Higher Education Equity Literature Database

Context: Describes WP/equity agenda post-Bradley as 'education revolution'. Examines an OECD framework ('Equity and Quality in Education. Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools' (2012)) designed to 'strengthen schools in disadvantaged areas' to help students complete Year 12 and consider tertiary education and focuses on one such program - AVID - as an example of secondary/tertiary collaboration. Critiques the implicitness of class and elitism in discussions of widening participation and 'aspiration' to HE: "It is our contention that the "raising aspiration" discourse is one that firmly fixes people from disadvantaged backgrounds as without ambition, understanding, realistic hope for change or even recognition that they "need" change. As with every dichotomy, this categorisation is set against a middle-class norm where people possess the cultural and social capital to understand the advantages that higher education brings, and the wherewithal to make sure they use the system successfully" (p.2)
Theoretical frame: None
Methodology: Essay/discussion
Findings:
Connects the OECD imperatives with the Advancement Via Individual Development (AVID) program: "AVID demystifies entry processes to tertiary education by explicitly teaching students institutional literacies" (p.6) - teaches 11 'essential attributes'. Authors make recommendations on basis of both OECD and AVID goals:
Recommendation 1: strengthen and support school leadership
Recommendation 2: stimulate a supportive school climate/ environment for learning
Recommendation 3: attract, support and retain high-quality teachers
Recommendation 4: ensure effective classroom learning strategies
Recommendation 5: prioritise linking schools-parents-communities
Core argument: AVID is a good program

Context: Canada: review of empirical literature
Aim: Explore refugee perceptions of higher education. Refugees are the least educated migrants on arrival, yet they invest in HE at lower rates than other newcomers.
Conclusions: Refugees are less likely to invest in HE because of misunderstandings about the costs and benefits of HE. Deterred by perceptions of high tuition costs. Academic preparedness (or lack of) is also a constraint. There is a need to explore how the pre-experiences of refugees resettled in Canada (and other Western countries) affect how they perceive and access HE, with a particular need for this research agenda to take a qualitative approach that specifically explores refugee subjectivities.
Core argument: Justifies our gap in the literature: the lived experience of HE and expectations, motivations, and challenges of HE for refugees needs to be explored from a qualitative perspective that takes into account refugee subjectivities.

Context: Discusses the use of student ambassadors in marketing HE in context of widening participation in STEM outreach in UK in two contrasting universities. Critiques discourses of aspiration as individual improvement project (quotes Burke, 2012). Student ambassadors positioned as aspirational role-models for school pupils. While the research literature suggests that there are benefits to ambassadors, there is less information/research on benefits to/ voice of pupils. Ambassadors can be source of hot or warm knowledge
Aim: To trace and analyse discourses around ambassadors and positioning within learning contexts, relationships with pupils and learning that takes place (abstract)
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Ethnography: 2 year engagement in two London universities (one 'new', one 'old') in field of WP outreach in STEM in 2008-9 (programs funded by different sources - see p.7). Interviews conducted with 41 pupils/16 ambassadors in old uni/ 71 pupils and 16 ambassadors in new uni. Pupils all Year 8-11 and most students from low SES schools in 'deprived' areas of south-east London.
Findings: Identifies 4 groups of main learning attributes: process/ location and setting/ purposes/ content. Discourse analysis
With teachers, Gartland identifies discourse of credentialism as a regime of truth (ambassadors requested to help raise C/D borderline (p.9) - gives examples of ambassadors supporting Year 11 pupils with GCSE Maths exam papers: didactic and formal assessment in school classroom - in this context, ambassadors were viewed as "inadequate substitutes for real teachers" (p.10). Teachers also wary of ambassadors' ability to 'teach' on basis of undergraduate discipline "Positioning ambassadors as teachers simply because of their mathematical expertise is problematic" (p.10) when aim of them being there was to drive up grades. Students' perceptions of ambassadors (p.10-11). Ambiguity noted in teachers/ organisers' understandings of ambassador role to manage behaviour. Activities described could be placed on continuum of formal - informal attributes. Example of 'Train Tracks' day = informal because no curriculum learning (instead mostly subject learning) with ambivalent purposes (aspiration raising/ subject knowledge/ promoting key messages) - experiential learning. Contrast with Maths Workshops.
Core argument: Generalised discourses about ambassadors as aspiration raisers/ role-models = commonplace but no shared understanding of how it works in practice. Stakeholders have vested interests in ambassador work which influences how they are constructed through discourse and positioned in institutional spaces. Positioning of WP in marketing spaces positions pupils as consumers. Dominant discourses of credentialism/ school cultures position ambassadors and pupils in particular ways. "The current government focus on pupils as rational choosers of HE who need access to better information (Department for Business Innovation and Skills [BIS] 2011) entrenches further individualised discourses of pupils as
consumers in the HE marketplace" (p.18)

Context: Reports on research commissioned by CQU: research aspirations for HE of 250 high school students from 14 public schools in Central Queensland, with data gathered from TASSA (9 = low SES schools; 5 = mid-SES)
Theoretical frame: Taylor (2004) 'sociological imaginary'; taste (Bourdieu, 1984); desire (Butler, 1987), possibility (Bourdieu, 1984), navigation (Appadurai, 2004; de Certeau, 1984) and resources (Appadurai, 2004)
Methodology: 2 surveys designed = TASSA (The Australian Survey of Student Aspiration), based on 6 themes: social imaginary, taste/status, desire, possibility, sociocultural navigation, and resources (financial and material but also cultural and social). TASSA-C = The Australian Survey of Co-curricula School Activities looked at efficacy/ limitations of co-curricula programs which schools/ students were involved in. Students completed surveys on uni campus days to CQU as part of outreach program.
Findings:
Navigational capacity = primary concept
67% of participants desire/ aspire to have university degree in future (no significant difference between metro/rural/remote students). However, only 60% see it as a possibility (less for males = 47% compared with 71% of females).
No appreciable difference between low and mid SES/ between Euro-decent and indigenous students
Students navigational capacity (identify pathways from school to HE) = 'patchy' (e.g. don't know what they want to study or where). Students from schools more than 50km from nearest uni campus = less idea of differences between TAFE and uni. Most students limit choice of uni to geographic locality.
Most students appear to draw from "limited archive of knowledge and experience" (p.6)
Advice of teachers and parents = significant (84% students ((94% of indigenous) believe parents' opinion = important or extremely important re: decisions for future (inc. education)
96% of students had received some encouragement from families to go to uni but few parents had experience themselves of studying in HE (14% mums, 6% fathers, 18% siblings)
"In brief, their aspirations are informed by a quite distant knowledge and experience of higher education" (p.6).
Core argument:
Two main implications: 1) increase development of students' navigational capacities (through schools and uni outreach) - map knowledge needs to be added to tour knowledge. Focus of aspiration building needs to extend beyond focus on individuals/ particular groups to families and communities (so as to build social imaginary)

Context: Australian HE sector has changed/ is changing/ is going to change and the view of equity it has/ we have must change too. The Australian sector is "defined by its institutional groupings by their relative claims to selectivity and exclusivity" (abstract) The paper takes a new stance on student equity. Sets out developments (Liberal gov't set up NCSEHE in 2007; Gillard gov't commissioned Bradley review and created Ministry of Social Inclusion in 2008) - "sent a strong signal to the sector that matters of student equity were to be centre stage once more" (p.6)
Aim: To explore how central equity actually is/ to ask whether a new stance on student equity might resonate nationally/internationally.
Theoretical frame: Draws on Bourdieu/ Marginson (2008): search for field positions = identifying positions of individuals and organisations and what they can do from these positions (p.7) + capital (p.12) / Bourdieu & Wacquant's notion of 'feel for the game'
Methodology: Essay
Findings: Changed relations in the field mean that 'what works' now might not work in the future. Provides a brief overview of history of equity in federal policies (Dawkins - Martin - Nelson - Bradley) - p.9-10. Discusses league tables/ international rankings in relation to 'field positions and stances' (and academic capital). Australian HE is characterised by conflict rather than consensus over excellence (elite, exclusive) and equity (public, inclusive). Concerns about the massification of HE diluting the academic capital has hitherto not been born out: increasing numbers of graduates has not seen an increase in the proportion of equity group (specifically indigenous/r&r/low SES) students. Notes how NCSEHE was born at a time when equity was high on the national/political agenda and as such needed to "leverage off this 'moment in the sun'" (p.14) to influence others. Student equity defined by numbers is "social inclusion in its narrowest sense" (p.16)
Core argument: View of social justice needs to involve more than physical presence when recognising representation of different groups. Need a new view of equity that asks what all students can bring/contribute to HE. Currently, this is packaged for low SES students as potential economic futures (national/individual); = "imagined narrowly" (p.17). "We need to explore new policy settings for equity in these emerging times, for governments, systems and universities" (p.17)

Context: Paper is situated in contemporary UK HE sector and explores the different orientations of students in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (pre and post-tuition fee increase to GBP9000 per year). Paper is situated in the marketised HE sector: "this development is often seen as foregrounding the purpose of higher education as providing private goods whose benefits are referenced against their potential future economic exchange value" (p.2). Common characteristics of the (international) neo-liberal academy are: increased role of markets, diminishing role of the state, "a new mode of service responsiveness that meets the needs of service users" (p.2) - evident in promotion of student choice (targets/ metrics/ marketing material). Of significance in this context is the idea that students' relationships with higher education have changed (have they internalised the discoursal shifts evident in policy changes) and does this affect their study behaviours? If so, this is:
a) likely to give rise to more 'paying customer' subject positions, "who expects their providers to deliver their services and products in ways commensurate with their demands" (p.2)
b) value given to HE = equated to costs of participating so that 'associated markers of value - teaching, learning, student experience - are based on these perceived costs: 'value for money'
c) students make strong connections between HE and other goods and services
d) students understand and respond in similar ways (and thus shape new approaches to education)
Aim: Explore key themes in literature on students as consumers; explore findings of qualitative study (UK-based) on students' attitudes, approaches and shifting identity positions in contemporary UK HE and in context of 2012 tuition fee increase.
Methodology: Focus groups and individual interviews with 68 UG students from 7 different HEIS: 4 in England (1 x Russell Group, 1 x post-1994, 1 x post-1992, 1 x guild) + 1 x Welsh, 1 x Scottish, 1 x NI university during spring in 2013. Students were mixed (pre-2012/ post-2012)
Key themes from literature review: 1) consumerism (consumption rather than production = central idea) "is now taken to be at the heart of modern productive relations in late capitalism, given that much of the post-industrial economy is based on the consumption of intangibles in the form of human services and products that have largely perishable value" (p.3); 2) impact of consumerism (and marketisation of HE) depends on relative privilege/status and kind of knowledge produced of HEI - more elite universities are able to maintain traditional pedagogies and ways of doing so that "Students receive the message that they are in receipt of elite education, whose knowledge is sacred and of high social value, and that conformance to the elite pedagogies is imperative if they are to succeed in this environment. In contrast, lower prestige institutions are more subject to the symbolic violence of consumer ideology given that their principal currency has been on providing students with a relevant and applied 'Mode 2' knowledge" (p.4); 3) increased consumerism leads to increased instrumentalism - resulting in higher levels of 'student performativity' (Ransome, 2011); 4) marketised HE inculcates a possessive 'having' mode (rather than an ontological/becoming/ 'being' mode) = Molesworth, Nixon & Scullon (2009).
Findings of study: Study identified range of attitudes/ subject positions on a scale of student-consumer:
- active service-user
- positioned consumer = students "expressed a mixed and ambivalent attitude toward the consumer ethos: while they had internalised discourses of student rights and entitlements, they still distanced themselves from the position of consumer" (p.6)
- non-consumers
Active service-users: "Active service-user attitudes were underpinned by a strong sense that increased costs needed to be matched by highly transparent and effective modes of delivery from institutional providers who were receiving the costs that students were incurring" (p.7) - signal a shift of power from institutional provider (university/ lecturer) to purchaser (student)
Positioned consumer: "At one level, they saw consumerism as an inevitable consequence of a marketised higher education system and something that was justified through students' private contribution and the need for experience commensurate to increased costs [but] they also acknowledged the limitations of this approach" (p.9) - 'value for money' attitude + need for responsibility and engagement for learning
Resisting consumerism: "those who challenged the notion of consuming higher education, and actively distanced themselves from this approach" (p.10) = consumption seen as passivity, signaling lower intellectual merit which could devalue social/economic status of degree.
Core argument: Notion that all students are consumers is challenged - there are a range of subject positions/ attitudes but consumerist discourses do appear to be widespread in students' talk. Be interesting to find out if disaffected students demonstrated consumerist attitudes (connections between disengagement and consumerism). Overall, "utilitarian values and attitudes are framing students' approach to higher education as reflected in increasing concerns about their 'returns', relative academic performance (grades outcomes) and how their credentials may be consumed by others in the marketplace (their 'employability' and 'attributes')" (p.13).

Context: Students' preference for university-level courses at TAFE - focusing on Victoria and South Australia. NCSEHE-funded research. Focus on schools' influence on students' higher education preferences, examined according to students' socioeconomic status, geographic location and sector. Report offers literature review of: student background (with Bourdieu/ habitus featuring strongly), school context, school practices (subject availability, career advice, engagement with higher education through outreach
Aim: To examine "the influence of school context (their socio-spatial location) on students' preferences for TAFE bachelor degrees" (p.2).
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Analysis of VTAC and SATAC data (rationale for focusing on Vic/ SA on p.13)
Findings: TAFE degrees = not popular in preferences for higher education of secondary school students; the overwhelming preference is to study at undergraduate level at a university
2013 data suggests a 30% increase in student preferences for TAFE degrees.
Possible reason for low preferences = lack of widespread application process.
Students with highest preference rate for TAFE =students in high SES areas (47% of preferences in Victoria; 39% in SA). Authors suggest this is due to 'hot' knowledge
Students in metropolitan schools are more likely to indicate a preference for TAFE degrees (possibly because there are more TAFEs in metropolitan areas that offer bachelor degrees
More students from public schools express a preference for TAFE degrees (compared with faith/ independent schools)
Core argument: "The report concludes that while the public perception of TAFE is that it is a sector primarily for students from low SES backgrounds, this is not reflected in students' preferences for TAFE bachelor degrees. Instead, the preferences of students from high socioeconomic schools outnumber other SES groups in almost every TAFE-degree field of study" (p.2).

Context: Asks whether students are investing less time in their university studies. If so, the author posits that this "potentially reflects a significant reduction in the opportunity cost of higher education" but may also "mean that less effort is producing less capable students with factors" (p.1). It could also pose problems for institutions (less time = increased likelihood of surface learning, lower grades, decreased motivation).
Aim:
Theoretical frame:
Methodology: Diary approach with first year students in a NZ university (n=111) - two weeks of full diary submissions. Students from 4 faculties. Students recorded time spent in 30-minute increments for 2 weeks of the academic term (in week 4 of S1 and week 8 of s2 = two different cohorts of participants; weeks deliberately selected to avoid peak assignment stress). Students categorized time accoracding to categories offered when they uploaded their diary entries (see p.4-5). Students also asked to complete surveys on motivation and self-efficacy. Analysis = standard deviation and two-tailed T tests, correlation analysis, Cronbach Alpha tests). Limitations noted in conclusion.
Findings: Students self-reports varied significantly. Highest correlations = lab and tutorials (compulsory), and travel. Less correlated = attendance in seminars and study in library.
Students invested between 13.5 and 82 hours in their studies (standard deviation= 27-55 hours a week; 55% dedicated more than 40 hours). High number of hours allocated to 'other course-related work' suggests that students perceive activities not captured in the survey.
Variation in time spent = correlates strongly with assignments due (0.67, compared with 0.20 for lectures). Course hours = significantly negatively correlated with personal time (-0.40), sleep (-0.33), TV (0-24), personal internet use (-0.19) and paid work (-0.19)
Core argument: Data presented in this paper contradicts the data reported in other articles that students spend less than 30 hours a week on full-time study (median = 40.5 hours). Overwork = problem (and disciplinary/context-dependent) and universities have a duty of care to prevent health impacts. Methodologically, the use of time diaries = different from many other approaches which rely on survey data. Analysis of time spent/ GPA suggests that the more time dedicated, the stronger the grades.

Context: ALTC-funded project to examine 19 funded projects, 5 fellowships on transition (between 2006-2010) so as to contribute to understandings of transition into HE. Projects/ fellowships = either under or postgraduate focus. Only 2 = specific focus on transition (one = Sally Kift's fellowship). As explicit focus = transition is usually focused at UG level
Methodology: Review of 24 projects and fellowships; literature review
Findings:
Two key observations: 1) HE is distinctive cultural context; 2) HE = governed by (particular forms of) cultural capital.
Offers three-part typology of transition (p.25):
1. as induction: sequentially defined periods of adjustment involving pathways of inculcation, from one institutional and/or disciplinary context to another (T1);
2. as development: qualitatively distinct stages of maturation involving trajectories of transformation, from one student and/or career identity to another (T2); or
3. as becoming: a perpetual series of fragmented movements involving whole-of-life fluctuations in lived reality or subjective experience, from birth to death (T3).
Recommendations:
1) Declare how transition is defined (it is often undefined or taken to be commonsensical)
2) Draw on related fields and bodies of knowledge (e.g. youth and life transitions, social theory)
3) Foregrounds students' lived experiences/ realities
Broaden the scope of investigation (include vertical and horizontal transitions)

Context: Promise of giving voice is a "mainstay of emancipatory and radical agendas" (p.179) and signals a concern with issues of representation and empowerment. Voice has been critiqued for "offering only superficial forms of inclusion to essentializing group identities and to the problem of power in selective bestowing of voice" (p.179). Acknowledges romance of voice in 'rescuing' often silent and marginalised voices.
Aim: Unpack what can be learnt from feminist/critical framings of voice in education and what might be the limitations of adopting pedagogy/politics of voice for equity and widening participation in HE.
Theoretical frame: Feminist and other critical orientations. Voice has many meanings: as identity, agency, power, capacity/aspiration, site of authentic reflection, democratic politics of participation, radical source of counter narratives. Voice is a code word for difference.
Methodology: Literature review
Findings: Four uses of voice in educational discourse:
1. Voice-as-strategy (way of achieving empowerment/equity)
2. Voice-as-participation (learning)
3. Voice-as-right (to be heard/to speak)
4. Voice-as-difference (to promote inclusion/diversity/respect)
Seale (2010) describes two most commonly cited purposes of voice in HE projects: quality assurance and staff development = tend to be aligned to policy and practices around assessment/evaluation and feedback but is relatively silent on relationships between students and teachers
Social and participatory research: giving voice and speaking for (p.182-3) = for example: oral histories. There tends to be 2 attitudes to voice: privileging and celebrating voice. Privileging = prominence given to perspectives and experiences of research participants, mostly with radical change agenda. Celebratory "is countered by recognition of the ethical and epistemological dangers of speaking for others and but also about whose voice speaks loudest" (p.183). Inequalities of power need consideration: can research be conducted that does not turn the subjects into 'objects' (p.183)?
Critical pedagogy - and when voice isn't empowering: voice-as-participation underpins critical pedagogy. Overview of (weak) critique here. What counts as voice and which/whose voices are recognised?
Listening and recognition: 'Politics of listening (O'Donnell, Lloyd and Dreher, 2009) - a way to canvas "issues of dialogue and meaningful interactions across difference and inequality" (p.423 on McLeod, p.185). Listening is a socially embedded practice = myriad factors shape what is heard and recognised.
"...listening can appear as a kindly gift, a benevolent act of charity, a patronising gesture to tolerance. But listening also forces relationality, intersubjectivity and power dynamics into view because it evokes the address and location of voice" (p.186).
Key question: How do universities respond to students' voices and who has responsibility for listening and for changing?
Core argument: Voice needs to be reframed a "a matter of listening, recognition and engaged dialogue" (p.187)

Context: Works from notion of transition as individually experienced ("unique, complex and dynamic", abstract) and connected to belonging and identity. Connects with idea that peer networks are potential sites for critical pedgagogies. Discusses UG course 'Experiential Learning in Communities' (elective for Education students considering PG teaching studies and for Year 1 UG students) at WSU. "ELC aims to disrupt students' conception of education as a power directive from teacher to student and open the possibility of learning being perceived as a mutually beneficial interaction between all participants" (p.A36). ELC = designed to respond to student diversity. Course based on principles of reflexive praxis and student-led communities of practice to facilitate 'transition as becoming', so that students collaboratively explore meaning and practice of being a university student and negotiate expectations of university on own terms and "academics [deliberately] positioning themselves as White cultural brokers, students are given permission to explore and leverage the various capitals they bring to the learning context" (abstract). Scopes peer mentoring literature (benefits and challenges; notes the argument of Christie (2014), arguing that peer mentoring is a form of governmentality). Authors position work in ELC as 'critical mentoring' (citing Freire), with academics = interpreters. Mentees can enroll or not to participate in peer mentoring (but this means many unenrolled students do not continue, making it a challenge to match sustainable mentor-mentee pairs at the beginning). ELC designed to prioritise social relations (face-to-face, debriefing groups with student facilitator, weekly group meetings with academic tutor, tutorials run by academics. Reading is core part of tutorial learning and students write reflective piece and debriefing group presentation for assessment.
Aim: To describe ELC
Theoretical frame: Critical pedagogy (Kress, Degennaro, & Paugh, 2013; Giroux, 2011); experiential pedagogy = Kolb's cycle of experiential learning; communities of practice = Lave & Wenger. Also uses theories of Whiteness (foregrounding notions of assumed/ tacit privilege and dominance)
Methodology:
Discussion: ELC CoP "provides a generative space for the creation of a new integrative melding of mul-tiple sources of cultural and social capital" (p.A41)
p.A42
Notes how sociocultural incongruence (Devlin & Mackay, 201?) is explicitly both attended to and ameliorated through this design. Notes how this model can promote and foster critical literacies and offers a space to 'reclaim understanding of learning as practice' (quote from Mary Lea, 2005; on p.A44)
Challenge = recruiting sufficient number of mentees
Core argument: Foregrounds the potential of such a "collective, multidimensional learning experience" for facilitating becoming, identity negotiation and transformations, meaning making, pushing forward alternative ways of doing/being/knowing[and feeling] by "disrupt[ing] the imposition of White values onto students of diverse backgrounds, while still enabling them to develop strategies to succeed in relation to it" (p.A45). Also reimagines what teaching and learning are/ could be.
Interesting fact: Program developed as result of Vickers & Zammit's OLT project on sfrb

Context: Classes in HE institutions are becoming larger and more diverse globally. Support for 'non-traditional' students often involves additional remedial classes offered outside the main curriculum, which has resulted in limited success. Sociocultural theories of learning contend that the 'potential clash between the sociocultural context of disciplinary knowledge and the very different home contexts of many non-traditional students' needs to be acknowledged' (p. 604). Student-generated content (SGC) is argued to enable teachers to acknowledge and include student experiences and voices into the 'community of practice' (p. 604) and the production of knowledge.
Aim: This paper focuses on the use of student-generated podcasts as a means to harness the diversity of student experiences in a large (nearly 600 students) first-year Economics class at a South African University.
Theoretical frame: 'Community of practice' (Wenger & Snyder, 2000): All learning is a social process in a specific context, where learners develop common understandings via debate and exchanging different points of view.
Methodology: Sample: Rhodes University (Small, rural English-medium institution,; 7500 students - 31% postgraduates & 59% women; 64% of Black students since 1994 - although SA population comprises 88% of Black Africans). Course where intervention took place: Economics 102 - Introductory course with one of the largest classes in university; Racial breakdown: 67% black Africans, 27% White, 6% 'coloured' or Indian South Africans. Intervention - Second week of course: Students were given the option of submitting either a 'paper-based tutorial exercise' or producing a 'video tut' (p. 609). Data collection: Data on student perceptions on the value of SGC were collected as part of the course evaluation. Two forms of feedback: a)Likert scale responses to statements b)Responses to open-ended question: 'If you chose the video tut option, in what ways did making a video tut help you to learn?' and 'For everyone, how did you benefit (or not) from watching the videos produced by others?' Response rate for feedback: 80% of class (n=470).
Findings: 1) 75% of respondents agreed/strongly agreed that the course included a range of learning opportunities (average score of 3.96/5) & that the course enabled them to apply knowledge in varying contexts (average score of 3.89/5). 2) For the podcast creators: 66% agreed that content creation was 'an interesting way to learn' (p. 611); 24% were neutral; 11% disagreed/strongly disagreed (average score of 3.84/5). 3)For viewers: 50% agreed/strongly agreed that videos created by others were 'a fun way to learn economics' (p. 611); 31% of students were neutral; 19% disagreed/strongly disagreed. 4)Responses to open-ended question: Significant theme from students who perceived the SGC as a positive experience: The role of videos in linking classroom theory to real-world reality.; extension of theme: realisations that academic knowledge could be applied, and was relevant 'beyond the lecture room' (p. 612). Other themes from student feedback: Context - immediate context of videos, alternative contexts to enable students to be more 'open-minded' and view things from another point of view; assistance with understanding and recalling concepts via 'real-life examples'; enjoyment of using new technologies and literacies; technical learning outcomes. Significant themes from students who perceived SGC negatively: Lack of theoretical content & contribution to learning activities - videos were regarded as 'irrelevant' or a 'waste of time' (p. 613); 'perceived lack of legitimacy of SGC compared to expert knowledge' (p. 612).
Implications: Students need to be reassured that the inclusion of SGC in classes have been carefully moderated for correctness and usefulness, and have been verified prior to being uploaded for general online use.
Core argument: A transformative approach to teaching and learning requires a redefinition of the roles and responsibilities of students and teachers (Neary, 2009; Cook-Sather & Luz, 2014). SGC, such as the student-generated podcasts can provide the opportunity to make students part of the community of knowledge creators, and members of a community of practice, rather than outsiders who passively receive knowledge, which is controlled and mediated by teachers.

Context: Widening participation, parenthood/ parenting and higher education in the UK, particularly with the New Labour focus on increasing participation of mature age students (but makes point that not all mature students are also parents, and not all student-parents are mature). Notes literature that argues the neoliberal focus has eroded the focus on systemic/ structure inequalities, resulting in the 'blame' for failure being shifted to individuals; she also notes literature that points to the significance of gender, and recognises the need to view student-parents as heterogeneous group
Aim: To present on findings from a Nuffield-funded cross-institutional study of support offered to student-parents
Theoretical frame: Social constructionist theoretical framework
Methodology: International comparison of support and experiences of student-parents in different national 'welfare regimes': UK (liberal regime); Denmark (social democratic regime). Data collected from two different universities within each country (categorised as 'older' and 'newer'). Data collected: institutional policies and other material that focuses on student-parents, as well as on childcare and financial support; individual interviews with staff members responsible for student welfare; individual students (n=15-20) from each institution. Analysis of transcripts and documents paid particular attention to structural constraints, as well as cultural and attitudinal influences.
Findings: Structural differences between UK and Denmark (summarised in Table 2; p.427) - clear differences between the countries (tuition fees in UK; tuition free to students in DK; no parental leave in UK, all students entitled to it in DK and offered additional grant; flexible modes at academics' discretion in UK, required by the state in DK; childcare = limited in UK, extensive provision and low cost in DK).
Cultural/ attitudinal differences: in UK = ideal learner (see literature) constructions = internalised and 'others' develop. Sense from staff in UK that academics largely view students as school leavers (author later describes UK attitude as 'hostile', p.432). Also sense that parents as group seen as unprepared. In comparison, in DK = different organisational culture that seemingly better recognises diversity among students. For example, one staff member talked about how s/he encourages students to talk about other commitments before embarking on group project to familiarise others with competing responsibilities. No similar 'ideal student' in DK; rather student-parents = valorised for balanced attitudes. Policies in DK that promote 'dual worker' (rather than 'male breadwinner') underpin the cultural and attitudinal/ policy differences between UK and DK - in DK, it is unusual for mum to stay at home as primary carer and not work
Institutional differences = some in DK (see p.432 for detail). In UK = greater inter-institutional variation: the older university provided "significant" practical support (childcare facilities, holiday clubs, dedicated bursaries), but this is unusual. Level of support at newer university = more representative = no dedicated childcare, no staff dedicated to supporting parents, no financial support except central financial support. When discussed in past, university has discussed in terms of potential revenue from childcare, rather than as service to students. Author suggests that older university might be better placed to offer such provision because it has more wealth/resources (and makes links to similar findings in US literature). Dominant constructions of 'the student' differed between older and newer UK universities (p.434). In older university, the higher level of practical support = in "considerable tension" with the culture and attitudes of staff/ the university
Core argument: There are clear differences in how student-parents are supported (or not) between a liberal welfare system (UK) and social democratic (DK). While the two universities (older and newer) in DK treated student-parents relatively similarly, the UK universities showed great difference in terms of how they support and view student-parents, which is reflective of the market-oriented neoliberal higher education system.

not easily visible. Examines impact of widening participation + casualization of workforce/ increased workload of academics (see Bexley, Arkoudis & James, 2013). Examines literature relating to academic capital/ institutional habitus of university and impact on 'non-traditional' students = impact of deficit discourse (Foucauldian position adopted; aka - not residing in individual, but as product of discourses. Smit (2012) = argues that 'disadvantage' = "umbrella term to cover a wide array of perceived shortcomings' (p. 370)" (p.10)
Aim: To examine the perceptions and understandings of university staff - how they perceive their role in relation to social inclusion
Theoretical frame: Foucauldian notion of discourse, power, deficit
Methodology: 2-stage mixed methods; in-depth interviews with 32 academics (representing broad spectrum of roles/levels/employment types) and an online survey (n=272) - 26 questionnaire items including: 'What does the term inclusivity mean to you?', 'Which students tend to require extra support with their learning, assessments and completion of coursework?', 'How do you implement inclusive pedagogies in your coursework?', 'How would you describe/identify student from LSES backgrounds?' and 'Do you feel you need extra support/what could the university do to support inclusive teaching?' (p.5). 63.6% = female; 36% = male. 84.9% = experience of UG teaching; 27.9% =HDR experience; 58.1% = casually employed/ on session contracts (thus ineligible to supervise HDR). Only 4% = professors
Findings:
Survey = strong support for notion of inclusive teaching = "essential to HE" and "basics of good teaching" (81%), but also 20% expressed cynicism/ lack of clarity/ neutral ("lip service is not enough", p.6; "inclusive is a vague term", p.8). Concern expressed about terminology and that inclusive teaching = 'dumbing down' (p.7). Concern also about adding to workload. 79% agreed that inclusive teaching = difficult to do well, especially for casual staff (lack of resources - time, money, space, practical assistance). But 63% thought that inclusive teaching = not enough to overcome challenges faced by students: 22 comments = teachers have responsibility; 28 = responsibility outside remit of teaching role; 20 comments = students ill-prepared for university
Core argument: "From the analysis of our data, it is difficult to get away from the conclusion that, following
Foucault (1984), for LSES students the politics of truth is one entwined with deficit" (p.10) - existing practices "promulgate deficit discourses" (p.10). Framework of deficit [appears to operate on a continuum] - one extreme =notion of student deficit (student must adapt); at other end = focus on institution (needs to respond to diversifying student body). There is a level of misunderstanding that keeps inclusion/ equity a concern. Also point to influence of casualisation: "It is difficult to expect people to enact inclusion when they do not feel included or valued in the institution... The lack of permanency may also translate into a sense of powerlessness around the issue of inclusion: how can staff make others feel included when they feel excluded?" (p.11)

Context: Students from widening participation (WP) backgrounds entering higher education (HE) in England have soared in number in the last decade, rising 43% since 2004 (HEFCE, 2013). The boom in WP students numbers can be partly explained by the New Labour government's (1997-2010) concerted effort to preserve access to HE as tuition fees increased. More recently, the Conservative government (2010- present) shifted policy outputs towards supporting the success and retention of these students (Farenga, 2015).
Aim: To consider how a support programme (Herts Success) might best support WP students and their diverse needs at the University of Hetfordshire. Herts Success: Starting in 2014/15, Herts Success delivered a programme based on social integration, skill development and developing an employability profile. Students were selected based on family income (under GBP25,000) and living in postcodes with the lowest levels of progression to HE.
Theoretical frame: Not specified in study.
Methodology: Qualitative approach; Data collection method: Focus groups & Online surveys (Open-ended, qualitative questions) across two academic years 2014/15 & 2015/16; Research participants: Focus groups - Year 1 & Year 2 students at the end of 2013/14 (n=56); Survey responses: 1000 responses; Data analysis: Thematic analysis (Flick, 2014).
Findings: 1)Individualised pathways: For WP students, the student experience impacts their success at university and eventually the graduate labour market; While some consensus was reached on individual activities, students requirement for support were 'virtually unique' for each individual -Students appeared to have highly individual conceptions on when support should be available & varying ratios were observed on the academic, employability & social support needed. 2)Herts Success' role in fostering success: Herts Success provides 'individual, tailored experiences' which meets needs of students, consequently promoting retention; Despite varying employability needs among students, Herts Success allowed students to tailor experiences according to their respective needs; Herts Success impacted students academically, either directly or indirectly - Personal academic mentor supported one student's success, while access to social events helped another student focus on their studies by providing an outlet. However, many students chose not to engage with Herts Success, although some felt that the available access of the program was already a 'reassurance' (p. 150).
Implications: 1)Cultivating a personal experience at university, where students can choose what to engage with, based on individual needs, would allow for personal pathways to be developed. 2)Incorporating concepts of 'transition' and the wider student experience will benefit students by allowing for a 'multiplicity of student lives' to be considered (p. 151). 3)Need of WP students can be met by offering 'specific forms of support' (p. 153) (Farenga, 2015)
Core argument: HE institutions should re-conceptualise 'transition' and the student experience away from a definition that places the institution at the centre, to one where the student journey is prioritised.

Context: Explores 'classed and embodied' nature of imaginations/ aspirations of young people who are disengaged from 'mainstream' schooling = who are often not included in discussions of widening participation (but see Graham et al. 2014). Explores UK and Australian contexts. Discusses NEET category in UK - not homogenous but "low academic achievement, school disaffection and belonging to low socio-economic groups respectively affects the likelihood of entering this demographic" (p.2). Work from Pemberton's (2008) contention that teacher-student relationships/ lack of teacher support = influential factor in students becoming NEET/ imaginings of university (addition of discussion on imagining university = new direction for WP/disaffected students research). Considers WP literature; notes that most literature relating to teachers = positive accounts.
Aim: To explore how disaffected young people perceive/ imagine university; "to bring the voices, educational experiences and imaginings of young people at the margins of tertiary education into literature on educational disengagement" (p.2), whereby margins = 'dead zones' (Harwood et al. 2013) - aka not considered in dominant models of university outreach. Premise of research = university not an idea that offers new possibilities (p.6)
Theoretical frame: Precarity (precarious relationships with education); draws on Appadurai's navigational capacity/ social imagination when discussing aspirations
Methodology: From 'Imagining University Education' study. Interviewed 250 young people (aged between 11 and 18) living in disadvantaged communities in 5 Australian states who had disengaged from school. Research team deliberately did not ask about teachers but there was "significant talk" about teachers/ influence of teachers on imagining further study. Students often recruited through youth sector and youth workers often sat in on interviews/ in youth settings. Interviews designed to work with imagination (close eyes and imagine...)
Findings:
The participants view universities as 'big', 'massive'/ large-scale alienating schools" (abstract): "This lack of differentiation between schools and universities is problematic; and had a confounding effect on these young people's capacity to imagine and pursue university participation" (p.7)
Elements of schooling become barriers to imagining and pursuing university education; in particular, relationships with school teachers are significant - so that universities are viewed as bigger schools full of teachers (p.8) = form of subjugated knowledge in uni-access literature (offering a different perspective from the norm). Students suggested that teachers = not considered 'normal adults', rather uncaring, strange, aggressive with power to significantly impact on education. "The young people's descriptions of schooling typically featured teachers as individuals who were authoritarian, apathetic, unsupportive, uncaring, unjust, aggressive, unreasonable and, at times, 'hateful' humiliators" (p.9) - but acknowledgement of 'good' and 'bad' teachers. As a consequence, imagining gaining respect and building relationships with educators at university was rare
Authors propose a continuum, where disengagement from school is seen as leading to non-engagement with 'big school' *aka uni*
Core argument: "Universities need to take initiatives to connect with LSES schools and model responsive student-teacher relationships" (p.14). This is not an individually-located issues, rather "the problem lies in the structural factors" that mediate our lives (including our imaginations). Disaffected students need to develop a 'defiant imagination' of education (Castoriadis, 1993) - aka to imagine things without getting tangled up in previous conceptions/experiences of compulsory schooling. Use of juxtapositions could be useful tool for developing new/defiant/radical imaginations. Also, universities need to recognize that conversations with disaffected youths = part of WP agenda.

Context: Students' experience of transitioning into university studies/ transitioning into academic writing
Aim: To explore the notion of 'interim literacies' in the context of transitioning into university studies/ writing; to examine the intersection of academic discourse and student voice in academic writing. Interim literacies = "very few students at first year university level could be said to have mastery over the new discourses they are acquiring and therefore I have used the construct of 'interim literacies' to describe first year student writing practices and to account for the heteroglossic nature of their texts" (p.46)
Theoretical frame: New Literacy Studies (Barton & Hamilton; Street); Bakhtin = intertextuality and voices ("a set of discourses that the writer brings to the act of writing" (p.46)); they are part of his/her social and historical formation and they weave their way intertextually through the writing.; d/Discourse (Gee); pluri-meaning making (Kress)
Methodology: Text analysis of students' assignments (first year Economics; first and last essays) + interviews after each essay. Students = working class/ rural/ EAL. Critical Discourse Analysis used to analyse interim literacies
Findings: Characteristics of interim literacies
1) Intertextuality = spoken discourses/ oracy: evidence of secondary discourses (to primary western essayist discourse) developed through first language teaching (Xhosa and Zulu), for example use of non-embedded question-and-answer sequences in their writing, echoing praise poetry: "The examples from the students' writing illustrate the way the students' interests are reflected in their writing and how, in the process of transferring the traditional rhetorical form, they attempt to transform it so that it is appropriate to the new academic discourse" (p.49). Author argues that analysis of final essay demonstrated a more confident command/effective use of the q&a rhetorical device; "there was evidence of prior discourses being reworked and rearticulated so that they blended more appropriately in the new context" (p.50).
2) Intertextuality = associated meanings: suggestion that students draw on existing conceptual/ situated, personal understandings to help them move forward with content/ concept development.
3) Intertextuality = borrowing/ mimicking new discourses: close to plagiarism, in that students used large chunks of published text to help develop their own voice, but inadvertently reproduce/ copy from existing texts.
4) Avoiding terminology from discipline: data suggest that students sought to avoid using new terminology, instead using "circuitous and long-winded explanations which make their writing confusing" (p.51), perhaps because the new terms are 'alien'
5) Lack of coherence: (definition of coherence on p.51): "All the
students experienced difficulties in structuring their writing in a logical and coherent way and in their interviews they explained that essay-writing practices at school had encouraged them to get 'the facts' down as quickly as possible without paying attention to coherence or logical development of argument" (p.52).
Core argument: Students in this study had difficulty in adapting/ mastering and "acquiring the complex discourses of academia" (p.52). Interim literacies = about making meaning in transition; "Therefore, the term interim must imply fluidity, a sense of movement and change" (p.52). Interim literacies are partly characterized by their hybridity, which "often provides us with insights into how past discourses and discourse models assist in concept formation" (p.52)
"The concept of interim literacies seems useful in a context of increasing cultural and linguistic diversity where students draw on a range of other discourses as they learn to make meaning in a new discourse" (p.46). Exploring students' interim literacies helps to challenge dominant assumptions and conventions with regard to western essayist literacies

Context: Debate in literature about role of higher education- "On the one hand, there is the perspective that universities should adopt an educational and human development approach in their curriculum development and quality assessment on the other hand, there is the functionalist perspective that considers higher education should use the terms, values and objectives of the general society, and so its effectiveness should be assessed in an instrumental way through the impact on the capacity to contribute to society and economy". Overall, need to understand factors that contribute to students' preparedness to transition to work from HE.
Aim: To understand factors contributing to students' perceptions of their preparedness to transition from HE to employment
Theoretical frame: No overarching frame but draws on models of employability, self perception and self efficacy.
Methodology: Questionnaire based quantitative study - convenience sample of 641 students enrolled in masters programs at a public university in Portugal. Descriptive statistics.
Findings: The results of the study show that students perceive that participation in lectures seems particularly beneficial for their transition to work, whereas regular attendance at lectures seems less important. Participation likely see as important in development of critical thinking skills. Both practical and theoretical work contributed positively to perceptions of preparedness to transition. Study areas that focus on competencies associated with employability have a positive impact. In terms of individual factors, gender didn't affect outcomes, but age did (older students felt more prepared). Work experience did not influence preparedness.
Core argument: Universities need to provide opportunities for students to increase employability competencies during their studies.