Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Claims for social justice: redistributive and recognitive - resulting in perception of need to make choices between class/identity politics, social democracy and multiculturalism. Fraser's thesis = choices = false: justice needs both redistribution and recognition - but how to combine?
Lecture focuses on moral-philosophical and social-theoretical dimensions of combining redist + recog. Poses 3 Qs:
1. Is recognition really a matter of justice, or is it a matter of self-realization?
2. Do distributive justice and recognition constitute two distinct, sui generis, normative paradigms, or can either of them be subsumed within the other?
3. Does justice require the recognition of what is distinctive about individuals or groups, or is recognition of our common humanity sufficient?
Fraser questions thinking that equates recognition with self-realisation; she argues it is unfair that some individuals and groups are denied the possibility of full participation on account of their backgrounds. This notion of justice allows for multiple possibilities for recognition (thus denying normative/ singular notions of what/who counts). This therefore gives individuals agency and capacity to create their own conditions of recognition, in "that it is up to men and women to define for themselves what counts as a good life and to devise for themselves an approach to pursuing it, within limits that ensure a like liberty for others" (p.3) = 'participation parity'. This therefore positions misrecognition as 'status injury' based on social relations rather than individual attributes/ behaviours. This social view foregrounds institutional patterns of denial/ misrecognition = "patterns of cultural value that constitute one as comparatively unworthy of respect or esteem" (p.3). This view of justice/recognition also rejects the notion that everyone is entitled to equitable amounts of esteem (because if everyone has it, esteem ceases to exist).
Can recognition and redistribution be reduced into one category? No = such a theory needs to include patterns of cultural value - not all misrecognition = result of maldistribution; "It must consider whether institutionalized patterns of interpretation and valuation impede parity of participation in social life" (p.4). Also need to consider wider socio-economic forces (such as neoliberal logics that push competition, marketization and profit).
Fraser promotes a bivalent view that recognises redistribution and recognition as distinct perspectives on/ dimensions of justice.
For parity of participation = 2 conditions must be met: 1) participants' voices must be sought and heard; 2) institutional cultural patterns of value must express equal respect for all participants and equal opportunity to achieve social esteem.
Answer to Q3: no, but critical social theory is needed to understand (mis)recognition in context.
Perspectival dualism = social theory that "can accommodate differentiation, divergence, and interaction at every level" (p.7) = constitutes two analytic perspectives that can be applied to any domain (recognition perspective = identify cultural dimensions or redistributive economic policies; redistribution perspective = focus on economic dimensions of recognitive issues. Perspectival dualism poses these questions:
Does the practice in question work to ensure both the economic conditions and the cultural conditions of participatory parity? Or does it, rather, undermine them? (p.9)

Context: Editorial for special issue on social justice/ neoliberalism. Argues that neoliberal goes beyond the economic focus and is "a comprehensive socio-political paradigm that informs our sense of ethical responsibility and social justice" (p.1) and creates subjectivities such as timeliness, accountability, self-entrepreneurship, individualism, competition etc. SI sought perspectives on 'grappling' with philosophical, social, theoretical and practical aspects of contemporary higher education.
Fovet & Giles = explore whether neoliberalism and critical theory can work together in context of disability provision
Sandberg = spaces of subversion in enterprise university in Canada - the 'alternative campus tour' explores uncomfortable stories/ public histories of land of campus.
Peacock = critical analysis of outreach program in Aus (UQ?) = conflation of WP outreach activity and behavior management.
Burke, Stevenson, Whelan = Foucauldian analysis of impact of WP on teaching practices in England - neoliberal discourses of teaching excellence resonate internationally
Whitty & Clement = examination of WP policy in UK and Australia resulting in mixed results. Offer research agenda for future.
Core argument: "social justice work is not always and everywhere incompatible with neoliberalism" (p.2)

Context: Capability = broad normative framework for examining "individuals' effective freedoms to achieve valuable beings and doings" (abstract). Set in context of global anxiety about rise in China's power. Work from Ball's notion of policy intents and effects = policy rarely has a singular focus and are not always taken up as intended. It is not therefore always clear what policies are intended to do/ what result is intended. "...policy meanings, values and assumptions are constituted in texts and discourses" (p.811). Argues that a deeper understanding of education capability = not reflected in recent policy: "In these policy documents, capability is defined in terms of learning outcomes and social justice goals are framed in terms of improving educational outcomes for disadvantaged groups" (p.816).
Aim: To examine positioning/ use of 'capability' in the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper.
Theoretical frame: Sen's notion of capability - focus on 'people's substantive opportunities' (abstract) = "The central proposition of the capability approach is that quality of life, deprivation, inequality and injustice as well as the level of development and poverty in society should primarily be evaluated in relation to people's substantive freedoms not the resources they possess or their self-evaluated level of preference satisfaction" (p.812-13).
Methodology: 'Critical policy analysis' - 'policy archaeology' - examining the social justice intents of the Australia in the Asian Century
Findings: Analysis identifies four key indicators of a capability-based account of social justice intents in education policy/ policy effects. Examines: human agency (v. human capability; p.819-21); social commitment (v. market logic; p.821-22); conversion factors (v. resources distribution; p.822-23); adaptive aspirations (v. preference satisfaction; p.8.23-24).
Capability = defined as "as knowledge, skills and competence that people and businesses need in order to be productive" (p.818). Capability-based account of social justice = 2 central intentions - capability for and capability through education
Capability for education (removing barriers for access to, and opportunities promoting choice in education = particular possibility for curriculum and pedagogy)
Capability through education (assumes education is a "foundational capability in itself" - p.817); "underscores the value of education for achieving skills and knowledge that generate socio-economic benefits, including
better employment opportunities, improved levels of health, active civic participation, and recognition and reward" (p.818).
Capability for education: The Australia in the Asian Century White Paper "construes capability as an individual's knowledge and competence in generic and specific skills rather than social justice notions of real opportunities and freedoms" (p.817). Attention to choice, agency or experience = missing; rather it "emphasizes the need for widening access to education and thereby broadening the pool of skills and competences the nation needs to benefit from the emerging regional economy" (p.817).
Capability through education: focus = instrumentalist purposes of education (contributing to national economic future) - education = becoming Asia-capable (Gillard, 2012)
Focus = distribution of resources (not recognitive)
Core argument: Re/misappropriation of capability as social justice driver: "the social justice intent of a capability approach appears to be overtaken in the White Paper by an emphasis on outcomes, performance and functionings that seek to serve the nation's economic interests more than the interests of students, especially the disadvantaged (abstract). "The capability perspective takes into account both intrinsic values and instrumental roles of education. That is, it duly recognizes that education generates economic and non-economic returns, promotes agency and supports social mobility of disadvantaged groups in society" (p.825).

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: Draws on survey data from Australian secondary school students. Describes aspirations as "a fundamental part of a student's decision making process and ultimately impact on the choices made by the individual (in this case to attend higher education)" (p.116). SES = measured by parents' educational background/ ethnic background = based on language spoken at home. Makes claim this is the first such study to explore post-school aspirations and cultural diversity.
Aim: To explore whether SES and cultural background impact on aspirations (secondary school level; Melbourne); to consider validity of 'area measures' as a way of identifying SES
Theoretical frame: Draws lightly on structure and agency: capital (Bourdieu), social mobility (Boudon), agency (Archer)
Methodology: Paper based on responses to 'Aspirations Online' survey in 2006-7 (Yr 9-12; n = 2189; 36 schools in Melbourne's metropolitan western suburbs: 23 public, 6 independent, 7 Catholic schools). Slightly different surveys used for Yr 9-10 and Yr 11-12. Compares data against the 'On Track' school leaver survey (DEECD, 2008)
Findings:
High SES students are more likely to aspire to higher education and low SES students are more likely to aspire to VET or work; this is stronger for NESB students: "the preference for higher education is strongest among students from more recently arrived non-English speaking groups from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Preference for higher education is weakest among students who were, or whose parents were, born in Oceania (principally New Zealand and the Pacific Islands)" (p.122). The majority of students aspire to higher education (51.2% chose 'university full time' as their preferred aspiration) but enrolments do not reflect this. CALD students are more likely to perceive receiving higher levels of support from parents. However, there is a 'considerable gap' (20%, p.127) between the number of enrolments of the level of [voiced] aspiration.
Use of postcode method of measuring SES finds no link between SES and post-school aspirations
Core argument: Aspirations are linked to SES. Preference for higher education is stronger in NESB households. Argues for the need for 'granulated' measures of SES that are based on parents' educational background rather than postcode.

Context: Research commissioned by Higher Education Council (HEC). At the time, low SES students = half as likely as mid/high SES peers to go to university. "With the expectation of completing secondary schooling now close to a social norm, tertiary education remains the locus of differing class expectations regarding educational participation" (p.49)
Aim: To investigate attitudes of senior secondary students towards higher education
Theoretical frame: Based on data previously collected from 7000 students from NSW, VIC, WA for HEC
Methodology: Based on data collected in 1998 by CSHE and YRC: students from Yr 10, 11, 12 from stratified schools (urban/rural/isolated, SES and gender). Survey asked students about post-school priorities/ intentions
Findings:
"The study reveals appreciable social stratification in the opinions of senior secondary students about the relevance and attainability of a university education" (Exec Summary). Differences in aspirations/attitudes = based on SES (biggest factor), gender and geographic location.
90% expressed desire to go to further study (in ideal circumstances) = 2/3 = university; _ = TAFE
High SES = stronger confidence in getting to university study (approx 70%) compared with 50% mid-SES and 42% low SES students. 16% low SES desired uni but did not think it was possible.
Low SES = more likely to view TAFE as more useful; have weaker interest in future subject(s); less confident that their parents supported desire to go to HE; stronger motivation/interest to earn money after school. Also, less confident academic results = good enough for entry to university; less likely to believe subjects studied at school = good for uni study.
Low SES = more likely to view cost as barrier to university study. 41% believed families would not be able to support costs and 1/3 perceived that they would have to self-support if they went to uni. View of cost as deterrent = heightened for rural students.
Gender: females more likely to show commitment to school. Males = less likely to see relevance and attainability of higher education. Females more likely to believe friends will go to uni and more likely to believe their teachers were supporting that aspiration.
Level of parental education = most closely tied with students' aspirations for uni study
Core argument: Lower participation of low SES appears to be "created by the cumulative effect of the relative absence of encouraging factors and the presence of a stronger set of inhibiting factors" (p.xi). Five areas for further consideration:
1) measurement of SES (parental education = better than postcode method)
2) more research needed to understand how HECS is perceived, especially by low SES students/ families
3) more research into early outreach/ collaborations between universities and schools
4) more research to ascertain influence of curriculum on students' aspirations/ how can curriculum accommodate p/t work
5) system-wide rethink of selection procedures = "vital ingredient" for making progress on access/entry for low SES students

Context: Set in Australian context where recent policy and funding efforts have concentrated on raising aspirations for higher education, especially in low SES students in relation to 20/40 targets set in Bradley Review (2008). Discusses the appropriacy of offering career advice in Year 10 when pathways to post-school destinations are set in motion before this age. Also makes the point that relatively little is known of younger students' aspirations or insight into how aspirations change over time
Aim: To test two key assumptions that underpin recent efforts to raise aspirations in low SES students: 1) that low SES student have lower career aspirations and 2) outreach activities are appropriate for secondary school students.
Methodology: Quantitative study. Paper maps career aspirations of [different] students' aspirations in Years 4,6,8,10 with their SES and other demographic information. Two RQs drove the paper: 1) how early do career aspirations take shape? 2) how do career aspirations vary by SES? Data drawn from Year 2 of 4-year study through purposeful sampling (50% schools metropolitan/ provincial) and used school-level Index of Community Socio-Economic Advantage to determine SES (in line with NSW DET). Also examined NAPLAN and demographic data for each student. Team developed measure of occupational certainty (certain, tentative, unformed)/ prestige/ justification. 3504 students in total surveyed.
Discussion: Aspirations of younger students similar to those of older students; weak relationship between age and occupational prestige (older students chose slightly more prestigious careers). Older students more likely to justify choice on basis of interests and strengths = students draw on dominant discourses of career education. With regards to SES, weak/ moderate relationship between SES and job prestige but vast majority of all participants expressed interest in professional or skills/paraprofessional careers (vet, teacher, sportsperson = consistently in top 5). High SES more likely to justify choice according to interest; low SES more likely to cite money as reason. Students with higher prior achievement (NAPLAN) more likely to be unclear about future career (possibly due to array of options available to them)

Context: Outlines and critiques WP model, drawing on international research from USA, Palestine and Singapore. Offers critique of intention to expand access (from 3 UK reports on lifelong learning: Kennedy, Dearing, Fryer)
Aim: To outline a critique of WP as articulated by 3 UK reports and other UK-based work
Theoretical frame: Foucault and Bourdieu
Methodology: Essay
Findings: Critiques positioning of WP/ expanded access in key publications/ reports:
Maguire et al. (1996) - report for DfEE: "This was very much an approach based upon individual commitment to learning rather than seeking to identify structural barriers that were inhibiting these groups" (p.246).
Macrae, Maguire & Ball (1998; ESRC-funded) - looked at 16-19 year olds and classified into typology of 5 'crude' categories: outsiders, hangers in, pragmatic acceptors, notional acceptors, embedded acceptors. Minter = critical of visual descriptor (concentric circles) for suggesting that these are separate categories with 'traditional' students placed in centre (which Minter describes as "narcissistic" (p.248), thus rendering the analysis as overly-simplistic.
Discussion of what actually counts as 'non participation' and what counts as 'lifelong learning' - is it only formal education? (and contesting the 'bolt-on' approach taken by FE colleges). Minter notes argument by Ilon (1997) about how educating 'the poor' is not based on altruistic rationale, but instead an economic one.
Identifies four flaws in the premise of WP (using Bourdieusian and Foulcauldian theory):
Flaw 1: WP = single loop learning (resolve an issue without questioning how it evolved); WP focuses on strategies rather than the underlying causes of inequity.
Flaw 2: WP often focuses (blame) on the individual, rather than questioning the inadequacy of the education on offer: first, 'blind acceptance' of poor schooling leading to non-participation in post-compulsory education; second, tendancy to label students into groupings that don't really exist = Minter makes connection to habitus here.
Flaw 3: Ignorance of 'trajectories' (drawing on Bourdieu) and habitus.
Flaw 4: Ignorance of power to normalise patterns of participation (Foucault); aka 'it's not for me'
Core argument: Need to acknowledge that WP is complex

Context: Situated in expanding HE sector - explores the experiences of FiF, rural and international students as they transitioned into Year 1. Explains expansion as result of neoliberalism - increasing workforce/ 'educated workforce'. Argues that neoliberal higher education system "contributes to processes of individualisation when young people detach from their family to become useful participants in society" (p.504) and encouraged to become self-entrepreneurs. Authors also draw on literature that explores affective dimension of transitioning/ starting higher education. Connects family/friends to habitus, capital and field. Draws on literature relating to loneliness. International students constructed as 'non-traditional'
Theoretical frame: Bourdieu - field, habitus and capital/ Weiss' dimensions of loneliness
Methodology: Interpretive, critical qualitative approach. RQs: (1) What are the experiences of non-traditional students as they transition into the first year of university? (2) How do they experience the academic as well as social transition to university?
Online survey (n=285: 112 FiF/ 42 = rural/ 16 = international) + purposeful sampling for follow-up focus group interviews (3-5 students of same category in each focus group). A prior and post-hoc coding according to commonalities and differences (post-hoc = experiences of transition/ social experiences; a priori = habitus, field, capital; Weiss' dimensions of loneliness)
Findings:
Transition
Non-traditional students do not have capital to understand 'field expectations' of higher education study. Grades/ performance are important signals of difference from prior educational experiences (and key triggers for loss of confidence)
Forced independence
For rural/ international students, forced independence = challenging - financial hardship/ responsibility for self/loss of emotional and social support
Social experience
1) disconnection, 2) lack of opportunity to meet other students: 'after the lectures it's like they've all gone' (p.512) = emotional isolation
Core argument: Facilitating transition for non-traditional students may necessitate/require cultural change in institution and move away from the notion that students need to adapt. "[N]on-traditional students are not well positioned in relation to cultural and social capital to negotiate transition to university" (p.513) and as a result they are constructed as 'other'. Problems occur when there is a 'mismatch' between family and university habitus. Students "who experienced a sense of community adjusted more easily and enjoyed the process of transition" (p.514). "The research calls for a broadened perspective in the moral
purpose of universities and a shared belief in wanting to make the transition to university smoother and accessible for all student groups. In order to facilitate the transition to university for non-traditional students, focus needs to be directed to the interconnectedness of academic and social experience of university and the importance of strong social support" (p.514-5).

Context: Australian high education and Indigenous academic teachers, particularly in the context of needing to indigenise the curriculum. Notes less than 1% of university staff in Australia are Indigenous (= less than 250 in Australian in 2008). Mentions the physical separation of Indigenous staff from other staff in Indigenous units, which = possibly significant to mis-/ lack of understandings of Indigenous academic work, as well as an absence in the literature on Indigenous scholars' work
Aim: To explore the 'highs and lows' of being an Indigenous academic in Australian higher education
Theoretical frame: Draws on Nakata's notion of the 'cultural interface' to explore Indigenous academics' identities and work
Methodology: "Indigenist"/ partnership research (Rigney, 1999; Smith 1999). Collaboration between Indigenous and non-Indigenous colleagues. Used Indigenous qualitative research frame to ensure project = not working from hegemonic Western/non-Indigenous assumptions (see p.390). Draws on a project funded by the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS). Focus of this paper = teaching; research is in Asmar, Mercier & Page, ??). Participants (n=23; 11% of all Indigenous academics) all recruited from Indigenous centres. 12 = f, 11 = m, range of roles. Teaching = defined as class teaching of Indigenous and non-Indigenous students and support/ academic advice to students (did not include research supervision).
Findings: Five major themes: stress, workload, satisfaction, career, identity
Stress: although common in literature on academics, participants noted that stress = result of "inherent difficulties of interacting with often resistant (and occasionally racist) non-Indigenous students" (p.393). Hostility and latent racism from non-Indigenous students = common, which has emotional consequences. Stress relating to Indigenous students = more located in anxiety about inadequate provisions/ resourcing
Workload = related to high levels of support needed to be given, which is again related to emotion issues (e.g. the students' emotions about leaving home/ studying etc.). Workload = not experienced wholesale as a burden like stress.
Satisfaction: predominantly = positive satisfaction and joy derived from sharing understandings with Indigenous students, contributing to student success. Some mild dissatisfaction noted about lack of recognition and institutional understandings.
Career: mixed bag - depended on individual as to how teaching was perceived in relation to other activities (research, administration); also = note of non-traditional pathways into academia (only 10% have PhDs).
Identity: for many, their role = 'cultural translator'; conflict with euro-centric epistemologies and curricula: "On the other hand, maintaining the integrity of their Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander identity can be tough when interacting with non-Indigenous individuals in largely White institutions. To remain strong in one's identity and cultural knowledges, a price must often be paid" (p.398).
Core argument: There is a lot of 'emotional labour' involved in Indigenous academic work.

Context: Attrition and retention in large first year course in Australian higher education context. First semester = constructed as critical for students making decisions about whether to stay or not - makes the case that students' perceptions of what helps make a successful transition = underexplored. Scopes literature on reasons for attrition
Aim: To examine students' perceptions of what factors enable successful transition to university x
Theoretical frame: No theorisation of transition
Methodology: Qualitative/ mixed methods/ 'pragmatic': in-depth interviews (n=8) and focus groups (n=22) - themes led to development of questionnaire for measuring existing students against new students (n=771). Analysis of quant data = interval scales/ factor analysis
Findings:
Themes from interviews:
Administration, Attachment, Classes, Effort, Expectations, Facilities, Learning at university, Motivation, Orientation, Qualifications, Resources, Staff, Social, Study, Work (see p.217)
Seven of these factors = perceived factors that impact on successful transition:
- Study
- Effort
- Orientation
- Learning@Uni
- Culture
- Facilities
- Social
These factors fell into two categories: student-centred enablers and university-led enablers
Study, Effort & Culture = endogenous [intrinsic] = STUDENT-CENTRED
Orientation, Learning@Uni, Facilities and Social = exogenous [extrinsic] = UNIVERSITY-LED
Core argument: There are two types of enablers (as perceived by students, as categorised by researchers): student-centred and university-led. These warrant further exploration: how do these types interact, how important are each type/ each factor etc.

Context: VET to university pathways; experiences of transitioning with Advanced Standing via TAFE. In Australia, in 2008 9.6% of student enrolments = via VET pathways; only 3% of Go8 students transition via TAFE articulation. These students = 'invisible' population in the domestic cohort.
Aim: To "examine the stories of participants to determine their reasons for choosing to pursue a pathway to university and to understand their experiences in the first year of study" (p.263).
Methodology: Narrative inquiry with students in Faculty of Education who transitioned into studies with Advanced Standing (n=8)
Findings:
Advanced Standing/ prior learning: participants were mostly negative about their experiences of arriving with Advanced Standing because it was confusing and it limited the elective options that they could select. Their prior learning experiences were valued by them, but seemingly not valued by the university. Students felt they had learnt more 'foundational' knowledge of the subject from TAFE, and that it functioned as a 'taster'. Students compared themselves and their motivations to those of peers. Students also noted several differences between TAFE and university: students felt they were 'handled' at TAFE, whereas university was larger and more self-directed. Participants also reported large gaps in expectations: more self-directed, more reading, more work, academic writing (more depth, complex terminology). Authors also discuss experiences of mature age students (perception as minority). Participants reported difference in relationship with educators (more familiar/ personal at TAFE). Students generally felt nervous about their academic performance, and felt that their vocational experience was not valued in their university studies. Some participants perceived that other students didn't want to do group tasks with them
Core argument:
- TAFE and higher education need to develop shared academic culture to ease transitions
- Universities should recognise and celebrate students' prior learning experiences/ knowledge brought from TAFE
- Authors propose conceptualisation of pathways as 'swirling' rather than linear

Context: Emotions and academic practice; exploration of "troubling emotions felt or aroused in all aspects of academic practice, including teaching, learning, research and relationships" (abstract)
Aim: To "theorise affective aspects of the everyday epistemic events of sharing and communicating ideas to each other, events whose entangled and intra-personal nature is not always deemed worthy of attention, as if they were straightforward and uncomplicated exchanges... to contribute towards a better understanding of the affective dimensions of higher education, and to show how certain group processes can develop the work of compassion, to provide a supportive framework for tutors to explore negative affect, so that it becomes educative" (p.180)
Theoretical frame: Liminality; liminal landscapes ("thresholds: pivotal moments or sharp points, emotional uncoverings") of troublesome knowledge (abstract). Three dimensions of liminality: physical/metaphorical, relational-emotional, epistemic. Authors describe a "recurring difficulty in our lives as academics is the strain of the performative" (p.182): "The punishing pace of the juggernaut of incessant change generates a mania all of its own, which deeply undermines compassion and intimacy" (p.182)
Methodology: Based on broader 'Dangerous knowledge' project, which invited participants to respond to this question: "has your work as an academic ever felt dangerous, difficult or disturbing?" (p.181)... answers "often came in the form of an example, rather than a definition" (p.181)
Discussion:
Physical/ metaphorical in-between spaces: research project was both a space to share, and a space to identify with/ become a compassionate collective. Physically this happened in spaces between formal spaces (e.g. in corridors, kitchens). Metaphorically, the space developed through the sharing and crafting of narratives: "The dynamic narration of individual accounts grew out of what was allowed, what was desired and made possible. These felt interior-exteriorisations incorporated the responses of group members and opened up new spaces of knowing, with wider views and a more varied landscape of insight" (p.184). The project also "created a metaphorical space for awareness and acknowledgement of events and emotions" (p.185).
Emotional-relational: authors cite Boler's (1999) argument that education offers "a singular opportunity for the recognition of emotion as part of an historicised ethics, for dialogue and difference, for privileging dissenting voices, for tracing the sources of beliefs" (on p.186) = pedagogy of discomfort. The project offered space for the drawing out of the affective ("range of anger, dismay, vulnerability, uncertainty, fear and shame", p.186) in a safe and bounded manner. Authors found Shotwell's (2011) writing on shame particularly useful: "This 'inarticulate' emotional landscape became a site of evocation and a powerful place for compassionate work; a space in which we could mutually encourage the summoning of troubling encounters"... "These troubling emotions were, indeed, the
'disturbance', infusing our memories with embodied resonances. These were the 'vivid' testimonies of lived experiences, shared with passion in a hospitable space" (p.187)
'Implicit understanding': Shotwell (2011) -" the idea that we might 'know' something, but not yet realise
it, or be able to express it fully" (p.189); elusive knowledge was collected and co-produced. Dangerous knowledges as project became 'shorthand and currency', provoking excited recognition from colleagues, and helping them to recognise that they knew more than they knew they knew.
Core argument: Compassion = fundamental for "forging liminal border crossings for human beings working out human difficulties, and for the frequent positive emotion and sense of recognition and connection it brought" (p.189)

Context: Although mature-age students are prioritised in HE research and policy due to the promotion of the concept of 'life-long learning' (p. 684), there is limited research on how 'mature-age' students experience the relational dynamics of university (p. 684).
Aim: To examine mature-age students' negotiation of 'the process of becoming legitimate members of the learning community' in HE, and 'the resistance they face in doing so' (abstract). Specifically, the article uses written accounts of both mature-age & school-leaver students to investigate how school-leavers may stigmatise mature-age students, due to contrasting priorities and academic practices.
Theoretical frame: Social theory of learning (Lave & Wenger, 1998) - 'people first learn as peripheral participants and move eventually toward a legitimate and full participation' (p. 695).
Methodology: Qualitative approach; Data collection method: Participant observation fieldwork (in different university settings) - students were asked to 'observe, reflect on and write about elements of 'university culture' (p. 688), particularly student-student & student-staff interactions, cultural practices and reflections on what shaped their own 'perspectives and experiences of university' (p. 688); Students were also asked to write reflections comparing their experiences to those of students described in a US college account by Rebekah Nathan (2005, pp. 90 -106); Participants: First-year anthropology subject students at La Trobe University, Melbourne (n=344); 64.5% female & 33.7% male; 55% self-identified as Australian, although participants were from diverse ethnic backgrounds; age range - 18 to 56, students from ages 21 and above - 42.5% (considered mature-age by the university).
Findings: 1)Anxieties about fitting into university culture - mature students are aware of the importance of the community's role in their learning and have anxiety regarding their position in the university; written accounts of students indicate the 'necessity of time to adapt to new routines, spaces and practices'; a majority of mature-age students showed concerns regarding sociality and the desire to establish social connection in the community, despite being more focused on their academics; belonging was shown to be a key concern; written accounts of students also indicate inadequate understandings and provision of support for older students, especially during their first-year transition; 2)'Normal' student practice and stigma - school-leavers in HE have an 'unwritten but widely shared mode of participation', and mature-age students became aware of how their 'enthusiasm for learning', especially in their first year, broke tacit codes of conduct when school-leavers stigmatise their behaviour; the attachment of terms such as 'annoying' and 'obnoxious' to 'mature-age' (p. 693) students is prevalent in university culture, and mature-age students are aware of being marked as the 'other' in the classroom; 3)School-leavers' views: endangering equality - 'displays of enthusiasm' was the primary concern of the 'normals' (p. 694) (school-leavers) in assessing the practices of mature-age students; school-leavers also displayed bafflement towards the perceived familiarity with instructors among older students; 4)Making judgments and re-evaluating practices - written reflections of students reflect the 'disillusionment with university culture' among mature-age students, which closely aligns with the disappointment of university staff regarding the lack of intellectual seriousness & engagement among some students; mature-age students 'begin to see themselves as a type of university student - a mature-age student - which is a stigmatised identity from the perspective of younger students, but also indicates a level of academic maturity as defined by their instructors' (p. 695); Mature students are often not interested in the social side of HE as much as school-leavers, for three reasons: i)they already have a social life, ii)they were focused on academic study, iii)they were already struggling to manage their current work-life balance.
Core argument: In contrary to the perceptions of school-leavers, mature-age students face anxieties regarding 'pressures external and internal to university life' (p. 697), and it is evident that while school-leavers disapprove of the enthusiasm and active engagement of mature-students at university, mature-age students are 'equally critical' of school-leavers' practices in HE. Findings from the study thus 'confirm the importance of socially situated models of learning and indicate that HE research and education policy will benefit from further understanding the processes involved in adopting and inhabiting a 'student' identity, particularly as this is negotiated amongst other students' (p. 697).

Context: Student transitions; set against normative, linear/ homogenous notions/ understandings of transitions that reflect institutional timescapes that deny the complex lives that students bring with them to their studies; "Within student transition too, the intense focus on fixed time frames and outcomes can also be seen to alter the 'timescapes' of higher education, presenting a view of time and of transition that may exclude individual lived temporal rhythms" (p.2).
Aim: To offer student narratives of transition that foreground multiplicities of experiences; to highlight experiences that happen in the gaps and margins (p.2); to operationalise the conception of transition (as troublesome, rhizomatic, as becoming) put forward in Gravett, 2019; to respond to this RQ:
"what will these stories tell us about students' understandings of transition and becoming within higher education, and how will these narratives compare to the pervasive grand-narratives of research, policy, practice?" (p.2)
Theoretical frame: See Gravett 2019
Methodology: Story completion and story-mediated interviews; project designed to explore students' experiences of becoming university students. Story completion as "sense-making exercise" (p.3). Two story stems used (see p.4); authors speculate whether using gender-neutral names may have been more effective. Story completion used because 1) can help participants to "engage more readily and openly with the topic presented" (p.4) because it offers distance/ hypothetical situation to test out ideas; 2) opens space for discourses to emerge, rather than seeking 'truth'; 3) it offers participants relative autonomy over research process. Analysis described as rhizomatic, which involved "actively look[ing] for ways of working with data in its nuances, differences, and singularities" (p.5), looking for 'data hotspots' that captured their interests and cross-reading/ interpreting.
Findings: Participants' stories yielded "emotional and vivid" data (p.6), which often indexed conventional/ normative discourses about transition. Interview data suggests more individualised, divergent and diverse experiences.
Unlearning/ learning in new context and environment: dissonance between previous educational experiences and expectations of university, including epistemological shifts and shifts in academic practices; authors make connection with threshold concepts (Meyer & Land, 2005), which leads to discomfort for some students.
Individual/ micro-experiences of transition: students' transitions were more than shifts in academic practices; they covered a range of aspects: "relationships, emotions, social, affective, material and spatial elements, and reached far beyond the acquisition of study skills, the development of subject knowledge, or adaptation to institutional norms" (p.7). Examples given include food shopping, fitting in socially without drinking alcohol, living away from home, having friends outside of 'university bubble' (see p.7).
Fluidity and change: data suggest students' transitions = "ongoing series of becomings" (p.7), which are ill-reflected by institutional rhythms which chime against the "experiences of first year students, where the lived rhythms of learning do not fit neatly into 'assimilationist pedagogies'" (Manathunga's, 2019 term; on p.8).
Data also suggest that students' experienced positive transitions (positive comparisons with school). However, students who commute [rather than moving to university town as is more common in UK] appeared to view themselves as different/ having a different experience compared with peers.
Core argument: Transition is complicated, individually experienced and messy; "Rather than transition signifying a neat process where skills are acquired and students follow a linear pathway into and through university, transition changes with individual context, and can be better understood as students' perpetual and ongoing becomings" (p.10). Institutions should/ could consider reorienting their approaches to supporting students so that this rich individuality and ongoing nature of transition is operationalised to better support students.

Context: Corporatisation of university, massification and efficiency are features of the higher education sector, along with concerns for graduate employment. Within this context, the higher education sector has promoted counterproductive and competing discourses around graduate employability.
Aims: The article sought to unpack and explore three views and their associated strategies universities have adopted in relation to graduate employability: (i) short-term graduate outcomes; (ii) professional readiness; and (iii) living and working productively and meaningfully across the lifespan (see abstract, p. 468).
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Review of studies
Findings: The authors highlight tensions in views adopted by universities. For example, the authors point out that definitions focusing on possession of skills to attain employment fail to consider other factors, such as social and cultural capital. Various factors affect employability, including labour market conditions, which means that the impact of educational interventions on percentage fulltime employment is likely to be somewhat limited (p471). In addition, focusing only on graduate short-term outcomes as an indicator of employability is problematic, and fails to consider for example, subjective dimensions such as the aims and goals of graduates. Regarding professional readiness, universities prepare students through professionally accredited pathways. The authors point out that it is quite possible graduates leave their profession within five years of employment, and that flexible degree programs could be effective in helping students identity career-related goals and opportunities new to them. The third approach to employability focuses on the lifespan of graduates, and considers various factors such as self-management, harnessing of skills, and social and civic contribution. While it considers the identity of the graduate, there are a range of criticisms associated with this approach, including concerns related to neoliberalisation in education.
Core argument: This study proposes the following principles as a way to better address tensions in employability (p.480):
¥ Adopt a systematic, explicit and evidence-based approach to determining the desired balance of employability views and outcomes for each program;
¥ Develop a programmatic approach to employability that reflects the desired balance of aims;
¥ Offer optional pathways that permit learners to pursue individual learning and employability pathways beyond the core programmatic approach and
Keep learners informed, and support them to make good, active choices about their employability learning.

Context: Perth, Australia.
Aim: Explore perspectives of university students from refugee backgrounds, specifically on adaptation and acculturation in Western Australia. To document the perceptions and experiences the refugee youth have regarding tertiary education and understanding their differing learning needs. To understand the role that family and communities play in the life of refugee youth and how these influence education outcomes and success. To propose strategies and make recommendations that may assist in improving the success of refugee youth attending tertiary institutions. To design, trial, and culturally sensitive and appropriate CD as a useful orientation tool for new refugee students in their first year of university that will assist with their engagement. To develop and trial a CD for academic staff to improve their understanding of refugee students
Conclusions:
- Found across all stages that cultural differences of refugee students need to be addressed
- Strategies that can be implemented to improve psychosocial wellbeing and outcomes for refugee students include mentoring, cultural sensitivity training for academics, strategies to improve participation in tutorials and involving SFRBs in guild (?) activities
Methodological comments:
- Conflates refugee youth with students from a refugee background - not the same thing, although may overlap
- Suggests that the specific pre- and post-migration experiences that SFRBs have demands "extraordinary levels of resilience and determination for success in tertiary study" - problematic discourse around resilience
Core argument:
- Positions "awareness" of the issues that SFRBs face as the basis of increasing educational outcomes: but I feel like this overlooks some of the structural and discrimination factors
- Early days of SFRB research: some of the problematic deficiency and resilience discourses as shaping research agendas are prevalent here
Recognises that the voices and needs of SFRBs are necessary to their "success"