAN) are further disadvantaged if low SES. Being a high achiever ameliorates being low SES. High SES students score more highly than low SES in NAPLAN by 5 percentage points (see p.34)
¥ Females are more likely to complete than males (low SES/ females more than males (irrespective of SES) in NAPLAN (see p.35)
¥ SES = more likely to impact on indigenous students: low SES indigenous students are 12 percentage points less likely to complete than high SES indigenous
¥ Field of study = higher impact on likelihood of completion for SES (low SES students in technical disciplines least likely to complete). Influence of field of study is less significant for high SES students
¥ Attending a Catholic or independent school cushions low SES student to some extent; government school students have lower completion rates
¥ Regional students have lower completion rates than metro students
¥ SES is not significant for students who work less than 20 hours a week. Low SES students who do not work are much worse off than higher SES counterparts.
¥ Students with Asian language = most likely to complete university
Core argument: Significant support needs to be offered to support all student groups to complete: low SES students from regional areas, who attended government schools and who are female, may need further support to ensure they complete at the same rate as their high SES peers (p.7).

Context: Looks at three proxies of educational quality (prior academic achievement), attrition/retention and progression rates to explore idea that accelerating access (as a result of uncapping places/ the demand driven system) leads to 'lower quality'. Examines student data from 2006-2011 (particularly 2010-2011)
*regarding NESB* NESB status = greater predictor [in Foster 2012] than international student status in terms of performing/ controlling for selection into courses, "suggesting that literacy rather than cultural conditioning was a greater issue" (p.613)
Aim: To assess the extent to which concerns regarding higher education quality can be informed by the data.
Methodology: Statistical analysis of student data sets
Findings:
Prior educational attainment: with DDS, more students "with lower (not low) academic grades gain access" (p.614), but so are more students with higher ATARs (because more competitive courses grew as well: "When access to supply was accelerated, universities first addressed the demand from 'elite' students... and only then moved to make offers of places to others", p.615). Also, more mature-age students entering HE
Attrition: with growing number of entrants, would expect attrition to increase but in many universities attrition rates dropped. Pre-DDS, Aus HE "was already tolerating institutional attrition variances of over 450%" (from 4.69% - 27.70% in 2008; 5.16% - 27.26% in 2011) - all p.616.
Core argument: It would "not be correct to say that accelerated access universally leads to lower quality inputs" (p.615). There is "no evidence that admission processes are over-selecting students unprepared for university studies" (p.620). Focus on metrics reduces access/quality to attention to "minor statistical shifts in scores"; meaning that the question of what is quality "is overlooked" (p.621). "This ultimately devalues higher education institutions themselves, as it suggests their role is primarily one of certifying the prior educational achievement of the students rather than value-adding in meaningful ways" (p.621).

Context: First in family students transitioning into university from school in Canada. Argues that FinF students have greater challenges with regard to transition. Stigma = major deterrent to seeking help with emotional and academic support, related to notions/ values/ expectations of independence. FinF students are "especially prone to stigma perceptions, despite the fact they would benefit most from the professional support resources offered within a university" (p.48). FinF students = more likely to "perceive greater incompatibility between their life as a university student and their former self" (p.49), leading to identity conflicts that could impact on help-seeking.
Aim: To explore relations between self-identification and stigma and the impact on help-seeking behaviours by comparing FinF and non-FinF students
Theoretical frame: identity/ identification as a multidimensional concept that includes: centrality/group membership, private regard/esteem, public regard/perceptions of external evaluation
Methodology: Quantitative/survey. Hypothesis 1: "although their status as university students would be equally central to FiF and non-FiF students, FiF students would report lower levels of public and private regard, and lower compatibility". Hypothesis 2: "FiF status would moderate relations between students' identification with their university status and the stigma associated with seeking help" (p.49-50). Participants = FinF students (n=83), non-FinF (n=269). Majority of participants = Euro-descent (65% FinF/ 78% non-FinF). 10% of FinF = South/SE Asian. Most participants had never been in therapy.
Survey = 14-item identification scale; 5-item compatibility scale; measures of stigma of seeking help (one for academic help; one for personal help). Analysis = descriptive statistics (means/ SDs + t-test)
Findings:
No difference between FinF and non-FinF with regard to identification
FinF reported lower levels of self-stigma for seeking help for both academic and mental health issues
No differences observed with stigma
Covariates of gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status = not significant in terms of self-stigma
Slopes analysis (see p.52) suggests private regard= related to lower self-stigma and asking for help; for non-FinF "self-stigma for seeking help for academic issues was most evident among this group when they perceived their identity to be held in low public regard, and self-stigma diminished as perceived public regard increased" (p.52).
FinF = low self-stigma for seeking help with mental health; for non-FinF lower public regard correlates with greater self-stigma
For FinF, 'others' (parents, siblings) = "not a source of assurance" with stigma and seeking help
No evidence that in/compatability between home and university identities and FinF
Core argument: Private and public regard = resources for diminishing self-stigma
"FiF students were placing greater emphasis on their personal and private pursuits for the educational aspect of the university experience, and consequently derived less emotional and social benefits from the regard held by others" (p.54)

Context: Readiness of Australian HE graduates for employment
Aims: To explore the extent to which accreditation requirements and employability in the industry align with graduate attributes in Australian HE nursing, psychology and education courses.
To determine if any gaps are informed by different priorities of industry and tertiary sectors.
Methodology: Thematic analysis of graduate attributes from and Australian University (not disclosed), SEEK search results and accreditation requirements from the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council, the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Accreditation Council, and the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.
Findings:
¥ The analysis found that university graduate attributes and accreditation requirements aligned more closely with each other compared to the criteria outlined on the found job advertisements.
¥ The criteria in the found job advertisements prioritized practical competencies, problem solving and communication skills.
¥ The job listings did not mention the necessity of cultural understandings and attitudes towards inclusion and diversity, which was a key feature of graduate attributes and accreditations.
Core argument: Graduate attributes may need to better reflect preparedness for the workforce, however workforces may need to be encouraged also by accreditation boards and tertiary institutions of the importance for graduates to develop an understanding of equity and diversity.

Context: Educators' resistance against neoliberal university that positions diversity as an opportunity for increasing productivity/ increase market share/ maximise profits (p.690); graduate students teaching in Canadian higher education
Aim: To demonstrate how "employing intersectionality as a pedagogical practice and a political intervention [can help] advance social justice" (abstract); to "reflect on how we navigate this regime within a university that is simultaneously implicated in and inextricable from the intensification of diversity management" (p.691).
Theoretical frame: Social justice pedagogy, which "works against this 'undoing' of intersectionality by embracing vulnerability, discomfort and the possibility of conflict in classrooms that do not simply accommodate, celebrate or include difference" (abstract). Standpoint theory/ collective standpoint (Hill Collins, 2000).. Anti-racist academic feminism, particularly Ahmed (2012): "insights about the feel-good affective politics to which claims to diversity in higher education belong, and to her directive that we explore how these claims obscure and hide social inequalities that continue to constitute universities and broader society" (p.691); resistance to 'whitening' of intersectionality (Bilge, 2013), but avoiding flattening difference (Luft, 2009).
Methodology: Reflections on own practice as forms of intersection, social justice-orientated teaching
Findings: Authors offer reminder that through critically examining their own practice, they "carefully engage with the complex ways that the personal is political by attending to how our own subjectivity and positionality informs our teaching, as well as how our students' subjectivities affect both their engagement with the course content and with higher education overall" (p.693, italics in original).
Strategies: storytelling, using intersectionality as "an analytic and pedagogical tool to challenge students to interrogate how different forms of oppressions, as social struggles, are interconnected. This has resulted in varying levels of success" (p.694). Authors note hooks' (1984) guidance that bringing in the personal can help to bridge everyday knowledge and academic practice/ inquiry (see p.695), plus the guidance that "instructors should demonstrate both the vulnerability and skill involved in linking their experiences to course materials" (hooks, 2010; on p.696). Authors note that storytelling/ personal sharing also invites emotion, not all of it good: "The potential for student discomfort in critical learning classrooms conflicts with the 'diversity' values of neoliberal universities where the ideals of the 'happy' student cum-consumer are promoted within sanitized notions of 'safe' classroom learning" (p.697). Authors (specifically Breton) note the challenges of discussing racism without invoking discomfort, and how to respond to this/ create caring classrooms to facilitate the unpacking of privilege/ marginalisation. Calling-out while drawing in also used to reflect on privilege and bias, crafting call-outs as "an opportunity for shared learning" (p.698)
Core argument: "As reflected within our narratives, taking up uneven power relations within our classrooms is frequently emotional, uncomfortable and disruptive. Yet as we aim to disrupt, even on a small scale, the accelerated neoliberal transformation of the university, we must risk classroom disruptions as we strive towards fostering broader social justice" (p.702).

Aim: Paper considers nature and extent of under-representation in PG and proposes institutional/policy responses.
Context: Set in post-Bradley context, reviews international literature/policy/statistics; focuses attention on Australian HE. Low SES/rural & remote students are least likely to proceed to PG study (cites Heageney, 2010 statistic: only 10.5% of Aus PG cohort = low SES; in 2008, only 11% of PhD students in Aus were r&r. Sets out argument for focusing on PG level: PG students earn more, more likely to hold professional/ managerial positions, more likely to enjoy their work (p.114-5). Discusses issue of elite universities/ higher loading of PG/ PhD students - mentions that Australians are more likely to remain at same institution for UG & PG study - thus diversification of student body at UG level in elite unis = significant to PG context. Discusses financial barriers for students, especially low SES students (p.117), including issues with Centrelink support/ income support for PG (noting that PGCW applicants receive significantly less $$ than UG students)
Relevance to PGCW/ equity: Discusses 'pipeline' effect of PG (example of University of Melbourne, p.119) - could extend a system already working for high performing school students that guarantees PG place to low SES students: "Guaranteeing postgraduate entry for a specified group of low socio-economic students could be a useful strategy to raise awareness of, and enthusiasm for, postgraduate options among disadvantaged Year 12 cohorts" (p.119). Also cites UNE/ Uni Sydney partnership. Mentions McNair Program in US (prepares selected UG students for doctoral studies, targeting academically capable first generation students in financial need/ students from under-represented groups). Also suggests appropriating Entry Access Schemes for PG applications, revised supervisory arrangements, increase in peer mentoring networks and academic advice and information about advantages of PG studies. Aus gov't could extend participation targets and funding to PG courses and deregulate CSP for PG places. Notes the proposal by IRU to implement fee remission for PG studies (partial/complete), whereby a completed PhD student could get up to 100% fee remission on UG studies.
Pedagogical intervention suggested? None
Points to future research agenda? Not really

Context: Reports on ESRC/ TLRP- funded project ('The FurtherHigher Project') which examines dual-sector (FE and HE) institutions in the UK. Argues = relatively under-explored context/ space. Makes connection between wider discourses about unified system - discourses and policy - "connect with larger debates about how governments structure their tertiary arrangements to achieve a shift from mass to near-universal levels of participation, and how to reconcile pressures for diversification and greater differentiation with demands for access and equity" (p.126). Who takes responsibility ("the bulk of expansion") = directed by policy and funding decisions. Creates "more complex and changing forms of differentiation" (p.126). Scopes evolution of 'policy contours' that collapsed binary higher education (HE, polytechnics) into binary (HE and FE) system, although qualifications = remain stratified. FE = supposed to help bear some of the load of the New Labour WP targets (50% of population) but "no consistent or coherent policy for dual-sector further and higher education has emerged in the post-Dearing period" (p.128)
Aim: To unpack questions related to dual-sector institutions, probing why some institutions have chosen to bring further and higher education inside the organisations and to consciously develop different identities to rest of organisational field: why, how does this impact on WP, is the goal = WP or something else? (p.130)
Theoretical frame: Scopes a theorised definition of boundary: distinction made between physical, social and cognitive (see p.134). Discusses 'boundary-marking' and 'boundary-crossing' in context of transition
Methodology: Interviewed former senior government officials (n=20 from 8 different institutions/ case studies of 4 models of education = Model A = dual sector; Model B = specialist college transferring to FE into HE; Model C= FE college with small offering of HE; Model D = FE college offering lot of HE... definitions offered p.131-2). Interviews with students (n=82) from 4 models (A-D) at two points of transition (moving from FE to HE or completing foundation degree and moving to bachelor degree) + 45 x lecturers. Also interviewed people tasked with leading new sector bodies/ documentary analysis
Findings: Of the 4 case study institutions, only 1 = evidence of 'seamlessness' progression at institution which branded itself a dual-sector. One = specialisation translates into progression into vocational/ academic areas; one case study = strategic alliance with one HEI; other case study =had expanded UG provision and progression = students moving on to other HEIs.
Disciplinary/ course differences: some foundation degrees and higher diplomas = "highly articulated" with programs above and below level = "ladder of progression", although higher level courses = centred on teaching in workplace (employment focused)
Core argument: In English HE, FE colleges are on one end of spectrum and Russell Group universities (Oxbridge) are on other end; dual-sector institutions = in middle. As teaching-only institutions with no power to accredit own qualifications, dual-sector = rely on other institutions for funding and validation. "In these circumstances, duality is associated with dependence and difficulty. In other respects, dual regimes have been permissive" (p.135). At policy level, duality suggest permeable boundaries: "These arrangements continue, as do strategies for widening participation that look to integration rather than elimination of sector regimes and territories" (p.135).

Context: Explores possibilities of early offers /delayed selection, which reduce reliance on ATAR, for attracting under-represented students to engage with HE. Harvey notes existing literature connecting ATAR to previous educational experience. Particular attention= systematic implications of growth of both options. Contextualised in post-Bradley HE landscape (20% target driving institutional change). Early offer schemes allow universities to make offers away from ATAR system. 'The Melbourne Model' (generalist UG courses and professional PG) has promoted/ advocated delayed offers (see Uni Melb/UWA)
Aim: To examine early/delayed offer models according to their transparency, efficiency, predictive validity and equity (from Palmer, Bexley & James 2011)
Findings:
Early offers: List of early offer schemes on p.169 [nothing listed for UON - because of Open Foundation, see p.172]. Early offer schemes = more "opaque" than transparency offered by ATAR because they are more subjective, resting in part on school nominations/ student nomination-school corroboration. ATAR = also more efficient; efficiency of early offers = variable and there is "greater risk of systemic inefficiency in the proliferation of the schemes" (p.173) - see devolution of responsibility from universities to schools. Predictive validity of school recommendation schemes appears to be high (see Harvey & Simpson, 2012); self-nomination likely to be strong predictor (but these students likely to be accepted through ATAR system too). Equity = not all under-represented students using early offer schemes, meaning self-nomination might be related to students access to capital (rather than reflecting disadvantage) - model also doesn't necessarily recognise issue of voice for disadvantaged students (possibly need more encouragement to self-nominate). Differences in schemes also potentially problematic: "If universities provide entry schemes of differing depth and quality, there may be confusion among secondary students and parents but also potentially a new arena of disadvantage" (p.175). "For school students, parents, teachers and principals, the rise of early offer schemes is challenging to comprehend, communicate and administer" (p.179)
Delayed offers: could improve transparency more broadly if they are able to reduce reliance on ATAR (which would also reduce need for schemes like early offers) and could improve efficiency by removing distortion of ATAR and reducing "established hierarchy of courses which drives student selection" (p.176) - because students strategically select courses to improve ranking. Supports equity agenda in principle (selecting students for more elite courses on basis of generalist UG study) but doesn't account for 'pipeline effect' = less low SES UG students = less low SES PG students (low SES = 10.5% of PG population). Also, delayed selection place attention on universities' assessment models/literacies. Delayed selection = costly in terms of money and time for institutions and students

Context: On-campus regional university in Australia
Aim: Explored 'early departure' of 20 students aged 18-25 who dropped out before week 4 of their course.
Methodology: Semi-structured interviews
Findings: Younger students had a higher rate of attrition. General themes that emerged: lack of commitment to undertaking study and lack of understanding of long-term goals. Six interviews described not taking up the identity of a university student (p.8); five interviewees' circumstances had changed. Evidence to support notion of 'positive attrition' (p.9-10). Authors call for stronger orientation program and more careers counselling.

Context: High quality feedback as essential to learning but a problem area in the UK; the divide between highly-structured guidance systems in schools and colleges and the promotion of 'independent learning' in higher education as a major contributor to student difficulties with transition.
Aim: "To improve the transition for first-year undergraduates by providing a structured set of guidance activities (scaffolding) as a means of an extended induction into the assessment processes in higher education" (331) by reporting research.
Theoretical frame: Constructive feedback is essential for improving performance: Laurillard's claim that 'action without feedback is completely unproductive for a learner' and it has been shown that 'high quality feedback is the most powerful single influence on student achievement' (2002, 55; see also Black and Wiliam 1998; Hattie 1987)" (332). Molloy and Boud's (2013) conceptualization of feedback that holds "students should not be passive recipients of teachers' comments (transmission model); instead, they should be central to the feedback process, taking an active role" (333).
Methodology: Four-stage AR model: planning the intervention using the DFC; implementing it; collecting data (questionnaire and semi-structured focus groups); and evaluating/reflecting on the results
Findings: Statistically significant improvements in students' perceptions of their understanding of assessment tasks and criteria and increased confidence in terms of completing assessment tasks and self-regulated learning.
Core argument: Incorporation of principles from the DFC into other first-year modules, increasing the emphasis on stage 1 and 2 activities will provide improved consistency of experience and reinforce the principles of self-regulated learning, helping students develop, through practice, essential self-assessment capabilities.

Context: Transition, particularly entry in, as a particularly challenging time and especially given the diversified student body resulting from widening participation, and with 'non-traditional' students at "particular risk" of attrition (p.3). Authors argue there is a gap in the transition literature, with "little extant research, which has attempted to link induction activities with student retention" (p.3).
Innovation: pilot immersion model = piloted in 19 first year programs in 2014; this morphed into a disciplinary-specific 4-week module in first year of study (active pedagogies; student-led; inclusive/ non-exam assessments)
Aim: To describe and discuss a cross-institutional 'curriculum innovation'; a four-week module/ intervention/ immersive model to support students with their transitions into their discipline area and improve retention. RQs:
"(1) In what ways and to what extent does the immersive module support students to develop peer networks and relationships with academic staff?
(2) To what extent did the immersive modules serve to prepare students for HE-level study through their implicit focus on study skills?
(3) How did students negotiate the transition from the immersive module into a standard curriculum structure?" (p.4)
Methodology: Evaluation: participant observation (field notes, semi-structured observation protocols) + online survey of students (n=789) + focus groups. Statistical data analysed with Chi-square test; focus groups = thematic analysis.
Findings: Themes: 1) Belonging and social self-efficacy; 2) Study skills and academic self-efficacy; 3) Managing students' expectations; 4) Inclusive assessment; and 5) Meeting expectations or moving goal posts.
1) Belonging: strategies were embedded to facilitate social integration (e.g. team-building activities), which helped prepare students for group work in subjects where that is a dominant mode of assessment. Students = generally positive about the team-building tasks. Students also reported positive experiences of interacting with staff.
2) Study skills: students gave mixed responses; some respondents found the support too generic so that it didn't meet their individual needs and that the timing of the sessions was too long (Health); in contrast, the Business students appeared to find the study skills sessions more relevant because they were embedded more holistically into the module.
3) Students' expectations: there was a mixed reception to the more student-led, problem solving approach taken by Business; authors suggest explicitly outlining the approach at the beginning to help set expectations, and should help students to identify what existing knowledge and practices they bring with them.
4) Inclusive assessment: students still found the assessments confusing, despite attempts to clearly outline expectations, tasks and deadlines.
5) Meeting expectations? Highlights from evaluation = peer networking and introduction to university expectations and assessment practices. However, focus groups suggest that students still need transitional support after the first 4 weeks, particularly as students moved to different groups, bigger groups, different lecturers and studying multiple modules concurrently.
Core argument: Many components of the innovation were useful, but more transitional support is needed. Setting/ managing expectations emerged as an issue that the designers had not predicted: "Having made an initial module which was widely felt to be successful, the expectations for subsequent teaching were arguably difficult to live up to" (p.14).

Context: Editorial for JALL issue which arose from Forum titled 'Critical Discussions about Social Inclusion' (held at UOW in June 2011). Sets out to explore social inclusion agenda from perspective of academic language/ learning advisors. Authors argue that: "Australian universities have been subject to expansion, diversification and increasing "inclusion" almost since their outset: it is just the discursive, regulatory and operational environment that continues to change" (p.E-1). Offers historical account of equity-related policy changes (Martin, 1964; Whitlam, 1973; Dawkins, 1989; Nelson, 2002; Bradley 2008)
Theoretical frame: Notes influence of Foucault (understanding power). Draws also on Butler (2004): "As a critical endeavour, we want to begin to mark out and question more specifically the domain of actions and subjects who are understood as "intelligible" or "viable" (Butler, 2004, p. xvii) within the current social inclusion focus in Australian higher education" (p.E-3)
Contributors to SI:
Nakata (2012): under-preparation of indigenous students
Williamson (2012): Generation 1.5 blind spot
Ashton-Hays & Roberts (2012): inclusion of international students in discussions around social inclusion and potential of "neo-imperial economic exploitation of Asia" (p.E-4)
Hitch et al. (2012): 'resource-based approach' to supporting students which capitalizes on students own/home knowledges and practices
Keevers & Abuodha (2012): call for shift away from deficit model - students' experiences of inclusion and belonging
Dearlove & Marland (2012): examines links between financial/ time constraints for low SES students
Bosanquet et al. (2012): explores lived experiences of students by looking at inclusion/ exclusion in terms of Graduate Attributes agenda

Context: Problematises mainstream aspiration raising in context of globalisation, where 'aspiration raising' exacerbates the situation by simplifying the complexities. Argues that "optimism is a cruel experience for many in the historic present, given lived conditions fraught with structural obstacles that thwart even the most reasonable strategies for pursuing futures hopefully" (p.227-8). Argues that policy relating to student aspirations fails to account for complex web of factors that are (at least partially) a result of globalization and fuels deficit discourses. Policy (specifically post-Bradley review) has focused on aspirations that inadvertently position those who do not aspire to HE as lacking the motivation for the 'good life' (see Gale, 2015 etc. for critique) and thus conceals the 'education as reproduction' social structure. Offers critique of human capital theory: it "remains a shibboleth of tenacious neoliberal governmentalities, permeating national policy discourses that place individual educational and vocational aspirations at the center of efforts continually to increase productivity and economic competitiveness" (p.230)
Aim: To "theorize aspirations as a subjective and intersubjective process among young people in marginalized social positions and geographic regions" (p.228) and to offer a sociological framework for understanding aspiration. Asks: "how do individual lacks of motivation apply to social groupings?" (p.229)
Theoretical frame: Bourdieu, Raymond Williams, Appadurai, Funds of knowledge; 'cruel optimism' (Berlant, 2011)
Methodology: Essay, drawing on action research project in collaboration with schools teachers to redesign curriculum with 'funds of knowledge' approach [connections here with Robinson (2012)]
Findings: Offers a conceptual framework for rethinking aspiration:
1) doxic aspirations: 'commonsensical' notions - so that when questions are asked in research, they yield 'doxic responses' (aka - interpellative/ responding to what seems commonsense). Authors argue that "impulses to pursue out-of-reach dreams of upward mobility are incited and reinforced by varied populist mediations" (p.232) = if you work hard enough..., leading to self-blame if failure, rather than recognising social structural limitations
2) Habituated aspirations: policy makers make assumptions based on simplistic judgements not based on observation or contextualised research that suggests that those who don't get where they want to be are lacking intelligence/ resilience/ 'correct' lifestyles (embodied dispositions). Habitus = "Such primary dispositions constitute deeply latent structural patterns for later perception of possibilities for 'the likes of us' as against 'the likes of them'" (p.234)
Emergent aspirations:- difficult to empirically examine because "social presents-becoming-futures, the 'logics' of which ... do not yet have language" (p.236)
Drawing on the action research, authors offer example of art class where students asked to draw on own experiences (funds of knowledge) to make videos. Class negotiated sensitive topics to avoid. Authors argue this activity "capacitated students to enact their agency-- as citizens of their locales-- to desire, imagine, articulate and pursue community futures that exceed, rather than reproduce, historically received
social-structural limits" (p,238)
Core argument: Aspirations are "complex formations" (p.241). Paper offers two logics: doxic and habituated + emergent. Emergent = capacitation and resourcing futures not yet imagined (but not commonsensical or habitual)

Context: Set in context of post-Bradley participation targets (in particular the 20% low SES target); reports on OLT-funded project. Naidoo argues that "lack of information about educational expectations, systemic ignorance regarding individuals' cultures and various implications that stem from settlement practices" push SfRB to 'the margins' of the Australian education system (p.210). Draws on RCoA statistics to foreground the composite disadvantage the SfRB face, which is poorly reflected in the 'low SES' label. Lack of understanding from institutions may further perpetuate the under-representation of SfRB in HE
Theoretical/ conceptual framework: Intercultural education (Portera, 2008); Bennett's (2004) model of intercultural sensitivity: 3 ethnocentric (denial, defence, minimisation) where person's own culture = interpretive lens for 'reality'; 3 ethnorelative (acceptance, adaptation, integration) where change = facilitated through/ by intercultural understandings.
Methodology: See Naidoo et al. (2015) for details of methodology; 3 unis = CSU, CAN, WSU. This paper reports on data collected from university SfRB (n=14) and secondary school SfRB (n=39). Individual, semi-structured interviews with students; focus group interviews with staff
Findings: Three major themes: prior life experiences, language development, culture of learning environments.
Prior life experiences 'decisively shape' participation in post-school education (e.g. settlement issues, past trauma)
Language development: intersects with literacy and culture. Naidoo discusses IECs, but notes cuts to provision [where they are available]. Literacy development = structural and individual constraints
Culture of learning environments: mainstream teachers often struggle to accommodate the needs of sfrb; professional development resources are limited - particularly with regard to literacy - and schools increasingly rely on community organisations for support. With regard to transition into HE, sfrb can find it "isolating and complicated", due to financial constraints, lack of networks, inadequate information, lack of awareness from university sfrb about academic/ literacy support.
Core argument: More must be done to increase awareness

Context: Theoretical discussion of intersections between educational policy and practice, with the focus on the 'economies of power' so as "to capture power relations in contexts of education policy production and enactment" (p.369). Policy conceived as ideas born through policy and enacted in classrooms (p.370)
Policies are formed and reformed in government and then reformed again in the work on institutions - working from idea that there is no true 'genesis' of idea, but instead that global/local understandings are "rearticulated into policy and that they are continuously remade through their re-enactment in different government and institutional settings" (p.372).
Conception of practice: practice "is never in a state of permanent completion, the world is constantly recreated and made possible in and through practice" (p.372). Practice engenders relational conceptualisation (about perpetual becoming-ness/ in between-ness) and thus is dynamic and fluid with a dialectical relationship between thinking and analysis [and with enactment = praxis]. "Form and context are bother crucial policy production and enactment parameters, but are static until they move through time and the contexts of people and the things they use to make and enact policy" (p.374). Important concept underpinning this is idea that some policies 'adhere' and others don't (analysis of power can help to understand why) but only a "temporary permanence" (p.374). To account for change, can explore how change in one area/ part impacts on other parts (in terms of examining the relationality/ ecology of policy & practice). Embedding of power relations = opens and constrains possibilities for policy makers and enactors. Power is described in terms of 'smooth power', in terms of "the distinctions and classifications that hold the social world together in its unequal and enduringly distending ways" (p.375)
Ball (1984) claimed that "it is always what is written as well as what is done that makes policy and makes it incomplete and unfinished when the policy is enacted in practice" [Heiman's take on Ball's idea; p.376).
Aim: To gather insights from different fields to "research the intersections of power and the material effects of education policy in practice" (p.370). Also "seeks to explore ways to think about policy through the "in-betweenness" inherent in conceptions of practice" (p.372). Asks these questions:
- What are the economies of power in policy?
- What are the values embodied in the policy and what are the mechanisms (technologies) which makes those 'natural' and valorise those values economically... and at what cost, to whom? (p.375)
To examine "the disjunction between what people in government and bureaucracy do and what people in education institutions do in relation to policy, and why" (p.21)
Theoretical frame: Draws on 3 theoretical fields: Bourdieu's 'triumvirate' of habitus, capital and field, consumption/organisational practice theory, and "policy 'meaning potential' in practice' (p.370) to explore/ conceptualise power relations in nexus of policy and practice. Diverse approaches = avoids "theoretical dogmatism" (p.371). Draws on notion of 'street level bureaucrats' (Lipsky, 1980) to conceptualise the potential of students and teachers to remake policy/ enact policy in different than expected ways.
Methodology: Essay
Discussion:
Bourdieu: the set of 'thinking tools' work better when used all together; permits a view of "socially (in)formed logic" which "assumes a socially derived relational view of both logic and practice" (p.377) - meaning that policy gets enacted in diverse ways because different social agents anticipate/view the world in different ways (draw on different sets of logic; e.g. policy makers view education differently from teachers). Need all three to offer view of relations between them; a way of thinking 'dialectically' and constitute practice when understood relationally (p.379). Different logics exist in different policy sites (fields)
Consumption theory: similar notion foregrounding 'becoming' or 'unfolding' in study of practice; Bjorkeng et al. (2009) identify general characteristics of practice:
1) practices = 'embodied array of activities' based on shared understanding and competence;
2) materiality = intersubjectively understood/configured in specific ways for specific practices;
3) practice = defines own rationality;
4) practice = nothing and everything at same time = nexus of human interconnectivity; and
5) practices establish and are established by social order and they are recursive.
They also offer 3 features of the 'becomingness' of practice: 1) authoring boundaries; 2) negotiating competencies; 3) adapting materiality
Trajectory of policy to practice is not linear or unidirectional (p.17) - scopes usefulness of discourse and multimodal analysis (Kress & van Leeuwen). Policy = developed and articulated as a text/ artefact: "This artifact (e.g., a public policy document, or policy speech, or policy directive, or informal negotiation between a policy public servant and an education "provider") is positioned in relation both to the conditions and embodiment of its production but also to the conditions and embodiment of its interpretation" (p.18) - meaning that its intended meaning = not guaranteed to be read as such and others can be other interpretive repertoires to the reading of 'the text': "policy moves from place to place, from person to person, and from organization to organization through time, through different logics of practice" (p.18)
Discusses notion of transmission as organized materiality (OM) and materialized organisations (MO) = transmission of ideas over time (Debray, 2000) - textbook = example of OM (see p.19). "Power, it is argued here then, is materialized in organizations through the organization of materiality, in practice, in and across distinct
policy sites" (p.20).
Also discusses notion of 'resemiotisation' (Iedema, 2003) = changing ideas/policy between contexts and logics of practice in different settings
Core argument: Using Bourdieu to examine policy as practice = moves away from binary of actor/structure and allows lens to focus on contexts of power and relations of power
"Practice involves both saying (and writing) and doing; both produce meaning. Meaning is established through and in practice and is subject to the power relations of practice in its production" (p.17).

A report by A/Prof Kalervo N. Gulson, A/Prof Andrew Murphie and Simon Taylor (University of New South Wales, Australia) and Dr. Sam Sellar (Manchester Metropolitan University, England).

This review addresses three key questions:  

1. What is education itself going to look like in an AI world? 
2. How do we prepare people to work in an AI world? 
3. How do we prepare Australian society to adjust to an increasingly AI world?  

Artificial Intelligence (AI) describes the use of computers to do the kinds of things that minds can do. There are two main goals for AI: (1) developing computer systems to do intelligent things and (2) using computer systems to model and learn about minds. AI is already part of media that we use in everyday life, but it is rapidly becoming more powerful and pervasive.  

The current organisation of education will shape how new AI technologies are adopted, but corporate interests and technological advances will also shape this adoption. Like other areas of social and political life, decisions about the uses of AI in education need to be enlarged beyond considerations of what is technically possible. AI in education will bring with it profound normative and ethical challenges to the social, economic and political purposes of education, including what is learnt and how we teach.  

The future of education could be one of atomised ‘personalisation’, but the role of schools and universities is likely, at least in the near future, to remain important as physical sites that are locally based organisations, with important community building functions. It is already evident that technological changes associated with AI could exacerbate inequalities in education. We must also entertain the possibility that in an AI world our conception of learning and education will change, in response to new insights into how minds work, as could our perception of the world and ourselves through our engagement with AI embedded in new media.  

Finally, while we have good research evidence relating to past and current trends in education, work and technology, the nature of our emerging AI world requires us to consider a very diverse set of possible future scenarios, and it also requires us to acknowledge inherent limitations on our capacities for prediction and planning.  

Read the report