Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Context: Transition to higher ed includes both academic and socio-cultural challenges. While research recognises that there is a specific social dimension to learning and "despite sustained institutional efforts to foster or even 'create' community in its broader sense, with an aim to facilitate integration and learning, there is growing evidence of student confusion, dissatisfaction and disengagement" (666).
Aim: Proposal of a "social network agenda, starting 'from below', to examine students' own use of formal and informal support in different academic contexts contained within or reaching beyond the university" (666) in response to failed efforts by institutions to create or manufacture communities.
Theoretical frame: Social network concepts, which emphasise the role of relationships among individuals or organisations as a complementary lens to "learning and community of practice perspectives, which emphasise participation as the driving force of learning and identity development (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998)" (666). Bourdieu's (1997) concept of social capital, defined as "'the aggregate of the actual and potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalised relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition or - in other words, to membership in a group' (p. 51)" (667). Coleman's (1997) discussion of social capital focuses on systematic functions, which distinguishes between resources and the 'ability' to gain them via membership in various networks (Portes, 1998, p. 5) and outlines three aspects of social capital: obligations and expectations, depending on the trust exercised in the networks; the capacity of information to flow through the network so as to generate action; and norms and sanctions that regulate relations (Harper, 2001, p. 8). And Putnam's (2000) social capital theorisations which focus on larger structures, arguing that education is one area where the benefits of social capital can be felt at both the individual and collective level.
Methodology: Two vignettes from two university students taken from an exploratory research study on student experience, which included student audio diaries. The study tried to capture spontaneous, non-directive particularities of the students' daily experience at university and the audio diary portion was optional participation.
Findings: First-year students' transition to university is not an even, smooth process. In particular, students may find imposition of 'forced socialisation' intimidating and unhelpful.
Core argument: Exploring the communities and informal networks within which students are embedded requires a 'from below' consideration to fully understand students' support needs.

Context: Changes in the university sector in the past fifty years (that is, from the Second World War), particularly its "massification" and "corporatisation", has led to contestation regarding the idea and meaning of the university (p. 384). Conceptualisations of the university sit on a spectrum, from the socially and cultural disengaged 'ivory tower' on the one hand, to entrepreneurially focused 'factories' preparing students as workers. This paper is produced from a broader OLT funded project related to first-in-family (FiF) learners and their families, produced in partnership between University of Wollongong, University of Newcastle and Open Universities Australia. This student cohort is apt for exploring the ways in which universities are conceptualised because they have little actual experience of universities and therefore their knowledge of them derives of familial, social and cultural imaginings and experiences, rather than hands-on knowledge.
Aim: To analyse the ways in which this student cohort conceptualise the purpose and meaning of 'the university', and the corresponding impact this has on student's experiences and expectations of their learning. To "show how a range of powerful metaphors are at work in relation to what a university is and can do for individuals and the wider society." (p. 386)
Methodology: Interview and survey of 44 FiF enabling students across two Australian universities in 2014. Participants were self-selecting. Surveys ad interviews asked similar questions around the themes of university experience, family reactions, perceptions of university, motivations to participate in university. Responses were loaded to NVivo and subject to thematic analysis and coding; this was an iterative process. This paper draws conceptually on the work Lakoff and Johnson (1980) regarding the role of metaphor in ordering understandings of society and as "a form of 'imaginative rationality'" (p. 388).
Findings: The idea of the university as an 'ivory tower' is enduring for FiF students, even though it is a conceptualisation that is increasingly deconstructed by government and university workers. FiF students have professional goals motivating their entrance into HE, but their motivations are deeper and broader than that too: "the idea of the university in these students' accounts encompassed the 'community of scholars' carrying out high-minded work in the service of humanity" and is therefore about finding the "passionate career" or meaningful vocation (p. 190). The metaphors used by these students stressed a separation between university and non-university life (for example, 'hard' and 'high', 'foreign country'). The foreign country metaphor posits the university experience as both about mobility and abut the student as outsider. A divide between upper- and working-class expectations of university enrolment was evident, which intersected with geographical location (i.e. reflections that working classes from regional areas were not expected to go to university). This can "provoke suspicion and derision" about university, especially from the family and friends of FiF students (p. 391). "Hard" was used to discuss expectations that university would be difficult, require effort, could cause anxiety but could also be good because achieving 'hard' things would be rewarding and cause pride; "the adjective 'hard' shows that the imaginary of the ivory tower can be forbidding: its practices and languages alien and demanding, and its surfaces stone-like" and some students will fail (p. 394). It is also 'hard' to communicate ideas of university back to family and friends.
Core argument: Enabling first-in-family students arrive at University with a cultural imagining of the purpose of University that resolves the seemingly oppositional views of the university as either an "ivory tower" or a "degree factory" (p. 397). This is articulated through the concept of the "passionate career" (students are both career minded but also desirous of a career that is meaningful and has the capacity to be helpful to their family, friends and communities). This presents a challenge to consider ways to facilitate more idealistic, hopeful and encouraging purposes for universities.

Context: Written (I assume) in context of reform to 'demand-driven' system ("might imply a shift from selection to recruitment" p.iii) - 3 primary challenges
- Ensuring fairness and transparency in student selection
- Identifying potential for student success
- "Improving equity of participation and equality of educational opportunity" (p.iii)
"Distinctions between selective and recruiting courses and institutions become blurred in expanding tertiary systems, where selection decisions are also informed by equity priorities" (p.1)
Aim: To provide an overview of university selection practices for "the desired mix of students" (p.iii). Fair and transparent are of particular importance
Main themes: Selection/ admissions testing in Australia: demonstrating merit via prior academic achievement (predictive validity of success); demonstrating merit via other selection tools (tests for aptitude/ interviews/ portfolios).
Prior academic achievement: Tertiary entrance rank (ATAR) "remains the most prominent criterion" for UG admission. Middle band results = less reliable predictor of university success. Year 12 completion/ ATAR and school performance all correlate with SES. Overview of ATAR by state/territory and critique of ATAR (p.1-2)
Tests of preparedness (e.g. STAT test) have "only moderate predictive power" (according to US research)
Other selection tools (broader student attributes): Interviews appear to be a poor indicator of student success (and are costly). Portfolio appears to be "an effective means of identifying student potential" and for diversifying participation (p.iv). Students who enter via 'special equity programmes' (enabling? Access?) have similar rates of retention and success as other students
Section 1.3 (p.5-9) Applications, enrolments and SES in Australia (2008-9): gives nuanced data according to SES and disciplines in 2009. Low SES students highly/overrepresented in Nursing and Education. Also higher low SES enrolments in Engineering and Related Technologies. Go8 universities = least likely to offer places to low SES students/ non-affiliated regional universities most likely (Table 4, p.8)
Section 2 - Selection criteria (p.10-16): student attributes generally taken into consideration when selecting students: academic preparation, aptitude for study and 'broader characteristics '. Academic preparation is usually evident in prior study - with secondary school most common. Admissions tests are also sometimes used. 'Broader characteristics' can be assessed by psychometric testing/ essays/ referee reports etc.
Discussion of school results as selection criteria - draws on study by Birch & Millar who offer overview of studies on prediction rates of school performance from 1975 -2001. School results have strong predictive power - which justifies use of school results - but tertiary entrance ranks are not so useful (below ATAR 80 = not good indicator of success at uni level) and these criteria hide the equity issues of impact of SES on school results (see Cardak & Ryan, 2009). VET, as an alternative pathway/ form of academic preparation accounted for 14.5% of students' prior pathways in 2009. VET students appear to be academically on par with other students (ref to Wheelahan, 2005). Foundation programs (section 2.1.3) - "effective means of recruiting and supporting equity-group students" (p.15). Discussion of aptitude tests (Section 2.2.), including the STAT on p.17-8.
Section 2.2.1: Equity and validity in admissions testing. Geiser (2009) discusses use of SAT in USA - often held up as meritocratic but they are relatively poor predictor of student performance and are more exclusive than inclusive - based on one exam rather than performance over time (school grades) - limitations on p.18-20. But in Australia (where school results are norm referenced and ranked by school/subject) there is evidence to suggest admissions tests might be more equitable/inclusive and add 'incremental predictive validity' when used alongside other measures (e.g. ATAR).
Section 2.4: Student equity in university selection: mentions Special Entry programs (e.g. through UAC) and school type - references Dobson and Skuja (2005) who recommend new equity category based on school type due to 'schooling effect' on rank. James et al. 2008 = overview of universities that offer bonus points based on school attended. Discusses class rank models - pros and cons (p.28-9)
Section 3: Strategic considerations in use of selection criteria. Starts with discussion of 'non-school leavers' and mature students - STAT originally brought in for mature students but increasingly is being used for younger students. Discussion of postgraduate student (3.2, p.31-3) - some PGCW applications managed by central agency, but most PGCW/RHD/ International PG applications managed by individual institution at faculty/school/departmental level. Prior academic achievement = prominent criterion. Discusses how "unduly narrow or strict application of criteria" potentially disadvantages students from under-represented groups for RHD study (p.32). PGCW appears to be the same - criteria used require some qual judgement.
Conclusions: Important to acknowledge that reforms to selection and admissions would need to be complemented with outreach, engagement activities and effective support (p.33). Transparency of procedures and decisions also paramount. Also important to acknowledge behaviour changes (e.g. 'teaching to the test')

Context: Works from premise that on principle, social inclusive has been embraced by HEIs but in practice, it is difficult to operationalize in pedagogy. Located in Australian university with 14% low SES student population
Aim: To examine staff perceptions of social inclusion and inclusive pedagogies in one Australian university, particularly with regard to teaching low SES students. Starts from widening participation/ post-Bradley review context. Notes difficulties created by increasing casualization of academic workforce. Notes that attrition remains concerning (12.8% in 2012). Scopes literature on non-traditional students (incl. Bourdieu, Liz Thomas, Jennifer Lawrence) - particularly focusing on 'institutional habitus'. Also scopes SA work (McKenna, Smit) on deficit
Analytic frame: Foucauldian discourse analysis
Methodology: Mixed methods approach: online survey for all academic staff (n=272; 60% of whom = casual/sessional staff) and in-depth interviews with academic staff (n=32) - from variety of disciplines/ faculties and roles/responsibilities
Findings:
Discourse of inclusivity: survey responses = strong support for idea of inclusive teaching (86.5% agree/strongly agree) = essential and contributed to 'rich learning environment' (e.g "like putting a big blanket over whole cohort to make them feel included"). Two respondents questioned meaning of inclusivity - commenting that it sounds like a 'buzzword' and questioning how anyone could be opposed to inclusivity (p.328)
Enactments of inclusive pedagogies: many respondents concerned with equality (meaning equal access to materials) and requires extra work. 79% agreed that it is difficult to 'do' inclusive teaching well (construed as 'catering for difference' by one respondent and 'giving every student opportunity to participate' by another). Lack of time/ space= noted as significant barrier to successful inclusive teaching.
Challenges to inclusivity: 63% = being 'inclusive' not enough to overcome challenges faced by students. 22 respondents = viewed responsibility as residing with lecturer/ 28 respondents = viewed responsibility as residing with students (aka - their responsibility to seek help). 20 = students too underprepared to succeed.
Authors argue that findings suggest "strong sense of student responsibility in terms of inclusive practices" (p.331) - refuting Devlin's 2013 claim that such deficit positions are shifting [ha, as if!]. Authors also point to impact of casualization on inclusivity: "It is difficult to expect people to enact inclusion when they do not feel included or valued in the institution" (p.332)
Core argument: Similar to Devlin, argues for 'dual responsibility' to be shared by staff and students to move beyond deficit perspectives.

Context: Although ''transition'' is highly researched area in education, there has been limited empirical study on how shifts in the ways that knowledge is packaged and valued impact on students' reading and writing as they transition into HE.
Aim: 'To explore the impact of particular ways of packaging disciplinary knowledge on students' reading and writing transitions as they move from school (A-levels in this case) to undergraduate study' (p. 19).
Theoretical frame: Not specified in study.
Methodology: Longitudinal ethnographic approach; Research design: Foregrounded the contexts of production of the participants' reading & writing, as well as participants "emic" view on literacies; Participants: A-levels students (final year- Year 13, into their second year of undergraduate studies) (n=11); Data collected: Interview talk, students' texts, Facebook status updates, literacy logs & key curriculum documents from both educational levels; Research setting: Three different A-level providers - 1. Rural comprehensive secondary state school (Site 1), 2. Independent boys' school (Site 2), 3. Further Education (FE) college (Site 3).
Findings: 1) A-level reading: Pre-packaged sources and limited forms of knowledge - all participants utilised limited sources to support A-level learning; Textbooks - principal reading material; Sustained focus on assessment in textbooks - constraints students' developing literacies (overtly privileges 'an epistemology of recycling content in "correct" and narrow forms over process' - students are discouraged from experimenting with their thinking, reading & writing (p. 10); 2) A-level wider reading - Most participants (8) did not read beyond the textbook or materials assigned by teachers; 3 participants utilised school-endorsed publications (to support A-level learning); 3) A-level writing: Texts, practices and assessment - A-level curricula & assessment are 'largely uniform' (p. 12): similar genres of writing observed across institutions (5 categories: 'essays (for Humanities/Social Science subjects); short-answers and calculations (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics-STEM subjects); course- work assignments (English Literature, English Language, History, Chemistry, Biology); translation (Modern Foreign Languages-MFL); and exam-practice questions (all subjects)' (p. 12); significant difference in writing practices observed in Site 2: in-text citation & referencing was a regular aspect of school-writing practices for two boys; 4)University reading: Broader forms of knowledge written for "expert" audiences - participants were required to read beyond "core material" provided & utilise "new" texts, including academic books, academic journals, & disciplinary websites (p. 13); academic journals - particularly challenging for participants to adapt to, as they were 'substantially different' (p. 13) from types of reading material participants engaged with during their A-levels; participants utilised a range of "new" resources besides journal articles, including disciplinary websites, which presented challenges in types of knowledge students needed to adapt to; 5)University writing: Texts, practices and assessment - More varied than those experienced during A-levels; Types of writing at university described by participants: "The essay", laboratory reports, "textual analysis", collaboratively produced academic posters, reflective writing *writing varies according to courses.; the "essay" was the most common type of writing reported by students (10/11); all participants engaged with writing previously not experienced during their A-levels, especially for subjects not studied previously; changes to writing is also observed 'in terms of "increase"': number of assignments, word count, number of references and citations, level of independent engagement (p. 16); differences also observed in assessment: in terms of 'expectations around how knowledge should be constructed, presented and consumed' (p. 16).
Discussion: 1) Students' literacies in transition: The formality level & procedures around the production & submission of texts were 'markedly different' (p. 17) at the university level, compared to A-level institutions; Participants found the need to adapt their 'habitual writing practices' & 'learning conventions' (p. 17) very challenging; Epistemological level - university writing requires a varying engagement with knowledge, where students develop their own comprehension & ideas, and learn to take risks and be creative; A-levels writing is often treated as a 'vehicle for content, rather than an epistemological practice that carries meaning, power & identity (Lea & Street, 1998; Lillis & Scott, 2007) (p. 17). 2) Packaging, accessing & privileging different knowledges: Tricky epistemological transitions - stark differences observed in the treatment & knowledge of participants at A-level and at university; reading was a 'largely invisible' aspect of A-level writing, while at university level, reading is significantly more valuable, and is made 'a visible component' of the writing process via inclusion as an assessment criterion (p. 18); These differences therefore form the 'core of disconnections between school and university learning', therefore framing "transition-related" issues as 'essentially epistemological' (p. 18).
Core argument: 'Knowledge-as packaged in examination-board produced textbooks and magazines-is treated as a given at A-levels, yet it is treated as something to be located and constructed at university' (p. 18). However, 'limited attention has been paid to the underpinning elements of academic writing, namely practices of reading and sources of knowledge, particularly in the context of students' moving between educational levels. Examination of students' literacy practices in transition and in real time illustrates how some of the practices that are often overlooked in discussions of ''student writing''-such as locating, evaluating, synthesising and adapting to new forms of knowledge-fuel the challenges some students face when they enter HE' (p. 19).

Context: Focuses on R&R students and STEM - notes falling participation in physical science and maths in schools and under-representation of rural students in higher education. Also R&R students = underperforming (according to PISA scores) in STEM subjects (mathematical and scientific literacy). Examines perspectives of R&R STEM university students regarding intentions to complete and possibilities of withdrawing. Paper positioned at intersection between global concerns over STEM participation and remote/rural access to higher education. Literature review scopes STEM literature and R&R literature: notes issues related to schooling (rural students = consistently lower achievement in STEM school subjects than metro counterparts) and finances. Lack of experienced teachers in rural places = noted issue (two positions in teaching difficult to fill = rural posts and STEM roles). Other research shows that Year 10 rural students = had significantly less positive attitudes towards science than those in larger population centres (Lyons & Quinn, 2010). Also draws on research that suggests that rural students are more likely to consider deferral or withdrawal (particularly with reference to family commitments or financial issues, and issues related to feelings of not belonging)
Aim: To explore the experiences of rural students studying STEM subjects at university:
1. What are the responses of a sample of rural/remote Australian first year STEM students at Australian universities to the question: "I will probably decide to leave this course before I finish", and how do these compare to the other location categories?
2. What reasons are given by rural/remote students for considering withdrawing from their STEM university course?
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Draws from large-scale international IRIS project (Interests and Recruitment in Science). Data collected in Australia from 3496 STEM students from 30 universities. Survey instrument used with Likert-scale items (exploring factors behind choosing STEM/ experiences of first year). 2 items examined in this paper ("I will probably decide to leave this course before I finish" and an open-ended question eliciting reasons if so). Sample = 274 students from 'small rural or remote town' (266 responses)
Findings: At end of Year 1, R&R student = no more or less likely to drop out but 20% of rural cohort had considered withdrawing
224/266 = disagreed with the statement about considering leaving, 17 = neutral and 25 agreed/strongly agreed. This pattern of responses = similar to students from other geographic locations.
53 rural students had considered leaving; reasons included: changing to another course, unenjoyable course, lacking clear goals, content difficult, not sure what I want, cost of living, course = pathway elsewhere, distance, limited career prospects, workload = demanding (top 10).
Limitation = survey does not capture views of students who have already dropped out

Context: Set in context of individualised conceptualisation of education ('neoliberal imaginary') and driving productivity/ human capital theory - claims that educational panic is used by politicians and media to obscure persistent issues with inequity in education. Scopes critiques of equity as discourse - noting access = positioned as choice within market and relations with class/SES. Offers critique of 'third way politics' and its impact on Labor government (e.g. Rudd, 2007) = narrow conception of excellence and equity. Scopes literature on panic (David Marr) and shock doctrine (Naomi Klein) and 'manufactured crises' (Berliner & Biddle, 1995)
Aim: To examine perceived 'crisis' in 'teacher quality' and shifts away from discourses of equity in education; to examine "how problems related to educational equity are reframed as problems of 'quality' within neoliberal
regimes, and the mechanisms of this reframing in the public space" (p.117)
Theoretical frame: Argues that panic = neoliberal tool; draws on Goffman's (1974) framing theory for analysis and discourse analysis (Foucault0
Methodology: Case study of 'policy moment' in Australian higher education policy = 42 speeches, media texts and policy documents related to a single event = 'Gonski Review' in Sep 2012. Three level content analysis
Findings: In first level of analysis, equity did not emerge as own 'package'/ dominant contributor to frame - equity replaced with 'quality'. Three main packages/ themes:
1) Saving the nation's education system ("national moral crusade", p.124) - mocked by conservative press
2) School improvement - focus shifted from school funding to school improvement (my emphasis), including justification for NAPLAN
3) Teacher quality - e.g. raising university entrance requirements for teacher education
Core argument: Through analysis of the policy moment, it is evident that discourses shifted from equity to teacher quality and school improvement, based on a perception of crisis/ panic = related to performativity (Ball, 2012) "Discourses of quality are linked to audit cultures through the accountability and compliance structures that are invariably seen as the key to 'improvement'... As a consequence of the reframing of 'quality' at the hands of neoliberal discourses, teacher habitus is currently being impacted and reshaped by a number of linked and interlocking trajectories, each related to the discourse of quality" (p.136). However, such accountability has positive potential for making teachers more trusted/ vigilant and committed to contributing to public debate around education

Context: Conditions under which women work in academia, responding to perceived loss of focus on higher education in debates about gender and education. Authors argue that 'old norms' of gendered being in the academy begin in experiencing undergraduate study as a student and are added to in graduate school. Authors argue that in addition to a general improvement in conditions and shifts in theoretical focus, the expansion/diversification of higher education has captured a lot of the attention, and this work has largely been degendered. Authors note that at the time of writing, there was limited scholarly attention to parenting and academia.
Aim: To ask why gendered barriers for women in academia persist, and what strategies women use
Theoretical frame: Critical feminist policy rubric (Bensimon & Marshall, 1997)
Methodology: Draws on two research projects (one by each author) concerning women academics, conducted in mid-90s (see p.7-9 for details)
Findings: Common findings relating to 'endemic concerns' between the two projects:
Challenges in balancing home and work: most of participants had non-traditional family/ home circumstances (i.e. they didn't follow traditional gender roles at home), "yet most of the women had some concerns related to having or caring for children and these needed to be understood within university structures that institutionalized career paths that did not take much account of family dilemmas" (p.9), but women in studies = positioned differently, according to age, children, age of children -older women had fewer concerns about fitting work around life (and vice versa), but had previously experienced challenges because of lack of maternity policies. Some older women described planning children for May/ June to fit in with the academic calendar; others described being discouraged from having children. Younger women = more actively tussling with questions about when to have children/ struggling to plan their work around children. Accessing childcare was difficult for some of the participants, particularly for single parents. Most participants described stress, tiredness and challenges with sleeping. Women who haven't yet had children reported wondering about when it would 'fit' into their careers. Authors highlight the temporal dimensions ('clashing clocks', p.11), but also note that a challenge is the suppression of sharing of concerns/ challenges by parents, leading to the authors describing these issues as taboo (p.11)
Evaluation/ performativity: authors describe institutional scrutiny placed on academics (tenure/ promotion) - age was also significant. Stress about tenure/ promotion always existed, but measurements shifted from support for students to individual achievements with grants and publications. Motherhood = viewed as a barrier to production, international travel and networking; anxieties = related to self-esteem and self-presentation. Obtaining tenure did not necessarily bring the participants relief.
Health and stress: common theme = fatigue/ burn out, related to particular times of year/ career and 'cultural taxation' (Tierney & Bensimon, 1996), particularly for women from minority groups (self-)tasked with care and mentoring for minority students. Some participants thought the reason was internalised feelings of not doing/ being good enough; others attributed the stress to intensification of workload.
Coping strategies: working harder and longer (getting up early and going to bed late), with leisure time for some spent playing with children. Another strategy is to find and focus on 'sources of agency and empowerment' (p.17). Less reliance on strategies related to resistance and collectivising (examples = sharing promotion applications; creating a women's caucus)
Core argument: Meritocratic discourses/ performance metrics are generally genderblind (under name of 'fairness') but gender, and parenting in particular, creates considerable challenges. Modes of surveillance are often internalised and are embodied (e.g. sleeplessness). Women may feel like they need to work harder and longer to compete with colleagues, partly because of a perceived need to 'prove themselves' in the male-dominated academy. It's important to break silence and discuss taboos.

Context: First-in-family males from low SES backgrounds in Australian higher education (elite courses). Young FinF men remain underrepresented in Australian higher education. Authors position article at nexus of literature on identity/ self-crafting/ navigation of social capital for 'non-traditional' students and accrual and deployment of social capital. Literature view of FinF and aspirational masculinities: working class men seeking access to elite institutions face significant barriers. Author draws on Reay's (2004) work that argues that emotional capital is depreciated through the process of accruing social/cultural capital while at university, leaving students (and young men in particular) open to 'psychic costs' (see p.3). Underrepresentation of low SES men = related to gender roles, pervasive depiction of men as 'breadwinners', the lure of employment in other trades.
Aim: To explore "the experiences of two FIF males as they transition from secondary school to elite courses in prestigious universities" so as to explore how experience drives strategy development (abstract); to add to knowledge about young men and the accrual of social capital/ mobility; to focus on "the differentiated ways in which they accrue social capital and the relationship this has to how they craft their identities in higher education" (p.2)
Theoretical frame: Bourdieu/ social capital; self-crafting as constant identity negotiation
Methodology: Qualitative case study of two young low SES men - Lucas and Adam - high-aspiring/ academic attainment who studied in (low) fee-paying schools in low SES locales and went on to study in elite courses in universities. Students were recruited from high school (see p.5 for detail of recruitment and sampling). Lucas = from Western Sydney studied Law and Economics; Adam from North Adelaide studied Science. Data collection included interviews and visual methods
Findings: Each student case study described in detail
Lucas: wanted to study at Uni of Sydney; was confident public speaker and participated in school life; understood the pathway into his chosen course/uni; he viewed himself as different from his peers because of his extracurricular activities (e.g. Youth Parliament), which introduced him to people outside of his local network. Lucas didn't get the ATAR he needed, but he did get into USyd and took on self-entrepreneurial/ neoliberal subjectivities (getting the maximum out of every opportunity) by joining many societies and engaging in bridging (contrasted with bonding) activities with middle class peers. Lucas is also able to capitalise on his biography: "he is able to use his social mobility biography to his advantage; the son of a concreter from the Western suburbs of Sydney studying at an elite university appeals to the right-wing individualist ideology of pulling oneself up by one's bootstraps" (p.9).
Adam: wanted to study science at Uni Adelaide. Adam = competitive race walker, which offered confidence but he was anxious about his exams. Described as a 'robot' by one teacher; Adam saw it as hard work and focused on his academics at school, quitting his p/t job in Year 12 to focus on his studies. Adam = shy and spoke about recognising he would need to work to make friends. Once at university, he described enjoying the social aspect with likeminded people. Unlike Lucas, Adam didn't join university clubs (time and money constraints) so didn't accrue the social bridges that Lucas did.
Both participants worked to enhance their sense of belonging and make university work for them (p.11).
Authors note that social capital = ephemeral, with temporality a concern for bridges made, which necessitates adaptability with self-crafting.
Core argument: Article argues the need to develop self-crafting strategies; the article thus highlights "the nuances between accessing social capital and operationalising social capital to one's advantage, which may involve varying degrees of success depend- ing on who is playing their hand, the stakes, as well as the context. While it would appear that actively fostering social connections makes university life more enjoyable, further research needs to be done to explore how the accrual of social capital can be used to counter- act the perpetuation of inequitable education structures" (p.13).

Context: Examines occupational aspirations of 'lower classes' - rejects the thesis that lower classes have lower aspirations (not or managerial or professional jobs); draws on socio-psych reading of aspiration (multiple factors/ lower classes = more strongly motivated
Aim: To compare the actual and relative aspirations of male high school seniors to test these hypotheses:
1) absolute occupational aspirations of higher/middle class = higher than those of lower classes
2) Relative occupational aspirations show lower class participants expect/ prefer higher occupational status than fathers
3) Lower classes more inclined than those from middle and upper strata to reduce their occupational aspirations when faced with the necessity of choosing between their preferred and anticipated occupations. (p.704-5)
Theoretical frame: Social psychology
Methodology: Questionnaire administered to probability sample of male high school seniors in Washington State in 1954 on occupational plans/ aspirations. Results analysed according to absolute and relative standard (absolute: compare lower and higher class; relative= compared with father's occupation).
Findings:
Hypothesis 1: There was "a direct relationship be-tween present social level and future occupational aspiration for both preferred and anticipated occupations" (p.706)
Hypothesis 2: Correct - lower classes preferred and anticipated higher occupation status than fathers
Hypothesis 3: not supported by the data
Core argument: A "measurement of aspiration for comparative purposes would likely be most accurate if it took relativities into account" (p.709).

Context: Examines relationship between social class and social integration. Works from hypothesis that working class students need social integration more than middle class students because their parents usually do not have experience of higher education (aka they are more likely to be FinF)
Methodology: Meta analysis of 35 studies on SES and social integration; analysis = different measures (social class, gender, year of publication, type of social integration)
Findings: There is a positive correlation between low SES students and lower levels of social integration (and higher levels with middle class students)
Core argument: "working-class students tend to be less integrated than middle-class students in higher education institutions" (p.31).

Context: Works from historical context (equity has long been a theme in Australian higher education). Focus on equity = justified for many reason, "ranging from moral and political rationales to reasons of economic
returns and efficiency" (p.6). Policy making = political process that requires policymakers to "assemble, organise and order values, configuring them in such a way as to render them more or less consistent and implementable" (p.9) = privileging some over others. According to Stone (2001), core values privileged in liberal democracies = equity, efficiency, liberty and community (but these are contested and polysemous) - see p.10. Authors scope historical treatment of equity in HE. Shifts from Keynsian to neoliberal sector/policies outlined brilliantly in Table 1 (p.13). Authors also note connections to schooling, in terms of increased numbers of Year 12 completers, and in an unmet expectation that better rates of school completion would resolve equity issues with participation of particular groups. Authors also note increased federal involvement and funding in certain parts of the school sector (e.g. NAPLAN), which tend to disadvantage equity students (e.g. low SES students). Authors argue this "regime of data-driven accountability is part of the governance turn associated with neo-liberalism, which views data as central to managing the 'system at a distance', and comparisons as central to this form of governance" (p.15).
Aim: Examines the Bradley Review document in order "to underscore the performative character of policy in attempts to bring together a range of considerations that might not normally be aligned" (abstract)
Theoretical frame: Deleuzian notion of assemblage (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987; also Ong & Colliers, 2004; Sassen, 2006; Olds, 2006) = it helps us to "understand the always-emergent conditions of the present" (p.7) and underscores performativity in policy. Assemblage = bringing together different ideas to evoke (new) concepts, with a focus on: "adaptivity rather than fixity or essences, spatio-temporal specificities, rather than linear and discrete determinations" (p.7) = rejection of positivistic notions and instead view relationships between concepts as temporal and dynamic. Where the juxtaposition = discomforting/ incongruent/inconsistent = emergent properties of assemblage; indeed, "theory itself is an assemblage that operates as specific conceptual combinations that are constructed to address specific problems" (p.7).
Methodology: Analysis of values in Bradley Review [no explicit methodological framing offered]
Findings: Analysis illuminates the messiness of social world evoked in policy. Authors argue a lot of 'hard political work' went into synthesising the different values together into coherent message
Positioning of social equity in higher education = "a new 'nesting' of values has replaced older assemblages, through processes that are contingent, and are affected by the changing political architecture of the state" (p.8).
Bradley Review = "framed at the macro level by a human capital discourse and one which views deregulation as the way of achieving its equity goals" (p.15) - through its explicit foregrounding Australia's position against other OECD countries and warning about future competitiveness without additional funding/ widening of the system. Also evident in suggestion to create demand-driven system and provision of new technologies of surveillance (accreditation/ QA/ outcome measures/ participation monitoring). At same time, it calls for alternative, 'funds of knowledge' approaches for teaching indigenous students and need to look beyond expanding access = juxtaposition of values.
Report "reproduces many of the current neoliberal assumptions about the role of higher education in the globalising knowledge economy" (p.17), as a result of struggling to resolve tensions between social equity and market logics. This results in narrow conceptions of social equity that are constrained by the 'policy as numbers' approach that emerge from the dominance of neoliberal imaginary and framed in technological terms. Thus, "Equity is thus re-articulated in terms of a human capital theory that assumes a necessarily competitive view of human nature and social relations" (p.17).
Conflation of excellence and equity against context of globalization and global discourses = proliferated around the world through inter-governmental organisations like OECD and World Bank that serve to expand ideological and political positions (such as neoliberalism) at a never-before-seen scale (including greater mechanisms of surveillance and accountability/ comparable systems). Based on a new theory of human capital that includes social equity, the authors argue that "in a global economy, performance is increasingly linked to people's knowledge stock, skills level, learning capabilities and cultural adaptability" (p.18), which require policies that support labour flexibility through reforms to education and training and deregulation of the market
Core argument: That social/educational equity cannot be understood in general terms: it needs to be viewed as an assemblage of competing and contrasting values such as excellence, autonomy and efficiency + focus on markets = 'new neoliberal imaginary' that redefines education in economic terms, related to notions of efficiency within the market (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). The Bradley Review "rearticulates the meaning of equity in terms of an underlying focus on market efficiency" (p.19).

Aim: To foreground and provide a rationale for the continued focus on equity (note: this paper was produced the year before the Bradley Review) and to 'myth-bust' six assumptions about equity
Key points from literature review: Equity usually involved vague notions of merit, fairness and equality of opportunity (p.2); it is difficult to make comparisons of patterns of access to HE on basis of low SES because of use of different indicators and scales. Internationally, comparisons are difficult because HE is classified differently across the world. James notes that Australia's participation patterns for equity groups were "far from satisfactory for a nation that takes pride in its egalitarianism" (p.5).
Findings: Presents 6 myths for critique (p.10-12):
1. Expanding the HE system/ increasing places will improve patterns of participation for equity groups
An increase in numbers will not necessarily change proportional representation (since proved correct)
2. Free or lower cost of HE will improve patterns of participation for equity groups
Needs differential levels of financial support: "everything possible must be done to achieve minimal costs for students who otherwise would not be able to participate..." (p.11)
3. Improving equity involves the removal of barriers to access
Challenge is to not only remove barriers but also to build possibilities and choices
4. The onus is with universities to resolve equity issues
The role of school and wider society needs to be brought into the mix
5. Widening Participation will lower standards
Notion of standards based on students entrance qualifications = 'shallow thinking' (p.11)
6. Students can be selected on basis of academic merit
Critique offered here of investment in measurements such as ENTER (now ATAR) as an indicator of merit: they are at best partial measurements of 'cumulative advantage or disadvantage'
Recommendations:
- Build policy and practice out of a multi-causal understanding of why under-representation is as it is
- Improve definition and measurement of SES
- Set targets/ provide incentives for universities (now in place)
- Outreach into schools much earlier
- Consider flexible admissions policies (less reliant on ENTER)
- Renew Year 1 curricula
- Develop better ways of measuring graduate outcomes
Special note: Consider international students = 25% of student body
Relevant for UON: Mention of Newcastle's 'thriving Foundation program that is without parallel in Australian HE' (p.7)

Context: Explores experiences of students from diverse backgrounds, conceptualisations of whom "render them as disadvantaged compared with 'traditional' school leaver students" (p.12). Positioned against backdrop of Bradley Review and 20/40 reforms. Social inclusion = "the processes or actions taken to ameliorate the impact of problems of disadvantage and/or to counter the processes that create them" (p.13). Scopes literature to illustrate student body is diversifying
Aim: To highlight how students from diverse backgrounds succeed in higher education
Theoretical frame: Draws on phenomenographical/ constructivist viewpoints but no explicit conceptual frame offered
Methodology: 3-stage project (longitudinal) - focusing on pathways in, how they were managing and reflections on experiences post-completion. Narrative inquiry. Interview 1 = 16 students (9 = off campus, 7 = on campus); interview 2 = 13 students. 5 in 40s, 11 in 20s or 30s. 3 = NESB
Findings:
Planning
Financial planning important to prepare for study = 7 reorganised work; 4 reorganised family finances. Unpaid work placements needed particular planning
Personal planning (drawing on previous study experiences, improving English for 2/3 NESB.
12 managed multiple demands: 8 = paid work; 7 = children/caring responsibilities; 5 = voluntary commitments.
Managing time
Organisations emphasised. 15 had dedicated study areas/ 8 = developed work schedules. 4 benefitted from flexibility of off-campus study
Changes in circumstances
All experienced changes and challenges: mentions language/ 'academic skills' (p.20), lack of understanding from friends/family/ off-campus difficulties/ isolation/ balancing childcare
Sources of support
All = family; 10 = partner; 7 = parental; 5 = friends outside course. Also supportive peer support; important to find similar friends for international students. 8 = received support from academic staff. "Limited support was sought from other university areas, including central university support services... Again, participants usually did not emphasise seeking this support" (p.23)
Implications for universities:
- Offer flexible study arrangements
- Professional development with focus on social inclusion
- Guidelines for academic support at departmental level
- Advice to families of Gen1 students
Core argument: Conceptualisation of student experience needs to be broadened to include students from diverse backgrounds/ to acknowledge diversity and heterogeneity in student population
"...students from non-traditional backgrounds are less likely to have access to physical and emotional resources to assist them to cope with difficult situations. For example, they frequently lack role models with higher educational qualifications to provide psychological support. Thus, there is stronger likelihood that contextual factors will have an impact on their study performance, or even their continuation of study" (p.24)

Context: Although there is extensive literature on socially inclusive pedagogy, there is a widening gap in the educational outcomes due to social disadvantage across OECD countries, including Australia, regardless of their increasing levels of overall wealth in aggregate terms (OECD, 2013, 2015).
Aim: To 'advocate a general disposition on which to build a social inclusive pedagogy' (p. 354) and describe the three principles involved: a) a belief that all students bring something valuable to their learning environment; b) a design which values differences while enabling access & engagement with dominance; c) actions that work with both students and their respective communities.
Theoretical frame: Pedagogic work (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990).
Methodology: Essay.
Discussion: A) Elements of Pedagogic Work: Belief, Design and Action - 1) Belief-in students' assets rather than their deficits: first principle of socially inclusive pedagogy - a refocus on students' assets is needed; students' assets are referred to as "funds of knowledge", the ""historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being" (Moll et al., 1992, p. 133), or the "virtual school bag", which highlights the "the importance of understanding community-based, popular, and extended cultural knowledges . . . as assets that are normally discounted" (Wrigley, Lingard, & Thomson, 2012, p. 99); 2)Design-of "Two-Ways" Pedagogy: Second principle of building a socially inclusive pedagogy - to 'value difference' (p. 352), although this should be done while offering access to and allowing for 'critical engagement with, dominance' (p. 352); need for developing a 'counter-hegemonic' (Connell, 1993) (p. 352) pedagogy which acknowledges both dominance & difference, which shows a commitment to 'epistemological inclusion' (Wrigley et al., 2012) (p. 352); 3)Action - "Working with" rather than "acting on" students and their communities: third principle to build a socially inclusive pedagogy - 'tactics that seek to not simply identify students' prior knowledge, interest or needs, but to engage students' own senses in their "sense-making" of the world, in practice' (p. 352) (Probyn, 2004, p. 22); B)Implications for teacher education - i) Importance of building ongoing opportunities for student teachers to utilise the socially inclusive pedagogy framework to critically reflect on their professional growth & pedagogic practice; ii) Need to recommend coursework tasks which encourages students' critical evaluation of their own HE trajectories & audit their individual forms of capital.
Core argument: The creation of opportunities for marginalized groups via a socially inclusive pedagogy-cognisant of all three elements of belief, design, and action is required to ensure the transformation of schools and teacher education.

Context: Examines issues affecting low SES students in UK higher education.
Theoretical frame: None explicit
Methodology: Essay
Findings: Social justice understood as "fair access to rewards for all individuals and groups within a society" (p.23), and universities have a role to play in achieving this. Notes historical context (Robbins report in 1963) and contemporary employment-focused iteration of higher education - makes comparison with Scandinavian approaches (free HE), compared to class-mediated context in England. Discusses how compulsory schooling contributes to current situation, particularly the role of private education to skew the system towards rich (comparison again to Scandinavia - Finland and Sweden). Describes the problem of 'working class' students feeling silenced/ a lack of belonging to HE in general and professional programs (Law, Medicine) compared with middle class students. To make a significant difference to stratification of HE, attitudes need to shift across whole of society (e.g., not tacitly discriminating on basis of accent/ dress).
Marketing/ recruitment: The ways and means of marketing = important for the stratification of HE (participation in and within the institutions themselves): "Universities and society need the best possible matches between the students and their subjects of study even if only from the standpoints of economics and efficiency. The academic
community and the whole of society lose out when talented non-traditional students avoid some subjects just because they feel they might not 'fit in'" (p.25). Author argues that UK could experiment with open access (like Germany), but this would require substantial transformation of the system.
Curriculum, pedagogy and support: social justice needs whole-of-institutional investment and support. Suggests strategies like flexible timetabling, evening/weekend tuition, online learning. Notes issues with support (targeting without othering), makes suggestions based on Open University model. Argues that peer support = beneficial, especially when networks brought with (or not) are considered - notes efforts by Goldsmiths. Lecturers/ educators need to plan student-centred and engaging teaching and methods of communication between educator and student need to be well-considered. Considers how a new curriculum model - e.g. the Melbourne Model - might be appropriated to achieve social justice aims. Universities must not 'water down' their programs to meet the needs of non-traditional students: "When universities work on matters of quality, everybody benefits" (p.27)
Core argument: Merely opening access is not enough to achieve social justice through higher education

Context: Disabilities.
Speaking to an audience of like-minded people so explicitly does not need to debate the merits of inclusive education, but cautions against resting on assumptions about shared definitions: "The absence of a language for inclusive education that stipulates its vocabulary and grammar increases the risk for political misappropriation" (p.167). Discusses inclusive education in context of special education (with particular focus on disabilities). Frames discussion around introduction of special/ inclusive education - notes how inclusive education = narrowly framed around disorders and defects, rather than acknowledging inclusive education= for all students.
Aim: To discuss "human rights and the production and reproduction of meaning as it adheres to the intersection of disablement and education" (p.169). Asks questions about how to teach and what research to draw on when teaching education students about inclusive education
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Essay
Discussion: Scopes the evolution of 'special education'. Argues that "The exclusion and `othering' of young people through the forms and processes of education is endemic" and "The context of education policy
creates the conditions for exclusion that militate against an inclusive educational project" (p.172). Makes the point that schooling was never designed to be for everyone, so the more education has opened to the masses, the more it has "developed the technologies of exclusion and containment" (p.172). Makes 3 propositions for teacher education:
1) inclusive education = cultural politics
2) consider cross-cultural dialogue (inter/intra-disciplinary with a focus on social justice)
3) teaching focus should shift to difference and identity politics
Core argument: For inclusive education to be congruent with hope for social justice, need to confront political nature of teacher education, and work against tokenistic and surface "strive against the notion that compulsory special education units for trainee teachers is better than nothing" (p.175).

Context: Historic overview of Australian HE through the lens of equity/ social justice. Tracing how HE policy is shaped by (and shapes) social and economic drivers and policies and social justice intentions in HE.
Theoretical frame: Draws on Gale & Densmore's (2000) three-part characterisation of social justice: distributive, retributive, recognitive.
Discussion: 1850 - University of Sydney opened, 1853 - University of Melbourne opened, 1874 - University of Adelaide opened, 1890 - University of Tasmania opened. Little is known about Australian HE students before WWII. In 1945, there were 7 universities with 15,600 students; in 1975 there were 17 universities and 7- AEIs with 273,000 students; in 2007 there were 39 universities and other private HEIs with 772,000 domestic students and 294,000 international students.
Widening participation has reached saturation point for the middle-classes; "equity in higher education has now become as much a matter of economic necessity as a matter of social justice" (p.32)
1988-90 (Dawkins reforms) - brought in HECs and merged universities and CAEs: "private gains of higher education became paramount in policy discourse, replacing the previous emphasis on the overall public good" (p.36). The Howard government then pushed the neoliberal agenda (cut the threshold/increased HECs) on the basis that industry and individuals profited.
In 2002-3, Nelson commissioned a review of equity groups and performance - findings: women, NESB and people with disabilities showed improved participation; low SES, remote/rural and indigenous - little/no progress. The question was here raised as to whether men in some subject areas should be considered an equity group. Gender was removed, but universities were to continue monitoring it and the other equity groups.
Rudd/Gillard government (Labor) were voted in on an 'education revolution' platform; they created the Ministry of Social Inclusion. The Bradley report (2008) placed emphasis on social justice/ equity - foregrounding the transformative role of HE ("must be a core responsibility of all institutions that accept public money" (Gillard, 2009). Subsequent created of HEPPP provided the financial means for more collaboration between schools/VET/HE.
Core argument: Each attempt at expansion has been accompanied by distributive notions of social justice with periods of consolidation and retributive notions of social justice. Social policy has become subsumed by economic policy. Finally, there is no equity without epistemological equity - it's no good letting people in if academic knowledges and discourses and practices prevent engagement and participation.