Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Context: Global higher education league tables in post-2012 (tuition fee increase in England) English HE. Examines media discourses and positioning of English HE in comparison with US and Asian universities. In UK mass media, global league tables contribute to policy debates as a proxy for 'quality'.
Aim: To evaluate the relationship between claims that English HE = becoming Americanised and the data that such claims are based on ('claim making'). Four RQs:
"what are the recurrent themes, objects and actors in media text?
what are the dominant frames within the textual data?...
"do league table results show US superiority and/or Asian ascent?" (p.171)
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Thematic analysis of UK news coverage of global university league table stories (2003-2012). 52 items from 7 outlets = identified as meeting inclusion criteria - inductive content analysis for first RQ, thematic analysis for RQ2. These themes then compared against results of league tables (Shanghai Index, QS, Times Higher Education)
Findings: Key themes = US superiority (linked to fees and spending); Asian ascent; and 'selective doubt' over league table results.
RQ1: recurrent themes, objects, actors in media texts?
Actors = Russell Group universities (mentioned 17 times), 1994 Group (mentioned once), Universities UK (mentioned 7 times), UCU (mentioned 4 times), NUS (mentioned twice). 18 people (university heads) = mentioned 37 times (most = as representatives of Russell Group unis). 'Professor' = mentioned 34 times; 'lecturer' referred to 30 times but not as individual person = lecturers and students = referred to but rarely speak. Analysis of verbs = 54 instances of 'compete*' and 12 cases of 'rivalry' = no references to cooperation and only 5 = 'collaborate*'. Many news sources cite RG universities (except The Sun and The Indpendent). Only 19 suggest doubt about validity of league tables.
Content analysis: dominance of elite voices (e.g. RG heads). UK = framed as between US superiority and Asian ascent
76/120 comparisons between UK and 'other' favoured 'other'; only 27 favoured UK. Half of comparisons = with US (48/63 favoured US; 9/63 = favoured UK), with most prestigious US universities representing US. Half of news articles compared spending/ investment, leading to comments about funding reform in relation to league tables (focus on Oxbridge). No questions about US model asked/ highly differentiated system = never questioned (higher highs = balanced by lower lows, p.184); more focus on competition and markets.
Asian ascent: Asian = favourably compared to UK 10 times; negatively only once. No amendment of incorrect reporting about Asian universities (relating to league table placing or funding).
Selective doubt: most BBC and Guardian reports expressed limited questioning of league table validity - questioning = by not of elites.
Checking media against data = English language countries selected (because of language of publication/ citations). US institutions = dominant in 3 league tables. Population numbers = correlated with number of top 200 universities and wealth (see p.179-181): "Having a 10% lower average position relative to the United States, the United Kingdom has 100% more top 200 entries per capita. Putting one's eggs in fewer baskets does not improve overall performance" (p.181). With regard to Asia: "The claim that league tables show Asian ascent is false. South Korea's improved QS results are roughly equal to those of Scotland (which has just over one-tenth of its population). Asia's overall ranking began and remains the same as or just below that of the United Kingdom (which has 50 times fewer people)" (p.182).
Core argument: League table data does not show US to be superior or Asia to be in ascent. Media reports on league tables = overwhelmingly pro-US HE and called for its highest ranking institutions to be used as models for UK HE. "In league tables the United States performs no better than the United Kingdom (size for size) and Asia is not catching up" (p.183), therefore media coverage = misleading. "That the legitimacy of statistical rankings is used to support policies even when ranking data do not evidence the success of such policies requires further explanation than simply 'faith' in numbers (however misguided)" (p.186).

Context: Set in context of increasing numbers of students entering HE via TAFE studies. Authors point to limited research on transitions from TAFE to university (notable exceptions = Wheelahan, 2008a, b; Hoelscher et al., 2010, Leese, 2010). Scopes literature on demographics of TAFE students, preparedness for study (Ertl et al, 2010), by SES background. Notes use of habitus in other literature and transition pedagogy and need for attention to academic support/guidance.
Aim: To report on experiences of students who entered University of Western Sydney in 2009 and 2010
in the fields of Business and Law, Early Childhood and Nursing from TAFE studies.
Theoretical frame: None explicated
Methodology: Mixed-methods. Data collected via survey (n=529), telephone interviews (n=74), and focus groups (n=33)
Findings: Demographic data from surveys showed:
- 39% = LBOTE (compared to 36% of general student population)
- 27% = low SES (compared to 23% of general student population)
71% = FinF (compared to 64% of general student population, except for Nursing and Business)
- 83% of participants had previously completed Year 12 and had gone to VET to update knowledge or skills, get work,
- 89% had studied at TAFE rather than private provider
Expectations and reality
- 43% found uni study a lot different from what they had expected. Most commonly, the gap related to perceived superior support at TAFE and more face-to-face contact. Also, "Students observed a number of differences at university, including the expectation of greater autonomy, less face-to-face teaching and teacher consultation time and a much greater workload" (p.247)
- Some students also noted that they had been 'spoonfed' at TAFE and were unhappy at how that ill-prepared them for university study
- Many Early Childhood students reported feeling swamped by the blended learning approach
- 39% enjoyed their new course more than, and 42% enjoyed as much as they were expecting
Difficulty and help
- Difficulty with academic conventions and academic reading (see p.252) = significant for particular groups (but weak)
- Nearly 40% had considered seeking help
- 12% had considered dropping out
- 26% had considered dropping units
- Two areas in particular = difficult for all students: unmet expectations and lack of preparedness for academic writing and conventions
- Authors note challenges (articulated by students) with relation to underpinning assessment approaches and ideologies/ preferred learning approaches
Information gaps
- Most students perceived a need for improved communication between sectors, especially prior to entry
- Some students spoke highly of UniStep bridging course
Core argument: Gaps between sectors/ experiences = unsurprising and HE = better placed to address gaps. Authors concur with other work that argues that transition strategies and support should not be 'mere gap fillers' (see p.253)

Context: There has been considerable research into students' patterns of progression and retention in HE, but little detailed understanding is achieved regarding the interacting factors contributing to non-traditional students' decisions to withdraw from university. This is mainly due to the insufficient exploration of the 'complexity of attrition experiences' (p. 2) for individual students.
Aim: To identify factors affecting early childhood teacher education students' decisions to leave university in their first year of enrolment, in order to offer better academic support programs in HE.
Theoretical framework: Longitudinal models of attrition
Methodology: Data collection method: Interviews (in person & phone); Participants: Discontinuing female students (n=35); Age bracket: 20 - 52 years old; Course: Early childhood teaching degree at a major Sydney metropolitan university; Variables guiding interviews: 1) background characteristics relating to the individual situation (eg: personal wellbeing, family status, employment status, financial considerations); (2) pre college experiences and achievements; (3) vocational goals and commitment; (4) academic adjustment & expectations; (5) work and home influences; and (6) student culture and environment (Bean & Metzner, 1985; Kember, 1989; Spady, 1970; Tinto, 1975).
Findings: 1)Three common underlying factors for withdrawal decisions: a) personal illness/family illness b) competing family responsibilities c)financial difficulties; 2)In most cases, all three factors contribute towards creating a 'flash point' that influences students' decision to withdraw 3)The actual decision to withdraw -often involved varying interrelated factors, alongside the perception that students' 'ultimate role' (p. 4) was to support their family and/or partner both psychologically and practically, and the lack of a flexible learning component of on-campus university study. 4)Despite common underlying themes, the interplay of varying factors revealed the case & circumstance of each participant was unique.
Recommendation: Interventions & support mechanisms must be targeted to the realities of students' lives - eg: flexible learning, multiple entry and exit points, mentoring, reliable & cost effective on-line access to resources, supported child care in students' homes.
Core argument: Attrition is a complex problem and unique experience for each student, which cannot be oversimplified via simple solutions. Therefore, enabling practices and policies, which truly recognise and support the varying contexts of student identities and circumstances, should be implemented.

Context: Reports on DEST-funded project. Regional = regional, remote and rural
Aim:
- Provide a better understanding of the aspirations and expectations of students in regional areas of Australia;
- Identify the underlying factors that drive those aspirations and expectations, in particular, any factors differentiating the aspirations and expectations of students in regional areas from those of their urban counterparts - the 'rurality' factor(s);
- Identify barriers that might hinder students' pursuit of their aspirations, and Identify strategies that have proven effective in enhancing and sustaining the aspirations and expectations of students in regional areas.
Methodology: Series of focus groups with regional students, parents and teachers from 13 regional research sites across the country (excluding ACT) + 2 urban sites in Melbourne. Where possible, mix of schools in research site recruited (independent, catholic, public). Mix of sizes (towns), mix of school years (yr 10, 11, 12). 72 interview interactions in total (some co-ed, some single sex, 23 with teachers, 3 with parents. Authors note ethical issues (barriers for state DETs resulting in loss of time; difficulty in accessing school; term time constraints with exam time and holidays; difficult to access parents
Findings:
_ Students generally had high levels of aspirations - most students sure that Year 12 not the end of educational journey, rather = transition point
_ Students' "awareness of changing economic and social structures and the need for further education and training was naturalised in student discourse" (p.246)
_ Students' aspirations = synonymous with leaving home/ communities: "data suggested that an inverse relationship existed between the strength of the local economy and the determination of students to pursue their lives and careers elsewhere" (p.247).
_ Some contrary responses recorded where students wanted to stay in community = reminder there is no one student voice
_ Rural parents and teachers = more pessimistic about students' educational futures beyond school
_ Authors note two key dimensions at play with students' aspirations: personal (impact on self and friends/families) and experiences; social dimension= broader social impact (quality of schooling/ local economies/ paid work/ gender roles)
_ Perception that rural spaces are 'male' could explain higher aspiration rate of females
_ Key obstacles= perceived cost of HE/ lack of occupational models/ lack of educational opportunities

Context: There has been increasing access to HE enrolment for equity groups following the Bradley Review of Australian higher education. However, recent studies have also found that members of equity groups are lagging behind their counterparts in terms of the completion of their university degrees.
Aim: To explore the determinants of student satisfaction in Australian HE, with a focus on various equity group students. The study also examines the determinants of three key academic outcomes:
- being at risk of dropout
- dropout from university studies
- academic performance, as measured by students' Weighted Average Marks (WAM).
Methodology: For all the binary (yes/no) dependent variables, specifically those relating to the student experience, consideration of leaving university, retention status and reasons for considering leaving, a series of logistic regression models were estimated with the general form: ln ( pi ) = _0 + _Ei + _Xi (1) 1 - pi; Ei: a vector containing the binary-coded equity group indicators; Xi: a vector containing the binary-coded control variables, including sex, age group, attendance mode, attendance type, combined degree and study area (and for the retention model, binary-coded indicators for considered leaving university and quality of overall educational experience); and pi is the probability of an affirmative response for observation i. Logistic models are estimated separately for commencing and later year students. In addition to logistic coefficients, average marginal effects (AMEs) are reported, which represent the average percentage change in the probability of an affirmative response associated with a particular explanatory variable. For the continuous dependent variable, WAM, linear regression models of the following form were estimated separately for commencing and later year students: Yi = _0 + _Ei + _Xi + _i (2) where Yi is the standardised WAM for observation i, _i is the error term, and Ei and Xi are as previously defined. Standard errors are again clustered at the university level for the reasons described above.
Theoretical frame: Not specified in study.
Findings: 1) Student Satisfaction Models: First in family students: Increased likelihoods of being satisfied with their university study, compared to students who were not the first in their family to attend university; Indigenous students reported being more satisfied with the level of student support they were given, and were four (five) percentage points more likely to be satisfied with student support compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts, when they were in their commencing (later) year of university study; NESB students: dissatisfied across all UES focus areas, as well as being dissatisfied with their overall educational experience, compared to ESB students; Low SES background students: Differences observed in satisfaction across three measures, compared to students from more privileged SES backgrounds: low SES students in later years had a very small increased likelihood of being satisfied with their learner engagement and the quality of learning resources & were more likely to report being satisfied with the level of student support received by around 2% in later years of study. 2) Models of Students at Risk of Dropout: Results indicate that all equity groups, with the exception of NESB students, are at increased likelihoods of being at risk of leaving university, at both stages of study; Indigenous students in their commencing year were six percentage points more likely to be at risk than non-Indigenous students; Students with disability - largest increased likelihood of being at risk compared to students without disabilities, at five percentage points in the commencing year and seven percentage points in the later year; Female students in non-traditional fields of study - similar outcomes compared to male students in the same fields, in terms of being at risk; Students from low SES backgrounds - statistically significant increased probabilities of being at risk compared to students from better-off SES backgrounds; students from rural or remote areas had small, increased likelihoods of being at risk, of around two percentage points in both university years; First in family students - small, 1.5 percentage point increased likelihood of being at risk in their first year of study, compared to students who were not first in their family to be in university; NESB students - three percentage points less likely to be at risk in their commencing year compared to ESB students. 3)Models of Reasons for being at Risk of Dropout: a)Financial reasons: commencing students in five equity groups had a greater probability of giving this reason than those not in each respective equity group, with the strongest effect observed for Indigenous students (12 percentage points greater than non-Indigenous students). b)Health reasons: students with disability have a vastly greater probability of giving health or stress as a reason for being at risk of dropout, especially regarding commencing students (22 percentage points above non-disability students). c)Academic/institutional factors: Only NESB students had a greater probability of listing academic/institutional factors as a reason
for considering dropout, and only in their commencing year of study. d)Social & personal reasons: Indigenous students were more likely than non-Indigenous students to indicate this in their commencing year, as were low SES students (compared with higher SES students), although to a lesser extent. d)Workload: ATSI and first in family commencing students had an increased probability of selecting this reason, whereas NESB students and women in STEM were significantly less likely to do so. e)Disposition (Students' attitude towards study): commencing students in five equity groups had a reduced probability of giving this reason. 4)Models of Dropout: Two variants of this model are estimated: (1) dropout is modelled as a function of equity group membership, standard demographic and enrolment variables; and indicators for being at risk of dropout and satisfaction with the quality of the overall educational experience (both as previously defined); and (2) as previously, but omitting the 'at risk' indicator. Results from Model 1: a)Commencing students: NESB students are less likely than non-NESB students to withdraw from higher education, with the opposite seen for first in family students. b) Later year students: Regional/remote students are significantly more likely to drop out than students from metropolitan Australia. Results from Model 2: Results on the equity group variables are generally similar to Model 1. 5)Model for WAM: a)Commencing students: Five equity groups were associated with significantly lower than average WAMs, with the effect size ranging from 0.1 standard deviation units (First in family) to 0.4 standard deviation units (Indigenous) below the institutional mean; b)Later year students: Four equity groups are associated with significantly lower WAMs
Discussion: Two interesting general findings: 1)The reasons for considering leaving university tend to differ across equity groups and, in a great many cases, are not significantly different from the reasons given by non-group members. 2) There are relatively few significant differences for later year students - suggesting that disadvantaged students' reasons are addressed early in their studies and hence are not significantly different from students generally by their later year of study; or that students experiencing these pressures are more likely to withdraw early in their studies.
Recommendation: Policy aimed at equity outcomes in higher education will need to take into account the influences of factors that occur in students' personal circumstances, notably, financial and health issues, which might require policy decision-making from outside the HE portfolio and sector, to provide equity groups with a 'level playing field' (p. 34) to complete their tertiary education successfully.
Core argument: There is a strong need for the provision of support for students from equity groups from an early stage, as the results from the various analyses all indicated stronger equity effects for commencing students as opposed to students at a later stage of their studies.

Context: Describes programs and initiatives at USQ that encourage R&R students to enrol, remain and complete their degrees, such as Head Start Program (HSP), the School Partners Program(SPP), Guidance Officer Days(GOD), enrichment camps, academic bridging programs, scholarships; Indigenous Higher Education Pathways Program (IHEPP). Head Start = allows school students to participate in mainstream Year 1 UG classes (orientation/ access to university resources/ network building) + development of strong networks with partner schools through School Partners Program. Guidance Officer Days = orientation/campus visit program. Academic bridging = enabling (TPP/ Foundation Studies/ EAP/ Indigenous HEPP). Acknowledges concerns for R&R youth = cost, distance and financial challenges = university offers range of scholarships: "These services are designed to ensure that the transition into university life is simplified and comfortable" (p.2)
Aim: To explore "the factors that impact on the rural remote students' participation in higher education and the services that enhance their progression and retention" (p.2): to identify factors of impact, to identify types of assistance and support needed, to investigate usefulness of services and supports
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: "Descriptive survey research" (p.2) = questionnaire included closed and open items about programs listed in context. 339 students invited to participate after being sampled systematically from total of 3389 R&R students at 3 USQ campuses. 89 students participated in 2010 (26% response rate)
Findings:
27% = 18 or younger
26% = 37 or older
62% = female
73% = enrolled through QTAC
13% = direct/ mature admissions process
29% = used internet as source of information about university
28% = used 'other' sources (e.g. school, employer)
25% = used parents or friends as source of information
18% = school visits/open days
Participants were somewhat aware of services (64% aware of scholarships; 49% = TPP; 20% = Head Start; 13% = Indigenous HEPP). 99% were not aware of other services/facilities.
Students = overall satisfied with TPP (mean rating of 2.45)
Mean ratings for other services suggest they were neither satisfied or dissatisfied
Student recommendations:
1) disseminate information as comprehensive information pack
2) include a step-by-step guide to study and information about financial support
3) need to simplify online communication
4) have a support person to help with more pastoral/ connection support
5) need more personal assistance
Core argument: "Multiple information sources on educational pathways are important in decision-making processes for high-school students" (p.7)

Context: Tensions between social mobility/ national economic competitiveness and role of higher education in England; role of Office for Fair Access (OfFA) and Access Agreements (AA)
Aim: To explore "how universities, as quasi-market organisations, might be expected to respond to the contradictory external pressures [of increased national economic competitiveness and social mobility]" (p.270)
Theoretical frame: Oliver's (1991) institutional theory and resource dependency theory (typology of organisational responses to external pressure: acquiescence, compromise, avoidance, defiance, manipulation) to "provide a framework within which different universities' responses to policy pressure could be compared" (p.270). See Table 2 (p.274) for research questions derived from Oliver's framework (including predictive dimensions leading to 10 hypotheses = Table 3). Authors selected 3 of 10 hypotheses, leading to 3 conjectures:
Selected hypotheses:
1) The greater the degree of constituent multiplicity, the greater the likelihood of organizational resistance to institutional pressures
2) The lower the degree of external dependence on pressuring constituents, the greater the likelihood of organisational resistance to institutional pressure
3) The lower the level of uncertainty in the organization's environment, the greater the likelihood of organizational resistance to institutional pressures. (all p.276)
Conjectures:
Conjecture 1: All universities in this study will show responses beyond acquiescence and there may be differences in the degree and nature of these responses between recruiting and selecting institutions (any response except acquiescence = resistance, according to Oliver)
Conjecture 2: Acquiescent responses will be more typical of recruiting institutions; more resistant responses will be associated with selecting universities (not all universities in England are equally dependent on OfFA approval; according to Oliver, for dependence, defiance and manipulation = resistant response, and high levels of external dependence likely to result in acquiescence or compromise).
Conjecture 3: Acquiescence would be demonstrated by all universities in this study but recruiting and selecting institutions would use different strategies in relation to widening participation (all p.277) - lower uncertainty leads to higher resistance, with resistant strategies = defy and manipulate.
Methodology: Application of Oliver's (1991) framework to OfFA reports/ AA from 8 universities (same ones as in Bowl & Hughes, 2013).
Findings: Russell Group universities underperforming in terms of measurement against WP metrics: clear difference between 'selecting' (RG) and 'recruiting' universities (Million+ and Guild Group alignments).
Russell Groups (RG)
Analysis of AAs and publicly available documentation shows that RGs positioned themselves as 'research intensive' and elite in terms of attracting the 'gifted and talented' students - academic excellence/ high academic standards etc. (see p.279). RG universities expressed belief that they should be benchmarked for WP performance against similar institutions because benchmarking against the whole sector "underplays both the success we have achieved and, crucially, the clear commitment we have to fair access and widening participation" (from Russell Group 2 AA; see p.279). Authors argue that this is an intention to excuse its underperformance: "In positioning themselves as distinctive, both downplayed their poor performance in widening participation relative to other institutions in their region, while asserting their commitment to fair access" (p.279). And yet, both RG universities positioned themselves as leaders in WP, using language like "'sector leading' and 'flagship'...[and] 'the first research-led University in the UK to give priority to widening participation and lifelong learning'" (p.280). Overall, RGs = signalling acquiescence to policy, compromise in terms of focusing on academic standards, and avoidance by focusing on state schools (rather than disadvantaged areas)
Million+
Tensions in positioning with regard to low rankings and high WP enrolments - these universities had to implement the highest student fees to avoid perception of being lower quality. These universities = "justifiably assertive" in positioning with regard to WP enrolments in their AAs/ messaging to WP, but downgrading these assertions in their public-facing messaging (for fear of being perceived as lesser). These universities generally position with employability message, rather than inclusivity, "reflecting their historical vocational specialism and national concerns about graduate employment" (p.281) to justify the increased fees. Authors argue this is 'mimetic isomorphism' (according to Oliver, 1991), but they also demonstrate acquiescence to policy ("in spite of the fact that their record on recruitment from underrepresented groups is good, when compared with the Russell Group universities, and they might have grounds to complain that they are being expected to do more than is reasonable to increase recruitment from these groups" (p.282).
Guild Group (brief analysis on p.282) - general messages about being committed to WP; messages based around 'student-centred' and 'community spirit', and messaging about employability. Consistency in messages to OfFA and public.
All three groups demonstrated acquiescence to policy but positioned themselves differently
Core argument: RG universities acquiescence = accompanied by manipulation and avoidance, in effort to craft a case about how they should be measured with regard to WP performance (partially supporting Conjecture 2).
Conjecture 3 = unsupported because authors' expectation that 'recruiting' universities would foreground WP enrolments, but instead the public messages were ambiguous, which they argue "highlights for us the tension between equity and market positioning which is apparent in a quasi-market situation" (p.284).
The quasi-market of higher education means that Oliver's theory does not easily work with snapshot analysis, but could be useful for longitudinal research.

Context: Students' choice of university (of different status) according to student groups in context of UK policy push towards 'fair access'. Scopes literature on social class and university choice - notes qualitative work that suggests (in contrast to Baker & Brown's 2007 study) that working-class students are more likely to apply to lower-ranking universities so as to 'fit in'. Chowdry et al. (2008) also drawn on heavily (effect of maternal deprivation, parents' education and ethnicity on likelihood of getting into 41 high-prestige universities)
Aim: To explore students' choice of university (particularly elite universities) may differ on basis of students' location (place of residence) and estimates size of effect according to prior attainment, income/class background, and individual variables. Important point of difference from other work: considers variables together and focuses on applications rather than admissions.
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Quantitative: based on survey of students' intentions, beliefs and background (not use of national databases) that impacted on students' approach to university choice. Survey conducted in two large urban areas in UK.
Findings:
"Social class background is strongly associated with the type of university to which students intend to apply" (p.346) - but do not directly affect choice of university; "there is no support here for the proposition that school students (as this study uses data from 17/18 year old students) match themselves by social class with universities of a particular status" ([.346). Instead, data suggests associations between social class and factors such as examination grades, attending an independent school, proximity of a high-ranking university and fear of debt
School type attended and fear of debt are significant independent factors
Social factors and types of information = not significant at this point
Locality and availability of high status university = significant, especially
Core argument: There is a 'postcode lottery' with regards to what appears to be available options (HE institutions) for particular students. Interventions to facilitate fair access = need to happen at school level, helping underrepresented groups to get better exam grades.

The Gonski Institute for Education (GIE) is embarking on a new research project in NSW primary schools that explores whether increasing access to play in schools reduces the effects of educational inequity for children. The project, known as Fair Play, aims to understand the benefits of structured and unstructured play opportunities and to understand how learning through play can help to enhance equity of education in Australian schools. There is a wealth of evidence supporting the importance of play to children’s educational outcomes, but there is a pressing need for rigorous research determining whether it is linked to equitable outcomes. Despite the importance of play to children’s wellbeing, children’s access to play as part of learning is ever more constrained and regulated by policy agendas and within families with low socio-economic status. In this new research, GIE has partnered with LEGO Education and will use LEGO bricks as a tool to examine increased access to opportunities for unstructured play in NSW primary schools (Fair Play 1), and access to participate in the FIRST LEGO League, as a structured play intervention, in NSW secondary schools (Fair Play 2).  The participants in this study will be students, their teachers and parents/ caregivers at the primary and secondary schools.

A particular focus of the Fair Play research will be on how the knowledge, skills, behaviours and achievements of children from different equity groups, particularly children who have limited access to toys at home, are affected by greater access to opportunities for play during their school day. Put simply, can play help to reduce the inequities that exist in Australian education? The focus of this research on children’s success in schooling will not be limited to cognitive or academic outcomes; the development of their social and emotional traits will be also explored. While there are two streams of this research (Fair Play 1 and Fair Play 2), with different intended outcomes, the data collection process will be similar. Under the guidance of Professor Pasi Sahlberg, the research team will be collecting both qualitative and quantitative data from parents, teachers and students on their experiences, both before the LEGO trial and after this. Known as triangulation, it is important to obtain data from a range of sources and using a range of methods to ensure that the complexity of the area is adequately captured. The research methodology and tools are currently being finalised, with focus groups planned for November 2019 with teachers and formal data collection during the school terms of 2020.

The project will be introduced at a Play Symposium, held in Sydney, Australia on November 15. This symposium will be hosted by GIE, with invited play researchers to share their work in this space and discuss the Fair Play project. This project has been accepted for presentations at the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference in December, where the proposed methodology will be outlined. The key literature in relation to the Fair Play project was discussed at the Australian Social Policy Conference in September. 

For more information relating to the project, please contact the Gonski Institute for Education at gonski@unsw.edu.au  

This research is funded by Frances Allen and Ian Narev. The Gonski Institute for Education is grateful for their ongoing support.

Aim: To test 3 hypotheses: family social status, ethnicity and aspirations have 1) large associations; 2) moderate aspirations/ attainment; 3) family social status and attainment are mediated by aspirations
Theoretical frame: Family contexts = 'opportunity structures' (p.104) = SES/ ethnicity. Also draws on Bourdieu [but does not specifically name capital or habitus]
Methodology: Quantitative. Participants = 6811 young people (3547 f; 3264 m) who were in Year 9 when study began. Data collected from LSAY (1995-2000)
Findings:
Large associations between family backgrounds, ethnicity aspirations and attainment, in which there were significant gender differences. In low SES families, there were differences in terms of ethnicity at all aspiration levels (but for high SES, ethnic differences = 'minimised' (all abstract)
Core argument: More research needed to probe: "what are the experiences and conditions that families from certain ethnic or immigrant groups provide that allow their children's aspirations to be expanded into high educational attainment, when family social status conditions might be expected to constrain relationships between aspirations and attainment?" (p.111)

Context: Addresses the lack of research into learning developers working with feedback - authors point to challenges created by 'hidden recipience' of feedback, and the lack of information we have about what students do with it. Authors argue that there is little known about the role of learning advisors in helping students to understand/use feedback. Literature review of barriers to using feedback (decoding jargon-heavy feedback, interpreting minimal notes, strategies for acting on feedback) + literature on related impact on motivation and affect
Aim: To explore learning developers' "insights into the barriers students confront when engaging with feedback, and into the role of learning developers within the feedback landscape" (abstract); to "explore students' use of feedback from the perception of this core group of higher education professionals" (p.2).
Methodology: Qualitative; interviews with learning developers (n=9) from an English university around these topics: "(1) perceptions of what makes 'good' feedback; (2) the nature of discussions when students attend for learning advice appointments, including the issues they raise and the emotions they express; and (3) a description of a specific instance when a student came to a learning advice session to discuss feedback on their work" (p.5)
Findings: Two broad themes: 1) barriers for students (including decoding language, applying feedback, motivation, and self-efficacy) and 2) various roles played by learning advisors (interpreter, coach, dialogue partner, listener, and intermediary).
Barriers: decoding the language used within feedback (described as "academic speak" by one participant), and some of the learning advisors reported they also sometimes struggle with the language used. Participants also noted issues with transferability of feedback, and with feeling anxious about asking for clarification from the marker because of power relations. Participants also discussed observing the very emotional reactions that students can have to receiving feedback.
Roles played: interpreter = "sees learning developers taking what are perceived to be opaque feedback comments, and supporting students to translate comments into more easily understandable language" (p.9) - as a go-between. Coach = giving students techniques to understand and operationalize feedback, and to take a more holistic approach to interpreting feedback. Intermediary = 'middle ground' between students and faculty in ways that were described as anonymous, safe and confidential. Learning developer = seen as 'quasi academics', and as such occupy the 'third space' (Whitchurch, 2008): "On one level then, the learning developer can be perceived as situated in between the boundaries of student and lecturer. Yet on another level the learning developer role could be viewed as blurring the boundaries between clearly defined institutional domains, as both learning developer and academic staff work to support students to develop their assessment literacy" (p.10). Source of feedback dialogue = offering a space for discussion and dialogue, which offers an opportunity for clarifying misunderstandings

Context: Higher education teaching, emotions while teaching and emotional regulation. Author reviews literature on approaches to teaching, higher education teachers' emotions (noting few studies on this topic, but see Stupinsky et al. 2014; Meanwell & Kleiner, 2014; Trigwell, 2012). Very little literature on emotional regulation, but author notes research on cultural differences to emotional expression
Aim: To examine "two sets of correlates of approaches to teaching: teachers' emotion frequency during teaching and their emotion regulation strategies" (p.219), examining cognitive reappraisal/ expressive suppression (Study 1), a possible mechanism of emotional regulation (Study 2), and relations to negative emotions (Study 3). Study 1: to respond to these RQs:
- "Research Question 1: Do positive emotions and negative emotions form two separate factors within the emotion questionnaire?
- Research Question 2: Are positive (negative) emotions correlated to a student-oriented (content-oriented) approach to teaching?
- Research Question 3: Are emotion regulation strategies (cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression) correlated to approaches to teaching (student-oriented and content-oriented approaches)?" (p.219).
Study 2 to respond to these RQs:
- "Research Question 4: Are negative emotions correlated to the student-oriented or to the content-oriented approach to teaching?
- Research Question 5: Do positive emotions mediate the relation between cognitive reappraisal and the student-oriented approach to teaching?
- Research Question 6: Does empathy mediate the relation between cognitive reappraisal and the student-oriented approach to teaching?" (p.223)
Study 3 to respond to this RQ:
"Research Question 7: Are the differing results (lack of relation between negative emotions and approaches to teaching) caused by the cultural context of the studies?" (p.225)
Methodology: Quantitative/ questionnaire. Study 1 & 2 with academic teachers in German university. (n=145; comprising 64 university teachers and 81 student teachers). Details on questionnaire on p.220. Study 3 with university teachers from Australian and NZ universities (n=76), recruited via HERDSA
Findings:
Study 1: Positive answer to RQ1; mixed answer to RQ2 - frequency of positive emotions = correlates positively with student-oriented approaches to teaching, which strengthened use of student-oriented approaches. Answer to RQ3 = positive: positive association between student-oriented approach to teaching and cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression, with higher reappraisal leading to less suppression.
Study 2: Negative answer to RQ4 - no relation between negative emotions. RQ5 = positive (partial mediation by positive emotions on cognitive reappraisal and teaching approach). Negative answer to RQ6: "distress). The more the teachers described themselves as being able to take over another person's perspective, the stronger they felt positive emotions towards others. The less they felt negative emotions towards others, the stronger their student orientation in their teaching" (p.225).
Study 3: Positive answer to RQ7 - cultural context is significant: "Australian teachers, but not German teachers, seem to experience negative emotions in dependence from their content-oriented approach to teaching" (p.226), likely influenced by student-oriented teaching being more used in Australasian contexts
Core argument: Strong positive association between higher education teachers' positive emotions and student-oriented approaches to teaching in Germany and Australia/ NZ

Context: Emotional dimensions of feedback; assessment -central aspect in student satisfaction (as evidenced by its frequency in student experience surveys). Students' receptiveness to feedback received = impaired if negative emotions are generated, particularly if there is an absence of dialogue. Authors focus on two groups of students: international students, and students who receive marks they are unhappy with. Authors review of literature on international students highlights the role of language and culture in taking up feedback (e.g. Warner & Miller, 2015), which can impact on their emotions; the review of 'underperforming students' suggests that many students internalise feelings of shame/ sadness, or get angry (because of perceived unfairness).
Aim: To respond to two hypotheses:
"H1: International students are more likely than domestic students to find the feedback comments they generally receive at university to be discouraging, upsetting and too critical.
H2: International students who speak languages other than English at home are more likely than domestic students who speak languages other than English at home to agree that the feedback comments they generally receive at university are discouraging, upsetting and too critical" (p.4).
Methodology: "Large-scale cross-sectional survey" conducted in two Australian universities with students (n=4514) - see p.5 for details of scales included.
Findings:
Majority of students = rarely or never discouraged by feedback
42.6% of international students = occasionally/ frequently/always discouraged, compared with 35.4% of domestic students
24.4% of international students 'strongly agreed' that feedback = too critical (compared to 13.5% domestic)
19.8% of international students 'strongly agreed' that feedback = too upsetting (compared to 12.5% domestic)
Students who received lower marks than expected = "more likely to feel sadness, anger and shame due to the feedback comments" (p.10)
Core argument: Students should not be treated as homogenous because this study supports the idea that international and domestic students respond to feedback differently

Context: Draws on feminist theoretical tools to examine the discourse of the 'intellectual' and how women do academia. Clegg uses three starting points for her examination: Her own discussion of theorising agency and sense of self; Val Hey's work on Butler and the importance of sociality and performativity; and Carrie Paechter's work on how masculinities and femininities modify the 'person who is me'. Previous data on academic personhood/identities is re-read through the lens of these starting points. In examining the discourse of the 'intellectual' Clegg points out that "the life of the mind" has been particularly symbolically significant in first and second wave feminism. She contends that understanding the pleasures of intellectual work offers opposition to current policy which favours anti-intellectualism in relation to research performativity and selectivity. In particular, looking at intellectual work through "woman 'as a situation'" (p. 210) allows the understanding of deconstruction of mind/body dualism via theoretical work on embodiment and counters the 'ideologically dominant masculinity of the academy" (p. 210).
Clegg on Intellectuals: Clegg offers "The intellectual life is still understood, largely, in masculine terms." (p. 213). In the mind/body dichotomy, women were assigned 'to the swamp of the body' while men were assigned the 'purity of the mind'. She discusses the invisible and the public: The invisible, hidden women intellectuals/writers/artists of the past are still being excavated, uncovered and still, "the idea of the intellectual is associated with having a public . . . This external, public definition itself creates a discursive bias towards masculinity." (p. 214).
Despite this, women thinking about an intellectual life, describe pleasure. The pleasure in intellectual recognition for Hey is 'perverse' because it is "inter-locked with the repetitive citation of research performance and an illicit pleasure in competition; in knowing who is 'in' or 'out', and in being 'in' oneself." (p. 214). Clegg goes on to say that "In the micro-politics of the academy it is redemptive as a way of holding onto certain values and, for women, as a way of claiming voice, a form of performativity and subjectification that can be claimed as a woman, and which appears to be deeply implicated in the narratives of the self who is "I". (p. 214)
Methodology: Idiographic analysis involving careful attention to meaning for the individual and detailed reading of the transcript in isolation from the other data. (p. 215).
Analytical frame: From phenomenology: Ashworth's (2003) categories of the lifeworld-Selfhood, Sociality, Embodiment, Temporality, Spatiality, Project, Discourse-but foregrounding Selfhood, Project and Discourse.
Findings: Being an 'intellectual' for the subject of the study "involves a form of analysis and way of thinking and approaching problems that crosses boundaries, and applies to her mode of being in the world irrespective of whether the job involves activities outside of the more conventionally 'academic'." (p. 216). For this interviewee, "being an academic [is] a way of thinking, not a realm of expertise of restricted to role. (p. 216). The interviewee, Claire, sees her project as closely tied to her embodiment as a woman and in contrast to the traditional (masculine) individualism of the academy, stressing "sociality and striving to achieve relationships through her personal project of supporting staff in their practice." (p. 218). The discourse framing this interview is that of a focus on particular areas of research and expertise as the dominant drivers of being an academic. Claire resists this hegemonic, masculine discourse indicating how it is isolating and preferring sociality, unrestricted by 'the need to protect expertise'. (p. 218).
Conclusions: "Even within a university Departmental and other cultures may provide differential possibilities for the formation of particular sorts of academic identity, resistance and re-inscription; and attention to the differing temporalities of the lifeworld remains an under-theorised resources for thinking about identity and performativity (Adam 2003)." (p. 219).
". . . to speak as a woman, from the body as a situation, pries open the limits of a false universalism which pretends to speak for all

Context: Impact on household/ home for older students in higher education
Aim: To "explore how their participation in the higher education environment led to conversations in the family around learning" (abstract)
Theoretical frame: Bourdieu: capital
Methodology: Draws on FiF research (see O'Shea 2016 for description); this article presents two narrative (co-constructed) accounts: Nigel and Ann
Findings:
Nigel: 26 year old, single, lives at home, worked in retail since age 18, entered on basis of high school qualifications. Says he was too immature to consider higher education after leaving school. University not discussed at home-assumption was that kids would start working after school. Nigel reports that despite being ambivalent at first, mum now used Nigel as a model for younger brother to consider uni.
Ann: 36 years old, married, two children (age 17 and 13), entered via vocational pathway. Returned to studying to get a better job- did TAFE courses to see what she was interested in. Didn't consider university after school; had baby at 19; had never been on uni campus before orientation day. No conversation about university at home. Receives support from family to help her study.
Main themes
Betterment, despite clear ideas before that university was not for them
Discussions of cultural capital: for Nigel = shift in status in family (role model for younger sibling); for Ann =emotional support and encouragement of family. Both = "actively 'bridging' between the home place and university" (p.152) for others in their families, "Both take on the role of cultural change agent within the household, actively creating the space for alternative perspectives on educational participation" (p.152).
However, returning to education = required shift and work to move between university habitus and home/ family habitus
Core argument: "Rather than university outreach and support initiatives focusing solely on individual learners, these two stories point to the value of a more holistic approach that includes the family unit" (p.152-3).

The Ambassador Schools Program was established by the NSW Department of Education in 2021 as part of its School Success Model. Ten diverse and high-performing NSW public schools were chosen as ‘Ambassador Schools’ to take part in a study to understand their effective practices and identify how they could be shared with other NSW public schools.

Funded by the NSW Department of Education, the NSW Ambassador Schools Research Centre (ASRC) was created to carry out this study. The Gonski Institute for Education worked in partnership with the University of Canberra and Charles Sturt University to identify the practices of Ambassador Schools that have had the greatest impact on student achievement in their unique context.

Research participants included principals, teachers, students, and caregivers from 26 schools, including the ten Ambassador Schools. We also conducted a review of research literature on effective teaching and learning, and leadership practices so that we could build upon what is already known about effective practices and identify what is distinctive about how these practices and the contextual conditions in which they were implemented that made them so effective.

Read the Ambassador Schools Research Summary report 

Read the Literature review: Ambassador Schools research program

Read the Final Report, Stage 1, Ambassador Schools Research Centre

This blog post is part of the Gonski Institute for Education’s open access annotated bibliography (OAAB) series, a project led by Dr Sally Baker. OAABs offer a snapshot of some of the available literature on a particular topic. The literature is curated by a collective of scholars who share an interest in equity in education. These resources are intended to be shared with the international community of researchers, students, educators and practitioners. The literature has been organised thematically according to patterns that have emerged from a deep and sustained engagement with the various fields.

Context: Explores the Murina (means 'pathway') Indigenous-specific enabling program (in The Riawunna Centre) at UTAS and the use of narrative and imagery to achieve a 'whole-person' approach. Paper is located in context of under-representation on Indigenous students in Australian higher education, due to myriad factors (e.g. financial, living away from home, health). Cites the Behrendt report's call for Indigenous culture and knowledge to be embedded throughout curricula, and the clashes that occur because it was (is) not, leading to exclusion and isolation. UTAS = low enrolments, high achievements. Increase in student numbers from 259 in 2010 to 368 in 2013 (success rate = 30%)= imperative to make changes. Aboriginal culture = core "The program focuses on promoting a positive sense of identity through affirmation of Indigenous student's culture... as complete preparation for university studies must also include the development of a mindset and resilience to enable students to cope with the longer term goal of completing their degrees" (p.4). [Check discourse of individual strength in use of 'resilience', but see p.6]
Theoretical frame: Based on Kovach's (2010) 'conversational methodology'. Imagery = "descriptive language in a literary work and or images collectively, to engage the students" (p.5).
Methodology: Based on deep listening and yarning with two academics in Murina program, drawing also on observations with staff and students and documentation such as student feedback sheets, reflective journals and staff reports.
Findings: Stories used as aid to understand concepts and for sharing experience. Also, journal writing = used for students to respond to content/ news/ learning - not always textual; some students drew pictures and images used to encourage students to tell their stories. Students created art works and portfolios, artist statements and an art calendar. All exhibited in public space and some student artwork used in marketing materials. Vignettes of 4 students offered.
Core argument: Program helped to develop community of practice, "to share our knowledge, skills, tools and resources to build our capacity to teach in this space and to form intercultural collegial relationships" (p.9).