Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Context: 'Tertiary preparation' in satellite campuses - widening participation and student experience at USC. Enabling program (TPP) has approximately 50% success rate. Classes began at satellite campus in 2013. Authors note limited research on experiences related to satellite campuses (but see Ballantyne, 2012 for literature on the feeling of small campuses). Authors note the disadvantaged profile of the region (and make connections to the high proportion (60%) of enabling students who are on welfare (see p.245)
Aim: Stated RQ: "In what ways do students experience a tertiary preparation program on a satellite campus?" (p.247).
Methodology: Phenomenographic study; semi-structured interviews with enabling students (n=9). Demographic details of participants on p.249
Findings: Students = enrolled as gateway to undergraduate study + other motivators = encourage family members, demonstrate to self and others that they are capable, avoiding unemployment.
Social element = important for many (sense of collective responsibility to each other, socialising)
Students experienced some poor teaching (tutor expectations) and good teaching (high levels of commitment).
Authors offer three metaphors for how students experienced the TPP: Stairway (challenges to be overcome), Doorway (access to undergraduate via enabling), Hallway (personal accomplishments = more important than other aspects) - see explanatory table on p.245-5
Core Argument: "Universities can widen access to study by offering tertiary bridging programs and by building satellite campuses in areas of need, but as educators we need to keep in mind that the success of our students
is greatly dependent on their individual motivations and experiences" (p.261).

Context: Follows 32 non-traditional students as they transitioned into higher education. Set in post-New Labour election in 1997 context. Scopes literature on mature age students - many researchers = argued that change in access needs change in institutional structure and culture, particularly foregrounding issues of race/ ethnicity
Aim: To describe mature age students' transitions
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Qualitative and longitudinal: critical, illuminative, feminist methodology (p.143). Participatory action research design - purposefully intending to facilitate mature age students speaking to academics; presents case studies of 3 students (adults, inner-city, involved in 'community-based, flexible access programs': REACHOUT project). Discussion with participants recorded according to daily encounters and weekly diary. Individual interviews conducted over two years. Participants took part in student conference (with emancipatory intention)
Findings: Issues/ concerns mentioned by students:
Inadequate funding, lack of childcare, difficulty with benefits system, 'unresponsiveness' of institutions.
3 case studies: Salma, Helen and Ruth
Salma: did well at school, not supported to progress by parents, married, 2 children, separated. Did flexible access program via REACHOUT - passed in 6 months - studied Social Policy at RG university. Fees and benefits = issue; struggle to survive over Christmas holidays, had to borrow money to buy computer (only one who couldn't afford a computer): "Looking back, she felt that she had survived in spite of the university, rather than
because of the support offered to her" (p.147).
Helen = Jamaican, began school in England when 11, grew up in very white community (15/200 children = black), differences in language (as patois speaker) = marker of difference, parents not familiar with education system, marginalized and discouraged at school, married, 4 children, partner deserted her, wife of vicar recommended REACHOUT - paid for childcare costs. Accepted to train as social worker - struggled with writing demands, financial demands, childcare responsibilities. Passed course but initially too ill to start work.
Ruth = Jamaican, poor, accent = marker of difference, mother couldn't/didn't encourage her. Ruth ran away from home, missed school exams, did YTS in catering, worked as club dancer, moved to Germany, married, studied Beauty Therapy in German language. Did REACHOUT part time - passed with high marks but felt on margins as part time student.
Key themes: school days + experiences of difference, lack of family support/ knowledge, frustration, anticipating change, entry to university, financial problems, time poverty, institutional barriers
Core argument: ..."the non-traditional student as a frustrated participant in an unresponsive institutional context and questions the tendency to problematize students from non-traditional backgrounds, rather than the educational institutions responsible for their progress" (abstract). Transition to higher
education "has complex practical and emotional implications" (p.157). Dislocation = gendered, classed, ethnic lines against the institution and 'traditional' students.

Context: Paper situated against deficit framings of low SES aspirations in Australian HE (post Bradley Review) and looks at social and cultural (not academic) factors affecting aspirations. Looks at influence of siblings with experience of HE on low SES secondary students' aspirations to HE
Aim: To develop more complex characterisation of how access to different resources (social, cultural, economic) impact on students' capacities to articulate and follow their aspirations
Theoretical frame: Appadurai's notion of capacity to aspire/ Ball & Vincent's (1998) 'hot'/'cold' knowledge
Methodology: Semi-structured interviews with students (Year 11/12) - only 3 profiled in paper. Students from a low SES area of SA where students are 7 times less likely to go to university than more affluent neighbours
Findings: Aspirations are heterogeneous and influenced by developing (relational) subjectivities, financial concerns/interests and family experience/perceptions/expectations. Discusses campus excursions as a form of 'hot' knowledge that can have an 'othering' effect ("outsiders looking in", p.172). Mentions difficulty of decoding cold knowledge - teachers or others who had recently been to university = considered most appropriate sources of help for decoding. One student had an older brother at university as his decoder. Having siblings currently studying at university = useful: "sibling-transfers of cultural capital may strengthen students' capacities to aspire" (p.174) - but not "all-pervasive. Rather, they open up a new sense of possibility" (p.175)
Core argument: Proposes concept of intragenerational family scripts (variation on Ball, David, Davies & Reay's 2002 notion of transgenerational family scripts)
Interesting fact: This paper was written by Smith who was a B(Ed) student at the time as a result of a NCSEHE summer school scholarship

Context: Comparative analysis of definitions of access and equity reveals important (dis)connections - patterns suggest movement from meritocratic ('inherited merit') to affirmative action approaches for under-represented groups - all accompanied by growing understanding of need to nuance when identifying and characterising equity groups
Aim: To review attempts to measure equity in access to HE so as to develop a programme of comparative research. Poses two key questions: how are access and equity defined, nationally and globally; and how are access and equity measured nationally and globally? (p.137)
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Analysed data from EUROSTUDENT project
Findings:
Comparison of history of access in several countries shows "common evolution of access norms reflects a broader understanding of social diversity" (p.137). Three broad patterns: inherited merit, equality of rights and equity (equality of access) (compares origins of HE in Indonesia/ SA/ USA/ France). Next = equality of rights (accompanying massification movement, post-WW2 and into 1950s and 60s; opening to women and ethnic minorities) but inherited merit/privilege remains a constant. Next = equity/ equality of opportunity = "take account of differences in the opportunity structure" (p.139). Each country identifies under-represented in different ways (regionality/ethnicity/socio-professional status of parents/SES) - in their comparison, authors note "a shift from racial to social and vice versa" (p.141). Key question about this is: who are the main players in the identification of the identities?
Measuring equity: (driven by competitive ranking; countries = keen to 'benchmark'). 3 measurements used to measure: entry measures, enrolment measures and output measures but difficult to operationalize because OECD definition of Type A and Type B universities -also difficult because measurements and equity groups are different. However, for countries who have 20+ years of data, there are patterns: appears to be significant reduction in SES inequalities (but uneven patterns of change) - not in Australia though (measure = fathers' education).
Continued tension between merit and equality norms
Core argument: Absence of common/systematic research data means that comparison of countries by policy and performance = impossible. "The persistence of large, and in some countries growing, disparities in wealth and opportunity will not be cancelled out by the limited scale of affirmative action that we find in education" (p.152)

Context: Set in context of increasing indigenous participation in higher education but addresses concerns about retention, attrition and completion. Indigenous students = still under-represented: "These issues, therefore, demand systematic and serious investigation, including a willingness to re-examine some longheld assumptions regarding the presumed link between engagement and success" (p.16). Literature suggests Indigenous students = more likely to have financial pressure, conflict between family and studies, discrimination and mis-expectations. Indigenous students = more likely to withdraw
Aim: To explore links between engagement (location of study/ mode of study/ relationships) and persistence. Engagement in studies = considered a proxy for likelihood to persist (therefore, with indigenous attrition rates high, hypothesis = indigenous engagement is lower)
Methodology: Draws on 2009 AUSSE survey (30 participating universities) = responses from 25,795 (77% online responses; 23% paper); 2480 Indigenous students invited; 526 responded + written comments from 355 students. Matched sample approach to compare with a similarly-composed non-Indigenous students (see Table 1, p.18)
Findings: Demographic profiles: Indigenous students = more likely to be female, low SES, older, FinF and come from provincial/ remote Australia (but survey shows 2/3 = metro address, presumably because of university attendance). Only 68% = studying on campus (compared to 83% of non-Indigenous). However, AUSSE also shows that 75% of Indigenous respondents = not low SES and 44% are not FinF. Student engagement = broadly the same for both Indigenous and non-indigenous students. Indigenous students = more likely to blend learning with workplace experience (p.20) and are more likely to engage in paid work outside of studies - Indigenous students are more likely to have worked before starting university and therefore choose courses based on profession/ current employment. Relationships with staff: Indigenous students = more likely to discuss grades, ideas and work with teachers (not clear from data if these teachers are also Indigneous). No significant differences between Indigenous/ non-indigenous student-student relationships. Reasons for attrition = more likely with these students:
- students whose circumstances qualify them for financial assistance
- students who are studying externally or at a distance
- students from a provincial or remote area
- students with a disability
- older students and
- male students (p.23)
Authors also argue that attrition = more likely among students enrolled in Indigenous-specific programs. Financial reasons are most common, followed by academic reasons. Indigenous students with a disability = more likely to consider dropping out. Indigenous students who have seriously considered departing
their institution report lower levels of institutional support (p.25)
Core argument: Indigenous students engage in similar way to non-indigenous but attrition rates are still higher. More nuanced understanding of who indigenous students are = needed. Authors make distinction (but problematise the crudeness of the binary) between younger school leavers and older students. They argue that older indigenous students "tend to share demographic characteristics associated with greater likelihood of withdrawal - characteristics such as poor health, financial insecurity, family obligations
and not being full-time on campus" (p.26). However, written comments on AUSSE suggest same group = enthusiastic and highly engaged - meaning that 'life gets in the way' for this group. Younger students, in contrast, "may well be simply getting on with the job of learning - and succeeding" (p.26). This distinction = also connected to whether students are in indigenous-specific programs or mixed 'mainstream' classes. Little is known about impact of indigenous centres for supporting indigenous students (appears positive from data but more research needed). "We propose that much more needs to be known about who the Indigenous students are, with whom they interact, why they may leave and how they may be utilising Indigenous centres" (p.28)

Context: Pedagogy of discomfort/ care in staff development program in South African university setting, which was developed to support 'cadre' of South African academics who had been recognised for 'teaching excellence'
Aims: RQs: "What elements of discomfort and care surfaced in the final written pieces submitted by participants reflecting on their experience of the TAU programme, and what was their significance in the self-reported growth of these participants? To what extent did the combination of discomfort and care in TAU succeed in creating a context within which recipients did indeed experience significant academic and personal growth?" (p.25)
Theoretical frame: Pedagogy of discomfort (Boler, 1999), which emerged out of this question: 'What do we -
educators and students - stand to gain by engaging in the discomforting process of questioning cherished beliefs and assumptions?' (Boler, 1999: 176), and works as a form of critical pedagogy and relational practice that requires participants to question hegemonic assumptions which is likely to be discomforting but permits critical and creative engagement. Care, as part of this pedagogy, can "minimize ethical violence"; authors draw on Tronto's (2010) definition of care as relational practice. Authors also discuss 'safe space' metaphor on p.24.
Methodology: Draws on reflective commentaries (written texts, 4-pages long + end of course evaluation survey results); n=50 from participants on the teacher development program
Discussion: Discomfort existed at many levels for the participants - hegemonic ways of thinking about the disciplines, about institutional types, from individual circumstances/ personalities.
Initial feelings of discomfort: related to lack of familiarity with course/ pedagogy of discomfort - resulting from lack of clarity, lack of familiarity with educational discourse, working in groups, diversity of experiences, overload in first session, use of collaborative/ digital tools.
End of course commentary suggests that participants overcame their initial discomfort.
Caring environment achieved via: retreat style environment (sessions held in city hotels), a responsive schedule, support for individual projects, team work, collaboration, collegiality.
Core argument: Authors argue for a leadership approach guided by a feminist ethics of care.

Context: drills down on issue of 'fair access' to RG universities (see Bolliver 2013) for ethnic minority students who are significantly less likely to be offered places at RG unis. Literature review scopes issues of racism and notes research that suggests that teachers have lower expectations for ethnic minority (EM) students - p.249). Contends that case is likely to be same/similar in HE. Notes other possible reason for inequitable representation of students in RG universities - tend to apply for oversubscribed courses (e.g. medicine and law, dentistry, business, maths) and are statistically overrepresented in these fields (and underrepresented in Humanities, Arts, Languages, Physical Sciences). Questions whether admissions decisions = based on notion of 'fairness' "as ultimate representativeness rather than fairness as equal treatment" (p.251) - author makes point that representativeness and fairness = not the same: "Simply equating fairness with ultimate representativeness is clearly problematic given that a group whose members apply in high numbers could end up being well-represented among students relative to their proportion of the wider population despite being treated unfairly at the point of admission" (p.251-2).
Aim: To examine underrepresentation of EM students in RG universities, controlling directly for variation in numerical competitiveness of entry, and to test for hypothesis that: "controlling for the numerical competitiveness of different courses and for applicants' prior attainment, ethnic differences in the chances of receiving an offer from a Russell Group university widen as the percentage of ethnic minority applicants to particular degree subject areas at particular institutions increases" (p.251).
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Uses UCAS data = 10% random sample of home applicants 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13 (n=151,281 applications = units of analysis). Analysis = series binary logistic regression models. Numerical competitiveness = calculation of initial rejection rate for 23 degree subject areas x 20 RG universities = 460 possible/ 398 actual combinations for numerical competitiveness variable
Findings: Two major findings: 1) EM students = 1) more likely to apply to oversubscribed courses but are also less likely to receive offers from RG universities; 2) "ethnic inequalities in admissions chances are greater for degree subject areas at Russell Group universities where the percentage of ethnic minority applicants is higher" (p.261) - suggested reason for this = idea that some admissions decisions made in order to build national representative picture of English population mix (thus rejecting some EM students on basis there are too many in some programs). More research is needed: how aware are admissions selectors of their decisions with regard to EM students? Also, more qualitative research needed
Core argument: EM students are disadvantaged in applications to RG universities.

Context: As new technologies are increasingly utilised for educational purposes and provide important mechanisms for widening participation and flexible delivery, it is important that universities consider the ways in which the digital literacies of students can be strengthened and attuned to educational purposes. Educational providers cannot assume a level of proficiency in digital literacies in students, or that digital literacies in other contexts translates to the university context. This is supported by international research in the US and UK contexts, which highlights that students have complex relationships with technology and that digital literacies do not always translate across contexts (Jisc [2015]) highlights the six digital capabilities that students engage with in higher education, emphasising that "a holistic understanding of digital literacy must attend to the collaborative, evaluative, and socio-emotional dimensions of technology use", p.37). The higher proportion of students from a recognisable equity group in enabling programs, the emphasis on skills development and the growth in flexible delivery means that enabling programs have an even greater imperative to critically examine their provision of digital literacies in the curriculum. This study focuses on
Aim: To explore the uses, perceptions, engagement and dispositions of students engaged in the James Cook University's (JCU) Diploma of Higher Education (DHE) enabling pathway program toward technology. This exploration will help scholars to understand the ways in which digital literacies are engaged with and can best be supported within enabling programs.
Methodology: This study provides a case study that focuses JCU's DHE enabling pathway program, which provides a one-semester core course designed to build capabilities in digital literacies. Its findings are informed by a survey, based on an EDUCAUSE Centre for Analysis and Research (ECAR) Students and Technology survey, conducted at the beginning and toward the end of semester, combining Likert scale and open ended questions focusing on students' use and ownership of devices, university experiences, preferred learning environments and disposition towards technology. Data was analysed sing a Grounded Theory approach. The first survey had a response rate of 415/435 students invited to participation; the second 150/317. Gender breakdown was fairly even and most respondents were in the age categories of 20-29 (45-46%).
Findings: Overall rates of device ownership amongst the DHE cohort were comparable to ECAR results, with rates of ownership increasing across all categories as the semester progressed. Mobile devices were seen by the DHE more important for learning and for the social elements of learning engagement at higher rates than the ECAR cohort. Research has pointed to the importance of mobile devices for learning amongst low SES students and first in family students, and therefore this finding may be related to the particular demographics of an enabling cohort. Overall students had a positive attitude toward technology, and most preferred blended learning. Many students wanted access to more course materials, like lecture recordings and slides, online. However, a "significant percentage" perceived themselves to be underprepared to engage with university learning systems and required software, which is a distinction from ECAR results and highlights the importance of understanding the specific context of students and programs. The demographic factors of students should be taken into account when designing programs with digital literacies. When undertaking this curriculum design enabling educators should be mindful of the need for authenticity in how technology is used, the practicalities of accessing and using technology for this particular student cohort and should be supported.
Core argument: Technologies used in higher education are educationally important and meaningful for students, however curriculum designers need to engage with technologies in a way that avoids making assumptions about students' digital literacies and their transferability. Digital literacies need to be developed, taught, supported and the demographic factors that may impact on students' access to and use of technology understood by educators.

Context: NCSEHE-funded research on the experience of FinF students, who are defined as "Students who are the first member of their immediate family, including siblings, to attend university" (p.8). FinF understood as disadvantaged because "their cultural and social capital does not readily align with that of the university" (p.8). Project focused on:
- The factors that influence FiF students' decisions to enrol, attend and continue at university, including their realisation of initial aspirations and ambitions.
- How FiF students experienced university, including the incumbent costs and related constraints of attending university, such as living costs, transport, housing, sacrifices made.
- The impact studying at university had on FiF students' physical, social and mental health and wellbeing.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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 finally, 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. (p.8).
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Mixed methods. Narrative inquiry case study approach adopted. Literature review (155 international papers reviewed); survey data from 5300 students; in-depth interviews with 18 FinF students. Data collection conducted in UniSA, UAD, FLIND
Findings:
4 key themes in literature review (offered in Appendix A):
1) The individual - emphasising individual/ personal characteristics of broad group
2) The student - adjustment to learner identity and practices
3) The journey - pathway into and through studies, particularly when combining work, family and study
4) The networks - importance of support networks (who and how)
Findings from survey and interviews
Demographics:
FiF = mostly school leavers; 15% = mature age
FiF = attend UniSA and Flinders more than Uni Adelaide, although UAD = highest number of FinF school leavers
School leaver FinF = less likely to live with parents while studying
Most FinF attended public school, especially mature FinF (74.1%)
30% of FinF attended rural high school, compared with 22% non-FinF
FinF generally had lower ATARs
More FinF students enrolled in nursing, education, management & commerce, society & culture
Mature FinF more likely to get information/ form expectations from friends and 'cold' forms of information
Mature FinF expected to study for the most time
Mature and school leaver FinF students more likely to attend classes if they perceived the teacher as enthusiastic
- There is clear diversity in FinF student cohort, in terms of age and prior life experience - important to remember that when using reductive categories, such as 'mature age'.
- The key motivating factor for FinF participation in higher education = for a better life and interest
- There are substantial financial and personal costs for FinF students in higher education, particularly for students who have to relocate to the city
- FinF students lack 'hot knowledge' that their non FinF peers have
- Cultural capital of FinF = not recognised = mismatch in habitus
- Transition = individual and difficult but = commonalities in terms of finding university an alien place and feeling a need to prove themselves as intelligent enough for university study (see significance of prior life/educational experiences)
- Data suggests that FinF = have realistic expectations
- Family and friends = important forms of support, and formal supports also utilised and valued
- Three core themes in benefits associated with higher education: personal growth; social experiences; and increased understanding of broader society (p.10)
Recommendations
Institutions should:
- systematically collect data on FinF students
- expand outreach into the community
- ensure that information given to students is explicit
- involve family members
- recognize and value FinF cohort
- provide more financial support to FinF students
Teaching and professional staff should:
- Recognise that higher education is transformational for many FinF students
- Get to know your student cohort
- Build a sense of community on campus
- Make expectations clear
- Use accessible language
- Be approachable and enthusiastic in teaching
- Promote health and wellbeing
- Encourage students to seek help
Core argument: Further research needed on why FinF choose the courses they do and why FinF students drop out. FinF are "able to successfully navigate the complexities of higher education when provided with the appropriate support and opportunities" (p.78).

Context: Exploration of enabling students' lived experiences at UniAd and UniSA post-degree commencement.
Aim: To answer the questions: How do enabling students see themselves through the process of their induction into academic culture? How do these transformations affect their personal relationships and their general outlook on life?
Methodology: Qualitative methodology; Bourdieusian notions of habitus and cultural capital combined with class theory and intersectionality in gender studies (in this case intersections of advantage and disadvantage); phenomenological perspective. Synthesised analysis + presentation of three case studies.
Method: 20 in-depth interviews (12 UniAd, 8 UniSA); 14 = Female, 6 = Male; variety of disciplines, however, largely situated in the Sciences
Findings: Experiences of enabling education and transition are complex and impacted by class/SES as well as gendered roles and physical and mental wellbeing. Difficulties included social adjustments around age differences, size of cohort and accessibility of staff in undergraduate degree programs compared to enabling programs. Space, place and belonging; self-efficacy and confidence; and the importance of academic literacies development in the transition to undergraduate degrees also emerged as themes. Of particular interest were intimate relationship breakdowns experienced by participants "as the social disjunction of entering a new academic pathway interfered with their domestic duties and identities" (p. 6) leading to understandings of how students' identities can be complicated in multiple ways.
Core Argument: "[D]espite the narratives of positive transformation and social mobility that emerge[d] from this ... research, it must also be acknowledged that student journeys also involve significant change, trauma, disruption and social stigmatisation. Because of this, institutional support structures are essential and should be given a more prominent place as essential instruments in building towards student success." (p. 49)

Context: Older mature age students (over 40 years old) in UK higher education; author argues that the label 'mature age' conceals a lot of diversity. Author starts from premise that older students get better outcomes than younger students. Author notes how many mature age students come from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds, so the increase in mature age participation has been heralded as success for social mobility.
Aims: To discuss the experiences of older mature age students in higher education, and to outline the implications of examining experience for institutions
Methodology: Qualitative study; research with sub-set of older mature age students (n=6; 3f, 3m) recruited from Foundation Studies [enabling program]. Author notes that by researching with his own students, he had to address three ethical concerns (informant bias, existing familiarity between participants, interview reciprocity). Students all transitioned in Social Sciences undergraduate degrees.
Findings: Several themes emerged: confidence, time management, difficulty in socialising, use of technology,
Confidence (or lack of) = significant because attending the Foundation Studies course was deliberate strategy to build confidence; issues with confidence arose at particular times - especially assessment time.
Time management: relating to commuting, time spent on studies, family and work pressures.
Social difficulties: all participants reported differing levels of difficulty in socialising, although some of their isolation was self-imposed. Students didn't socialise outside of university, but some reported having coffee together. All participants reported a turning point where they had to socialise and this shifted/ opened up opportunities to socialise.
Use of technology: students mentioned challenges with adapting to technology, preferring to handwrite at the beginning
Core argument: Older mature age students can find it difficult to engage with younger students; confidence can be an issue.

Context: NCSEHE-funded research that examines the retention and success of students with disabilities (SwD) in higher education
Aim: "to explore the relationship between supports and university adjustment for students with disability, and their retention and success" (p.ix).
Theoretical frame: Not specified in study.
Methodology: Mixed-methods: examined data (2007-2013) from Higher Education Student Data Collection for: number of students with disability, type and disclosed need for support. Disability categories = hearing, learning, mobility, visual, medical and other [note: nothing explicit about mental illness] . Student data was also analysed regarding retention and success. Universities (Table A and B) categorized according to performance (high, medium, inconsistent, low). Three institutions from each category invited to participate in interviews on policy and practice to provision of adjustments for SwD. Desktop audit also conducted: "to provide an overview of policy, practice and institutional culture in relation to
disability across the institutions" (p.ix) in 2015.
Findings:
- Percentage of commencing and enrolled SwD increased over 2007-2013 but no real changes in types of disabilities (3.67 - 5.04%)
- Smaller universities (10k-30k students) have larger proportion of SwD
- Students with medical disability = most common; hearing issues = least reported
- SwD = slightly lower success rate
- Students with learning disability = retained at higher rate than other disabilities
- SwD + support = retained at consistently lower rate
- Differences between institutions in terms of policy and practice = at level of maturity of inclusive policy/ practices
- Some institutions do not have current Disability Action Plan (DAP)
- Few institutions involve students in development of policy
- Disability support services = generally located in central support and generally shared throughout the institution = "indicating the move from a medical model to an inclusion model" (p.xi)
- Factors that improve retention and performance
- Recruitment via external linkages (schools/ disability networks)
- Collaborative approaches (internal + external stakeholders)
Recommendations
Nationally consistent approach to categorizing students needed
Changes to policy and practice needed nationally, including: whole-of-institution inclusive framework built of concept of universal design, flexibility and current policy, offer financial resources to create suitable responses, integrate disability support with mainstream support, employ specialist disability support staff, regular monitoring of student outcomes, develop formalized learning action plans. Also "Consider students with disability from the perspective of the student lifecycle model, including recruitment and outreach strategies, and career transition strategies" (p.xiii).
Core argument: "students with disability are retained at consistently lower rates and have lower success rates than the total student population,suggesting that higher education institutions need to do more to redress this situation" (p.45) More research needed on better methods of disclosure, how to better support students with mental health issues and autism and more training for staff needed (academic and non-academic)

Context: Competition/ tension between two agendas of internationalisation and widening participation: "The main reason that comparing and contrasting internationalisation agendas, discourses and policies with those relating to widening access/participation may initially appear counterintuitive is that the latter are funded and enacted strictly at a national level - the focus is very much on improving equality and diversity (in terms of socioeconomic status; ethnic minority status; gender; sexual identity/orientation; care leavers - to name only a few relevant groupings) among those classed as 'home' students. Internationalisation agendas remain firmly distinct, and often relate to efforts to increase numbers of fee-paying students from around the world - the term 'diversity' within such agendas typically refers to nationality, and it could be argued that national groups of students are often considered as homogenous entities by universities, rather than there being an appreciation of their inevitable heterogeneity within" (p.2).
Aim: To answer these questions:
"What overlap exists between conceptualisations of widening access/participation, and internationalisation?
What scope is there for addressing equality of access and participation among international cohorts?
What parallels exist in the HE experiences of international students, and those coming from a widening access/
participation route?" (p.3)
Methodology: Critical review of literature on internationalisation and WP in tandem, so as to identify overlaps and problematize the notion of diversity.
Findings:
- Authors considers the literature in the context of a question about what higher education is for, drawing on literature that offers analysis of public discourse and students-as-consumers. Higher education is largely represented/ promoted as/for private good, thus it follows that universities will promote internationalisation agendas over social justice agendas. Similarly, authors notes how conflicting institutional identities confuse/ are confused by the dual/ oppositional agendas of internationalisation and WP because "When there are too many identities for an institution to effectively reconcile, however, problems can arise in sufficiently satisfying them all" (p.5).
- Author's take on WP argues that issues relating to equity/ supporting students do not end with domestic students, and that universities need to do more to support international students/ provide more holistic supports (see Richardson, 2015's argument about the 'ethically dubious' practice of providing access but not support).
- Discourse of diversity = overlaps between internationalization and WP; diversity = often used reductively in ways that group students into homogeneous groups, often based on ethnicity/ nationality.
Overlaps in student experience between international and non-traditional students:
- "the potential for mismatch between students' existing knowledge and expectations, and the reality encountered: what knowledge/ experiences/qualifications do they arrive with, and to what extent do these adequately equip them to participate fully in, and successfully complete, their intended programme of study?" (p.7)
- Adjustment to campus, study, systems, demands
- Accessing and processing information about university when making decisions
- Lack of familial experience of higher education system (in general, or in host country)
- Both groups of students "bring with them diverse and varied multilingual repertoires" (p.9), which are not recognized as assets by instititions (see Martin, 2009), leading to discrimination (Migge, 2019)
- Author draws on ideas behind translanguaging to create 'transnational spaces' (Preece, 2015), "rather than institutions seeing their linguistic and cultural repertoires as falling short of the mark, and falling short of expected norms" (p.10).
Core argument: Strong overlaps between internationalisation and WP agendas, and the challenges faced by international and 'non-traditional' students

Context: Reports on HEA-funded project exploring transitions into PG based on ethnographic work with students in 5 UK universities. This paper examines the multiplicity of identities = construct student experience and transition. Paper based around the dearth of literature exploring transitions to PG, based on assumption that "the nature of the transition is less challenging as it may be assumed that there is little to overcome in moving from undergraduate to postgraduate study because, essentially, the environment does not change" (p.261), which results "in their construction, albeit in an implicit way, as 'expert' students" (p.262)
Aim:
Theoretical frame: Works from view of learning as social process; draws on Lave and Wenger's theory of CoP. Theory of transition = shift between (from/to) educational environments (physical/ levels of complexity/ mode of study/ underpinning meanings of study - p.265): " Transition identities, then, are not linear and 'clean'. Rather they are the work of internalising and enacting change in the face of contradictory emotion and experience" (p.266). Also draws on Wenger and Butler's ideas of the power of silence and absence of action (p.272)
Methodology: Ethnographic - to ensure micro/macro engagement with student/staff lives: 44 PG students (taught MA, research MA, doctoral), 6 staff members (f2f data collection); 180 students, 6 staff (participant observation data collection)
Findings: No differences between taught MA and doctoral students. Finding 1) dominance in data regarding students' lives outside of studies and need for whole-of-life view of transition rather than restricting the view to students' learning/engagement in curriculum. All participants (spontaneously) expressed frustration with the difficulty of balancing PG study and their "complicated" personal lives (p.269): "Many postgraduate students are giving up time and money, which indicates a commitment and involvement with the process but this exists in parallel with the tensions of family demands and self-denial" (p.270). Students' self-reporting (through diaries) suggests that students with family responsibilities and jobs were time poor = unsurprising but important because "university structures tended not to be flexible and in many cases seemed not to be designed with the student in mind" (p.271).
There was little reference to students' outside lives by staff members.
Students can "never achieve full membership of the CoP" (p.273) because = lack of 'mutuality of engagement' because they do not/ are not able to/ invited to contribute to changing the practices in the university = results in 'peripheral trajectory' (Wenger, 1998).
Discussion of independent learning and self-reliance: "It may be argued that the notions of finding out alone and independent study lend further support to our supposition above that the postgraduate student is constructed as already 'expert' and so less attention is given to their inculcation into university culture than to undergraduate students" (p.275).
Relevance to PGCW/ equity: No explicit connections made; highlights assumptions about 'readiness' of PG students and that students with jobs/families etc. are more time poor. Staff participants did not acknowledge complexity of students' personal lives: The silence surrounding their outside lives within the university, coupled with the emphasis on independent functioning, may result in identity shifts that do not facilitate learning" (p.277)
Pedagogical intervention suggested? None
Points to future research agenda? No

Context: Transitioning into higher education in England; students as consumers. Equity angle described in terms of "students from lower-class backgrounds lack the ability to draw on a discourse of entitlement, which their middle-class counterparts have" (p.820). Authors cite literature that describes the emotional and psychosocial impacts of the struggles created by transition. Authors argue against deficit view and promote using a student-centred perspective.
Aim: To examine students' transitions with specific regard to "questions regarding the identity of student, academic writing, academic progression and what the university is remain ill-defined" (p.821) and to provide an opportunity for students to become co-researchers.
Theoretical frame: 'Becoming'; reference to Bourdieu/ cultural capital
Methodology: Small-scale qualitative inquiry with students as co-researchers; "two-stage generic qualitative approach" (p.821): first stage = each researcher (4 academics, 4 students) "immers[ing] themselves in the methodology and epitomised the notion of making experiences visible and shared, by reflecting on difficult or significant events in their own transition into HE" (p.821). Second stage = repeat focus groups based on work from first stage (n=12; 11 of whom = 'non-traditional' students) - see p.822 for details.
Findings: Three themes: 1) resources; 2) networks; 3) external perceptions of 'students'
Resources: time, cultural/ social capital, emotional energy, financial resources, physical space to study. Participants/ literature describes the investment of resources in terms of potential risk.
Importance of student networks: significant emphasis on networks/ relationships with tutors = "core in supporting their successful transition into university life and study" (p.825). Participants suggest list of benefits to having strong networks (mental health, confidence, motivation, reassurance - see p.825). Students = aware of being different to other students and a sense of being more dedicated than peers. Participants also noted benefits of spending extended periods of time (e.g. field trips) with fellow students to develop stronger bonds (but these opportunities are rare and potentially should be expanded).
Perceptions of 'a student': preconceptions of 'becoming a student' = important for understanding how transitions unfold and why. Some participants = excited; others = apprehensive. Authors found more negative ideas than positive about who/what a student is/ should be. These negative conceptions = partly generated by perceptions from external folks (not current students) about university students (e.g. avoiding getting a 'proper job'). Other influences included school experiences (and feeling ill-prepared), awareness of a shift in identity and potential tensions with home/ family because of growing awareness/ knowledge.
Being on campus = strongly connected with ideas about being a student
Core argument: "...'becoming student' is not as straightforward or as easily understood a process as may be implied in the marketing literature and the general discourse around neoliberal society's need for graduates" (p.831)

Context: The examination of teachers' 'emotion expression' through observations of and interviews with three secondary school teachers
Aim: To examine whether teaching is emotional labour and if so, does that suggest that teachers are selling their emotions? Also to assess if teachers are managing their emotions heteronomously. Finally, the introduction of the concepts of emotion management and self-disclosure.
Theoretical frame: The theorisation of teaching as 'emotional labour' (Hargreaves, 1998, 2000; Intrator, 2006; Isenbarger & Zembylas, 2006; Winograd, 2003; Zembylas, 2005) and the support of this theory as evidenced by teacher interviews.
Methodology: Observations of, and semi-structured interviews with, three secondary school teachers in Japan. Subsequent interpretive analysis of their emotion expression during classroom discourse.
Findings: Teachers consciously and unconsciously expressed negative and positive emotions based on their caring professional identity and personal beliefs and values, in the service of student concentration, interest in learning and positive participation. Teachers autonomously manage their emotions without much regard to school policies, and the management of emotions performed by teachers differs from emotional labour and 'entails the wide discretion that characterizes private life'. The amount and method of emotion expression varies based on working conditions including school culture, student profile, and subject matter, as well as personal factors such as professional identity, personal beliefs, morals, and life experience.
Core argument: A full understanding of the emotional labour of teaching and the expression of such emotion cannot be fully assessed from interviews alone; teaching observations are crucial. Additionally, emotional labour requires the enforcement of emotional control by external systems as a condition of employment by an institution or company, thus 'teaching cannot be identified as emotional labor without determining whether teachers autonomously manage their emotions, or if such emotion management represents official school policy'.
As observed, teachers disclose genuine emotions according to the context or situation and do not manage their emotions or alter their values based on administrative encouragement. Thus, teachers' emotional practice is an autonomous, discretionary and professional activity of caring rather than emotional labour.

Context: In England, although the Browne Review (2010) recommended that the cap on tuition fees be abolished and state contributions reduced, the government opted to raise the maximum annual fee that universities could charge from GBP3375 to GBP9000 in 2012. They introduced a repayment system that required graduates to contribute 9% of their income above GBP21,000 per year until their debt was repaid, with interest charged at up to 3% above inflation and unpaid loans forgiven after 30 years. Supplementary measures included non-repayable maintenance grants of up to GBP3250 per year for students with household incomes below GBP40,000 per year, plus a bursary entitlement for those with household incomes below GBP25,000.
Aim: To explore the decision-making processes of those for low-participation backgrounds, for whom university is not 'a natural destination', but who have the ability to pursue HE. The specific aims of the study are: (1) to gauge the accuracy of young people from very low-participation backgrounds' understanding of the 2012 student fee and repayment structures; (2) to consider how young people's responses interact with their other social, cultural and academic dispositions towards university entry; (3) to assess the extent to which those responses are reflected in wider public discourses about participation
Theoretical frame: Not specified in study.
Methodology: Data collection instrument: Questionnaire; 'informal, interactive presentation that allowed their knowledge to be assessed'. Second half of the interactive session: provided information about 2012 fee & repayment structure & HE admissions process. Views of students were investigated pre- and post- supply of information. All interactions were via open dialogue, with questions taken throughout. Duration: One hour. Participants: year 10 & 11 pupils (n=198) who were streamed into high achieving, mixed gender classes. 3 schools located In the top 5 most deprived local authorities in England were chosen (Office for National Statistics, 2010). Data analysis: Framed in terms of 'information asymmetry' (281) - which describes an information transaction where one party is possesses more accurate or extensive knowledge than others (Dill & Soo, 2004).
Findings: 1)Knowing the price of HE: Significant variations observed in the knowledge & understanding of the 2012 fee structure - Approximately 50% of participants were aware of the GBP9000 fee; most students were confused about the study period covered by the fee. 2) Knowing the financial support available: Majority of students were unaware that some of them may be eligible for financial aid; no students were aware of the available support for varying levels of household incomes; only 1/198 student knew the meaning of 'bursary'. 3)Under-consumption and the Ellsberg Paradox: 'Wildly inappropriate' (p. 283) estimates of typical graduate salaries were observed; many students struggled to view themselves in a professional occupation. 4)Aversion & tolerance types: a)Headline price aversion & tolerance b)Risk price aversion & tolerance c)Religion-based price aversion d)Lifestyle cost aversion & tolerance e)Identity cost aversion & tolerance e)Failure cost aversion & tolerance e)Types of 'non-choice' aversion and tolerance: 'No opt-out tolerance; 'no alternative' tolerance; 'non-choice' behaviour (aversion). Summary of aversion & tolerance types: Most participants articulate both tolerance & aversion, and even include multiple types in one statement.
Discussion: 1) The findings suggest that 'price' and 'cost' of participation in HE were very different considerations for such young people. 2)The lack of social capital observed in previous studies were also evident in the findings
Core argument: Higher fees change the terms of a participation 'bet' for young people of all backgrounds. However, for those from low SES, a broader spectrum of variables may be involved, together with a different (and sometimes contrary) set of social and cultural factors. This can create 'a reality totally contrary to market theory' (Callendar & Jackson, 2005, p. 513), in which established rational choice behaviour models are distorted by localised and highly personalised considerations. Hence, public discourse assumptions that lifestyle gains, identity gains and enhanced future earnings will outweigh the deferred price of participation may not always be accurate.

Context: Describes impact of UC 4 Yourself university experience day (part of HEPPP-funded Aspire UC outreach) for students from low SES ('financially disadvantaged backgrounds'). Navigates literature on SES and aspirations (lower rates of Yr 12 completion/ lower levels of parental education/ lack of support networks/ stratification of school system =reproduces inequity. Barriers to study = distance, cost, low academic achievement, and low otivations/ aspirations (Gale et al. 2010). Imagined futures (draws heavily on Sellar/Gale et al.)
Methodology: 2 x surveys (n=525 students; 231 m/ 294 f from 29 high schools - most Yr 9. 31 = indigenous) administered before/after visit. Survey 1: students rated 3 statements 1) 'I have often considered going to university'; (2) 'I like the idea of going to university'; and (3) 'My plans for after high school don't include university'. Survey 2= (i) 'I like the idea of going to university'; (ii) 'I feel more comfortable on a university campus'; (iii) 'I can imagine myself as a uni student'; (iv) 'I feel more confident that I could attend uni'; (v) 'I want to find out more about uni'; and (vi) 'I want to go to university'.
Findings: Attendees = more likely to attend university and better able to imagine themselves as university students
Survey 1= no differences found between students on basis of year level, indigineity, previous experience with Aspire UC. Revealed 'high levels' of interest in HE. Females reported more interest than males but scores for both genders =high
Survey 2 = difference found between students who had experienced Aspire UC before ("additional visits further enhance the capacity to picture oneself in the situation, that is, to conceive of oneself as a student of the university" (p.91). No gender effects with regards to barriers. Students reported uni = less expensive than expected
Core argument: Provision of information = paramount (p.92); tangible experience (physical experience) = important and facilitates imagination of self as uni student.